IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—D. Vt.: University of Vermont owns ‘Rally Cat’ logo under work-for-hire doctrine, (Nov 5, 2025)

By Ravindra Kumar Singh, B.L.

An ex-employee’s infringement claims failed because the employee's design was found to be within the scope of employment and derived from a preexisting university logo.

The federal district court in Burlington, Vermont, granted summary judgment in favor of the University of Vermont and State Agricultural College (UVM) in a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by a former employee. It held that the university owned the copyright to its “Rally Cat” logo under the work-for-hire doctrine and, alternatively, even if not a work for hire, the logo was an unauthorized derivative of UVM’s preexisting copyrighted “V-Cat” mascot design (Boyages v. University of Vermont and State Agricultural College, No. 2:24-cv-00538-wks (D. Vt. Nov. 4, 2025)).

Background. The plaintiff, Sophia Boyages, is an artist and former administrative assistant in UVM's Athletics Department, employed between October 2022 and December 2023. Boyages, trained in studio art and illustration, volunteered her artistic skills for internal projects during her tenure. The defendant, the University of Vermont and State Agricultural College, is a public research university known for its "Catamount" athletic teams and the long-standing "V-Cat" mascot logo, which was registered under federal copyright protection in 1996.

Boyages claimed authorship of a digital illustration of a front-facing catamount head—titled the "SophCat"—which she created in January 2023. She registered the design with the U.S. Copyright Office on December 10, 2023, listing herself as the sole author and omitting any "work for hire" designation. The certificate listed January 31, 2023, as the date of first publication. UVM, however, asserted that the "Rally Cat" logo was derived from its preexisting copyrighted "V-Cat" mascot, registered decades earlier, and that Boyages's design was created in furtherance of her employment duties and institutional branding goals.

The dispute arose after UVM’s Associate Athletic Director for Communications, Krista Balogh, established a Branding Working Group (BWG) in January 2023 to explore redesigning UVM’s athletics imagery. Boyages joined the BWG alongside other staff, including digital designer Pete Estes. Following a discussion about creating a front-facing cathead logo, Boyages produced a prototype design that evening using Adobe Photoshop. She shared the draft with Estes, received feedback, and presented an updated version to the BWG, which reportedly endorsed the design. UVM adopted the logo in April 2023, branding it as the “Rally Cat Head,” incorporating it into merchandise, and filing for trademark protection.

After her resignation in December 2023, Boyages sought acknowledgment and compensation for her contribution, claiming that the university had commercialized her work without authorization. When UVM refused, citing its intellectual property ownership policy, Boyages filed suit for copyright infringement.

UVM responded with a motion for summary judgment, asserting that the “Rally Cat” logo was (1) a work for hire and (2) an unauthorized derivative work of its existing “V-Cat” logo. Boyages filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, arguing that her registration certificate established presumptive ownership under 17 U.S.C. § 410(c) and that UVM had no written work-for-hire agreement.

Court’s analysis. The court applied the standards set out in Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), reiterating that summary judgment is appropriate where no genuine issue of material fact exists. Although the registration certificate created a presumption of authorship in Boyages’s favor, the court found UVM had rebutted this presumption with clear evidence showing that Boyages created the design within the scope of her employment.

Work-for-hire doctrine. Under 17 U.S.C. § 201(b), an employer is deemed the author of a work created by an employee within the scope of employment. The court relied on the three-factor test articulated in Fleurimond v. New York University, 876 F. Supp. 2d 190 (E.D.N.Y. 2012)—(1) whether the work was of the kind the employee was hired to perform; (2) whether it was created substantially within authorized time and space limits; and (3) whether the employee acted, at least in part, to serve the employer.

The court observed that Boyages’s position included administrative support, design assistance, and event promotion for the Athletics Department. Her participation in the BWG and her role in producing graphics fell within this scope. The court cited Horror Inc. v. Miller, 15 F.4th 232 (2d Cir. 2021) and Sterpetti v. E-Brands Acquisition, LLC, 2006 WL 1046949 (M.D. Fla. 2006), to emphasize that an employee’s creative output may qualify as “work for hire” even if not explicitly listed in the job description, provided it furthers the employer’s objectives.

Furthermore, Boyages developed the design during working hours, utilized institutional branding meetings for feedback, and incorporated suggestions from supervisors. The court held that her conduct demonstrated intent to benefit UVM, satisfying the motivational element described in City of Newark v. Beasley, 883 F. Supp. 3 (D.N.J. 1995). Accordingly, the “Rally Cat” logo was deemed a work made for hire, with copyright ownership vested in UVM.

Derivative work doctrine. Alternatively, the court concluded that Boyages’s “SophCat” image was an unauthorized derivative of UVM’s preexisting “V-Cat” logo. Under 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 106(2), the exclusive right to prepare derivative works belongs to the copyright owner.

Applying the “ordinary observer” test from Peter F. Gaito Architecture, LLC v. Simone Dev. Corp., 602 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2010), the court found substantial similarity between the two works in terms of composition, proportion, and expressive features, such as the stylized muzzle, brow lines, and eye shape. The court reasoned that the designs conveyed the same visual identity and "aesthetic essence" of UVM's catamount mascot, rendering the new logo a recasting of the original rather than an independent creation.

Citing Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc., 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998) and Keeling v. Hars, 809 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2015), the court reiterated that derivative works created without authorization cannot themselves obtain valid copyright protection. The opinion also referenced Nola Spice Designs, L.L.C. v. Haydel Enterprises, Inc., 783 F.3d 527 (5th Cir. 2015), emphasizing that while depictions of natural subjects, such as animals, are not protectable per se, their stylized artistic renderings can constitute original expression. The "Rally Cat" design borrowed such expressive elements from the "V-Cat," thereby infringing UVM's copyright and precluding Boyages's claim of originality.

Outcome. Thus, the court granted summary judgment for UVM, holding that the “Rally Cat” logo was either (1) a work made for hire belonging to the university or (2) an unauthorized derivative of UVM’s “V-Cat” logo. It denied Boyages’s summary judgment motion and also denied UVM’s request for a sur-reply.

The Case is No. 2:24-cv-00538-wks.

Judge: Sessions III, W.

Attorneys: Loletta Darden (Darden Betts Strategic Intellectual Property Counselors) for Sophia Boyages. Justin B. Barnard (Dinse PC) for The University of Vermont and State Agricultural College.

Cases: Copyright VermontNews GCNNews