## Facts

- A creator developed a musical stage show concept featuring three male vocalists performing preexisting songs across multiple genres, connected by bridge dialogue and staged to create a specific dramatic progression.
- The creator recruited three singers and retained final authority over the show’s structure, including the selection, ordering, and medleys of songs and the bridge material.
- The show was registered for copyright protection as a compilation, covering the original selection and arrangement of preexisting musical works and related connecting material.
- After the original production ended due to financial collapse, the three singers continued performing together under a new name and staged seven additional performances without authorization.
- Six of the post-collapse performances largely duplicated the show’s set list and structure (with essentially one substitution); a seventh performance was substantially shorter and did not replicate the full program.
- For the first six unauthorized performances, gross revenues totaled $330,000; the court credited certain costs and deductions, ultimately finding net profits of $101,771.18 attributable to those performances.

## Issues

1. Whether the singers were joint authors (and thus co-owners) of the show’s copyrightable elements, permitting them to perform the work without permission.
2. Whether replicating the show’s selection and arrangement of preexisting songs and bridge material in live performances infringed the compilation copyright.
3. How to calculate profits attributable to infringement and deductible expenses under 17 U.S.C. § 504(b).

## Decision

- The court found the creator (through an assignee) owned the protectable compilation elements of the show and that the singers were not joint authors.
- The court held that the six substantially duplicative performances infringed the compilation copyright by copying the protected selection and arrangement (and associated show structure), despite the underlying songs being preexisting works.
- The court awarded plaintiffs disgorgement of defendants’ net profits attributable to the six infringing performances: $101,771.18 (gross revenues less proven direct costs, overhead, and tax-related deductions).
- The court treated the materially shorter seventh performance differently because it did not replicate the full protected compilation in the same way as the first six performances.

## Legal Principles

- A copyright in a compilation protects the compiler’s original selection, coordination, and arrangement of preexisting materials, not ownership of the underlying works.
- Joint authorship requires more than performer-level input; it depends on co-authorship intent and meaningful contribution to the copyrightable expression of the work as a whole (e.g., its structure and arrangement).
- Copying a protected compilation’s selection and arrangement can constitute infringement even where the underlying components are individually unprotected or separately owned.
- Under 17 U.S.C. § 504(b), the copyright owner must show the infringer’s gross revenues; the infringer bears the burden to prove deductible expenses and to segregate profits not attributable to infringement.

## Conclusion

The court held that performers who continued staging a substantially identical version of a copyrighted song-and-dialogue compilation infringed the compilation rights, rejected their joint-authorship defense, and ordered disgorgement of net profits attributable to the infringing performances.


Caffey v. Cook, 409 F. Supp. 2d 484 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)