Partner
Here’s What Happened:
Tracy Anderson developed the “Tracy Anderson Method” that combines dance, fitness and cardiovascular movement for her fitness studios. Tracy employed Megan Roup as an instructor for seven years. Megan signed an employment agreement which included a confidentiality clause that covered the Tracy Anderson Method manuals and other business information. Megan left and opened The Sculpt Society where she conducted classes that also combined dance, fitness and cardiovascular movement. Megan contacted some of Tracy’s clients to announce the opening of her studio and Tracy was not happy about this.
Tracy’s company filed suit against Megan and her company. Tracy’s trademark and unfair competition claims were dismissed. So the complaint was down to two counts; (1) copyright infringement and (2) breach of contract.
Tracy claimed that her fitness routines were copyright-protected choreographic works and that Megan’s workouts infringe upon those copyrights.
Choreography can be protected by copyright but that doesn’t include all forms of dance. Choreographic works are defined as “the composition and arrangement of a related series of dance movements and patterns organized into a coherent whole.”
Both sides brought motions for summary judgment. On the issue of the dance routines, the court applied a two-prong test. First, the threshold question is whether the work constitutes protectable expression, as opposed to an idea, process, or system which is not subject to protection. If the answer is no, the analysis stops there because the Copyright Act protects only expressive works. If the answer is yes, the second prong asks whether the dance sequence meets the creative threshold for copyright protection.
The court determined Anderson’s routines are not expressive works protectable under the Copyright Act. Exercise programs don’t qualify for copyright protection. The Tracy Anderson Method is, by name, a method; it was created after “years of scientific research, testing, and development”; its stated purpose is health and fitness, not art or expression. The court granted Megan’s motion for summary judgment on the copyright issue.
The court held that there were too many disputes of fact on the breach of contract claim so that count will go to trial.
WHY YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS: This decision is not a blanket prohibition against copyright protection for exercise dance routines. There could be situations where a dance/exercise instructor creates a routine that is meant for exhibition or entertainment (like a recital).
Tracy Anderson Mind & Body, LLC v. Roup, No. CV 22-04735 PSG (E), 2024 WL 3221739 (C.D. Cal. June 12, 2024)