Hurn v. Oursler
Headline: Court says federal judges can decide unfair-competition claims tied to a copyrighted play, but separate claims about an uncopyrighted revision must be dismissed, affecting playwrights and theater producers.
Holding: The Court held that federal courts may decide unfair competition claims that are inseparable from a copyright infringement claim, but separate claims based on an uncopyrighted revision are outside federal power and must be dismissed.
- Lets federal courts decide unfair competition claims tied to a copyright infringement.
- Requires separate state or other suits for claims about uncopyrighted revisions.
Summary
Background
A pair of playwrights sued theater owners and producers, saying the defendants’ play "The Spider" copied their copyrighted play "The Evil Hour." The plaintiffs asked the court to stop public performances and sought money damages and an accounting. The trial court found no copyright infringement and dismissed the complaint; the court of appeals affirmed.
Reasoning
The Court examined whether the federal court had the power to decide a claim of unfair competition that rested on the same facts as the copyright claim. It explained that when one asserted wrong is really a single legal injury, even if described in different ways, the federal court may resolve both the federal copyright question and the related unfair-competition claim on the merits. But the Court distinguished claims that rely on a separate right — for example, complaints about an uncopyrighted revision — which form independent causes of action and lie outside the federal court’s power.
Real world impact
Because the trial court found no infringement, the Court held the linked unfair-competition claim based on the copyrighted play must also be dismissed on the merits. However, claims that depend on an uncopyrighted version remain outside federal court and must be dismissed for lack of power to hear them; those claims can be pursued in other forums if the parties wish.
Dissents or concurrances
Justices Brandeis and Stone would have affirmed the lower court’s decree without the Supreme Court’s modification, preferring no change to the dismissal.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?