## Facts

- Dashiell Hammett wrote *The Maltese Falcon*, first published serially in 1929; the serial copyrights were assigned to Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., which later published the book and secured a book copyright.
- By earlier agreement, Hammett granted Knopf book publication rights and additional exploitation rights other than first serial publication.
- In 1930, Hammett and Knopf contracted with Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc. for specified motion picture, radio, and television rights to *The Maltese Falcon* writings, accompanied by an instrument described as an “Assignment of Copyright.”
- Years later, Hammett licensed CBS and related parties to create and broadcast radio programming featuring the character Sam Spade, including “The Adventures of Sam Spade,” and wrote a radio story, “The Kandy Tooth,” using Sam Spade.
- Warner and Knopf sued CBS, Hammett, and related participants in the radio program for copyright infringement and unfair competition, seeking an injunction and damages.
- The district court tried liability separately, rejected the claims, and entered judgment for defendants; Warner and Knopf appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the 1930 contract and related instruments granted Warner an exclusive right to use Sam Spade (and character names) apart from adaptations of *The Maltese Falcon*.
2. Whether Hammett’s later Sam Spade radio works and CBS broadcasts infringed protectable expression from *The Maltese Falcon* or invaded Warner’s granted rights.
3. Whether defendants’ use of Sam Spade on radio constituted unfair competition by trading on Warner’s goodwill or confusing audiences.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the judgment for defendants.
- The court held Warner did not obtain exclusive rights to use the characters and their names because the instruments did not explicitly grant such rights.
- Reading the grant as limited to specified adaptation and exploitation rights, the court declined to construe general language as creating a monopoly over Sam Spade in new stories.
- The court found no sufficient showing that the later radio works copied protectable expression from *The Maltese Falcon* rather than merely reusing the character.
- The court upheld rejection of the unfair competition claim in the absence of evidence of passing off or likely source confusion.

## Legal Principles

- A transfer of copyright-related interests is construed according to the agreement’s specific grants; enumerated adaptation rights do not, without clear language, include broad exclusive “character rights.”
- Under ejusdem generis, general terms following specific grants are confined to the same class as the specifics and will not be expanded to convey unmentioned rights.
- Reuse of a fictional character, without copying protectable expression from a prior work, does not by itself establish copyright infringement.
- Unfair competition requires more than use of a character name; liability generally depends on misleading conduct such as passing off or likely confusion as to source or sponsorship.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit treated the dispute as primarily contractual and held that Warner’s adaptation rights in *The Maltese Falcon* did not include an unexpressed, exclusive right to the Sam Spade character and name; the later Sam Spade radio programs were not shown to infringe protectable expression or to mislead audiences into believing they were Warner productions.


Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc. v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc., 216 F.2d 945 (9th Cir. 1954)