IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—S.D.N.Y.: Copyright claim in Top Gun movie dismissed as unauthorized derivative work not entitled to copyright protection, (Jan 12, 2026)

By Linda O’Brien, J.D., LL.M.

Copyright infringement and fraud counterclaims by a media company in a declaratory action by a screenwriter who claimed to have co-authored the screenplay for the film Top Gun: Maverick will proceed to trial.

A copyright infringement claim by an independent screenwriter against the Paramount media company alleging that he co-authored the screenplay with his cousin and film’s credited screenwriter for the Top Gun movie sequel was dismissed as his claimed screenplay scenes were unauthorized derivative works that were not entitled to copyright protection, the federal district court in New York City, New York has ruled. However, Paramount’s copyright infringement and fraud counterclaims were not barred by the statute of limitations as no knowledge of the screenwriter’s involvement through his cousin could be imputed to Paramount. Thus, the summary judgment motion by Paramount was granted and the summary judgment motion of Gray was denied (Gray v. Paramount Global, No. 1:25-cv-03484-JSR (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 9, 2026)).

Paramount Global and its related entities Paramount Pictures Corporation and Paramount Streaming Services, Inc. are major U.S. entertainment and media companies engaged in film production and distribution. In 1986, Paramount released the motion picture Top Gun, a film that follows a group of young naval aviators as they trained at the U.S. Navy’s Fighter Weapons School, known as Top Gun. Paramount registered its copyright for the film and screenplay. Years later, Paramount began producing a sequel to the film titled Top Gun: Maverick. As part of the sequel’s production, Paramount hired writers, including Eric Singer, pursuant to written “work made for hire” agreements. As part of Singer’s agreement, he agreed that his screenplay draft would be written solely by him. When Top Gun: Maverick was released in 2022, the film credited Singer as one of the writers for the screenplay. Paramount also registered its copyright for the film and screenplay.

Shaun Gray, an independent screenwriter and cousin of Eric Singer, claimed that Singer invited him to co-write the Maverick screenplay and that he contributed to key scenes in the film’s central action sequences. After the film’s release, Gray notified Paramount of his role in the screenplay and registered a copyright of the scenes in Maverick that he claimed to have drafted. In April 2025, Gray filed a complaint seeking a declaration of joint authorship and ownership of the Maverick screenplay and film, and in the alternative, claiming copyright infringement. After the court partially denied Paramount’s motion to dismiss, Paramount filed an amended answer, asserting counterclaims for copyright infringement and fraud. In October 2025, the court denied Gray’s motion to dismiss, holding the counterclaims were timely and legally sufficient under federal and state law. Before the court were the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment.

Copyright infringement claim. Gray’s copyright infringement claim lacked a protectable copyright in an infringing derivative work, the court found. There were undisputed facts that the scenes Gray claimed to have drafted were themselves infringing derivative works that could not be copyrighted. The original Top Gun film was fully copyrighted by Paramount and it was self-evident that scenes in Maverick were materially based on the original film, including the characters, settings, and plot devices, that would be expected in such a sequel.

Gray’s contention that, because Singer was hired by Paramount to work on Maverick and he in turn hired Gray to work on the script, he had an implicit right to use material from the original Top Gun was rejected. The argument ignored the question of whether Gray had the right to assert independent ownership and copyright over his writing derived from that material and Singer’s contract with Paramount had no right to copyright was he produced for Maverick and no authority to grant such right to Gray. Gray is a writer who indisputably based his entire script on the existing Top Gun material and Maverick represented Gray’s capturing of Top Gun in ways that entirely pervaded his claimed scenes. Gray’s copyright was therefore invalid, the court explained.

Copyright infringement and common fraud counterclaims. Paramount’s counterclaims of copyright infringement and common law fraud were predicated in effect on the derivative nature of the scenes Gray claimed to have drafted in Maverick. The copyright infringement counterclaim alleged that Paramount was entitled to damages because any work Gray purportedly performed on Singer’s draft would have unlawfully derived from Paramount’s copyright to Top Gun and Maverick and Gray devalued Paramount intellectual property by intentionally concealing from Paramount he wrote scenes and made contributions to Singer’s draft of the Maverick screenplay.

Gray’s assertion that the counterclaims were time-barred because Paramount had imputed knowledge of his role in writing the Maverick screenplay as early as 2017 when Singer allegedly invited him to participate in writing the draft through Singer as Paramount’s agent was rejected. Singer’s agreement with Paramount contained an express disclaimer that each party was not an agent of the other party. Gray’s further argument that a transaction must have occurred between the parties for a duty to disclose to arise was rejected as misplaced as the duty to disclose was not limited to “the parties in privity of contract.” Paramount had introduced evidence that, if it had known that Gray was writing scenes, it would have required Gray to sign a temporary work made for hire agreement. Accordingly, no transaction was required for the duty to disclose to exist. Finally, Paramount adequately claimed damages as, under state law, a fraud claim must allege out-of-pocket damages caused by the alleged fraud and a resulting “cloud” on its intellectual property ownership, the court concluded.

The Case is No. 1:25-cv-03484-JSR.

Judge: Rakoff, J.

Attorneys: Jaymie Parkkinen (Tauler Smith LLP) for Shaun Gray. Molly Manning Lens (O'Melveny & Myers LLP) for Paramount Global.

Companies: Paramount Global

Cases: Copyright NewYorkNews