Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Finch v. Casey, 22-20144 (S.D. Fla. 2023), concerned 99 songs co-written by Rick Finch and Harry Wayne Casey (aka KC) while they were members of KC & The Sunshine Band in the 1970s.
Between the mid-1970s and early-1980s Casey and Finch entered into publishing agreements with a major music publisher and formed Harrick Music Inc., which they co-owned on a 50/50 basis, as their publishing designee.
Casey and Finch formally severed all personal and financial ties in 1983 through the execution of a "property division agreement" that divided between them various items of tangible and intangible property that they had previously owned together. The agreement provided, among other things, that Finch would transfer to Casey all his rights in their co-owned copyrights along with his 50% ownership interest in Harrick Music. Twenty-nine years later, in 2012, Finch served a notice of termination under 17. U.S.C. §203 of the U.S. Copyright Act on Casey and Harrick seeking to terminate the copyright grants that Finch made to Casey in the 1983 property division agreement.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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 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.
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?