Can You Copyright a Car as a Character?
Can a car become so iconic in a movie that it becomes a copyrightable character in its own right? People may remember the green 1968 Ford Mustang GT driven by Steve McQueen in the movie “Bullitt,” but could that particular version of the car be copyrightable as a character? That was the question posed before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California when Denice Halicki asserted a copyright on a Shelby GT500 which would prohibit the Shelby Trust from licensing other people and companies to manufacture, sell, or auction Shelby GT500s.
The copyright claim stems from a film made by Ms. Halicki’s spouse H.B. “Toby” Halicki who produced/directed the 1974 “Gone in 60 Seconds” film, the 1982 “The Junkman” film, and the 1983 “Deadline Auto Theft” film. A black and yellow 1971 Ford Mustang code-named “Eleanor” was used in the Halicki’s “Gone in 60 Seconds” and “Deadline Auto Theft” films, and one of the beaten prop cars from “Gone in 60 Seconds” was used in “The Junkman.” In 2000, a remake of “Gone in 60 Seconds” was released in which the code name “Eleanor” was used to refer to a rare Shelby Mustang GT500 which was painted black and grey in the movie. Ms. Halicki claimed that all these multiple cars referred to as “Eleanor” appearing across the four above-mentioned movies comprised a single copyrightable character belonging to her.
In the thorough 41-page opinion in November 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California reject the notion that the “Eleanor” vehicles depicted in the films could be granted “character” copyright protection. The court ruled that Halicki “assign(ed) anthropomorphic characteristics to the [Eleanor] character, such as strength, talent, endurance, and a tendency to always save her leading man. In the Court’s view, these characteristics are an invention of overzealous advocacy.” In addition, the court’s ruling notes that Eleanor is portrayed inconsistently across and within each of the four films, that the application of a human name to a car is not particularly unique, and that “Eleanor’s make and model do not make it especially distinctive. Eleanor is not entitled to standalone copyright protection as a matter of law.”
In November 2023, the same court rejected Ms. Halicki’s fallback argument that a 2007 settlement agreement prevented the Shelby Trust and its licensees from selling newly manufactured Shelby GT500s made under license to Carroll Shelby Licensing. The court found that this argument was not supported by the text of the contract, finally bringing the decade-long case to a close.
BUT WAIT, Mrs. Halicki has filed an appeal before the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. So, the saga continues on longer than any of the chase scenes in any of the movies involving Eleanor herself.
Someone from the Renner Otto team would be happy to discuss this topic or any related Intellectual Property matters. Contact us for a complimentary consultation to see how we can help your business move your innovation forward. The attorneys at Renner Otto strive to be authorities in all matters concerning the ever-evolving landscape of Intellectual Property; however, the information provided on our website is not intended to be legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship.