Scribd

No. 13-1178

In The

Supreme ourt of the United States

_______________ LISA

R.

KIRBY,

NEAL

L.

KIRBY,

SUSAN

N.

KIRBY, BARBARA

J.

KIRBY,

Petitioners,

v. MARVEL CHARACTERS, INCORPORATED, MARVEL WORLDWIDE, INCORPORATED, MVL RIGHTS, LLC, WALT DISNEY COMPANY, MARVEL ENTERTAINMENT, INCORPORATED,

Respondent

.

_______________

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

_______________

BRIEF OF SCREEN ACTORS GUILD-AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TELEVISION AND RADIO ARTISTS

,

DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA INC. AND WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA WEST INC. AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

_______________ D

UNCAN

W.

C

RABTREE

-I

RELAND

Counsel of Record

D

ANIELLE

S.

V

AN

L

IER

SAG-AFTRA 5757 Wilshire Blvd., 7th Fl. Los Angeles, CA 90036 Tel.: (323) 549-6627 dci@sagaftra.org June 13, 2014

(Additional counsel on signature page)

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ....................................... ii

INTEREST OF THE

AMICI CURIAE

....................... 1

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................... 3

ARGUMENT ............................................................... 5

I.

For Over a Half-Century, Federal Courts Found Works Made for Hire Only within Traditional Employment Relationships............... 5

A.

The Copyright Office’s Studies Illustrated

that Works-Made-for-Hire Were a Product of Traditional Employment Relationships ............................................. 8

B.

Evolution of the Instance and Expense Test . 12

i.

Implied Assignment Cases ...................... 14

ii.

Commissioned Works become Works-Made-For Hire ......................................... 15

iii. Subsequent Developments ...................... 17

II.

The Common Law “Instance and Expense”

Test Has Real and Significant Effects Beyond the Litigants of This Case. ................................. 18

A.

The Test Poses a Nearly Insurmountable Hurdle for Creators and Their Heirs ...... 18

B.

Application of the Instance-and-Expense Test Creates a Windfall for Purchasers .. 20

III.

Review is Necessary to Clarify the State of the Law to Avoid Unnecessary Litigation ......... 22

CONCLUSION ......................................................... 25

Appendix A

–

Identification of Amici ...................... A-1

ii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases

Brattleboro Publishing Co v. Winmill Publishing Corp.

, 369 F.2d 565 (2d. Cir. 1966) ........ 3, 4, 15, 16

Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid,

490 U.S. 730, 744 (1989) .............................. passim

Easter Seal Society for Crippled Children and Adults of Louisiana, Inc. v. Playboy Enterprises

, 815 F.2d 323, 325 (5th Cir. 1987) ......................................................... 14, 16, 17

Estate of Hogarth v. Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc.,

342 F.3d 149, 158 (2d Cir. 2003) ........ 14, 15, 16, 18

Lin-Brook Builders Hardware v. Gertler

, 352 F.2d 298 (9th Cir. 1965) ................................. 12, 13

Martha Graham Sch. & Dance Found., Inc. v. Martha Graham Ctr. of Contemporary Dance, Inc

., 380 F.3d 624, 635 (2d Cir. N.Y. 2004) ............................................................... 12, 13

Marvel Characters, Inc. v. Kirby

, 726 F.3d 119 (2d Cir. 2013) .............................................. 4, 13, 19

Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder

, 469 U.S. 153 (1985) ....7, 8

Picture Music, Inc. v. Bourne, Inc.,

457 F.2d 1213 (2d Cir. 1972) .............................................. 16

Playboy Enters. v. Dumas

, 53 F.3d 549, 554 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1995) ................................................ 13, 14

Shapiro, Bernstein & Co. v. Jerry Vogel Music Co

., 221 F.2d 569 (2d. Cir. 1955) .................. 3, 7, 15

Stewart v. Abend

, 495 U.S. 207, 220 (U.S. 1990) .... 19

Yardley v. Houghton Mifflin Co

., 108 F.2d 28 (2d Cir. 1939) ...................................................... 3, 7, 14