Carell V. The Shubert Organization, Inc.: Case Study
Case examples outcomes:
The importance of utilizing all the sources of the Agreement on Trade-Related-Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) is illustrated in the following case:
Case #1: Carell v. The Shubert Organization, Inc.
Facts:
The Plaintiff, Candace Anne Carell was the make-up designer for the New York production of the Broadway musical Cats. The Shubert Organization, Inc. was the New York Corporation that produced Cats. The Shubert Organization also comprised of another production unit called as The Cats Company. The Really Useful Group, Ltd. (RUG), is a British corporation that produced Cats and granted license agreements. Napier was the set and costume designer for the musical.
The Plaintiff states that her contract made no reference to copyrights in …show more content…
However, the Copyright Office declined to cancel Carell’s registration. Further in 1995, Carell was warned by The Cats Company not to claim authorship of the make-up designs.
In 1997, RUG and The Cats Company authorized the creation, production and distribution of the “Official cats Coloring and Activity Book” and also released the video version of Cats which was later aired on television. Further, in 1998, they also released a Cats makeup kit called the “Face Painting Set”. All these releases and playbills or similar programs removed Carell’s name for the Make-up Designs and others were credited.
On July 12, 1999, Plaintiff brought action against 18 defendants including RUG, The Cats Company and Napier, seeking monetary damages, and declaratory and injunctive relief.
On December 1, 1999 the defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) (6).
Issues:
Issue #1: If Carell was the sole owner of the copyright make-up designs?
Issue #2: If the plaintiff’s copyright infringement claims could be
The importance of utilizing all the sources of the Agreement on Trade-Related-Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) is illustrated in the following case:
Case #1: Carell v. The Shubert Organization, Inc.
Facts:
The Plaintiff, Candace Anne Carell was the make-up designer for the New York production of the Broadway musical Cats. The Shubert Organization, Inc. was the New York Corporation that produced Cats. The Shubert Organization also comprised of another production unit called as The Cats Company. The Really Useful Group, Ltd. (RUG), is a British corporation that produced Cats and granted license agreements. Napier was the set and costume designer for the musical.
The Plaintiff states that her contract made no reference to copyrights in …show more content…
However, the Copyright Office declined to cancel Carell’s registration. Further in 1995, Carell was warned by The Cats Company not to claim authorship of the make-up designs.
In 1997, RUG and The Cats Company authorized the creation, production and distribution of the “Official cats Coloring and Activity Book” and also released the video version of Cats which was later aired on television. Further, in 1998, they also released a Cats makeup kit called the “Face Painting Set”. All these releases and playbills or similar programs removed Carell’s name for the Make-up Designs and others were credited.
On July 12, 1999, Plaintiff brought action against 18 defendants including RUG, The Cats Company and Napier, seeking monetary damages, and declaratory and injunctive relief.
On December 1, 1999 the defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) (6).
Issues:
Issue #1: If Carell was the sole owner of the copyright make-up designs?
Issue #2: If the plaintiff’s copyright infringement claims could be