## Facts

- DC Comics owned copyrights in Batman-related works, including expressive depictions of the Batmobile in comic books and in licensed screen adaptations.
- Mark Towle, doing business as Garage Gotham, manufactured and sold full-size “Batmobile” replica cars modeled on the 1966 television series and the 1989 motion picture versions, typically for about $90,000.
- Towle also sold kits enabling customers to modify their own cars to resemble the Batmobile and marketed the products as Batmobile replicas.
- DC sued Towle in the Central District of California for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and unfair competition.
- The district court granted summary judgment to DC on copyright and trademark claims and rejected Towle’s laches defense to trademark infringement.
- Towle appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether the Batmobile is a protectable character under copyright law.
2. Whether DC retained sufficient rights in the Batmobile as depicted in the 1966 television series and the 1989 motion picture to sue for infringement despite licensing those productions.
3. Whether Towle’s replica cars and kits constituted infringing, unauthorized derivative works.
4. Whether laches was available as a defense to DC’s trademark infringement claim where Towle’s infringement was willful.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for DC.
- The court held the Batmobile is a copyrightable character because it is sufficiently distinctive and consistently delineated across appearances, notwithstanding changes in visual details.
- The court held DC owned a copyright interest in the Batmobile character as expressed in the television series and film because licensing derivative works did not transfer DC’s underlying character rights.
- The court held Towle infringed by creating and selling unauthorized derivative works that copied protectable expressive elements of the Batmobile as depicted in the 1966 series and 1989 film.
- The court held Towle could not assert laches against the trademark claim because the infringement was willful.

## Legal Principles

- A character may be protected by copyright when it (1) has physical as well as conceptual qualities, (2) is sufficiently delineated to be recognizable as the same character across appearances through consistent, identifiable traits, and (3) is especially distinctive and not a stock character.
- The author of an underlying work may sue for unauthorized copying of protectable material appearing in authorized derivative works when the copied material is derived from the underlying work and the author has not transferred ownership of the underlying rights.
- Making and selling a replica that appropriates protectable expressive elements from a copyrighted work can infringe the exclusive right to prepare derivative works, even if not every feature is copied.
- Willful trademark infringement can bar equitable defenses such as laches.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit concluded that the Batmobile is independently copyrightable as a distinctive character and that Towle’s sale of replica cars and modification kits infringed DC’s derivative-work rights; it also affirmed that willful infringement foreclosed a laches defense to DC’s trademark claim.


DC Comics v. Towle, 802 F.3d 1012 (9th Cir. 2015)