335 F. Supp. 3d 273
D. Conn.2018Background
- Victor Miller, a WGA member, wrote the treatment and screenplay that became the original Friday the 13th (1979–1980). He signed a short-form "Writer's Flat Deal Contract" with The Manny Company (Manny), which was a WGA signatory; the form did not expressly state "work made for hire."
- Manny (via Sean Cunningham) controlled production and later sold its rights to Georgetown and successors; film released 1980 with Miller credited as sole screenwriter. Georgetown registered the film copyright as a work made for hire.
- Decades later Miller served multiple termination notices under 17 U.S.C. § 203 seeking to reclaim his transferred copyright interests; Horror, Inc. (successor) and Manny sued for declaratory judgment that the screenplay was a work for hire so Miller could not terminate. Miller counterclaimed for declaration that termination was valid.
- Key factual points: Miller wrote primarily at home on his own typewriter, was paid lump-sum project fees (no traditional employee benefits and no payroll tax withholdings), collaborated informally with Cunningham (idea exchange, editorial suggestions, approval authority), and worked on the project for only a short period.
- Court granted summary judgment to Miller, holding he was an independent contractor (not an employee), that the screenplay was not a work made for hire, that Miller was sole author (no timely, viable co-authorship by Cunningham or Scuderi), and that Miller’s Second Termination Notice validly terminated Horror’s rights effective July 1, 2018.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Horror/Manny) | Defendant's Argument (Miller) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Miller’s screenplay was a “work made for hire” under 17 U.S.C. §101(1) | Because Miller was hired under a WGA-signatory contract and the company was a WGA employer, Miller must be an employee and the work a work-for-hire | Apply CCNV agency-law multi-factor test; facts (skills, tools, payment, duration, benefits, tax treatment) show independent contractor status | Miller was an independent contractor; not a work made for hire (summary judgment for Miller) |
| Whether labor-law / collective-bargaining status displaces CCNV test | WGA membership and hiring under a signatory MBA dictate employee status; union context alters definition of "employee" | Labor-law exceptions do not displace CCNV; agency-law test controls for Copyright Act analysis | Labor-law arguments rejected; CCNV test governs; labor law does not require treating Miller as employee |
| Authorship / joint authorship claims by Cunningham and Scuderi | Cunningham and Scuderi contributed creative elements and thus share authorship or own portions of the screenplay | Cunningham’s contributions were general ideas/edits; Miller fixed the expression; no mutual intent to be co-authors; any co-author claims are time-barred | Miller is sole author of screenplay; Cunningham/Scuderi not joint authors; their belated claims are barred by §507(b) statute of limitations |
| Validity/effect of Miller’s termination notices under 17 U.S.C. §203 | Notices defective (didn't name all grantees, failed to identify specific grants, omitted treatment) and thus invalid | Notices reasonably identified grants; termination covers prior drafts/treatments; later notices cured service/address issues | Second Termination Notice valid; effective July 1, 2018; Miller reclaimed copyright in screenplay (with narrow exception noted) |
Key Cases Cited
- Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989) (adopts common-law agency multi-factor test to determine employee vs. independent contractor for work-for-hire)
- Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Darden, 503 U.S. 318 (1992) (reaffirms agency-law approach and rejects broad statutory redefinitions of "employee")
- Aymes v. Bonelli, 980 F.2d 857 (2d Cir. 1992) (identifies which CCNV factors are especially probative in this Circuit)
- Marvel Characters, Inc. v. Simon, 310 F.3d 280 (2d Cir. 2002) (authors cannot contractually convert non-works-for-hire into works-for-hire to evade termination rights)
- Kwan v. Schlein, 634 F.3d 224 (2d Cir. 2011) (statute-of-limitations accrual turns on when a reasonably diligent plaintiff is put on inquiry or there is express repudiation)