IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—D. Md.: Federal inmate's suit over HBO’s We Own This City series succumbs to dismissal challenge, (Jul 29, 2026)

By Saurabh Kashyap, B.A., M.A., LL.B., LL.M.

Because the allegedly copied material consisted of historical facts and events rather than protectable expression, the memoir author failed to state a plausible copyright infringement claim.

A federal district court in Maryland has dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by a federal inmate who alleged that HBO's limited television series We Own This City copied material from his self-published memoir about his encounters with the Baltimore Police Department's corrupt Gun Trace Task Force (GTTF). The court held that the memoir's allegedly copied elements consisted of historical facts, events, and insights, which are not protected by copyright. Having dismissed the only federal claim, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff's related defamation and negligence claims under Maryland law and dismissed the entire action without prejudice (Shropshire v. Home Box Office, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-02342-ABA (D. Md. Jul. 28, 2026)).

Background. The dispute arose from Antonio Shropshire's interactions with members of the Baltimore Police Department's Gun Trace Task Force during a 2016 raid at his girlfriend's home. Shropshire, who was later convicted on federal drug charges and remains incarcerated, self-published a memoir titled The Real Shropshire Organization in 2021, describing those events. That same year, journalist Justin Fenton published We Own This City, a nonfiction account of the GTTF scandal, which HBO adapted into a limited television series released in 2022. Shropshire alleged that the series portrayed him falsely and copied original material from his memoir.

Shropshire asserted claims for copyright infringement, defamation, and negligence, seeking compensatory and punitive damages as well as a public retraction. HBO moved to dismiss, arguing that the defamation claim was untimely, the negligence claim merely duplicated the defamation allegations, and the copyright claim failed because the allegedly copied material consisted of unprotectable facts. HBO also challenged whether Shropshire had adequately alleged copyright registration, although Shropshire later submitted a registration certificate dated before he filed suit.

Historical facts. The court assumed, without deciding, that Shropshire had satisfied the Copyright Act's registration requirement because the complaint failed on a more fundamental ground. To establish infringement, a plaintiff must plausibly allege that the defendant copied protected, original expression rather than unprotectable facts or ideas. Citing Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340, 345 (1991), the court emphasized that factual accounts receive only "thin" copyright protection, extending only to an author's original expression of facts, not to the facts themselves.

Examining each allegation individually, the court concluded that none involved protectable expression. Shropshire first claimed HBO copied his description of yellow heroin by depicting "bumblebee bags" in the series. Even assuming the television series drew upon the same underlying event, the court held that the existence of yellow heroin in a particular neighborhood was a historical fact, not a copyrightable expression.

The same reasoning defeated claims based on a customer returning narcotics before Shropshire's arrest, dialogue during his arrest concerning a call to his fiancée, and a search of his girlfriend's house by then-Sergeant Keith Gladstone. According to the court, Shropshire's memoir presented each incident as something that actually occurred. Because copyright does not protect historical events or purported quotations presented as factual, HBO's alleged use of those incidents could not support an infringement claim.

The court likewise rejected Shropshire's claim that HBO appropriated his "tripartite structure" linking Gladstone's corruption, his mentorship of Wayne Jenkins, and the later use of BB guns to conceal police misconduct. Although Shropshire characterized the connection as his own original narrative insight, the court concluded that the alleged relationship among those historical events was itself factual in nature. Even an author's original historical interpretation or discovery remains outside copyright protection and may be freely used by later authors.

State law claims. After dismissing the sole federal copyright claim, the court declined to retain supplemental jurisdiction over Shropshire's Maryland state-law defamation and negligence claims. Because the litigation remained at an early stage and little judicial or party resources had been expended, considerations of judicial economy, fairness, and comity favored allowing any remaining state-law issues to proceed, if at all, in state court. The court therefore dismissed all claims without prejudice.

The Case is No. 1:25-cv-02342-ABA.

Judge: Abelson, A.

Attorneys: Antonio Shropshire, pro se. Stephanie S. Abrutyn (Dentons LLP) for Home Box Office, Inc.

Companies: Home Box Office, Inc.

Cases: Copyright MarylandNews TechnologyInternet