Casa Duse v. Merkin
WL 5510770 (2013)
Rule of Law:
An individual's creative contributions to a unitary work of authorship, such as a film, are not themselves separate 'works of authorship' subject to copyright protection if those contributions are inseparable from the final work. In such cases, copyright ownership of the entire work vests in the 'dominant author,' the party who exercises ultimate control over the project.
Facts:
- In September 2010, 16 Casa Duse, LLC, owned by Robert Krakovski, purchased the rights to a screenplay titled 'Heads Up.'
- Krakovski hired Alex Merkin to direct a film based on the screenplay for an informally agreed-upon fee of $1,500.
- Casa Duse assembled a cast and crew of approximately thirty individuals, each of whom, except Merkin, signed an 'Independent Contractor Agreement' designating their contributions as 'work for hire' and assigning all copyrights to Casa Duse.
- Between February and May 2011, Krakovski repeatedly sent Merkin a similar work-for-hire agreement, which Merkin acknowledged receiving but never signed.
- Despite the lack of a signed agreement, production proceeded in May 2011, with Merkin performing directorial duties, instructing the cast and crew on creative and technical aspects of filming.
- After filming, Krakovski provided Merkin with the raw film footage on a hard drive for editing purposes, but negotiations over a formal agreement broke down as Merkin asserted ownership over his 'creative work.'
- In January 2012, Merkin registered a copyright for the 'Raw footage for film ‘Heads Up’' in his own name, listing himself as the sole author.
- In April 2012, Merkin's attorney threatened the New York Film Academy with a cease-and-desist action, causing the Academy to cancel a planned screening of the film.
Procedural Posture:
- 16 Casa Duse, LLC sued Alex Merkin in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- The district court granted Casa Duse's request for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against Merkin.
- Casa Duse filed an amended complaint seeking a declaratory judgment that it was the sole copyright owner of the film and asserting state-law claims including tortious interference with business relations.
- Merkin filed an amended answer and counterclaims, seeking a declaratory judgment that his copyright registration was valid.
- On cross-motions for summary judgment, the district court granted summary judgment to Casa Duse on its copyright and tortious interference claims.
- The district court dismissed Merkin's copyright-related counterclaims and awarded damages, attorney's fees, and costs to Casa Duse.
- Merkin, the appellant, appealed the district court's judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Casa Duse is the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a film director who is not a joint author or an employee under a work-for-hire agreement hold a separate, protectable copyright interest in their creative, inseparable contributions to the film?
Opinions:
Majority - Sack, Circuit Judge
No, a director's inseparable contributions to a film do not constitute a separately copyrightable 'work of authorship.' The Copyright Act protects 'motion pictures' as a unitary work, not the various individual contributions that are merged into it. The Act's structure distinguishes between contributions to a 'joint work,' which merge into a unitary whole, and contributions to a 'collective work,' which must be 'separate and independent' to be individually copyrighted. A director's efforts are inseparable from the final film and do not qualify as separate works. Allowing individual contributors to hold separate copyrights would create a 'legal morass,' undermining the film's primary copyright and granting contributors greater power than joint authors, who cannot unilaterally prevent a co-author from using the work. Furthermore, Casa Duse is the 'dominant author' of the film and its raw footage because it initiated the project, acquired the screenplay, hired all personnel, controlled the production, and executed all third-party agreements, thereby exercising far more decisionmaking authority than Merkin. Therefore, Casa Duse owns the sole copyright to the film in all its forms.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies for the Second Circuit that individual, inseparable contributions to a collaborative work like a film do not create separate copyrights for each contributor. It introduces the 'dominant author' framework for determining ownership in situations that fall outside the statutory definitions of joint work or work-for-hire, protecting the producer or 'master mind' who orchestrates the entire project. The ruling strongly reinforces the practical necessity for producers to secure written work-for-hire agreements from all contributors to avoid complex ownership disputes and potential challenges to their right to exploit the final work.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Casa Duse v. Merkin (2013)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"