Page:Coinme (USCO Review Board, 2022).pdf/3

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Stephen B. Winters, Esq.
Lane Powell PC
March 28, 2022
 

that the Office may refuse to register a claim if the author “merely added, changed, or combined expected or familiar sets or pairs of colors”).

Additionally, after considering the work as a whole, the Board finds that the selection and coordination of the unprotectable elements that comprise the Work are insufficiently creative to sustain copyright protection. Though some combinations of non-protectable elements may contain sufficient creativity with respect to how they are arranged to support a copyright registration, not every combination will be numerous enough and their arrangement original enough to constitute an original work of authorship. See Satava v. Lowry, 323 F.3d 805, 811 (9th Cir. 2003); Compendium (Third) § 905. While “the standard of originality is low … it does exist.” Feist, 499 U.S. at 363. Here, Sands Costner’s simplistic arrangement of a dot, an arch, and a business name in green and blue coloring does not demonstrate the requisite level of creativity needed to warrant protection. See, e.g., John Muller & Co. v. N.Y. Arrows Soccer Team, Inc., 802 F.2d 989, 990 (8th Cir. 1986) (upholding the Copyright Office’s refusal to register a simple logo consisting of four angled lines which formed an arrow and the word “Arrows” in a cursive script beneath the arrow).

Sands Costner argues that the Work contains creativity due to “[t]he shape and positioning of the green arc and circle, which doubles conceptually as both the dot of the I and as a ‘coin’—soars or jumps over from the word ‘coin’ to the word ‘me,’ creating an artistic representation of the message.” Second Request at 3. However, the author’s intentions, ideas, and concepts underlying the creation of a work are irrelevant to the determination of its copyrightability. See Compendium (Third) § 310.5 (stating that the U.S. Copyright Office “will not consider the author’s inspiration for the work, creative intent, or intended meaning.”).

Finally, the applicant points to other works registered by the Office, arguing that the Office failed to apply the same standard of creativity here. First Request at 4–6; Second Request at 3–5. The Office does not compare works that have been previously issued or refused registration. Compendium (Third) § 309.3 (“The fact that the U.S. Copyright Office registered a particular work does not necessarily mean that the Office will register similar types of works or works that fall within the same category.”). Because determinations of copyrightability are made on a case-by-case basis, the Board declines to engage in a side-by-side comparison with other works.

-3-