## Facts

- A survivors’ organization commissioned Henry R. Huttenbach, a Holocaust studies professor, to write a history memorializing the Riga Ghetto based largely on survivor testimony.
- Huttenbach conducted well over 100 interviews, created and catalogued collected materials (tapes, transcripts, documents, memorabilia), and assembled what the parties treated as an archive of Riga Ghetto materials.
- The parties executed a June 14, 1982 contract setting deadlines and compensation and stating the organization would assume full ownership and all copyrights in the manuscript; the manuscript would be published under Huttenbach’s authorship with the organization as sponsor/publisher.
- Later agreements modified timing and reaffirmed the organization’s ownership; one characterized the book as a work for hire and included a covenant restricting Huttenbach from preparing another book or article about the Riga Ghetto until a specified date.
- The relationship deteriorated after delays, Huttenbach’s publication of a chapter-length summary before completion, and the organization’s dissatisfaction with the manuscript’s accuracy and presentation.
- The organization sued for breach of contract and sought return of the manuscript and archive and to prevent competing publication; Huttenbach denied breach, sought to compel the organization to proceed with publication, counterclaimed for damages, and asserted the later agreements were signed under duress and that he owned the manuscript.

## Issues

1. Whether contracts assigning “full ownership and all copyrights” in a commissioned manuscript to the sponsoring organization vested copyright and control of the manuscript in the organization despite a publication dispute.
2. Whether the later agreements, including a work-for-hire designation and a covenant limiting competing publication, were voidable for duress.
3. Whether the organization was entitled to possession and control of the manuscript and associated archival materials, and what limits could be placed on the author’s further use of the Riga Ghetto interview-based materials.

## Decision

- The court held that the organization owned the manuscript and its copyrights under the parties’ agreements and could enforce those ownership rights despite the parties’ disagreement over publication.
- The court rejected Huttenbach’s duress claim and enforced the later agreements’ terms, including restrictions on publishing competing work about the Riga Ghetto during the agreed period.
- The court granted relief favoring the organization’s right to obtain possession of the manuscript and archival materials, while recognizing that Huttenbach could continue scholarly work generally so long as he complied with contractual limits tied to the Riga Ghetto project.
- Huttenbach was not declared the owner of the manuscript; his counterclaims were not sustained on the central ownership and control questions.

## Legal Principles

- Clear contractual language assigning “full ownership and all copyrights” in a commissioned manuscript is enforceable between the parties and controls allocation of copyright and proprietary interests in the work.
- A work-for-hire designation and related publishing covenants in subsequent agreements will be enforced absent a legally sufficient basis to invalidate the contract.
- Under New York law, duress requires wrongful or unlawful pressure leaving no reasonable alternative; hard bargaining or insistence on revised terms in response to delay or unauthorized disclosure does not, by itself, establish duress.
- Contractual ownership and possession of interview-derived materials and research compilations may be awarded to the sponsor, while an author may retain personal authorship attribution and general scholarly competence, subject to enforceable noncompetition and use restrictions agreed to by contract.

## Conclusion

The court enforced contracts placing copyright ownership and control of a commissioned, interview-based historical manuscript and related materials in the sponsoring survivors’ organization, rejected the author’s duress challenge to later work-for-hire and noncompetition terms, and required the author to honor agreed limits on competing publication while permitting general scholarly activity consistent with the contracts.


Society of Survivors of the Riga Ghetto, Inc. v. Huttenbach, 535 N.Y.S.2d 670 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. 1988)