Judge Tosses Copyright Suit Against Jerry Seinfeld Over 'Comedians in Cars' Series
U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan ruled Monday that the suit by Christian Charles, a writer and director who worked with Seinfeld on the show's pilot, was barred under the three-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement claims.
October 01, 2019 at 02:08 PM
4 minute read
Jerry Seinfeld has won a copyright lawsuit from a former collaborator who claimed to have come up with the idea for the hit series "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee."
U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan of the Southern District of New York ruled Monday that the suit by Christian Charles, a writer and director who worked with Seinfeld on the show's pilot, was barred under the three-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement claims.
In a nine-page ruling, Nathan said that Charles knew about his potential claim for ownership as early as 2011, when Seinfeld twice rejected his request for back-end compensation on "Comedians in Cars," making it clear that Charles' only involvement was on a work-for-hire basis.
But Charles, who claimed to have pitched the idea of two friends "driving and talking" to Seinfeld, did not file his lawsuit until February 2018.
According to court documents, Charles worked up a treatment and shot a pilot with Seinfeld when the comedian began developing the show in 2012. The two later had a falling out over Charles' demands for compensation and ownership. Though he was eventually paid nearly $108,00 for his work, Charles had no further involvement with the show.
Charles said in court filings that between 2012 and 2014, he "maintained a reasonable and good faith belief" that Seinfeld would eventually acknowledge his ownership and "bring him in" on the show, which debuted as a popular web series on the streaming service Crackle.
In wasn't until Netflix inked a lucrative deal to bring the show onto its platform in 2017 that Seinfeld's lawyer told Charles directly that Seinfeld was the sole creator and owner of the show, he said.
However, Nathan said that Seinfeld's early rejections were enough to put Charles on notice of his copyright claims, and it was clear that Seinfeld went on to produce the show without him.
"Even if all inferences are drawn in favor of Charles, a reasonably diligent plaintiff would have understood that Seinfeld was repudiating any claim of ownership that Charles may have," Nathan wrote.
"Because Charles was on notice that his ownership claim had been repudiated since at least 2012, his infringement claim is time-barred," she said.
Orin Snyder, a Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner who represented Seinfeld, called the ruling "complete vindication" for his client.
"Jerry created 'Comedians in Cars' and this lawsuit was nothing but a money-grab seeking to capitalize on the success of the show," Snyder said in a statement. "We are pleased that the court saw through the noise and dismissed the case."
Peter Skolnik, who represented Charles, said in a strongly worded statement that he intended to appeal the decision.
"The only thing that has protected Mr. Seinfeld—so far—from having to answer for his arrogant and unprincipled theft of Christian Charles's property is the district court's mistaken analysis of the applicable statute of limitations," said Skolnik, of Clark Guldin in Montclair, New Jersey.
Seinfeld was represented by Snyder and David M. Kusnetz of Gibson Dunn in New York.
The case was captioned Charles v. Seinfeld.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSoundCloud GC Takes Legal Reins of Condé Nast at Tumultuous Time
With SDNY Stay Lifted, Sex Trafficking Civil Suit Against Vince McMahon, WWE Gets Green Light
3 minute readBig Tech and Internet Companies Slammed With Consumer Class Actions in December
Trending Stories
- 1On the Move and After Hours: Goldberg Segalla, Faegre Drinker, Pashman Stein
- 2Recent FTC Cases Against Auto Dealers Suggest Regulators Are Keeping Foot on Accelerator
- 3‘Not A Kindergarten Teacher’: Judge Blasts Keller Postman, Jenner & Block, in Mass Arb Dispute
- 4A&O Shearman, Hogan Lovells and the Stories That Shaped Africa This Year
- 5Borden Ladner Gervais Cyber Expert Warns of AI-Boosted Ransomware Attacks
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250