The Court first dismissed Gentieu's copyright infringement claim. Because Gentieu "cannot claim copyright in the idea of photographing naked or diapered babies or in any elements of expression that are intrinsic to that unprotected idea," the Court held that her copyright "is limited to protecting against exact replication of her images." [Italics added]

Copyright, the court said, protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. Copyright "does not extend to the subject matter of the image itself, but instead protects the expression of the subject as contained in such elements of the author's composition as the selection of lighting, shading, camera angle, background and perspective."

In this instance, however, Gentieu's white backgrounds, straight camera angles, and sharp focus were not protectable original elements. Rather, the Court considered these features to be indispensable to studio portrait photography and, therefore, unprotectable under copyright law's scénes á faire doctrine (i.e., scenes that must be done). This doctrine makes it impossible to have copyright protection in standard photographic conventions and devices necessary or standard in a genre. To protect these elements, the Court stated, "would come all too close to granting one photographer a monopoly over all photographs of naked babies on white backgrounds . . . ."