Carol Barnhart Inc. v. Economy Cover Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
773 F.2d 411 (1985)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
In March 1982, Carol Barnhart Inc. (Barnhart) (plaintiff) began producing mannequin forms to be used as retail display models for clothing. By December 1982, Barnhart had designed four forms and taken substantial orders from clothing retailers. In early 1983, Economy Cover Corporation (Economy) (defendant) noticed that Barnhart’s forms did not feature any copyright notices and proceeded to copy each of the four forms to produce Economy’s own versions. Economy began marketing the copied forms in September 1983. Barnhart asked Economy to cease production of the copied forms, but Economy refused. Barnhart subsequently applied for copyright registration of Barnhart’s four forms as sculptural works. The registration was granted, and Barnhart again requested that Economy stop producing the copied forms on the basis of copyright infringement. Economy again refused, and in December 1983, Barnhart filed a copyright-infringement suit, seeking an injunction to prevent Economy from continuing to sell the copied forms. Economy moved for summary judgment on the issue of whether the forms where copyrightable works. The district court granted the motion, finding the forms to be utilitarian articles incapable of copyright protection. Barnhart appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mansfield, J.)
Dissent (Newman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
