Scott Zebrak
Co-Founding Partner
Scott Zebrak is a founding partner at Oppenheim + Zebrak, LLP. Scott has more than 25 years of copyright litigation and counseling experience, with a particular focus on content protection issues that involve digital media, new technology, and disruptive business models. Scott represents some of the world’s most prominent companies in music, education, publishing, and other creative industries. His cases have been at the forefront of online copyright protection and mass infringement, shaping the law, shutting down illegal services, and achieving substantial settlements or jury verdicts.
Scott is nationally recognized for his accomplishments in copyright and related litigation. Scott has been ranked multiple times as a leading intellectual property litigation attorney by Chambers USA; as a Best Lawyer® (for intellectual property law) by the Best Lawyers guide; as a Top Music Lawyer by Billboard magazine; as a Copyright Star by Managing IP; as a Top-Rated Intellectual Property Litigation Attorney by Super Lawyers; and as AV Preeminent® by Martindale-Hubbell. Chambers USA noted that Scott “is sought after for his adroit handling of copyright infringement disputes.” One source also told Chambers, “He is a great trial lawyer and very professional. He is pragmatic, resourceful, efficient and among the best lawyers I know.” The Best Lawyers guide named Scott the 2023 “Lawyer of the Year” for copyright in DC.
Prior to launching O+Z, Scott served for four years as Vice-President, Litigation & Legal Affairs, at the Recording Industry Association of America (“RIAA”). He advised on the preeminent copyright and DMCA issues of the day and handled significant music industry litigation. Before the RIAA, Scott was Deputy General Counsel & Director of IP at CoStar Group, Inc. He built CoStar’s anti-piracy program, protected its robust IP portfolio, and provided strategic advice on associated licensing, marketing, product development, and Internet matters. Scott began his career as an IP litigator at the Venable law firm, where he focused on copyright, trademark, and false advertising cases. He joined Venable after serving as a judicial clerk for a U.S. Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Virginia.
AAP v. Frosh
We obtained a preliminary injunction and declaratory judgment for the U.S. publishing industry against the Maryland Attorney General, preventing enforcement of a state-level compulsory license for copyrighted works. The court agreed with our argument that a state statute mandating that publishers license their literary works in digital format to public libraries, and under terms mandated by the state, is invalid, unconstitutional, and federally preempted. The ruling serves as a critical reminder that the nation’s copyright laws are a single federal system, within the exclusive domain of Congress rather than states. (District of Maryland)
Advance v. Cohere
We are representing several news publishers including Condé Nast, The Atlantic, and Vox in a copyright and trademark infringement action against Cohere, an artificial intelligence company, for its unauthorized use and copying of the publishers’ news and magazine articles and brand names. (Southern District of New York)
American Chemical Society v. ResearchGate
We represented two leading journal publishers, American Chemical Society and Elsevier, in a large-scale, high-profile copyright infringement litigation against ResearchGate, an online social network and file sharing/download service operated from Europe, based on ResearchGate’s unauthorized copying and distribution of peer-reviewed published journal articles. After discovery, the matter was resolved via a settlement and entry of an injunction that requires ResearchGate to take specified steps to prevent unauthorized use of our clients’ copyrighted works. (District of Maryland)
Bedford Freeman & Worth v. Shopify
We represented our long-time educational publishing industry clients, Cengage, Elsevier, Macmillan Learning, McGraw Hill, and Pearson, in litigating claims of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement and contributory trademark infringement against Shopify, an e-Commerce platform, for allegedly assisting and profiting from the sale of pirated copies of eBooks and related teaching and testing materials. The case settled after discovery but prior to trial. (Eastern District of Virginia)
Cengage v. Book Dog Books
We obtained a $34.2 million jury verdict, $5 million fee award, and permanent injunction for our clients Cengage, McGraw-Hill, Pearson, and Wiley against a U.S. commercial distributor for willful trademark and copyright infringement arising from the importation and sale of counterfeit books. (Southern District of New York)
Concord v. X (Twitter)
We are representing a group of major and independent music publishers in a copyright infringement litigation against X Corp. for its unauthorized use, including streaming, of musical compositions in videos on the Twitter platform. (Middle District of Tennessee)
Hachette v. Internet Archive
We prevailed at summary judgment, and on appeal, on behalf of four major book publishers (Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley) in a copyright infringement litigation against Internet Archive over Internet Archive’s mass scanning of print books and online distribution of the resulting digital copies. In a powerful opinion, the district court rejected Internet Archive’s attempt to justify its conduct, something Internet Archive called “controlled digital lending,” as fair use. (Southern District of New York; Second Circuit)
Higher Education Publishers’ Anti-Counterfeiting Enforcement
We successfully represented a group of the nation’s leading educational publishers (McGraw-Hill, Pearson, Cengage, Elsevier, and Macmillan Learning) in numerous litigation and non-litigation enforcement matters against commercial suppliers, importers, and sellers of counterfeits. We also obtained widespread adoption of industry best practices against counterfeiting, see www.stopcounterfeitbooks.com, a best practices guide to avoid counterfeits that we developed with the support of major publishers in over a dozen federal district courts across the country.
