## Facts

- The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, a nonprofit corporation, sponsors the Academy Awards and awards recipients copies of the “Oscar” statuette.
- The Oscar is a stylized gold figure of a muscular man holding a sword; the awards ceremony has been widely televised and photographed for decades.
- From 1929 to 1941, the Academy distributed 158 Oscar statuettes to award winners without statutory copyright notice and without written restrictions on recipients’ use.
- In 1941, the Academy registered the statuette as an unpublished work of art and later distributed copies bearing copyright notice and subject to contractual restrictions.
- Creative House Promotions created and sold the “Star Award,” a gold statuette closely resembling the Oscar but shorter and featuring a star instead of a sword.
- The Academy sued for, among other claims, copyright infringement and Lanham Act false designation of origin based on Creative House’s statuette.

## Issues

1. Whether the Academy’s pre-1941 distribution of Oscar statuettes without copyright notice constituted a “general publication” under the 1909 Act, placing the work in the public domain.
2. Whether extensive public exposure of the statuette through photographs, newsreels, and broadcasts constituted a general publication.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Creative House’s request for attorneys’ fees.
4. Whether the Academy was entitled to double costs on appeal.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s holding that the Oscar statuette had entered the public domain through general publication.
- The court held the pre-1941 distribution was, at most, a limited publication to a restricted class (award recipients) for a limited purpose (honoring achievement), without conferring reproduction or unrestricted public-use rights.
- The court rejected the view that lack of copyright notice on the pre-1941 copies, by itself, converted the distribution into a general publication.
- The court distinguished widespread public exposure from publication, concluding that media depictions did not necessarily reflect a general publication of the underlying sculpture.
- On cross-appeal, the court affirmed the denial of attorneys’ fees and denied the Academy’s request for double costs.

## Legal Principles

- Under the 1909 Act, a general publication without required notice could divest common-law protection and dedicate a work to the public domain; a limited publication does not.
- A limited publication occurs when a work is disseminated to a restricted class for a limited purpose and without granting rights of further reproduction or unrestricted distribution.
- The character and purpose of dissemination control the publication analysis; absence of notice is relevant but not determinative where distribution is limited.
- Public visibility of a work through photographs, broadcasts, or news coverage is not necessarily a general publication of the underlying work.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that awarding Oscar statuettes to winners before 1941 did not constitute a general publication that forfeited copyright; the distribution was limited in audience and purpose, so the statuette was not dedicated to the public domain, and the court also affirmed denial of attorneys’ fees and refused double costs.


Acad. of Motion Picture Arts & Scis. v. Creative House Promotions, Inc., 944 F.2d 1446 (9th Cir. 1991)