Seiler v. Lucasfilm, Ltd.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987 · Evidence

808 F.2d 1316 (1987)

Updated August 1, 2026

Evidencebest evidence ruleFederal Rules of Evidence 1001-1008Rule 1002Rule 1004(1)Rule 1008original document ruledrawings as writings

Facts

Seiler claimed that creatures in The Empire Strikes Back infringed his earlier creatures called Garthian Striders. He obtained a copyright in 1981 by depositing reconstructed versions of the alleged 1976 and 1977 originals, but at the evidentiary hearing he could produce no originals and no documentary evidence showing that the originals existed before the 1980 release of the film. The district court found after a seven-day hearing that Seiler testified falsely, destroyed or withheld the originals in bad faith, and fabricated and misrepresented the nature of the reconstructions. It therefore excluded all secondary evidence, including the Copyright Office deposit copies.

Issue

Does the best evidence rule apply to Seiler's drawings so that he had to produce the originals or satisfy Rule 1004(1)? If so, did Rule 1008 require the jury rather than the judge to decide admissibility, and did 17 U.S.C. § 410(c) require admission of Seiler's reconstructed drawings or copyright certificate?

Rule

When a party seeks to prove the contents of a drawing whose contents are material, the drawing is a "writing" under Rule 1001 because it is the equivalent of letters, words, or numbers for purposes of the best evidence rule. Under Rule 1002 and Rule 1004(1), the proponent must produce the original or show that it is unavailable through no serious fault of the proponent; secondary evidence is inadmissible if the originals were lost or destroyed in bad faith. Under Rule 1008, the judge determines preliminary facts governing admissibility under Rule 1004, while the jury resolves only issues such as whether admitted secondary evidence correctly reflects the contents. Section 410(c) makes a copyright certificate prima facie evidence only of the validity of the copyright and the facts stated in the certificate, and it does not compel admission when the certificate is irrelevant to proving that reconstructions match the missing originals.

🔒

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, illustrator Nora Kim sues a game studio for infringing creature sketches she says she made years earlier. To prove substantial similarity, she offers enlarged redrawings she created last month because the original sketch pages are missing.

Which is the strongest argument for excluding Nora's redrawings under the Federal Rules of Evidence?

Explanation. When the contents of drawings themselves must be proved, the drawings are "writings" under Rule 1001 because they are the equivalent of letters, words, or numbers for best-evidence purposes. If the contents are material, Rule 1002 requires the original unless Rule 1004 excuses its absence. The majority rejected the view that the rule is limited to words or numbers.