Background
Dr. Frederick Perls wrote an unpublished article titled “Psychopathology of Awareness.” After his death, its copyright passed to his wife, Laura Perls. In 1991, Laura’s estate granted the Center for Gestalt Development exclusive rights to publish a collection of Perls’s unpublished manuscripts that included the article. The parties later agreed, however, that the contract transferred rights only in the collection, not in the article standing alone.
Charles Bowman and Jean-Marie Robine included the article in a book of the same name, supplemented by commentary from gestalt therapists. The book went to print in December 2019 and became available for sale in February 2020. Before the Center acquired the article’s copyright in 2021, Laura Perls’s children—then the copyright owners—had authorized Bowman and Robine, through Leslie Gold, to use the article in exchange for royalties. The Center sued for infringement, but the district court granted Bowman and Robine summary judgment.
The Court’s Holding
The Seventh Circuit affirmed. Under Sections 103(b) and 201(c) of the Copyright Act, copyright in a compilation is distinct from copyright in its component works. The Center’s 1991 rights in the collection therefore did not give it the exclusive right to publish, or prevent others from publishing, the “Psychopathology of Awareness” article separately from that collection.
Although the Center acquired the article’s copyright in 2021, it took that copyright subject to Bowman and Robine’s preexisting nonexclusive oral license. The license did not need to be in writing because it transferred permission to use the work, not copyright ownership, and payment of royalties made it irrevocable. Any infringement before that license arose belonged to the Perls siblings, who owned the article’s copyright at the time; their settlement with the Center did not transfer accrued infringement claims.
Key Takeaways
- A compilation copyright protects the compiler’s original selection, coordination, or arrangement, not the copyrights in the individual works included in the compilation.
- A copyright owner may grant a valid nonexclusive license orally, and consideration can make that license irrevocable.
- A later copyright assignee generally cannot sue for infringement that occurred before the assignment unless the right to pursue those accrued claims was also transferred.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the need for contracts involving anthologies, archives, and collected works to distinguish expressly between rights in the compilation and rights in each component work. Ownership of the larger collection does not itself confer authority over a contribution standing alone.
It also confirms that later purchasers or assignees of copyrights take subject to existing licenses and must obtain an express transfer of accrued infringement claims if they intend to pursue violations predating their ownership.