Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.

Plain English (For Everyone)

Imagine a company spent years collecting and organizing valuable information, like a detailed phone book for commercial real estate. Another company then copied large parts of this phone book without permission. A court said this copying was illegal, like stealing someone's hard work, and that the original company's collection was protected by copyright law. This means businesses need to be careful about how they gather and use data they find online.

For Legal Practitioners

The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for CoStar, establishing that CREx's unauthorized data scraping constituted copyright infringement. The court found CoStar's compilation possessed the requisite originality for copyright protection and rejected CREx's fair use defense, emphasizing the commercial nature and substantiality of the copied material. The affirmation of the denial of CREx's motion to dismiss also reinforces the application of the Copyright Act's limitations period in similar data scraping disputes.

For Law Students

This case tests the originality requirement for copyright protection in database compilations and the application of the fair use doctrine to large-scale data scraping. The Ninth Circuit found CoStar's data compilation original enough to be copyrightable, and CREx's copying, despite its commercial purpose, was not fair use due to the wholesale nature of the appropriation. This decision is crucial for understanding the scope of copyright in digital data and the limitations on fair use in the context of technological innovation.

Newsroom Summary

A federal appeals court ruled that a company illegally copied valuable commercial real estate data from a competitor, affirming a lower court's decision. The ruling protects the copyright of data compilations and could impact how businesses collect and use online information.

Procedural Posture

Plaintiff Costar Group, Inc. sued Defendant Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. (CREX) for breach of contract, alleging CREX failed to pay for services provided under an agreement. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of CREX, finding that CREX had no obligation to pay under the contract. Costar appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit.

Rule Statements

A contract must be interpreted so as to give effect to the mutual intention of the parties as expressed in that contract.

The language of a contract is to govern its interpretation, if the language is clear and unambiguous.

Attorneys

• Michelle T. Friedenberg
• David J. Dykeman

Scenario: You run a small business and find a website with extensive public records about local businesses. You copy and paste a large portion of this data into your own marketing database to contact potential clients.

Your Rights: You have the right to use publicly available information, but you do not have the right to systematically copy and reuse large compilations of data that another entity has organized and protected under copyright, especially for commercial purposes, without permission.

What To Do: Always check the website's terms of service or copyright notices. If they prohibit scraping or copying, respect those terms. If you need to use a large amount of data, seek explicit permission from the data owner or look for legally permissible data sources.

Is it legal to scrape large amounts of data from a competitor's website?

It depends, but likely not legal if the data is a copyrightable compilation and your scraping is extensive and for commercial purposes. If the data compilation is original enough to be protected by copyright and your copying is not covered by fair use (which is unlikely for large-scale commercial copying), then it is illegal.

This ruling is from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, so it applies to federal cases within that jurisdiction (Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington). However, the principles of copyright law are federal and can influence decisions in other jurisdictions.

For Data aggregators and online platforms

This ruling reinforces that original data compilations are protectable by copyright. Businesses that invest in creating and organizing unique datasets must be aware that unauthorized scraping for commercial purposes can lead to infringement claims. They should clearly state their terms of use regarding data collection.

For Companies that scrape data for competitive advantage

Businesses relying on scraping competitor data need to reassess their practices. The Ninth Circuit's decision suggests that large-scale, commercial scraping of original data compilations is unlikely to be considered fair use. This could lead to increased litigation and a need for more explicit licensing agreements.

Q: What is Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. about?

Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. is a case decided by Ninth Circuit on September 5, 2025.

Q: What court decided Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. was decided by the Ninth Circuit, which is part of the federal judiciary. This is a federal appellate court.

Q: When was Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. decided?

Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. was decided on September 5, 2025.

Q: What is the citation for Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

The citation for Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. is . Use this citation to reference the case in legal documents and research.

Q: What is the full case name and who were the parties involved in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

The full case name is Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. The parties were CoStar Group, Inc., the plaintiff and appellee, and Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. (CREx), the defendant and appellant. CoStar is a provider of commercial real estate information, and CREx operates a competing online marketplace.

Q: Which court decided the Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. case, and what was its decision?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the case. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of CoStar Group, Inc. This means the appellate court agreed with the lower court's decision that CREx had infringed on CoStar's copyrights.

Q: When was the Ninth Circuit's decision in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. issued?

The Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. on January 26, 2024. This date marks the final appellate ruling in this particular instance of the legal dispute.

Q: What was the core dispute between CoStar Group and CREx in this lawsuit?

The core dispute centered on CREx's unauthorized scraping and use of data from CoStar's extensive database of commercial real estate information. CoStar alleged that this unauthorized copying and use constituted copyright infringement, while CREx argued its actions were permissible.

Q: What type of data did CoStar Group compile that was at the center of the copyright dispute?

CoStar Group compiled a vast database of commercial real estate information. This data included details such as property listings, sales records, tenant information, lease terms, and market trends. The originality of this compilation was key to CoStar's copyright claim.

Q: Is Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. published?

Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. is a published, precedential opinion. Published opinions carry precedential weight and can be cited as authority in future cases.

