Benay v. Warner Brothers Entertainment, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
607 F.3d 620 (2010)
- Written by Mike Cicero , JD
Facts
Aaron Benay and Matthew Benay (plaintiffs) authored a screenplay titled The Last Samurai (the screenplay) and registered their copyright for the screenplay. Later, on December 5, 2003, a film titled The Last Samurai (the film) was released. Two years later, the Benays sued Warner Brothers Entertainment, Inc. and others (collectively, WB) (defendants) in a federal district court for copyright infringement, asserting that important aspects of the film had been copied from the screenplay. WB contended that it had developed the film independently of the screenplay. Although WB did not challenge the Benays’ copyright validity, WB moved for summary judgment of noninfringement. The district court conducted an extrinsic-test analysis evaluating the similarities between the screenplay and the film in terms of the plots and sequences of events, characters, themes, settings, mood, pacing, and dialogue. The district court concluded that the most significant similarities involved unprotectable elements. For instance, although both plots included an 1870s samurai uprising in Japan, such an uprising actually did occur in Japan, making that similarity based on historical fact, which copyright law does not protect. The district court granted WB’s summary-judgment motion. The Benays appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fletcher, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
