Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Jeff Grosso v. Miramax Film Corp., a New York Corporation Miramax Books Spanky Pictures, a New York Corporation David Levien, an Individual Brian Koppelman, an Individual Ted Demme, an Individual Joel Stillerman, an Individual
Citations: 383 F.3d 965; 72 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1543; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 18909Docket: 01-57255
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; September 8, 2004; Federal Appellate Court
Jeff Grosso appealed the district court's judgment favoring Miramax Film Corp. and others, alleging breach of contract and copyright infringement regarding his screenplay *The Shell Game*. Grosso contended that Miramax appropriated his ideas in the film *Rounders*. The appeal examined two district court orders: one granting summary judgment on the copyright claim and another dismissing the state law claim as preempted by the Copyright Act. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the summary judgment on the copyright claim, finding no substantial similarities between the two works in genre, mood, themes, characters, and plot. The only shared elements were generic poker terminology, which is not copyrightable. However, the court reversed the dismissal of Grosso's state law claim for breach of implied contract, which was based on the premise that he disclosed his idea with the expectation of compensation. The court noted that under California law, particularly the *Desny v. Wilder* precedent, an implied contract may arise when one party shares an idea with another, and the second party's acceptance of that idea suggests an obligation to compensate. The court concluded that Grosso's complaint met the requirements for a *Desny* claim, asserting he had submitted his idea to the defendants with the understanding that he would be compensated for its use. Preemption under the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 301) involves a two-part test: (1) the work must fall within copyright subject matter; and (2) state law rights must be equivalent to exclusive copyright rights. The central issue here is whether rights protected by a Desny claim are equivalent to copyright rights. To avoid preemption, a state cause of action must include an "extra element" that alters the nature of the claim. The case of Landsberg v. Scrabble Crossword Game Players established that an implied promise to pay can serve as this extra element. In that case, a plaintiff's contract claim was upheld even though copyright existed, as it centered on the obligation to compensate for disclosed ideas. Conversely, Del Madera found unjust enrichment claims preempted due to the absence of such an element. Grosso's claim for breach of an implied-in-fact contract includes this extra element, thus it is not preempted by the Copyright Act. The district court's summary judgment on the copyright claim is affirmed, but the dismissal of the state law claim is reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Each party will bear its own costs.