## Facts

- The dispute concerned rights to the 1948 Italian film *Ladri di Biciclette* (*The Bicycle Thief*), first published on December 6, 1948, in Italy by Produzioni De Sica (PDS).
- Defendants claimed exclusive U.S. distribution rights through a 1967 agreement between PDS and Feiner (initially focused on an English-dubbed version), amended in 1970 to include distribution of an Italian-language version “with or without subtitles” and to extend rights through 1992; Feiner licensed rights to Corinth and others.
- PDS later entered bankruptcy; in 1974, Italfilm acquired PDS’s “rights of economic utilization” in the film, subject to third-party rights previously acquired under specified conditions; Italfilm’s rights were later assigned to GFC.
- In 1974, GFC granted IFEX an exclusive license to create and distribute a subtitled version for a term beginning in 1977; IFEX then granted an exclusive license to MacMillian (later Brandon) to exploit the subtitled version.
- Plaintiffs sued for copyright infringement based on their claimed exclusive rights; defendants counterclaimed for infringement based on their claimed exclusive rights.
- Both sides moved for summary judgment.
- The court treated the operative rights questions as governed by the Copyright Act of 1909 because the relevant rights and publication/renewal events occurred while it controlled.

## Issues

1. Whether the original Italian-language film retained U.S. copyright protection under the 1909 Act or had entered the public domain due to lack of a valid, timely renewal.
2. If the original film remained protected, which party’s chain of title conferred exclusive U.S. distribution rights, including any effect of asserted Italian currency-control requirements on contractual validity.

## Decision

- The court held the original Italian-language film entered the public domain in the United States because no valid, timely renewal was filed under the 1909 Act.
- Because the underlying work lacked an enforceable U.S. copyright, neither side could maintain a copyright infringement claim premised on exclusive proprietary rights in the original film.
- The court declined to decide the parties’ competing chain-of-title and foreign-law arguments, treating them as unnecessary after finding public-domain status.
- Summary-judgment relief seeking to enforce exclusive copyright-based rights in the original film was denied in substance to both sides.

## Legal Principles

- Under the 1909 Act, a work’s initial U.S. copyright term ran 28 years from first publication; continuation required a timely renewal by the proper claimant.
- Failure to file a valid, timely renewal causes the work to fall into the public domain, eliminating statutory infringement claims based on exclusive rights in that work.
- Once a work is in the public domain, disputes about competing licenses or assignments do not create enforceable copyright exclusivity against others using the public-domain work; remaining disputes, if any, are not resolved through infringement of a non-existent copyright.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that the film’s U.S. copyright lapsed for want of a timely renewal under the 1909 Act, placing the work in the public domain and defeating both parties’ infringement claims that depended on exclusive rights in the original film.


Int'l Film Exch., Ltd. v. Corinth Films, Inc., 621 F. Supp. 631 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)