Penguin Group (USA), Inc. v. Steinbeck
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
537 F.3d 193 (2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 2383 (2009)

- Written by Sarah Holley, JD
Facts
John Steinbeck entered into an agreement with The Viking Press in 1938 for the publication of some of Steinbeck’s most successful works. The rights granted were later assigned by Viking to Penguin Group (USA) Inc. (plaintiff). When Steinbeck died in 1968, he bequeathed his copyright interests to his widow, Elaine Steinbeck. Later, in 1994, Elaine entered into a new agreement with Penguin. The new agreement provided for the continued publication of all works that were covered by the 1938 agreement, as well as some additional works and more favorable financial terms, and stated that, once signed, it would cancel and supersede the previous agreement. Elaine died in 2003 and bequeathed her copyrights interests to her children and grandchildren from a previous marriage. Then, in 2004, John Steinbeck’s surviving son and grandson (defendants) served a notice of termination on Penguin pursuant to Section 304(c) and (d) of the Copyright Act in an attempt to terminate the grants made by the 1938 agreement. The district court granted summary judgment to the Steinbeck heirs after concluding that the 2004 termination was valid on the grounds that the 1994 agreement was an invalid agreement to the contrary and did not supersede the 1938 grant. Penguin appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sack, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.