Bit Parts

Friday the 13th Screenplay Author's Copyright Termination Notice Found Valid

The original production company and the successor-in-interest for the first Friday the 13th film filed a declaratory action challenging a copyright termination notice sent by original screenplay author Victor Miller. Horror Inc. v. Miller, 3:16-cv-1442. First finding the screenplay wasn't a work for hire that would have barred Miller from prevailing on the notice, Federal District Judge Stefan R. Underhill of the District of Connecticut explained: “Miller performed skilled work, received no employee benefits, was not treated as an employee for tax purposes, and his engagement did not provide Manny the right to assign additional projects. The weight of those factors alone might be enough to determine Miller's status, but other factors also bolster Miller's independent contractor status. Miller was paid in lump sums based on his completion of the screenplay, and worked on the screenplay for Manny for only a short period of time. Miller mainly used his own tools, and frequently worked from home at his own pace. Although [Many principal ] Cunningham did not tightly control the manner and means of Miller's work, even if he did somewhat control Miller's work, that factor, together with the fact that Manny was in the business of filmmaking cannot overcome the significance and effect of the other factors.” Ruling then on the effectiveness of the termination notice, District Judge Underhill noted: “[Successor-in-interest] Horror and [original production company] Manny [Company] have attacked the effectiveness of Miller's termination notices for failing to identify any express grant of rights sought to be terminated, failing to be properly served on current rights holders, and for failing to seek the termination of rights in the initial treatment.” The court concluded: “Because Miller authored the screenplay, to the extent Horror and its predecessors engaged in an authorized use of the copyright in the screenplay, such authority must have derived, in the first instance, from Miller. I therefore reject Horror's and Manny's argument that Miller's inability to identify any express language through which he conveyed his initial copyright precludes his termination of such conveyance pursuant to [17 U.S.C. §203.”

Infringement Suit over Justin Timberlake's “Damn Girl” Allowed to Proceed

The rights holder in the 1969 song “A New Day Is Here At Last” by the late Perry Kibble filed a copyright infringement suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York over a sample in the 2006 release “Damn Girl” by Justin Timberlake that featured lawsuit co-defendant will i. am. PK Music Performance Inc. v. Timberlake, 16-CV-1215. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the case wasn't timely filed. Denying the motion, District Judge Vernon S. Broderick noted in part as to accrual of the claim: “Defendants' argument that the popularity and success of the [Timberlake] Album, DVD, Tour, and HBO Special gave rise to constructive or inquiry notice of Plaintiff's claims is unpersuasive. Nothing in the record before me suggests that “Damn Girl” was ever played on the radio, and even if it was, that Plaintiff had the opportunity to hear it. The only way Plaintiff would have heard “Damn Girl” would have been by buying the Album or DVD (or obtaining/hearing the song in some other way), owning an HBO subscription (or watching HBO or the performance of the song on HBO in some other way), or attending a concert on the Tour. Defendants have supplied no case law that suggests that a diligent plaintiff is one who obtains all popular or successful albums or concert DVDs at any given time and scours each song and the liner notes to discover potential infringements.”