Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc. v. CBS, Inc.
216 F.2d 945 (1954)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The assignment of copyright in a literary work does not, by itself, convey the exclusive rights to the characters in that work. For a character to be protected by copyright, it must be sufficiently delineated and constitute the story being told, rather than being a mere vehicle or 'chessman' for the plot.
Facts:
- Dashiell Hammett wrote the mystery story 'The Maltese Falcon,' featuring the detective character Sam Spade, which was published and copyrighted.
- In 1930, Hammett and his publisher, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., entered into a contract with Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., granting Warner Bros. exclusive rights to use 'The Maltese Falcon' story and title in motion pictures, radio, and television for $8,500.
- The contract detailed many specific rights transferred to Warner Bros. but did not explicitly grant the exclusive rights to the characters from the story, such as Sam Spade, or their names.
- Sixteen years later, in 1946, Hammett began using the characters from 'The Maltese Falcon,' including Sam Spade, in new stories.
- Hammett subsequently granted rights to third parties, including Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS), to use these characters in radio programs, leading to broadcasts like 'Adventures of Sam Spade,' which featured new plots distinct from 'The Maltese Falcon.'
Procedural Posture:
- Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc. sued Dashiell Hammett, Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., and others in the U.S. District Court (trial court).
- Warner Bros. claimed copyright infringement and unfair competition based on the defendants' use of characters from 'The Maltese Falcon'.
- Hammett filed a counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment affirming his rights to use the characters.
- The trial court ruled in favor of the defendants, denying relief to Warner Bros. and declaring that Hammett had the right to use the characters.
- Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., as appellant, appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
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 contract that grants exclusive motion picture, radio, and television rights to a copyrighted story, but does not explicitly mention character rights, prevent the story's author from using the characters in subsequent, different works?
Opinions:
Majority - Stephens, Circuit Judge
No, the contract does not prevent the author from using the characters in subsequent works because the rights to the characters were not explicitly conveyed. The court reasoned that since Warner Bros., an experienced film producer, drafted the contract and failed to explicitly include character rights while itemizing other rights like the title, any ambiguity should be resolved in favor of the author, Hammett. Applying the doctrine of ejusdem generis, the court found that the general grant of rights could not be interpreted to include the specific, unmentioned right to the characters. The court also noted the well-established custom of authors reusing characters in sequels, suggesting that if the parties had intended to prohibit this valuable practice, they would have used clear language to do so. Furthermore, the court questioned whether characters are copyrightable at all, suggesting a character is not protected unless it 'really constitutes the story being told' and is not merely a 'chessman in the game.' Since the new stories were not substantially similar to 'The Maltese Falcon' and did not deceive the public, there was no copyright infringement or unfair competition.
Analysis:
This landmark decision, often called 'The Sam Spade Case,' established the principle that literary characters are not automatically transferred with the copyright to a story unless explicitly included in the grant. It created a legal distinction between a story's plot and its characters, preserving an author's ability to create sequels and build a franchise around characters. The court also introduced an early version of the 'well-delineated character' test for copyrightability, suggesting that only characters who are central to the story, rather than being mere plot devices, might be eligible for copyright protection. This analysis has profoundly influenced entertainment law and contract drafting, requiring parties to be specific about the conveyance of character rights.
