## Facts

- A writer created a screenplay about a small, family-run funeral home in Connecticut after the suicide of the patriarch; two sons inherit the struggling business.
- The screenplay’s central storyline is a murder mystery tied to the parents’ deaths and includes a business-revival arc involving pressure from a corporate competitor.
- The writer gave a copy of the screenplay to a chiropractor, who offered to pass it to a friend who was an executive in original programming at a cable network.
- A television series later aired about a family running a funeral home in Los Angeles after the sudden death of the patriarch in a car accident.
- The series uses an episodic structure, often beginning with a death each episode, and focuses primarily on the family’s relationships and themes surrounding death.
- The copyright holder sued the network and related entities for infringement, alleging similarities including a family-run funeral home, the death of the patriarch, and sibling conflict over the business.
- The district court assumed access for summary-judgment purposes but granted summary judgment for defendants for lack of substantial similarity and denied further discovery.
- Plaintiffs appealed the substantial-similarity ruling and the denial of additional discovery.

## Issues

1. Whether the works are substantially similar in protectable expression such that a reasonable jury could find copyright infringement.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying additional discovery before ruling on summary judgment.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for defendants.
- Assuming access, the court held no reasonable juror could find substantial similarity of protectable elements under the extrinsic test.
- The court affirmed denial of additional discovery because further discovery could not change the outcome where protectable expression was not substantially similar.

## Legal Principles

- Copyright infringement requires (1) ownership of a valid copyright and (2) copying of original constituent elements.
- In the absence of direct evidence of copying, a plaintiff may rely on access plus substantial similarity.
- At summary judgment, the Ninth Circuit applies the extrinsic test: an objective comparison of concrete expressive elements (e.g., plot, themes, dialogue, mood, setting, pace, characters, and sequence of events).
- Courts must filter out unprotectable material, including general ideas, stock elements, and scènes à faire that naturally flow from a premise.
- Shared premises (e.g., a family funeral home, a dead parent, sibling tensions) are not enough without similarity in specific, protectable expression.
- When lack of substantial similarity is dispositive even assuming access, additional discovery into access or copying may be denied as futile.

## Conclusion

The court held that similarities between a funeral-home screenplay and a funeral-home television series reflected unprotectable ideas and stock elements rather than shared protectable expression; it therefore affirmed summary judgment for defendants and upheld denial of further discovery.


Funky Films, Inc. v. Time Warner Ent. Co., 462 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2006)