Legal Question in Intellectual Property in Iowa

Re: definition of author

I would advise the opposite of the prior posting. The items included in the book are part of the overall artistic impression of the book, and the editorial revisions may not be "minor" to the non-writing party. Based on the skimpy facts given, the reviser and content selector cannot be absolutely ruled out as being sufficient to be a co-author. Note that one can be a coauthor even if one contributes only a small percentage of original artistic content to a work. Once a co-author, the co-author is entitled to an undivided interest in the whole unless agreement to the contrary is proven. So, the default should be that both are authors, unless facts show otherwise.

The writer may be sole author of the version written by the writer if, and only if, the content selection by the non-writer is not original or is not the selection actually used. Even if the material selected is old, the combination selected may be creative.

Re: definition of author

This isn't a black and white issue. If there isn't a contract between the parties, then one would look at the facts that would manifest the parties' intent, that is whether they intended to be joint authors or joint owners of the work. In your fact pattern, it would appear that the writer contributed an original work of authorship & the other person contributed non-copyrightable ideas which were merged into the work. So, absent additional facts, it would be my opinion that the writer is the author.