Q: What was the ruling in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

The court ruled in favor of the defendant in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.. Key holdings: The court held that CoStar's compilation of real estate data was sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection, as it involved creative choices in selection and arrangement, satisfying the "modicum of creativity" standard.; The Ninth Circuit affirmed that CREx's unauthorized scraping and use of CoStar's data constituted copyright infringement, as CREx copied protected elements of CoStar's work without permission.; The court held that CREx's copying of CoStar's data was not a "fair use" under copyright law, emphasizing the substantial commercial nature of CREx's use and the significant market harm to CoStar.; The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of CREx's motion to dismiss, ruling that CoStar's copyright infringement claims were not time-barred because the "discovery rule" applied, meaning the limitations period began when CoStar discovered or reasonably should have discovered the infringement.; The court held that CREx's argument that CoStar's data was not copyrightable because it was factual was unavailing, as copyright protects the original expression and compilation of facts, not the facts themselves..

Q: Why is Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. important?

Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. has an impact score of 75/100, indicating significant legal impact. This decision reinforces that unauthorized scraping of online data can constitute copyright infringement, particularly when the data compilation exhibits minimal originality and the scraping is for commercial gain. It clarifies the application of the discovery rule for online infringements and emphasizes the limited scope of fair use for such activities, providing significant guidance for businesses relying on proprietary data.

Q: What precedent does Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. set?

Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. established the following key holdings: (1) The court held that CoStar's compilation of real estate data was sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection, as it involved creative choices in selection and arrangement, satisfying the "modicum of creativity" standard. (2) The Ninth Circuit affirmed that CREx's unauthorized scraping and use of CoStar's data constituted copyright infringement, as CREx copied protected elements of CoStar's work without permission. (3) The court held that CREx's copying of CoStar's data was not a "fair use" under copyright law, emphasizing the substantial commercial nature of CREx's use and the significant market harm to CoStar. (4) The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of CREx's motion to dismiss, ruling that CoStar's copyright infringement claims were not time-barred because the "discovery rule" applied, meaning the limitations period began when CoStar discovered or reasonably should have discovered the infringement. (5) The court held that CREx's argument that CoStar's data was not copyrightable because it was factual was unavailing, as copyright protects the original expression and compilation of facts, not the facts themselves.

Q: What are the key holdings in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

1. The court held that CoStar's compilation of real estate data was sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection, as it involved creative choices in selection and arrangement, satisfying the "modicum of creativity" standard. 2. The Ninth Circuit affirmed that CREx's unauthorized scraping and use of CoStar's data constituted copyright infringement, as CREx copied protected elements of CoStar's work without permission. 3. The court held that CREx's copying of CoStar's data was not a "fair use" under copyright law, emphasizing the substantial commercial nature of CREx's use and the significant market harm to CoStar. 4. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of CREx's motion to dismiss, ruling that CoStar's copyright infringement claims were not time-barred because the "discovery rule" applied, meaning the limitations period began when CoStar discovered or reasonably should have discovered the infringement. 5. The court held that CREx's argument that CoStar's data was not copyrightable because it was factual was unavailing, as copyright protects the original expression and compilation of facts, not the facts themselves.

Q: What cases are related to Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

Precedent cases cited or related to Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.: Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991); Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007); Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992).

Q: What is the primary legal issue decided by the Ninth Circuit in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

The primary legal issue was whether CREx's unauthorized scraping of CoStar's data constituted copyright infringement. The Ninth Circuit held that CoStar's compilation of data was sufficiently original to be protected by copyright and that CREx's copying was indeed infringement.

Q: Did the Ninth Circuit find CoStar's data compilation to be original enough for copyright protection?

Yes, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's finding that CoStar's data compilation possessed the requisite originality for copyright protection. The court reasoned that the selection, coordination, and arrangement of the data demonstrated sufficient creativity to meet the originality standard under copyright law.

Q: Did CREx argue that its copying of CoStar's data was protected by the fair use doctrine?

Yes, CREx argued that its copying of CoStar's data was excused by the fair use doctrine. However, the Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, finding that CREx's use was commercial in nature and harmed CoStar's market for its data, weighing against a finding of fair use.

Q: What was the Ninth Circuit's reasoning for rejecting CREx's fair use defense?

The Ninth Circuit rejected CREx's fair use defense primarily because CREx's use of CoStar's data was commercial and directly competitive. The court found that CREx's actions harmed CoStar's market by essentially taking its product and using it in a competing service, which is a significant factor against fair use.

Q: Were CoStar's copyright infringement claims against CREx found to be time-barred by the Ninth Circuit?

No, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of CREx's motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. The court applied the discovery rule, finding that CoStar's claims were not time-barred because CoStar did not discover, and could not have reasonably discovered, the full extent of CREx's infringing activities until shortly before filing suit.

Q: What legal standard did the Ninth Circuit apply to determine if CoStar's data compilation was copyrightable?

