976 F.3d 620
6th Cir.2020Background
- Hiller, LLC hired the Bob Pike Group in 2015 to design a 117‑page customer‑service training "Guide" for HVAC/service technicians; Pike conducted a two‑day workshop with Hiller staff and created the Guide’s text, graphics, layout, and assigned its copyright to Hiller.
- Clockwork previously owned Success Group and the copyrighted training "Manuals" that Hiller’s employees had used; Clockwork retained the Manuals’ copyrights when it sold Success Group but licensed Success Group to use them.
- Portions of the Guide were original to Pike/Hiller (selection, organization, graphics, exercises), while other passages and at least one graphic were copied from Clockwork’s Manuals (including verbatim sample scripting).
- Hiller registered the Guide’s copyright and sued Success Group and Rebecca Cassel for infringement; Clockwork intervened seeking a declaration that it owned the underlying intellectual property and that Hiller’s copyright was invalid.
- A jury found Hiller’s copyright valid and that Success Group infringed protected elements; the district court denied Clockwork’s post‑trial Rule 50(b) motion and Clockwork appealed.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed: sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding of originality in the Guide, and the district court’s jury instruction (allowing copyright in original parts even if other parts copied preexisting material, absent pervasive copying) was correct.
Issues
| Issue | Hiller's Argument | Clockwork's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Guide contains originality sufficient for copyright | Guide contains independently created, minimally creative selection, arrangement, graphics and exercises created by Pike/Hiller | Guide lacks independently created material; any protectable expression derives from Clockwork Manuals | Jury reasonably found the Guide contains original elements; copyright exists for original parts (affirmed) |
| Effect of including material from Clockwork’s Manuals | Unauthorized use of preexisting material does not destroy copyright in discrete original portions of a work | Unauthorized incorporation of Clockwork material should wholly invalidate Hiller’s copyright | Copyright protection extends to original parts; unlawful use of preexisting material only strips protection from those parts, not the entire work unless preexisting material pervades it (affirmed) |
| Validity of district court’s jury instruction about "pervades" / inextricable intertwining | Instruction correctly explained that only pervasive/unity of preexisting material defeats the entire copyright; discrete parts may remain protected | Instruction flawed because an unauthorized derivative should forfeit all copyright protection | Instruction proper: §103(a) allows protection for new material; loss of all protection requires preexisting material to pervade the whole work (affirmed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991) (copyright originality requires independent creation and minimal creativity)
- Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., 471 U.S. 539 (1985) (originality and scope principles in copyright)
- Sykes v. Anderson, 625 F.3d 294 (6th Cir. 2010) (standard of review for Rule 50(b) JMOL)
- Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 387 F.3d 522 (6th Cir. 2004) (merger doctrine and limits on copyright over ideas)
- Pickett v. Prince, 207 F.3d 402 (7th Cir. 2000) (example of preexisting work pervading derivative works)
- Ets‑Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc., 225 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2000) (discussion of when a work is not derivative because underlying subject is uncopyrightable)