Fink v. Goodson-Todman Enterprises, Ltd.
9 Cal. App. 3d 996, 88 Cal. Rptr. 679, 169 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 106 (1970)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For breach of contract claims involving the submission of an idea, the idea need not be legally protectible (novel and concrete) to be enforceable; the relevant inquiry is whether the defendant's work was "based upon" a material element of the plaintiff's idea. For non-contract claims like common law copyright infringement, a sufficiently elaborated idea, including its theme, character development, and back story, can be a protectible literary property if it is substantially copied.
Facts:
- Plaintiff created a concept for a television series titled 'The Coward,' featuring a hero, Dundee, a World War II officer court-martialed for surrendering his company under duress, who subsequently becomes a police officer to continually prove his courage.
- Plaintiff's presentation included a detailed back story, a pilot script, plot summaries for 15 episodes, and specific portrayal techniques like flashbacks and using nickels as a talisman to remind the hero of his past.
- On September 15, 1960, at the express request of defendants, a television production company, plaintiff submitted his presentation and pilot script for their review.
- Plaintiff and defendants conferred about the project, and on November 2, 1960, plaintiff granted defendants an exclusive option to acquire the program.
- Defendants later informed plaintiff that they had decided not to produce a series based on his program, claiming it was not saleable.
- During the 1965-1966 television season, defendants produced and broadcast a series titled 'Branded,' based on a presentation by another writer, Larry Cohen.
- 'Branded' featured a hero, McCord, a U.S. Army officer in the American West who is court-martialed, branded a coward, and subsequently wanders the frontier proving his courage.
- The 'Branded' series used similar portrayal techniques, including a signature sequence depicting the hero's disgrace, flashbacks to his back story, and a talisman (the hilt of his broken sword).
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendants in the California Superior Court, alleging counts including breach of express and implied contract, breach of confidence, common law copyright infringement, and fraud.
- Defendants filed a general demurrer, arguing the complaint failed to state a cause of action.
- The trial court sustained the demurrer, finding as a matter of law that there was no similarity between plaintiff's submission and defendants' televised series.
- The trial court granted plaintiff leave to amend his complaint.
- Plaintiff declined to amend, and the trial court subsequently entered a judgment of dismissal.
- Plaintiff, as appellant, appealed the judgment of dismissal to the California Court of Appeal.
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 plaintiff state a valid cause of action for breach of contract and common law copyright infringement when a defendant's television series shares the same core theme, character motivation, detailed back story, and dramatic portrayal techniques as the plaintiff's submitted proposal, despite differences in setting and specific episodic plots?
Opinions:
Majority - Reppy, J.
Yes. A plaintiff states a valid cause of action for both contract and non-contract claims where substantial similarities exist in the core 'structural spine' of the works, precluding dismissal on demurrer. For contract claims, an idea need not be protectible under copyright law to be the subject of a valid agreement; the key question is whether the defendant's work is 'based upon' a 'material element' of the plaintiff's submission. Here, the alleged express and implied contracts did not require novelty, only use. For the non-contract claims (common law copyright and breach of confidence), which do require a protectible property interest, plaintiff's submission was not a mere abstract idea but an 'elaborated idea' or 'structural spine' combining a detailed back story, character motivation, and specific portrayal techniques. This combination possesses sufficient concreteness and novelty to be protectible. The court found that 'Branded' shared a 'strikingly similar' basic theme and a 'substantially similar' back story with 'The Coward,' and that differences in setting and episodic plots could be seen as deliberate contrivances to disguise copying rather than grounds for dismissal as a matter of law.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the legal distinction between protecting ideas through contract versus copyright law in the entertainment industry. It affirms that creators can contractually protect ideas that may not meet the novelty and concreteness standards required for copyright, thereby lowering the bar for breach of contract claims to a 'based upon' standard. The ruling also broadens the scope of what constitutes a 'protectible' property interest under common law copyright, recognizing that a detailed 'format' or 'structural spine'—a combination of theme, character, back story, and technique—is protectible, not just the final literal expression. This precedent strengthens the position of writers in disputes with producers, making it harder for producers to escape liability by making superficial changes to a submitted concept.
Unlock the full brief for Fink v. Goodson-Todman Enterprises, Ltd.