You are on page 1of 3

Sebastien Kraft

(Attorney - Salinger v. Colting)

Theme: Mr. C belongs to J.D.

Our Witnesses:
Kenneth D Crews (Expert on Fair use)
Fair Use: A Place in the World
Several articles/books/publications analyzing the application of fair use and other
copyright exceptions.

Deborah A. Batts (original judge)

Ori Zwerdling
Anthony Falzone (Expert on fair use/copyright law)
Aidan Reilly
Unfair Competition Laws
Marcia Beth Paul (Salinger lawyer in original trial)
Julie Ahrens (Expert on fair use/copyright)- 7 years 5 months in working with fair use mainly
Rebecca Rich
Response to common objections to case (?)
Ivan Hoffman (Expert on protection of fictional characters)
J.D. Salinger (Defendant)

July 16, 1951 - Catcher in the Rye was published. Since that day, the book has become an icon of
American literature. Holden Caulfield, a character etched in American lore by Mr. Salinger, has
recently been renamed Mr. C. In 60 Years later: Coming Through the Rye by Fredrik Colting,
Mr. C has a sister named Phoebe, calls everyone phonies, and regularly incorporates the words
helluva and goddamn into his speech. This adaptation of Holden Caulfield is not an
adaptation; he is Holden Caulfield. Mr. Colting has not transformed Mr. Salingers work, but has
rather set it in a new time period, in which Caulfield is 76 years old. This is why, whether it be
1951 or 2009, Mr. C belongs to J.D.
Two categories of Fair Use:
Commentary and Criticism; doesn't fit b/c comm./crit. describes the copying of only a few
quotes or paragraphs.
Parody; cant be parody b/c works are closely related and 60 Years Later in no way ridicules
Rights granted under Copyright Law:
Right to reproduce: according to Copyright Act of 1976, copyright infringement is must be
"substantial and material." As we will discuss further, Mr. Coltings reproduction of Mr.

Sebastien Kraft
(Attorney - Salinger v. Colting)
Salingers work is not transformative enough to escape the substantial and material
Right to prepare derivative works: In order to refer to the derivative works principle, must prove
that Coltings rendition of the book is transformative enough. However, we do not believe that
Coltings adaptation sufficiently changes the content of Catcher in the Rye.

Opening Statement FINAL DRAFT

If I were to call you a goddamn phony, who would you think of? If I were to tell you
about a boy and his beloved sister, Phoebe, who would you say the boy is? If your answer to
these questions is Holden Caulfield, then your answer must also be J.D. Salinger. Holden
Caulfield, a character etched in American lore by Mr. Salinger, has recently been renamed Mr.
C by Mr. Fredrik Colting in 60 Years later: Coming Through the Rye. Mr. C is not based on or
adapted from Holden Caulfield; he is Holden Caulfield. Indeed, Mr. Colting has failed to
transform Mr. Salingers work, using diction, word choice, and characterization that is eerily
similar to those contained in Salingers 1951 novel. In addition, Mr. Coltings inclusion of
gratuitous sexual descriptions, and his attempt to kill off Holden Caulfield at a nursing home
have shed a false light on Salingers work, tarnishing its reputation beyond reclamation. If Elia
Kazan wasnt granted the rights to stage it on Broadway, and Steven Spielberg and Harvey
Weinstein werent allowed to adapt it on the movie screen, then why should Fredrik Colting be
able to pen his own rendition of The Catcher in the Rye without even asking for the rights to Mr.
Salingers work? There are four criteria for patent owners seeking an injunction, established by
the precedent set forth in the 2006 court case eBay v. MercExchange:
(1) that the patent has suffered irreparable injury;
(2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are inadequate to compensate for
that injury;
(3) that a remedy in equity is warranted; and
(4) that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction.

Sebastien Kraft
(Attorney - Salinger v. Colting)
In the ensuing moments, you will hear from a fair use expert, the judge from the original
Salinger v. Colting trial, an expert on fair use and copyright law, Mr. Salingers lawyer in the
original trial, another fair use and copyright expert, an expert on the protection of fictional
characters, and the defendant, Mr. Salinger himself. Now, you must now prepare yourself for the
emergence of the truth. The stage is set, the jury is out, and whether it be 1951 or the present day,
Mr. C belongs to J.D.