Wanjuan Media Co. LTD. v. Amazon.Com, Inc.

Background

Wanjuan Media (Tianjin) Co., Ltd., also known as Pilot Film and Television Media (Tianjin) Co., Ltd., sued Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon.com Services LLC for copyright infringement. Wanjuan is a joint copyright holder in the Chinese television drama “General and I.” It alleged that Amazon streamed the show on Prime Video without its license or authorization. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, which asks whether the record shows no genuine dispute of important facts and one side is entitled to judgment under the law.

Wanjuan and Shanghai Croton Culture Media Co., Ltd. agreed to co-own the copyright. Wanjuan alleged that a later Joint Distribution Agreement transferred Croton Culture’s rights to Shanghai Croton Film and TV Media Co., Ltd., which allegedly later transferred rights to Horgos Croton Culture Media Co., Ltd. Amazon disputed the validity and occurrence of those transfers. Separately, Croton Culture granted DramaFever Corp. nonexclusive online distribution rights, including the right to sublicense or redistribute the show to platforms such as Amazon Prime. DramaFever and Amazon then made an agreement under which DramaFever supplied programming for a Prime Video channel.

Timeliness

The court rejected Amazon’s argument that Wanjuan’s claim was untimely. Applying Second Circuit precedent, the court held that a copyright claim accrues when the copyright holder discovers, or with reasonable diligence should have discovered, the infringement. The court also explained that the period for recovering damages is separate from the period for bringing the claim. Because Wanjuan alleged that it discovered the infringement in May 2021 and filed suit in February 2022, Amazon did not establish that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations.

Validity of Amazon’s License

The court held that the February 2016 Joint Distribution Agreement was void under Chinese law. The agreement stated that it would become effective only when authorized representatives of all three parties signed it and all parties affixed their seals. Although Croton Culture and Croton Film and TV signed and sealed the agreement, Wanjuan affixed its seal but did not sign it.

The court treated the agreement’s wording as the starting point under the Chinese Civil Code. It found that the wording unambiguously required both signatures and seals from all three parties. Wanjuan did not provide contractual or contextual evidence showing that the parties intended the agreement to take effect without all required signatures. Because the agreement was not signed and sealed by all parties, the court concluded that it did not transfer Croton Culture’s copyright rights to Croton Film and TV.

The court rejected Wanjuan’s arguments based on United States bankruptcy decisions and the Copyright Act, explaining that Chinese law governed the validity of a transfer involving a Chinese work and Chinese companies. The court also rejected Wanjuan’s argument that the licensing agreement between Croton Culture and DramaFever was invalid because Wanjuan and Croton Film and TV had not signed it. That argument depended on the validity of the Joint Distribution Agreement, which the court had found void. The court further found that Wanjuan offered no hard evidence that Croton Film and TV transferred its rights to Horgos Croton.

The court therefore held that Amazon had a valid licensing chain: Croton Culture licensed DramaFever, and DramaFever supplied programming to Amazon’s Prime Video channel. A valid license protects the licensee from copyright-infringement liability when the licensee uses the work as permitted.

Scope of the License

The court also held that Amazon did not exceed the license’s scope. The undisputed evidence showed that “General and I” was available to stream on Prime Video from December 31, 2017, through October 31, 2018, when Warner Bros. shut down DramaFever operations.

Wanjuan argued that screenshots and customer comments suggested Amazon might have continued streaming the show as late as 2021. The court found that evidence speculative. Users could continue reviewing or commenting on a show after it was no longer available, and screenshots from August 2021 stated that the video was unavailable. Wanjuan’s corporate representative also could not watch the show on Prime Video in 2019 or later. The court concluded that no reasonable factfinder could determine from the record that Amazon streamed the show after October 2018.

Motion to Amend

Wanjuan also sought permission to add a new copyright theory based solely on Amazon’s display of images from episodes on the show’s product-detail page. The court denied that request. Wanjuan’s existing pleadings alleged infringement through streaming and referred to copyright rights to reproduce and distribute the work, not the separate right to display individual images from an audiovisual work.

The court found undue delay because Wanjuan had screenshots of the product-detail page in August 2021 but did not raise the display theory in its initial or amended complaint, by the court’s amendment deadline, or through a request to modify the scheduling order. The court also found that allowing amendment more than a year after discovery closed would unfairly prejudice Amazon by requiring additional resources and delaying resolution.

Disposition

Judge James Oetken granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, denied Wanjuan’s motion for summary judgment, and denied Wanjuan’s motion for leave to amend. The court directed entry of judgment for the defendants and closure of the case. The court also granted the motions to seal identified as ECF Nos. 48 and 56.