Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Second Circuit Asks NY Ct. of Appeals To Answer Pre-1972 Recordings Issue
The New York Court of Appeals has been sent an important and unresolved issue on copyright infringement for music recorded prior to 1972. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has asked New York's highest court to determine whether there is a right of public performance for creators of sound recordings under that state's law and “if so, what is the nature and scope of that right?”
The issue arose in a putative class action brought by lead plaintiffs Flo & Eddie Inc., a corporation controlled by two of the founding members of a 1960s band, The Turtles, that owns the recordings of the group's hits like “Happy Together.” With no federal copyright protection for pre-1972 sound recordings, the plaintiffs in Flo & Eddie Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., 15-1164, are looking for a remedy under New York common law from the 30-million subscriber Internet-radio broadcaster, Sirius-XM. Flo & Eddie's suit alleges Sirius commits infringement both by broadcasting The Turtles and other bands' recordings and making internal reproductions such as library, buffer and cache copies.
Sirius moved for summary judgment, arguing there is no public performance right in pre-1972 recordings under New York law and that the reproductions are fair use. But Judge Colleen McMahon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New in 2014 denied the company's motion, holding that there was indeed a public-performance right and the reproductions were not fair use. She rejected a second argument by Sirius, finding that recognition of the right would not implicate the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause because the right is not a state “regulation” of commerce. (For more on the case background, see, “Focus on Flo & Eddie's New York Litigation Seeking Public Performance Rights in Pre-1972 Recordings,” in our April 2015 issue.)
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
"Holy Fair Use, Batman": Copyright, Fair Use and the Dark Knight
The copyright for the original versions of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse have expired. Now, members of the public can create — and are busy creating — their own works based on these beloved characters. Suppose, though, we want to tell stories using Batman for which the copyright does not expire until 2035. We'll review five hypothetical works inspired by the original Batman comic and analyze them under fair use.