Copyright Office Report: Copyright Claims Board a Success, But Statutory Changes Needed for Efficiency

The U.S. Copyright Office on Friday released its report pursuant to the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act, finding that the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) is largely successful but that there is “room for improvement in various respects.”

The Copyright Claims Board (CCB), established by the December 2020 CASE Act, is an alternative to federal court where copyright owners can bring suits before a tribunal at the Copyright Office.

In March 2022, ahead of the CCB’s launch, the U.S. Copyright Office issued final rules that established procedures for various aspects of the proceedings, including the designation of service agents and the process for parties to opt-out of the voluntary program.

Steady and Growing Demand

A “steady and growing demand for the CCB’s services since its launch” is detailed in the study, with over 1,700 claims filed as of December 31, 2025. The daily claim rate has increased from 1.3 claims per day in its first year to 1.7 claims per day in the first half of its fourth year. If the trend continues, projections indicate the CCB will see over 600 claims in its fourth year. Additionally, claimants have come from all 50 states and dozens of countries, showing the tribunal’s wide reach.

A significant majority of claimants are using the system without retaining outside counsel, fulfilling the CASE Act’s goal of creating a more accessible forum. Approximately 67% of claimants were self-represented individuals, and another 17% were represented by in-house counsel or an authorized business representative. In contrast, respondents were more likely to retain counsel, with 37% doing so.

The most common type of claim is for copyright infringement, with 1,503 such claims filed. A breakdown of the types of works involved shows that pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works are the most frequent subjects of disputes at 36%. This is followed by motion pictures and other audiovisual works at 24%, literary works at 13%, and sound recordings at 11%.

Dispute Resolution and Settlement Outcomes

The Copyright Office found that the CCB has been effective in resolving copyright claims. The CCB issued 43 final determinations as of the end of 2025, and these have been “praised for their quality” by public commenters, according to the report. The determinations in contested proceedings have been relatively evenly split between claimants and respondents, suggesting a balanced process.

Moreover, nearly two-thirds of the 27 settlement conferences held resulted in settlement agreements. Additionally, 136 proceedings were resolved through a known party settlement, and the findings suggest the actual settlement rate is likely higher, as over 100 additional proceedings were voluntarily dismissed.

Concerns about the potential for abusive behavior, such as copyright trolling, were also addressed. The study found that “use of the CCB for abusive or bad-faith purposes has not been significant.” This is attributed to the detailed procedures in the CASE Act and the CCB’s regulations designed to prevent and address bad-faith conduct.

Opportunities for Improvement

The most significant barrier to the CCB’s efficacy is the compliance review process. The Copyright Office states that “as much as three-quarters of its time is spent on the initial review of claims and amended claims and writing noncompliance orders.” Only 43% of all claims filed were found compliant, and 63% of all claims received at least one noncompliance order.

Service of process has also proven to be challenging for many claimants as 63% of all claims received at least one noncompliance order, and among those who received such an order, less than a third went on to successfully file a compliant claim. The study recommends permitting additional service methods or streamlining the current ones to make it easier for claimants to notify respondents of the proceedings.

To address these and other challenges, the Copyright Office made several recommendations for statutory changes. These include giving the CCB discretion to allow only one opportunity to amend a claim in certain circumstances. Another key recommendation is to allow a single Copyright Claims Officer to preside over standard proceedings, which would reallocate resources and allow the CCB to handle a larger volume of cases.

Other recommendations include easing the process for enforcing CCB determinations in federal court and allowing prevailing parties to recover costs. The proposal would also give Copyright Claims Officers discretion to determine whether actual or statutory damages are more appropriate in each case. It also suggests allowing pro se parties to recover either a multiple of costs or a flat fee in the event of bad-faith conduct by the opposing party. Ultimately, the study concludes that while the CCB has “served the public well,” these statutory amendments are needed to speed up the process, enhance the use of CCB resources, and improve remedies and enforcement.