Tabberone Logo

Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won
not tay ber own

Tabbers Temptations     www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/ Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Edmund Burke


Lee v. Deck the Walls, Inc., 925 F.Supp. 576 (N.D.Ill.1996):

Plaintiff Annie Lee is an individual artist who draws and publishes works of art. Annie Lee distributes these works of art through Annie Lee and Friends, Inc., a store located in Glenwood, Illinois. Annie Lee is the author and creator of fifteen works of art which are registered with the Register of Copyrights. Annie Lee published these art works on notecards.

Deck the Walls' North Riverside, Illinois store purchased 430 such notecards from Annie Lee. DTW sent the notecards to ART who mounted each work onto a ceramic tile. The process of mounting the art work onto the ceramic tiles is relatively simple. ART trimmed the card images, adhered the cards to a ceramic tile, and covered the image with a clear epoxy resin. ART did not reproduce any of Annie Lee's cards. DTW later repurchased the notecards (now mounted on the tiles) from ART and sold them in its store.

Annie Lee commenced the action alleging that DTW and ART engaged in acts tantamount to copyright infringements and unfair competition. The district court dismissed the unfair competition count leaving only the a copyright infringement claim which was the subject of a motion for summary judgment.

The district court rejected arguments using Mirage Editions and Munoz, describing them as being in error, preferring to focus on whether the tiles represented derivative works under the copyright act.

The mundane act of placing notecards onto a ceramic tile falls into the narrow category of works in which no creative spark exists. Thus, the ceramic tiles are not a new and different original work, but the same exact work placed onto a different background. ART did not display any creativity in gluing Annie Lee's work onto the separate surface. ART did not reproduce the images, did not enlarge or diminish the size of the images, and did not make any alteration to the drawings themselves. To the contrary, ART simply glued onto a ceramic tile the exact same notecards DTW purchased from Annie Lee, and placed a clear epoxy resin coating over the entire tile. Since the notecard is in the same "form" as Annie Lee's original work, it necessarily cannot be in a "form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted." 17 U.S.C. § 101. No intellectual effort or creativity was necessary to transfer the notecard to the tile. It does not meet the definition of a "derivative work."
Court ruled in favor of ART.

counter for iweb