Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Aalmuhammed v. Lee

Aalmuhammed v. Lee

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

April 19, 1999, Submitted, 1 Pasadena, California; February 4, 2000, Filed

No. 99-55224

Opinion

 [***1662]  [*1229]   KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge:

This is a copyright case involving a claim of co-authorship of the movie Malcolm X. We reject the "joint work" claim but remand for further proceedings on a quantum meruit claim.

I. FACTS

In 1991, Warner Brothers contracted with Spike Lee and his production companies to make the movie Malcolm X, to be based on the book, The Autobiography of Malcolm X. Lee co-wrote the screenplay, directed, and co-produced the movie, [**2]  which starred Denzel Washington as Malcolm X. Washington asked Jefri Aalmuhammed to assist him in his preparation for the starring role because Aalmuhammed knew a great deal about Malcolm X and Islam. Aalmuhammed, a devout Muslim, was particularly knowledgeable about the life of Malcolm X, having previously written, directed, and produced a documentary film about Malcolm X.

Aalmuhammed joined Washington on the movie set. The movie was filmed in the New York metropolitan area and Egypt. Aalmuhammed presented evidence that his involvement in making the movie was very extensive. He reviewed the shooting script for Spike Lee and Denzel  [*1230]  Washington and suggested extensive script revisions. Some of his script revisions were included in the released version of the film; others were filmed but not included in the released version. Most of the revisions Aalmuhammed made were to ensure the religious and historical accuracy and authenticity of scenes depicting Malcolm X's religious conversion and pilgrimage to Mecca.

Aalmuhammed submitted evidence that he directed Denzel Washington and other actors while on the set, created at least two entire scenes with new characters, translated Arabic into [**3]  English for subtitles, supplied his own voice for voice-overs, selected the proper prayers and religious practices for the characters, and edited parts of the movie during post production. Washington testified in his deposition that Aalmuhammed's contribution to the movie was "great" because he "helped to rewrite, to make more authentic." Once production ended, Aalmuhammed met with numerous Islamic organizations to persuade them that the movie was an accurate depiction of Malcolm X's life.

Aalmuhammed never had a written contract with Warner Brothers, Lee, or Lee's production companies, but he expected Lee to compensate him for his work. He did not intend to work and bear his expenses in New York and Egypt gratuitously. Aalmuhammed [***1663]  ultimately received a check for $ 25,000 from Lee, which he cashed, and a check for $ 100,000 from Washington, which he did not cash.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

202 F.3d 1227 *; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 1378 **; 53 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1661 ***; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P28,010; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Service 940; 2000 Daily Journal DAR 1397

JEFRI AALMUHAMMED, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPIKE LEE; FORTY ACRES AND A MULE FILMWORKS, INC.; BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY CINEMA, INC.; WARNER BROTHERS, a division of Time-Warner Entertainment LP; VICTOR COMPANY OF JAPAN LIMITED; LARGO INTERNATIONAL N.V.; LARGO ENTERTAINMENT, INC.; JCV ENTERTAINMENT, INC., Defendants-Appellees.

Prior History:  [**1]  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. D.C. No. CV-95-07885-JSL. J. Spencer Letts, District Judge, Presiding.

Disposition: AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

CORE TERMS

movie, authors, authorship, creative, film, contributions, co-author, scenes, district court, genuine issue, producer, parties, summary judgment, religious, statute of limitations, dramaturg, script, co-authorship, repudiation, ownership, picture, quantum, meruit, star

Copyright Law, Copyright Infringement Actions, Civil Infringement Actions, General Overview, Governments, Legislation, Statute of Limitations, Time Limitations, Scope of Copyright Protection, Ownership Interests, Joint Authors & Works, Interpretation, Subject Matter, Statutory Copyright & Fixation, Originality Requirement, Protected Subject Matter, Graphic, Pictorial & Sculptural Works, Photographs, Deposit & Registration Requirements, Registration, Application Requirements, Presumptions, Summary Judgment, Formalities, Registration Certificates, Civil Procedure, Federal & State Interrelationships, Choice of Law, Preliminary Considerations, Business & Corporate Compliance, Registration Procedures, Federal Registration, Publication, Federal Unfair Competition Law, False Designation of Origin, Reverse Palming Off, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Dismissal, Involuntary Dismissals, Failure to State Claims