High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
09-2878-cv
IN THE
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
J.D. S
ALINGER
, individually and as Trustee of the J.D. Salinger Literary Trust,
Plaintiff-Appellee
,—against—F
REDRIK
C
OLTING
, writing under the name John David California,W
INDUPBIRD
P
UBLISHING
L
TD
., N
ICOTEXT
A.B., andABP, I
NC
.,doing business as SCB Distributors, Inc.,
Defendants-Appellants
.
ON APPEALFROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICTOF NEWYORK
BRIEF FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
M
ARCIA
B
ETH
P
AUL
D
AVIS
W
RIGHT
T
REMAINE
LLP1633 Broadway, 27th FloorNew York, New York 10019(212) 489-8230
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellee
d
i
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Appellee J.D. Salinger is an individual. No publicly held corporations have
an interest in The J.D. Salinger Literary Trust.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
.........................................................
i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
...................................................................................
iv
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
...............................................................................
1
COUNTER
-
STATEMENT OF ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW
.................
2
COUNTER
-
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
.............................................................
3
COUNTER
-
STATEMENT OF FACTS
...................................................................
5
The Catcher in the Rye
and Holden
.....................................................................
5Salingers Protection of His Intellectual Property
...............................................
6
Comparison of the Works
....................................................................................
6
The Decision Below
...........................................................................................
11
COUNTER
-
STATEMENT OF STANDARD OF REVIEW
................................
.
15
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
..............................................................................
16
AR
GUMENT
..........................................................................................................
20
I.
THE DISTRICT COURT APPLIED THE PROPER STANDARDON PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
......................................................
20
II.
THERE IS NO REASON TO DISTURB THE FINDING BELOWTHAT SALINGER IS LIKELY TO SUCCEED ON THE MERITS
.....
20
A.
The District Court Properly Found That
60 Years
Infringes
Salingers Copyright in the Holden Character
..............................
21
1.
The Scope of Character Protection
.....................................
22
2.
Substantial Similarity of the Characters
.............................
25
B.
60 Years
is an Unauthorized Derivative
........................................
26
III.
THE DISTRICT COURT CORRECTLY FOUND THAT
60
YEARS
IS NOT A FAIR USE
................................................................
.
28
Sections
« prev | next »- PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
- Catcher In The Rye (Catcher). Defendants and amici1
- COUNTER-STATEMENT OF ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW
- COUNTER-STATEMENT OF THE CASE
- COUNTER-STATEMENT OF FACTS
- The Catcher in the Rye and Holden
- Salingers Protection of His Intellectual Property
- Comparison of the Works
- The Decision Below
- COUNTER-STATEMENT OF STANDARD OF REVIEW
- SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
- ARGUMENT
- 1. The Scope of Character Protection
- 2. Substantial Similarity of the Characters
- B. 60 Years is an Unauthorized Derivative
- A. The Purpose and Character of the Use
- 1. Transformative Use Generally
- 2. Parody is a Form of Transformative Use
- 4. The Sequel is Not a Parody
- a. No Joinder of Reference and Ridicule
- 5. The Sequel is Not Otherwise Transformative
- 7. Defendants Bad Faith Cuts Against Fair Use
- B. The Nature of the Copyrighted Work
- C. The Amount and Substantiality of the Taking
- D. The Impact On the Actual Or Potential Market
- A. Balancing the Harm to the Parties
- CONCLUSION
Add a Comment