Dr. Seuss Enterprises, LP v. Penguin Books USA, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997 · Property

109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997)

Updated July 23, 2026

PropertyCopyrightTrademarkFair UseParodysatiretransformative usesubstantial similarity

Facts

Dr. Seuss Enterprises owned copyrights in several Dr. Seuss works and common law trademark rights in "Dr. Seuss," "Cat in the Hat," and the Cat's distinctive stove-pipe hat. Penguin and Dove published an unauthorized rhyming account of the O.J. Simpson murder trial titled The Cat NOT in the Hat! A Parody by Dr. Juice, which used Seuss-like lettering and illustrations and repeatedly depicted Simpson wearing the Cat's distinctive hat. Katz admitted the illustrations and lettering were inspired by The Cat in the Hat and stated that The Cat in the Hat was the object of his parody. About 12,000 copies had been printed when the district court enjoined distribution.

Issue

Whether The Cat NOT in the Hat! likely infringed Seuss's copyrights and trademarks, and if so, whether the copying was excused as fair use parody. Also, whether the district court abused its discretion by enjoining distribution of the entire book.

Rule

Copyright infringement requires ownership of a valid copyright and infringement through substantial similarity in protected expression, assessed through objective and subjective analyses of expression. For fair use, courts weigh the four statutory factors case by case; a parody must use elements of the original to create a new work that at least in part comments on that original, whereas satire that merely uses the original as a vehicle to comment on something else has a diminished claim to fair use. Trademark infringement turns on likelihood of confusion, analyzed in the Ninth Circuit under the eight Sleekcraft factors.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Portland, an author releases a commercial picture book about a mayoral bribery scandal. The book copies the distinctive look and recurring costume of a famous fictional rabbit from a children's series and tells the scandal in that author's signature rhyme, but nowhere comments on the rabbit books or their style except to borrow them as a framing device.

If the copyright owner seeks a preliminary injunction and the author argues fair use because the book is a parody, which is the strongest response?

Explanation. A parody must use elements of the original to create a new work that at least in part comments on that original. When the borrowed work is merely a vehicle to comment on something else, the use is satire, not parody, and its fair-use claim diminishes. Commercial borrowing to attract attention without critical bearing on the original weighs against fair use.