## Facts

- Abraham Zapruder filmed President John F. Kennedy’s assassination on November 22, 1963, creating a motion-picture record of the event.
- Time Inc., through *Life* magazine, acquired rights in the Zapruder film and published still images from it, maintaining copyright compliance.
- Josiah Thompson authored *Six Seconds in Dallas*, a critical study of the assassination and the Warren Commission’s account.
- After *Life* repeatedly refused permission to reproduce Zapruder frames, defendants arranged for an artist to create charcoal drawings that were exact copies of 22 frames and included them as “sketches” in the book.
- Time Inc. sued Bernard Geis Associates, Bernard Geis, Thompson, and Random House for copyright infringement based on the book’s illustrations.
- Time moved for summary judgment on liability; the court treated the record as permitting judgment for defendants if warranted as a matter of law.

## Issues

1. Whether a motion-picture film depicting a news event, and its individual frames, are copyrightable even though the underlying event is not.
2. Whether defendants’ close charcoal reproductions of 22 Zapruder frames in a critical historical work constituted infringement or fair use.
3. Whether, even assuming technical infringement, relief should be denied due to public interest and minimal market harm.

## Decision

- The court held the Zapruder film was copyrightable and that copying protections extend across media, including drawings.
- The court concluded the book’s use of the 22 copied frames was fair use given its critical, historical purpose, the strong public interest in information about the assassination, and the absence of meaningful injury to Time Inc.
- Time Inc.’s request for summary judgment on liability was denied, and summary judgment was entered for defendants.

## Legal Principles

- Facts and news events are not protected by copyright, but a fixed expressive recording of an event (such as film footage) may be copyrighted.
- Copyright protection is not confined to the original medium; unauthorized copying can occur through reproduction in another medium (e.g., film frames copied as drawings).
- Fair use is an equitable limitation evaluated by the traditional factors: purpose and character of use, nature of the work, amount taken, and market effect.
- Public interest may weigh strongly in the fair-use balance where copyrighted material is used as evidentiary support for criticism and historical analysis.
- Minimal or no market substitution and little economic injury to the copyright holder favors a finding of fair use.

## Conclusion

The court treated the Zapruder film as protected expression but held that exact charcoal reproductions of selected frames in a serious critical study of the Kennedy assassination were fair use, largely because the images served commentary and evidentiary purposes, the public interest in the subject was exceptional, and the use caused little or no market harm.


Time Inc. v. Bernard Geis Assocs., 293 F. Supp. 130 (S.D.N.Y. 1968)