Cavalier v. Random House, Inc. 297 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2002) The Cavaliers wrote some children's books involving a talking moon. They tried to sell these books to Random House, but no agreement was ever reached. A little while later, Random House published different books with similar themes. The Cavaliers sued for copyright infringement. The Cavaliers argued that Random House's new books were substantially similar to their work. The Trial Court found for Random House. The Cavaliers appealed. The Trial Court found that many of the elements that the Cavaliers' claimed were being infringed were just general ideas or stock characters, and those are not protectable by copyright. The Court found that the copyrightable elements of the Cavaliers' work were not substantially similar to Random House's work. The Appellate Court affirmed. The Appellate Court found that there is a two part analysis for infringement: The extrinsic test which is an objective comparison of specific expressive elements, and The intrinsic test which is a subjective comparison that focuses on whether a reasonable audience would find the "total concept and feel" of the works to be similar. The Court looked at the fact of the case and concluded that neither the works as a whole, nor specific elements of the works were substantially similar enough to rise to the level of infringement.