## Facts

- Superior Form Builders, Inc. designed and sold polyurethane animal mannequins used by taxidermists to mount animal skins.
- Superior Form’s owner created the forms by sculpting animals in clay from carcass casts and anatomical references, then producing fiberglass molds and casting polyurethane mannequins with detailed features (e.g., eye receptacles and ear structures).
- Superior Form registered each mannequin with the U.S. Copyright Office as a sculptural work.
- A competitor, Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Co., acquired multiple Superior Form mannequins through an intermediary or pseudonym.
- Chase used the acquired mannequins as models to produce competing forms with little or no modification, registered those forms as its own, and offered them for sale.
- Superior Form sued for copyright infringement and related misconduct, alleging deliberate copying and marketing of the copied forms as Chase’s copyrighted products.
- The district court entered judgment for Superior Form, awarding statutory damages and attorney’s fees; Chase appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether animal mannequins used in taxidermy are unprotectable “useful articles” or copyrightable sculptural works under the Copyright Act.
2. Whether the district court committed reversible error in evidentiary rulings and jury instructions concerning originality, copying, and willfulness.
3. Whether the statutory damages award and attorney’s fee award were an abuse of discretion.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment for Superior Form.
- The court held the mannequins were copyrightable sculptural works, not “useful articles” as defined by the Copyright Act.
- The court found no reversible error in the challenged evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
- The court upheld the statutory damages and attorney’s fees as within the district court’s discretion, supported by findings of willful infringement.

## Legal Principles

- An item is a “useful article” only if it has an intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray appearance or convey information; an object whose intrinsic function is to portray appearance may qualify as a protectable sculptural work.
- Originality requires only a minimal creative contribution; sculptural choices in pose, anatomy, and detailing can satisfy this threshold even when informed by real-world models.
- Evidence of access and substantial similarity, including use of a competitor’s product as a direct model with minimal changes, can support a finding of copying and infringement.
- Statutory damages and attorney’s fees may be upheld where the infringement is willful and the award is within the statutory range and the trial court’s discretionary authority.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit affirmed liability and remedies, holding that taxidermy animal mannequins were copyrightable sculptural works because their intrinsic function was to portray animal appearance, and it sustained statutory damages and attorney’s fees based on willful copying and the trial court’s discretionary determinations.


Superior Form Builders, Inc. v. Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Co., 74 F.3d 488 (4th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 809 (1996)