Legal Question in Business Law in California

Re: Copyright & Patent Violations

1. A studio would only violate a copyright if it had actually copied from the plaintiff's material. Where the similarity is merely coincidence there is no violation, no matter how strong the similarity may be. Writers who see movies which strongly resemble their works often believe the screenplay was copied from them and sometimes they are right, but in order to prove their case they must show both that the two stories are very similar and that those responsible for making the movie had actually taken the story from the prior work.

At trial the plaintiff bears the burden of proving both of these elements; in other words, he has to prove copying and the studio does not have to prove an innocent coincidence. This is why studios are not obliged to read every book that has ever been written in order to guard against such suits. Even so, many producers document the steps they take while preparing the movie so that they can disprove a claim of copying if one should arise.

The reason writers only sue over successful movies is that the damages they are entitled to collect are largely based upon the film's profits. If the movie fails financially then the cost of bringing a lawsuit will not be justified.

2. Unlike copyright infringement, patent infringement does not require actual copying. Also, only the actual inventor is entitled to seek a patent; merely being the first to apply for a patent is not enough. If you invent something and then I happen to invent the same thing independently, I am not entitled to a patent regardless of whether you have obtained one or not. I may get one if you don't apply and I do, but you could challenge my patent in court and such a suit should be successful. This is what happened with the patent for the intermitent windshield wiper.

Re: Copyright & Patent Violations

As to the first question, there is inadvertent similarity and there is deliberate copying. If I produce a movie that just happens to have the same plot as someone's book of 50 years ago, it is up to the copyright holder to prove that I took my idea from the book. That can't be shown. Successful idea-pirating lawsuits arise from situations where the plaintiff author and the defendant producer have been in contact and have discussed the story line. This is a very general answer and doesn't cover the subject by any means, but perhaps you get the general idea.

As to ideas and patents, I'd say that a patent or patent application is about the only way to protect an idea that has been disclosed through publication or production of the product, but ideas that are not yet publicized can be protected as trade secrets through non-disclosure agreements between the inventor and possible developers. So, if I think of a way to improve the basic widget, I can go to Amalgamated Widget Works, Inc. and, by having them sign a suitable agreement, discuss with them their possible interest in buying or licensing my idea. There is always risk that the idea will leak or the other party will make minor changes and claim they thought of it first. The whole area of patents and trade secrets is full of expensive litigation.

Re: Copyright & Patent Violations

You are confusing reality with what you have heard or read in the media, the two are not the same. In the world of Media Hype there are always people who claim that this or that lawsuit, or most lawsuits, or all lawsuits, are baseless. In the real world, most lawyers (who, after all, are in business to make money) only take good cases. In the realms of copyright and patent infringement these include cases where there is some proof that the defendant had access to the plaintiff's creative work or invention before producing the movie or manufacturing the product.