Copyright Law
Ronald W. Staudt
Class 8
September 24, 2013
Overview for today
Computer Programs
Photographs
Computer Programs
CONTU and the 1976 Act
“A computer program is a set of statements or instructons to
be used directly or indirectly in a computer in order to bring
about a certain result.”
 Apple v. Franklin
Object v. source code
Source- C, Fortran, Cobol, Basic
Object- machine instructions
ROM v. floppy fixation
Operating system v. application software
Operating system- Linux, Windows Vista,
Application software- WordPerfect, Word, PowerPoint,
Process, system, method of operation
Idea/expression and merger
Lotus Development
Facts
Decision below
Expression & methods of operation
Identical to Baker?
Method of operation
v. screen display or code
macros and compatibility
Concurring opinion- utility and the
calculus of harm
method of operation or privileged use or
shorter term?
Lotus 1-2-3 Command
Menu
Issues
Mitel v. Iqtel
Can a work have both an unprotected “method of
operation” and protectable expression?
Communications to humans
Recipes and compilers
Keeton and utility
Pictorial, Graphic &
Sculptural Works
Today: Photographs
Mannion v. Coors
Diodato v. Spade
Thursday: The Problem of Applied Art
Mannion Case Photographs
Mannion v. Coors
Facts
Three works: Mannion’s, Comp Board &
Coors Billboard
Prima Facie Case
Ownership of a valid copyright
Copying
Improper Appropriation or Infringing Copying
or substantial similarity between protected
elements of P’s and D’s works
Mannion v. Coors
Protectible Elements of Photographs
Rendition
Contrast Bridgeman and SHL —features of the photo not
sweat- usually photographer’s selection of camera, lens,
lighting, filters, etc. is somewhat original.
Timing
Image, not subject evidences creativity
Creation of the Subject
Koons and Seligman
Compare protected elements of Mannion’s photo
to the Coors Billboard—dissection in the 2nd Cir.
Photography examples
Creation of the Subject
Timing
Page 839
Mannion v. Coors
Idea and Expression in Photographs
Compare the Kaplan photos and state the
idea:
Sense of desperation
Businessman contemplating suicide
First person view of businessman contemplating
suicide by jumping from a building with shoes set
against distant street
Idea in photos= general description of
subject or subject matter
Mannion v. Coors
“Thus another photographer may pose a couple
with eight puppies on a bench, depict a
businessman contemplating a leap from an
office building onto a street, or take a picture of
a black man in white athletic wear and showy
jewelry. In each case, however, there would be
infringement (assuming actual copying and
ownership of a valid copyright) if the subject
and rendition were sufficiently like those in the
copyrighted work.”
Mannion v. Coors- result
“The parties have catalogued at length and in
depth the similarities and differences between
these works. In the last analysis, a reasonable
jury could find substantial similarity either
present or absent. As in Kisch v. Ammirati &
Puris Inc., which presents facts as close to this
case as can be imagined, the images are such
that infringement cannot be ruled out - or in as a matter of law.”
Kisch v Ammirati Puris, Inc
Diodato v. Spade
Facts and Photos
Details that are part of the idea
Scenes a faire
Pose as common and predictable
Handbag as standard or de minimis
Summary Judgment for D- Elements copied
from P’s photograph lack originality!
You