Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
California Federal Court Sorts Out Ownership Issues In Dispute Over Record Albums
Each co-owner of a copyright can independently grant third parties non-exclusive rights in the work, but approval of all the co-owners is needed to grant exclusive rights to third parties. Despite that, under U.S. copyright law, any co-owner of the work can sell that co-owner's exclusive ownership share to third parties without the permission of the other co-owners.
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California recently released an opinion that considered the interplay of these copyright issues. In Yellowcake Inc. v. Morena Music Inc., 1:20-CV-0787, Jesus Chavez Sr., the founder of the Mexican music group Los Originales De San Juan, had entered into an agreement in 2013 for a three-album deal for his band with the record label Morena Music.
As Eastern District Senior Judge Anthony W. Ishii noted — based on a First Amended Counterclaim (FAC) that Morena Music filed in the litigation that grew out of the record deal — in 2019, Jose David Hernandez, principal of the music companies Yellowcake and Colonize Media, allegedly "intentionally and willfully misled Chavez into mistakenly believing that Morena had no rights in the Los Originales' albums and cover art and that Chavez was free to sell all rights in the works exclusively to Yellowcake and Colonize," which Chavez purportedly did.
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?