Page:United States Court of Appeals 06-4222.djvu/5

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.

to this opinion. G&W's digital models were then sent to Saatchi to be employed in a number of advertisements prepared by Saatchi and Toyota in various print, online, and television media.[1]

B

This dispute arose because, according to Meshwerks, it contracted with G&W for only a single use of its models – as part of one Toyota television commercial – and neither Toyota nor any other defendant was allowed to use the digital models created from Meshwerks’ wire-frames in other advertisements. Thus, Meshwerks contends defendants improperly – in violation of copyright laws as well as the parties’ agreement – reused and redistributed the models created by Meshwerks in a host of other media. In support of the allegations that defendants misappropriated its intellectual property, Meshwerks points to the fact that it sought and received copyright registration on its wire-frame models.[2]

In due course, defendants moved for summary judgment on the theory that Meshwerks' wire-frame models lacked sufficient originality to be protected by copyright. Specifically, defendants argued that any original expression found in


  1. G&W also shared one of Meshwerks' original wire-frames with defendant 3D Recon, one of Meshwerks’ competitors hired to work on a subsequent phase of Toyota’s advertising campaign.
  2. An initial suit for copyright infringement was dismissed without prejudice because Meshwerks had not obtained registrations for all of the copyrights it claimed defendants infringed. Meshwerks subsequently registered the copyrights at issue and filed this suit.

-5-