Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Copyright Grantees Served Sour Grapes in Steinbeck Dispute

By Jason Linder, Eric Carsten, and Annette Meyerson

In 1976 and again in 1998, Congress extended subsisting copyrights, by 19 and 20 years respectively. See Pub. L. 94-553, 90 Stat. 2541 (1976) (extending renewal term for pre-1978 works to 47 years, for 75 years total protection); Pub. L. 105-298, 112 Stat. 2827 (1998) (extending renewal term for pre-1978 works an additional 20 years, for 95 years total protection). Seeking to allow authors and their kin to share in the benefits of the newly extended terms, Congress afforded them a mechanism known as statutory termination. See 17 U.S.C. '304(c) and (d). The mechanism allows abrogation of contracts executed prior to Jan. 1, 1978, otherwise valid under state law, by which an author (or certain other specified persons) had transferred away copyright interests. To bolster and protect this termination right, Congress mandated that it may be effected 'notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.' 17 U.S.C. '304(c)(5); see also 17 U.S.C. '304(d)(1).

This summer, the Southern District of New York gave broad effect to that language. In Steinbeck v. McIntosh & Otis, Inc., 433 F. Supp. 2d 395 (S.D.N.Y. 2006), the court held that a post-1978 contract canceling a pre-1978 grant and then re-granting the exact same copyright interests previously conveyed does not extinguish the statutory termination right. Any other construction, the court found, would render the post-1978 agreement an impermissible 'agreement to the contrary.' While it is consonant with decisions of the Second Circuit, the district court's holding is in tension with, and likely contrary to, recent decisions arising out of the Ninth Circuit. Whether this apparent conflict among the circuits will soften or sharpen awaits further judicial development and, perhaps, resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers Image

There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases Image

The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.