Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Leading up to the Case Ian Hamilton—a critic, author, and poet—had requested to work with Salinger on a biography he wanted to publish about Salinger, but Salinger had declined the invitation, as it is well known that Salinger was an extremely private person who was more a recluse than a socialite. Undeterred by the decline, Hamilton wrote a biography about Salinger anyway. The backbone of the biography rested upon unpublished letters Salinger wrote to various people. These letters had been housed in university libraries and accessible to the public (Stanford University Libraries and Academic Information Resources, 2010).
Citation preview
Letters to Holden to
Copyright Brief Salinger v. Random House
Alicia FrancisUniversity of Central Arkansas
J.D. SalingerWho was Salinger?
American novelist, most famous for his 1951 work, The Catcher in the Rye, about a young teenager named Holden Caulfield who travels to New York City after being expelled from a boys’ prep school and whose neurosis plagues him with immense intolerability toward “phonies” and hypocrites in general.
A recluse after fame brought on by Catcher.
Died last year at the age of 91.
Leading up to the Case
Ian Hamilton—a critic, author, and poet—had requested to work with Salinger on a biography he wanted to publish about Salinger, but Salinger had declined the invitation, as it is well known that Salinger was an extremely private person who was more a recluse than a socialite.
Undeterred by the decline, Hamilton wrote a biography about Salinger anyway. The backbone of the biography rested upon unpublished letters Salinger wrote to various people. These letters had been housed in university libraries and accessible to the public (Stanford University Libraries and Academic Information Resources, 2010).
The ProblemSalinger decided to get a copyright license
on the letters with the intention of removing the letters—and references to the letters—from Hamilton’s biography (Copyright Advisory Network, 2009).
Not taking subtle hints, obviously, Hamilton rewrote the biography, changing direct quotes from the letters to paraphrases of the letters.
The CaseSalinger sued Hamilton and Random
House, the biography’s publishing company, for copyright infringement, damages ensued by the infringement, breach of contract, and unfair competition (Copyright Advisory Network, 2009).
It all boiled down to Copyright and Fair Use law. Fair Use states that it is okay to use portions of a copyrighted work as long as it meets certain requirements.
Fair UseAccording to Cornell University’s Legal
Information Institute, it states the following of fair use:“The use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use
the factors to be considered shall include 1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether
such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work; 3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; 4. and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or
value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. “ (Cornell University Law School)
The DecisionGiven this law, the district court judge denied
Salinger’s case initially, but Salinger appealed the decision. When taken to the circuit court, Salinger won out (Primary Materials).
The rationale for the circuit court’s ruling was that the letters were “more of a means of capitalizing on the interest in Salinger than in providing a critical study of the author” (Trademarks 101-Copyright Fair Use Infringement Precedents, 2009).
Image ReferencesSalinger photo. Retrieved November 13,
2011 from: http://www.theipinionsjournal.com/index.php/2010/01/jd-salinger-literary-one-hit-wonder-is-dead/
ReferencesCopyright Advisory Network. (2009, January 8). Retrieved November 13, 2011,
from Salinger v. Random House Inc.: http://librarycopyright.net/wiki/index.php?title=Salinger_v.Random_House_Inc.
Copyright Infringement Myths. (2011). Retrieved November 13, 2011, from NOLO: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/copyright-infringement-myths.html.
Cornell University Law School. (n.d.). Retrieved November 12, 2011, from US Code Title 17,707: Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Primary Materials. (n.d.). Retrieved November 10, 2011, from Stanford University Libraries and Academic Information Resources: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/primary_materials/.
Stanford University Libraries and Academic Information Resources. (2010). Retrieved November 11, 2011, from Summaries of Fair Use Cases: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-c.html.
Trademarks 101-Copyright Fair Use Infringement Precedents. (2009). Retrieved November 13, 2011, from Trademark Eductation and Information: http://www.trademark-education.com/copyright-photo-fair-use.html.
