The following excerpt is from Siegler v. Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., CASE No. 3:18-cv-01681-GPC-NLS (S.D. Cal. 2019):
Id. at 105. "[R]ecognizing this vital distinction between ideas and expression, courts have routinely held that the copyright for a work describing how to perform a process does not extend to the process itself," and held against plaintiffs on that basis. Bikram's Yoga, 803 F.3d at 1037-38 (holding that a "system" of yoga poses and breathing exercises described in copyrighted books were not copyrightable in and of themselves and affirming summary judgment in favor of defendant who incorporated the poses and exercises in their yoga class offerings); see e.g., Rosado v. Roman, 16-CV-784-SI, 2017 WL 3473177, at *3 (D. Or. Aug. 11, 2017) (granting motion to dismiss because plaintiff's copyrights to technical drawings of water pipes did not confer on the plaintiff "the exclusive right to manufacture from his technical drawings").
Because ideas may not be copyrighted, there is no unlawful appropriation, and
Page 16
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.