Community for Creative Non-violence v. Reid
846 F.2d 1485 Aff'd, 490 U.S. 730, 109 S.Ct. 2166 (1989)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A work created by an independent contractor is a "work made for hire" under the Copyright Act of 1976 only if it falls within one of the nine specific statutory categories in § 101(2) and the parties expressly agree in a signed written instrument. The "scope of employment" provision in § 101(1) applies only to formal employees under traditional agency law, not to independent contractors, regardless of the level of supervision exerted by the commissioning party.
Facts:
- In the fall of 1985, the Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV) conceived of an idea for a sculpture to dramatize the plight of the homeless, titled "Third World America."
- CCNV's specific concept was a modern Nativity scene with life-sized homeless figures huddled on a streetside steam grate that would emit simulated steam.
- CCNV contacted James Earl Reid, a sculptor, and they reached an oral agreement for Reid to sculpt the three human figures and a shopping cart for a cost not to exceed $15,000, with Reid donating his artistic services.
- Under the agreement, CCNV assumed responsibility for constructing the pedestal and creating the steam effect.
- During the creation process, various CCNV members conferred with Reid and requested changes to the form and arrangement of the figures to ensure the final product conformed to their concept.
- The parties never discussed copyright ownership, nor did they sign a written agreement stating the sculpture would be a work made for hire.
- After the sculpture was displayed, it was returned to Reid for repairs. A dispute subsequently arose over CCNV's plans for a fundraising tour, and Reid refused to return the sculpture.
Procedural Posture:
- Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV) filed a complaint against James Earl Reid in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking return of the sculpture and a declaration of copyright ownership.
- The district court granted CCNV's request for a preliminary injunction, ordering Reid to return the sculpture.
- Following a two-day bench trial, the district court declared the sculpture to be a "work made for hire" and held that CCNV was the exclusive copyright owner.
- Reid, as appellant, appealed the district court's final decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, with CCNV as 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 work created by an independent contractor qualify as a "work made for hire" under the Copyright Act of 1976 solely because the commissioning party supervised and directed its creation, even if the work does not fall into one of the nine statutory categories for commissioned works and there is no written agreement?
Opinions:
Majority - Ginsburg, J.
No. A work created by an independent contractor cannot be a "work made for hire" merely because the commissioning party exercised supervision. Under the Copyright Act of 1976, such a work only qualifies as a work for hire if it falls within one of the nine specific categories enumerated in § 101(2) and the parties expressly agree in a signed written instrument. The court adopted the "literal interpretation" of the statute, aligning with the Fifth Circuit's reasoning in Easter Seal Society. This interpretation holds that Congress created a sharp distinction between works prepared by employees (§ 101(1)) and works specially commissioned from independent contractors (§ 101(2)). The term "employee" refers to a formal, salaried employee within the meaning of agency law. Section 101(2) provides the exclusive means by which a work by an independent contractor can be deemed a work for hire. The court explicitly rejected the Second Circuit's test from Aldon Accessories, which allowed a supervised independent contractor to be treated as an employee, finding that this approach improperly blurred the statutory distinction and reverted to the superseded doctrines of the 1909 Act. Since Reid was an independent contractor and a sculpture is not one of the nine categories listed in § 101(2), the work is not a work for hire. The court reversed the district court's judgment and remanded the case to determine if the sculpture is a "joint work" co-authored by both Reid and CCNV.
Analysis:
This decision deepened a circuit split by rejecting the broad "supervision and control" test for the work for hire doctrine, instead adopting a narrow, literal interpretation of the 1976 Copyright Act. By doing so, the court provided greater copyright protection and certainty for freelance creators, establishing that they retain ownership of their work unless it falls into a few specific statutory categories and they explicitly sign away their rights in writing. This ruling significantly limited the ability of commissioning parties to claim authorship over works created by independent contractors, paving the way for the Supreme Court to eventually resolve the circuit split. The court's pivot to analyzing the dispute under a "joint work" theory also provided a crucial alternative framework for resolving ownership when multiple parties make creative contributions.
