Stan Lee Media, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co.
774 F.3d 1292
| 10th Cir. | 2014Background
- Stan Lee entered a 1998 agreement assigning "all right, title and interest" in characters he created to Stan Lee Entertainment (predecessor to Stan Lee Media) while he remained a part-time Marvel employee.
- In November 1998 Lee also executed a similar assignment to Marvel; in 2001 Lee repudiated the 1998 Agreement, claiming Stan Lee Media materially breached.
- Stan Lee Media recorded the 1998 Agreement with the Copyright Office in 2006 and beginning in 2007 filed multiple lawsuits asserting ownership of pre-1998 Marvel characters (e.g., Spider-Man, X-Men, Iron Man).
- Many courts, including the Southern District of New York (Abadin) and the Ninth Circuit, previously addressed overlapping litigation; the Ninth Circuit dismissed Stan Lee Media’s ownership claims for failure to plead plausibly under Twombly/Iqbal.
- Stan Lee Media sued Disney in Colorado for copyright infringement based on asserted ownership; the district court dismissed, and the Tenth Circuit affirmed on collateral-estoppel grounds because the Ninth Circuit already decided the ownership issue against Stan Lee Media.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Stan Lee Media plausibly pleaded ownership of copyrights in pre-1998 Marvel characters | Stan Lee Media: the 1998 Agreement assigned Lee’s rights to Stan Lee Media, so it owns the characters | Disney: Ninth Circuit already found ownership allegations implausible; Stan Lee Media cannot establish ownership | Held: Stan Lee Media cannot plausibly allege ownership; issue precluded by Ninth Circuit decision |
| Whether the Ninth Circuit judgment is entitled to collateral estoppel in Colorado action | Stan Lee Media: it lacked a full and fair opportunity to litigate plausibility on appeal and could amend complaint | Disney: prior adjudication decided ownership on merits and Stan Lee Media had full opportunity to litigate; amendment would be futile | Held: All elements of collateral estoppel satisfied; issue precluded |
| Whether Stan Lee Media stated a copyright-infringement claim against Disney | Stan Lee Media: Disney’s recent exploitation (films, merchandising) infringed its alleged copyrights within the statute of limitations | Disney: plaintiff lacks ownership, a threshold element; prior rulings and accrual issues bar claim | Held: Claim fails because ownership element is conclusively decided against Stan Lee Media |
| Whether alternative procedural grounds (personal jurisdiction, Abadin preclusion) must be decided | Stan Lee Media: (challenged those defenses) | Disney: raised jurisdictional and other preclusion defenses | Held: Court affirmed on issue-preclusion/ownership ground and did not resolve other alternative defenses |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility pleading standard)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (application of plausibility standard to complaints)
- Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340 (copyright-infringement elements)
- Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (issue preclusion principle)
- Semtek Int’l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497 (preclusive effect of federal judgments)