## Facts

- Jartech, Inc. produced the motion picture *Behind the Green Door* and, with Mitchell Brothers Film Group, obtained a properly registered copyright under the 1909 Copyright Act.
- Two separate groups of theater operators acquired copies of the film without authorization and publicly exhibited it in their theaters.
- One group defaulted in the district court; the other group (Cinema Adult Theater and its operators) appeared and defended.
- The defending theater group asserted that the film was obscene and that the copyright owners were barred from relief by the equitable doctrine of unclean hands.
- After viewing the film, the district court found it obscene and denied the copyright owners injunctive and monetary relief against the defending theater group.

## Issues

1. Whether the alleged obscenity of a copyrighted work can be asserted as an affirmative defense—via unclean hands or otherwise—to bar relief for copyright infringement under the 1909 Act.
2. Whether the 1909 Act contains, expressly or by implication, an obscenity-based exception to copyrightability.
3. Whether the Copyright Clause imposes content-based limits that would exclude obscene works from congressional copyright protection.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit reversed the judgment denying relief to the copyright owners as to Cinema Adult Theater and its operators.
- The court held that obscenity is not a valid affirmative defense to copyright infringement under the 1909 Act.
- The court declined to decide whether the film was in fact obscene and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its holding.

## Legal Principles

- The 1909 Act’s protection for “all the writings of an author” is facially inclusive and contains no obscenity exception.
- Courts may not use equitable doctrines such as unclean hands to create content-based limitations that conflict with the statutory policy Congress enacted.
- Copyright protection is generally content-neutral; it does not depend on a court’s assessment of a work’s taste, morality, or social value.
- Granting copyright protection does not immunize a work from criminal obscenity regulation; it only provides civil protection against unauthorized copying and exhibition.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit held that a validly copyrighted work remains enforceable even if alleged to be obscene, rejecting obscenity and unclean hands as defenses to infringement under the 1909 Act and remanding for entry of appropriate relief without reaching the obscenity question.


Mitchell Bros. Film Grp. v. Cinema Adult Theater, 604 F.2d 852 (5th Cir. 1979)