This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Intellectual Property
Copyright Infringement
Rights to Characters

Stan Lee Media Inc. v. The Walt Disney Co.

Published: Sep. 21, 2013 | Result Date: Sep. 5, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1:12-cv-2663 Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Colorado


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Robert S. Chapman
(Sauer & Wagner LLP)

Mark T. Barnes

James R. Molen
(Greenberg Glusker LLP)

Jon-Jamison Hill

John V. McDermott


Defendant

Holly C. Ludwig

Randi W. Singer
(Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP)

Frederick J. Baumann

James W. Quinn
(Berg & Androphy)


Facts

Stan Lee Media Inc. filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against The Walt Disney Co.

Stan Lee, a comic book artist, created several well-known characters while employed at Marvel Comics. In 1998, Stan Lee Media Inc. entered into an agreement with the artist wherein Lee assigned to the corporation the copyrights to the comic book characters that he had created, including those that he would create in the future. Several disputes arose in connection with this agreement, including the issue of ownership of the copyrights to Lee's characters.

In 2009, Disney purchased Marvel, turning it into a wholly-owned subsidiary. Disney used copyrighted characters in movies, merchandise, and other media without obtaining Stan Lee Media Inc.'s consent.

This instant lawsuit was filed on Oct. 9, 2012, alleging that Disney had infringed on its copyrights by virtue of the 1998 Agreement. Disney filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that the court has jurisdiction to hear the matter.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant contended that the court lacked personal jurisdiction. Defendant also contended that plaintiff failed to prove the ownership of its copyright because the issue had been litigated in prior lawsuits that were decided against it. Defendant contended that the prior lawsuits barred plaintiff from re-litigating the same issues. Defendant also contended that plaintiff's copyright infringement claim was barred by the statute of limitations. Further, defendant contended that plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts to state a claim.

Result

U.S. District Court Judge William J. Martinez found that plaintiff's claim was barred by issue-preclusion. As a result, plaintiff's amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice in its entirety. The court then entered judgment in favor of Disney.


#118223

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390