Do Those Plans Infringe on My Plans? Depends Where You Are

[...]the jury performs the "intrinsic test," and determines whether an ordinary observer would perceive that the two works express those shared ideas in a substantially similar way. [...]the plaintiff sued a group of homebuilders and an architectural firm for infringing its copyrighted architectural designs and works.9 Before trial, the district court performed the extrinsic test, granting partial summary judgment for the plaintiff after finding that the ideas expressed in the defendants' technical drawings were substantially similar to the copyrighted works.10 At trial, certain of the defendants presented the testimony of an architectural expert witness. "13 And because expert opinion is not relevant to that intrinsic analysis, the district court abused its discretion in admitting the expert's testimony.14 Thus, the court reversed the district court's judgment and ordered a new trial to determine whether the two works contained substantially similar designs. The general public almost never sees the design drawings for a building, and few would argue that the general public (rather than contractors and other designers) are the intended audience for design drawings. [...]one should be able to convincingly argue that design drawings are intended for a specialized audience of construction professionals.