Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an opinion in Beaulieu v. Stockwell, Case No. 21-3833 (August 30, 2022), affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgement that defendants did not infringe plaintiff’s copyrights in Prince photographs.
Allen Beaulieu was Prince’s personal photographer. Beaulieu shot album covers and world tours, and he registered copyrights for his original photographs. Beaulieu began working on a book in 2014. He hired Thomas Crouse and Clint Stockwell to collaborate on the development and promotion of the book, and Beaulieu entered contracts with Crouse and Stockwell related to the promotional activities. After Prince died in 2016, Beaulieu gave photographs to Stockwell to digitize to expand the proposed book. To solicit investors, Stockwell emailed a slideshow of Beaulieu’s photographs and a press release to roughly a dozen people. But the collaboration between Beaulieu, Crouse, and Stockwell fell apart, and Beaulieu demanded his photographs back. Beaulieu filed suit when Stockwell refused to return the photographs, alleging that his former collaborators kept his photographs and used them without permission. Among the allegations was a claim for copyright infringement. The district court found that Stockwell had an implied license to create and distribute the press release and slideshow, and it dismissed Beaulieu’s copyright claims on summary judgment. Beaulieu appealed.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed. The Court explained that the contracts between Beaulieu, Crouse, and Stockwell were not limited to the book, but also included provisions for promotional and merchandising rights. Beaulieu had received a copy of the slideshow and press release prior to the distribution to potential investors in an email from Crouse, which stated: “This is a foundation of all our marketing ideas going forward. It stands as a decent summary of everything we’ve discussed so far.” Beaulieu never objected to the marketing plans memorialized in Crouse’s email. Indeed, Beaulieu received several more emails including the slideshow, showing he was aware of, and did not object to, the distribution of his photographs to market the book. Beaulieu was expressly credited as the photographer of the photographs in the slideshow. The Court concluded that these interactions created an implied license: “Beaulieu’s silence, coupled with continued and normal interactions between him and the collaborators, implied his approval of the marketing plan and the corresponding distribution of his images.” Accordingly, the Court affirmed the dismissal of Beaulieu’s copyright infringement claims.