Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Arguments Heard in 'Happy Birthday' Copyright Fight
In a court battle involving the song “Happy Birthday to You,” a federal judge was set to decide whether Los Angeles-based music publisher Warner/Chappell has unlawfully been collecting licensing fees for the song's copyright.
Federal District Judge George King of the Central District of California heard more than two hours of arguments last month on whether to declare Warner/Chappell Music Inc.'s copyright invalid and find that “Happy Birthday to You” should be in the public domain. At stake are potentially millions of dollars in licensing fees to what the complaint calls the “world's most popular song.”
The case was brought in 2013 by two New York music producers, a California musician and a film producer who each paid between $455 and $3,000 in licensing fees to Warner/Chappell, the music-publishing arm of Warner Music Group Corp., to perform the song. The class action, filed on behalf of anyone who was forced to pay similar fees starting on June 18, 2009, seeks declaratory relief and the return of “millions of dollars of unlawful licensing fees.” Majar Productions LLC v. Warner/Chappell Music Inc., 2013cv05164.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?