Donahue v. Ziv Television Programs, Inc.
California Court of Appeals
245 Cal. App. 2d 593, 54 Cal. Rptr. 130 (1966)
- Written by Matthew Celestin, JD
Facts
In 1955, Frank Donahue and others (collectively, Donahue) (plaintiffs) created the idea for a television show called The Underwater Legion (the Donahue show). Donahue subsequently submitted the idea and several story outlines in writing to Ziv Television Programs, Incorporated (Ziv) and its producer, Tors (defendants). During meetings between Donahue and Ziv executives, the executives discussed the different types of deal options for Donahue to be compensated if Ziv used Donahue’s idea, but no concrete terms were ever decided. In 1958, Ziv aired a television program entitled Sea Hunt (the Ziv show), which was similar to the Donahue show with respect to plot, themes, sequence, and other dramatic features. Donahue filed suit against Ziv and Tor for breach of contract, alleging that Ziv and Tor had used Donahue’s idea and story outlines for the Ziv show without compensating Donahue. Ziv argued that it had not used any portion of Donahue’s idea that was protected by copyright or trademark and that the idea for the Ziv show had been independently conceived by Tors. A jury found in Donahue’s favor, but the trial court granted Ziv’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and a new trial. Donahue appealed and provided substantial evidence that Tors had used Donahue’s idea and story outlines in producing the Ziv show.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kaus, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
