Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Pre-1972 Recordings Case Against Sirius In GA Hits Spotlight

By Katheryn Hayes Tucker and Zack Needles
March 02, 2017

The February 16 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordering the dismissal of Flo & Eddie's closely watched class-action lawsuit against Sirius XM Radio over the use by the satellite provider of pre-1972 sound recordings lately has received the lion's share of attention on this hotly litigated issue. (The Second Circuit shot down the claims by the original members of the 1960s hit-makers The Turtles who alleged common-law copyright infringement and unfair competition. Flo & Eddie Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., 15-1164.)

But a few days before the Second Circuit published its decision, the Georgia Supreme Court heard arguments in a class action case against iHeartMedia over its use of pre-1972 sound recordings. Attorney Matthew Galin of the Foster firm in Chicago flew down to Atlanta to tell the Georgia Supreme Court that iHeartRadio is a bootlegger and a pirate playing his clients' songs without paying for them. At an oral argument field trip for the state supreme court justices to Emory University School of Law in Atlanta, they seemed a bit skeptical of Galin's suggestion that broadcasting songs on the radio is legal and even good for the music industry, but streaming them on the Internet is a violation of Georgia's criminal record piracy statute, Ga. Code §16-8-60, that hurts the owners of the master copies by depriving them of record sales (and thus allegedly makes iHeartMedia run afoul of Georgia's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act).

But “[i]t's the same broadcast,” Justice Nels Peterson said.

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
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.

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.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

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?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.