Sohm v. McGraw-Hill, 16-cv-4255
Joseph Sohm is a professional photographer, and he directly – or through his wholly-owned corporations – licenses his photographs to various publishers, including McGraw-Hill. Sohm issued licenses to McGraw-Hill to utilize some of his photographs, but the licenses were limited in scope. On February 25, 2016, Sohm filed suit against McGraw-Hill, alleging that the company infringed his copyrights by exceeding the limited scope of the licenses it was given.
Sohm outlined for the court examples of the overprinting McGraw-Hill engaged in, and even cited to other court cases in which McGraw-Hill acknowledged liability for copyright infringement. Sohm also noted that McGraw-Hill used his photographs in international editions of its books, and reproduced or distributed photographs to third-party publishers, in violation of the limited license McGraw-Hill had obtained from Sohm.
On April 25, 2016, McGraw-Hill requested that the court dismiss part of Sohm’s complaint, alleging that some of the photographs Sohm is claiming copyrights in are actually in the public domain. McGraw-Hill stated that pictures of the Presidential Seal, Constitution, Declaration of Independence and One and Twenty-Dollar Bills cannot be copyrighted by Sohm, because those images are in the public domain. Sohm disagreed, stating that his “original artistic choices” as they relate to the images, entitle his pictures to copyright protection.
On September 16, 2016, the court denied McGraw-Hill’s request. The court reviewed the case law establishing the requirements for a work to be subject to copyright protection, and more narrowly discussed the requirements for a photograph of a public domain work to qualify for copyright protection. The court accepted Sohm’s certificates of registration as “prima facie evidence” of the validity of his copyrights. Although McGraw-Hill bore the burden of proving the invalidity of the copyrights, it was not allowed to offer any evidence at such an early stage in the proceedings. Thus, the court denied McGraw-Hill’s motion to dismiss.
On October 20, 2016, Sohm filed a Second Amended Complaint, and attached an exhibit outlining his “original artistic choices” for the images McGraw-Hill alleges are in the public domain.