v. Video Yesteryear, 85 F.3d 1424, 1428 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing 3 Nimmer § 10.03[A] at 10-39; Valente-Kritzer Video v. Pinckney, 881 F.2d 772, 775 (9th Cir. 1989); Eden Toys, Inc. v. Florelee Undergarment Co., 697 F.2d 27, 36 (2d Cir. 1982)). Moreover, under the 1909 Act, where an author did not register the copyright and instead gave the manuscript to someone else to publish (here, FIP), a written assignment was unnecessary. See Houghton Mifflin Co. v. Stackpole Sons, Inc., 104 F.2d 306, 311 (2d Cir. 1939). FIP subsequently licensed the Course to Penguin for publishing. FIP later assigned the copyright to FACIM, in writing, subject to the Penguin license. The chain of title is valid and Defendants have not met their burden of proof to demonstrate otherwise.
Because the facts sustain neither the originality defense, nor the fraud on the Copyright Office defense, nor the chain of title defense, Plaintiffs have a valid copyright in the Course.
- B. Infringement
"To prove infringement, a plaintiff with a valid copyright must demonstrate that: '(1) the defendant has actually copied the plaintiff's work; and (2) the copying is illegal because a substantial similarity exists between the defendant's work and
41