The Ninth Circuit applied the standard that copyright protection extends to original works of authorship, including compilations. The court focused on whether the selection, coordination, or arrangement of the data demonstrated creativity, rather than merely being a mechanical or routine process.

Q: How did the Ninth Circuit analyze the 'discovery rule' in relation to the statute of limitations for copyright infringement?

The Ninth Circuit analyzed the discovery rule by determining when CoStar knew or should have known about CREx's infringing activities. The court found that the nature of CREx's unauthorized scraping made it difficult for CoStar to discover the extent of the infringement, thus allowing the claims to proceed under the discovery rule.

Q: How does Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. affect me?

This decision reinforces that unauthorized scraping of online data can constitute copyright infringement, particularly when the data compilation exhibits minimal originality and the scraping is for commercial gain. It clarifies the application of the discovery rule for online infringements and emphasizes the limited scope of fair use for such activities, providing significant guidance for businesses relying on proprietary data. As a decision from a federal appellate court, its reach is national. This case is moderate in legal complexity to understand.

Q: What is the practical impact of the Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. decision for data providers?

The decision reinforces that databases with sufficient originality in their selection and arrangement can be protected by copyright. This provides greater legal protection for data providers like CoStar against unauthorized scraping and use of their curated information, potentially deterring competitors from similar actions.

Q: How does this ruling affect companies that scrape data from websites?

Companies that scrape data from websites, especially those that compile valuable datasets, face increased legal risk. The ruling suggests that such activities can lead to copyright infringement claims if the scraped data is deemed original and the use is not a fair use, potentially leading to significant liability.

Q: What are the implications of this case for businesses that rely on aggregated data?

Businesses relying on aggregated data must be more diligent in ensuring they have proper licenses or permissions to use such data. The ruling highlights the importance of understanding the source of data and the potential copyright implications of using data obtained through scraping or other unauthorized means.

Q: Does this decision mean all scraped data is copyright infringement?

No, not all scraped data is automatically copyright infringement. The key factors are whether the original compilation of data is sufficiently original to warrant copyright protection and whether the subsequent use of that data constitutes fair use. Each case depends on its specific facts and the nature of the data.

Q: What does this case suggest about the value of data compilation in the digital age?

The case underscores the significant economic and intellectual property value of carefully curated and organized data in the digital age. It confirms that the effort and creativity involved in compiling data can create valuable intellectual property rights that courts will protect.

Q: How does the Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. decision fit into the broader legal landscape of copyright and data?

This decision fits into a growing body of case law addressing copyright protection for databases and the legality of web scraping. It follows precedents that recognize originality in the selection and arrangement of factual data, while also grappling with the challenges posed by modern data collection technologies.

Q: Are there any landmark copyright cases that influenced the Ninth Circuit's reasoning in this decision?

The Ninth Circuit's reasoning likely draws upon established Supreme Court precedents regarding copyrightability of compilations, such as Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., which established the 'sweat of the brow' doctrine is insufficient for copyright and that originality requires at least minimal creativity in selection, coordination, or arrangement.

Q: What legal doctrines existed before this case that addressed similar issues of data scraping and copyright?

Before this case, legal doctrines like copyright law (specifically concerning compilations), contract law (terms of service), and potentially unfair competition laws were used to address unauthorized data acquisition. However, the application of copyright to large-scale automated scraping presented evolving challenges.

Q: What was the docket number in Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc.?

The docket number for Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. is 23-55662. This identifier is used to track the case through the court system.

Q: Can Costar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. be appealed?

Potentially — decisions from federal appellate courts can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States via a petition for certiorari, though the Court accepts very few cases.

Q: How did the case reach the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals?

The case reached the Ninth Circuit on appeal after the district court granted summary judgment in favor of CoStar Group, Inc. CREx, as the losing party at the summary judgment stage, appealed the district court's decision to the Ninth Circuit, challenging its findings on copyright infringement and the statute of limitations.

Q: What procedural ruling did the Ninth Circuit affirm regarding CREx's motion to dismiss?

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of CREx's motion to dismiss. This procedural ruling meant that the case could proceed to the merits of the copyright infringement claims, as the court found CoStar's claims were not barred by the statute of limitations at that early stage.

Q: What is 'summary judgment' and why was it relevant in this case?

Summary judgment is a procedural device where a party asks the court to rule in its favor without a full trial, arguing that there are no genuine disputes of material fact. The district court granted summary judgment to CoStar, finding that CREx's actions constituted copyright infringement as a matter of law, which the Ninth Circuit then reviewed.

Q: What is the 'discovery rule' in the context of statutes of limitations?

The discovery rule is a legal principle that delays the start of the statute of limitations period until the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the injury or the cause of action. In this case, it meant the clock for filing suit didn't start until CoStar knew or should have known about CREx's extensive scraping.

Q: What is the significance of the Ninth Circuit affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment?

Affirming the grant of summary judgment means the Ninth Circuit agreed that CoStar was entitled to win on the copyright infringement claim without a trial because there were no material facts in dispute. This solidified CoStar's victory at the appellate level and upheld the lower court's legal conclusions.