Higher Education Publishers’ Online Anti-Piracy Enforcement
We successfully represented a group of the nation’s leading educational publishers (McGraw-Hill, Pearson, Cengage, Elsevier, and Macmillan Learning) in numerous litigation and non-litigation enforcement matters against hundreds of pirate websites, storefronts, or other illicit online sellers. We have obtained judgments, settlements, TROs, injunctions, asset freezes, and seizures of domain names and financial accounts.
Pearson v. Boundless Learning
We successfully represented Pearson, Cengage, and Macmillan Learning in a copyright and trademark infringement case against an online business for developing and marketing versions of our clients’ leading products. The resolution included a judgment and injunctive relief with damages payments, destruction of offending items, and additional copyright and brand protection. (Southern District of New York)
Sony Music v. Cox
We obtained a landmark $1 billion jury verdict against one of the nation’s largest internet service providers (“ISPs”), Cox Communications, on behalf of Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, Universal Music Publishing Group, Sony/ATV, and Warner Chappell. After a three-week trial, the jury found Cox liable for willful contributory and vicarious infringement, for assisting and profiting from its subscribers’ uploading and downloading of copyrighted music through peer-to-peer networks such as Bit-Torrent. The litigation involved over 10,000 copyrights and it was reported as the fifth largest jury verdict in the United States in 2019. While the Fourth Circuit reversed the vicarious liability verdict and remanded for a new trial on damages, it affirmed the jury’s verdict of willful contributory infringement. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on the question of contributory liability, and reversed and remanded. (Eastern District of Virginia; Fourth Circuit; Supreme Court)
SoundExchange v. Sirius XM
We are representing SoundExchange in an action against Sirius XM to recover royalties Sirius XM owes to artists and copyright owners for digitally performing sounding recordings under statutory licenses. (Southern District of New York)
UMG v. Kurbanov
We successfully litigated copyright infringement and anti-circumvention claims against the owners and operators of two of the most popular “stream-ripping” services in the world, www.FLVTO.biz and www.2conv.com. On behalf of our clients Universal Music Group, Sony Music, and Warner Music, we obtained terminating sanctions, injunctive relief, and an $83 million damages award. (Eastern District of Virginia)
-
Arista Records v. LimeWire
Obtained injunctive relief, based upon a finding of willful secondary copyright infringement, against the proprietors of the LimeWire peer-to-peer file-sharing service, along with a $105 million settlement reached during a damages trial. Represented the major record companies. (Southern District of New York)
-
Arista Records v. Usenet.com
Obtained spoliation sanctions and summary judgment against a Usenet service named Usenet.com, with a finding of direct and secondary copyright infringement and a multi-million-dollar damages award. Represented the major record companies. (Southern District of New York)
-
Arista Records v. MediaServices (AllofMp3.com)
Successful copyright infringement suit against an illegal download site (AllofMp3.com) based in Russia. Represented the major record companies. (Southern District of New York)
-
Atlantic Recording Corp. v. Project Playlist
Successful copyright infringement suit against Project Playlist, a service billing itself as music search engine. Represented the major record labels. (Southern District of New York)
-
A&M Records v. LaMonte
Obtained injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees, and a destruction order in a litigation proceeding to halt the unauthorized auction of music copyrights. Represented the major record labels. (Central District of California)
-
Mechanicals Proceeding
Actively oversaw a historic mechanicals proceeding before the Copyright Royalty Board to determine rates and terms for the compulsory license under Section 115 of the Copyright Act. Represented the major record companies. (Library of Congress)
-
Blount v. CoStar
Successful defense of litigation claims alleging defamation, tortious interference and unfair competition. Represented CoStar Group. (Southern District of California)
-
CoStar Group v. LoopNet
Seminal copyright litigation against LoopNet online listing service regarding unauthorized posting of photographs. Represented CoStar Group. (District of Maryland, Fourth Circuit)
-
Amdahl Corporation v. CHE
Successful litigation of copyright and trade secret claims over use of a computer manufacturer’s proprietary diagnostic software. Represented Amdahl. (Middle District of Pennsylvania)
-
Decision Support Systems v. Hughes Communications
Successful trademark litigation involving allegations of reverse confusion. Represented Decision Support Systems. (Eastern District of Virginia)





