Cameo Clips

A music publisher failed to allege a viable copyright infringement claim against associate Mary J. Blige producer Scott Storch, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has ruled. Brought to Life Music Inc. v. MCA Records Inc., 02-1164 (Feb. 14). Brought to Life claimed that the defendants, which included Storch, producer Dr. Dre and artist Mary J. Blige, had infringed on the music publisher's work 'Sam Adams.' The complaint alleged that Storch had given a copy of 'Sam Adams,' a portion of which appeared on Blige's recording 'Family Affair,' to Dr. Dre. Dismissing the suit, the district court stated, 'Plaintiff here has not alleged that Storch has violated any of its alleged exclusive rights in its works. Specifically, Storch is not alleged to have i) reproduced plaintiff's work; ii) prepared derivative works based on plaintiff's work; iii) distributed copies of plaintiff's work to the public for sale; or iv) performed plaintiff's work publicly by means of digital audio transmission. See 17 U.S.C. '106. Plaintiff has not attempted to describe 'by what acts and during what time' Storch infringed the copyright.' The court also held that there was no viable contributory infringement claim because it hadn't been alleged that Storch knew of or had substantially participated in the alleged infringement. Finally, the district court decided that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Pennsylvania resident Storch, whose New York activities included involvement with musical recordings produced in New York, deriving income from the sale of records in New York, musical performances in New York and a co-publishing relationship in New York. The court concluded that these activities didn't constitute 'continuous and systematic contacts' in the state as required by N.Y. CPLR Sec. 301.

Music Publishing/Tax Deductions

The phrase 'all net sums actually received” in contracts between songwriters and a music publisher didn't encompass the benefit of foreign tax credits that the publisher took on its U.S. income tax payments, the New York Appellate Division, First Department, has held. Evans v. Famous Music Corp., 13 (Feb. 6). The contracts entitled the songwriters to 50% of the net sums that Famous Music received, less all expenses, charges and tax deductions. Foreign sub-publishers paid Famous Music after deducting their fees and the taxes imposed by the foreign jurisdictions. The lower court found that the publishing contracts clearly and unambiguously obligated Famous Music to include the songwriters in the benefit of any foreign tax credits. Unanimously reversing, the appellate court noted: 'Although it is argued that the contractual language entitles plaintiffs to half the value of any benefit of a foreign tax credit, the specific language of these contracts specifically identifies and delineates all of the royalties in which plaintiffs are entitled to share. Under fundamental principles of contract interpretation, the failure to identify the foreign tax credit benefit indicates that such benefit was not envisioned by the parties to be an intended term in any of the subject contracts.'