Just recently in a compelling twist worthy for a TV drama, a federal judge delivered a decisive victory to auction house Goldin Auctions, streaming giant Netflix, and the producers behind “King of Collectibles,” a reality television series. The legal win came in the form of dismissed copyright infringement allegations lodged against parties involved.
The drama all started with Gervase Peterson, an alum of the popular reality game “Survivor,” crying foul. Peterson stated that he’d pitched a similar concept to Ken Goldin, the founder of Goldin Auctions, back in 2019. The proposed show, dubbed “The Goldin Boys,” was purportedly developed without Peterson’s knowledge or contribution and aired on Netflix – a classic case of an idea whisked away, he claimed.
The heart of the contention was the glaring similarities Peterson identified between his initial pitch and the upbeat pace of the Netflix show, now traversing its second season. After conversing with Peterson regarding the concept, all chatter abruptly halted mid-2020. Shortly after the silence, a show bearing a striking resemblance to Peterson’s pitch sprouted roots.
In their defense, however, the defendants took a solid stance, arguing that their reality series focused mainly on the day-to-day affairs of Goldin Auctions with a dash of genuine peaks into Goldin’s private life – generic ideas not protected under the sturdy umbrella of the Copyright Act.
U.S. District Judge Christine O’Hearn sided with the defendants, stating that the elements Peterson claimed were ripped were categorized as scènes à faire (translated as ‘scenes a faire’), a legal doctrine implying that some scenes or themes typical of a genre are not eligible for copyright protection. In fact, she opined that many aspects of the reality television genre could be pigeonholed into this category, including the array of routine business operations displayed in the “King of Collectibles.”
Judge O’Hearn further emphasized the point by citing that real-life accounts and common elements that make for a gripping reality TV show are regularly deemed unprotectable. She drew references to previous court rulings that had addressed similar issues. The judge’s decision in favor of the defendants reaffirms the complexity and, often, the impossibility in gaining copyright protection for broad themes and concepts commonly used in reality television.
Beyond successfully navigating through gnarly legal tangles, “King of Collectibles” continues to earn its stripes in the competitive world of entertainment. The show recently raked in a nomination for an Emmy award, reinforcing its position as a potential throne holder in the reality TV world. This case sets a precedent, reminding us that reality TV – an everyday slice of life presented for entertainment – might be challenging to protect under copyright law. A broader discussion and revision of copyrighting concepts within the reality television sector are up for the taking.
