Alice Childress v. Clarice Taylor, Paul B. Berkowsky, the Moms Company, and Ben Caldwell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that joint authorship cannot be based on incidental suggestions and “minor bits of expression”
• noting that parties need not “under[stand] precisely the legal consequences of [their] relationship”
• discussing joint authorship inquiry “where one person [ ] is indisputably the dominant author of the work and the only issue is whether that person is the sole author or she and another [] are joint authors”
• discussing joint 7 authorship inquiry ʺwhere one person [] is indisputably the dominant author of 8 the work and the only issue is whether that person is the sole author or she and 9 another [] are joint authorsʺ
• “[W]hatever thought of co-authorship might have existed in Taylor’s mind was emphatically not shared by the purported coauthor.”
• “[A] useful test will be whether, in the absence of contractual agreements concerning listed authorship, each participant intended that all would be identified as co-authors.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).