Frank Morrissey v. The Procter & Gamble Company Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Plaintiff sued for copyright infringement of contest rules. The court held that simple contest rules with limited expressive options are not copyrightable under the merger doctrine, even if copied.
Legal Significance: This case exemplifies the merger doctrine in copyright law, where an idea and its expression are inseparable, rendering the expression uncopyrightable to prevent monopolization of the underlying idea.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Frank Morrissey, owner of a copyright for a set of rules for a sales promotional sweepstakes contest involving social security numbers, alleged that The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G) infringed his copyright by copying, almost precisely, his Rule 1 for their own contest. Morrissey testified he had mailed his copyrighted rules to P&G. P&G’s employees denied access. P&G’s Rule 1 was substantially similar to Morrissey’s, with minor variations. For example, Morrissey’s rule stated: “Entrants should print name, address and social security number on a boxtop, or a plain paper.” P&G’s rule stated: “Entrants should print name, address and Social Security number on a Tide boxtop, or on [a] plain paper.” Both rules contained nearly identical language regarding the use of a family member’s social security number if the entrant did not have one and disqualification for wrong numbers. The district court granted summary judgment for P&G, finding no copyrightable material and no access.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Are simple contest rules, which describe an uncopyrightable contest idea and offer limited means of expression, protected by copyright such that near-identical copying constitutes infringement?
Affirmed. The plaintiff’s contest rule is not copyrightable because the subject matter Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo conse
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Are simple contest rules, which describe an uncopyrightable contest idea and offer limited means of expression, protected by copyright such that near-identical copying constitutes infringement?
Conclusion
This case is a significant application of the merger doctrine, clarifying that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco lab
Legal Rule
Copyright protection extends only to the expression of an idea, not the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint oc
Legal Analysis
The court first addressed the issue of access, finding the district court Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- When an idea can only be expressed in a very limited