Home Legend, LLC v. Mannington Mills, Inc.
784 F.3d 1404
| 11th Cir. | 2015Background
- Mannington and Home Legend sell laminate flooring; Mannington registered a copyright (2010) in a two-dimensional décor-paper design called “Glazed Maple,” a composite digital image of fifteen simulated, time-worn maple planks.
- Mannington’s designers fabricated and distressed raw maple planks with tools and stains, photographed and retouched selected planks, and digitally composed the final 120"×100" image.
- Home Legend sold flooring with a design Mannington alleged was virtually identical; Home Legend sought a declaratory judgment that Mannington’s copyright was invalid; the district court granted summary judgment for Home Legend on three independent grounds.
- District court holdings: (1) Glazed Maple lacked sufficient originality; (2) the design was inseparable from the useful article (the flooring) and thus uncopyrightable; (3) the copyright purportedly covered an idea/process rather than protectable expression.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed de novo, viewing facts in Mannington’s favor, and reversed, holding the design is an original, conceptually and physically separable two-dimensional work and that the registration covers the image, not the process.
Issues
| Issue | Mannington's Argument | Home Legend's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Originality: whether Glazed Maple meets the low constitutional/copyright originality threshold | The design reflects independent creation and a modicum of creativity through deliberate distressing, selection, retouching, and arrangement of planks | The design is a slavish copy of natural wood and thus lacks protectable originality (akin to “sweat of the brow” or slavish reproduction) | Held original: Mannington made creative, non‑trivial expressive choices; compilation/arrangement adds protectable originality above Feist’s low bar |
| Separability / Useful article: whether the image is separable from the laminate flooring | The two‑dimensional image is physically separable (interchangeable décor paper) and conceptually separable (could be applied to wallpaper, framed art) | The design is inseparable and functional; neither flooring nor image would be marketable separately; design serves to hide wear | Held separable: evidence supports both physical and conceptual separability; secondary utility (hiding wear) does not negate copyright |
| Idea/process exclusion: whether the registration impermissibly claims an idea or method rather than an image | Copyright protects the specific two‑dimensional digital artwork registered, not the methods used to create it | The registration is effectively for the idea/process of recreating a rustic aged-wood look | Held for Mannington: copyright covers the specific expressive image, not the underlying process or idea |
Key Cases Cited
- Feist Publ’ns v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340 (1991) (originality requires independent creation plus a modicum of creativity)
- Leigh v. Warner Bros., Inc., 212 F.3d 1210 (11th Cir. 2000) (photographs may be original based on choices of lighting, angle, etc.)
- Meshwerks, Inc. v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc., 528 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir. 2008) (computer models that slavishly copy physical designs lack originality)
- BUC Int’l Corp. v. Int’l Yacht Council Ltd., 489 F.3d 1129 (11th Cir. 2007) (originality is a question of fact for jury when factual disputes exist)
- Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. Toy Loft, Inc., 684 F.2d 821 (11th Cir. 1982) (copyright originality standard discussion)
- Montgomery v. Noga, 168 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 1999) (minimal creativity suffices for copyright)
- BellSouth Adver. & Publ’g Corp. v. Donnelly Info. Publ’g, Inc., 999 F.2d 1436 (11th Cir. 1993) (compilation protection limited to original selection/arrangement)
- Norris Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Tel. & Tel. Corp., 696 F.2d 918 (11th Cir. 1983) (physical and conceptual separability tests for useful articles)
- Warren Publ’g, Inc. v. Microdos Data Corp., 115 F.3d 1509 (11th Cir. 1997) (distinction among creative works, derivative works, and compilations)