Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc.
624 F.3d 1253
9th Cir.2010Background
- Ahanchian appeals district court's summary judgment for Xenon Pictures, CKrush, Sam Maccarone, and Preston Lacy on authorship of skits in National Lampoon's TV: The Movie and on attorneys' fees.
- Ahanchian concedes Lanham Act claims are foreclosed by Dastar; appellate court affirms summary judgment on those claims.
- The court finds genuine issues of material fact on Ahanchian's implied contract claim; reverses grant of summary judgment on that claim.
- Dispute whether Ahanchian and defendants co-authored nine skits; certificates of registration list Ahanchian as sole author for ten skits.
- Movie is a collection of independent skits (collective work) with separate copyrights per skit; joint authorship requires substantial independent contributions.
- For the skit 'Sex and the Pen,' the registration indicates co-authors Maccarone and Lacy; district court correctly granted summary judgment against Ahanchian on that skit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lanham Act viability after Dastar | Ahanchian concedes foreclosed | District court correctly foreclosed | Affirm summary judgment on Lanham Act claims |
| Implied contract claim viability | Course of conduct showed implied promise to pay | No implied contract | Genuine issues preclude summary judgment; implied contract remanded |
| Joint authorship of skits other than Sex and the Pen | Defendants contributed to skits; may be co-authors | No independently copyrightable contributions; not joint authors | Genuine issues as to joint authorship exist; not resolved on summary judgment |
| Sex and the Pen co-authorship | Ahanchian claims co-authorship | Registration shows Maccarone and Lacy co-authors; Ahanchian not sole author | Summary judgment upheld against Ahanchian on this skit |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Tucker ex rel. Tucker v. Interscope Records, Inc., 515 F.3d 1019 (9th Cir. 2008) (affects allocation of attorneys' fees; precedent for remand following partial reversal)
- Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (Supreme Court 2003) (copyrights and misattribution; exhausted to foreclose Lanham Act claims)
- Gomez v. Lincare, Inc., 173 Cal. App. 4th 508 (Ct. App. 2009) (course of conduct can create implied contract under California law)
- Spinelli v. Tallcott, 272 Cal. App. 2d 589 (Ct. App. 1969) (implied contracts; discovery related accrual concepts)
- Aalmuhammed v. Lee, 202 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir. 2000) (joint authorship factors; substantial contributions not always copyrightable)
- Zuill v. Shanahan, 80 F.3d 1366 (9th Cir. 1996) (co-authorship requires evidence of joint creation of a work)
- Richlin v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures, Inc., 531 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 2008) (threshold for determining joint authorship; audience appeal considerations)
- Oddo v. Ries, 743 F.2d 630 (9th Cir. 1984) (co-authorship limitations; co-ownership cannot infringe against co-owner)