Graham School And Dance Foundation, Inc. v. Martha Graham Center Of Contemporary Dance, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the defendant’s list of ballets “filmed and sold” constituted an admission in copyright infringement action
• noting that “evidence that Graham personally received royalties for her dances ... may rebut[ ]” the notion that the dances were made for hire
• finding significant in conclusion that works (choreographed dances) were not made for hire the fact that even after employing the artist to teach she “continued to receive income from other organizations for her dance teaching and choreography”
• “The right to direct and supervise the manner in which the work is created need never be exercised” (emphasis in original)
• “It may well be that the resources of the Center—notably, its rehearsal space and the dancers enrolled at the School—significantly aided Graham in her choreography, thereby arguably satisfying the ‘expense’ component....”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).