This week, the U.S. Supreme Court opened Pandora's Box.
The decision that the Supreme Court may come to regret involved a copyright infringement lawsuit surrounding the script to the movie Raging Bull, which was released in 1980. In the film, Oscar-award winning actor Robert DeNiro played boxer Jake LaMotta.
An heir to the co-author of a 1963 screenplay about the life of the boxer apparently waited until 2009 to file a copyright lawsuit, claiming that the 1980 movie had copied portions of her father's screenplay without authorization.
The District Court in Los Angeles and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals applied the equitable doctrine of "estoppel by laches," borrowing the 3-year statute of limitations in the U.S. Copyright Act. Those Courts both found that the writer's heir had deliberately waited to file suit, prejudicing MGM which had released the film thirty-four years ago.
However, on Monday, in an unusual 6-3 split not along ideological lines, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the majority, finding that the significant delay will not bar the heir from seeking damages or an injunction on a rolling basis, going forward.
The majority reasoned that each time a new Raging Bull DVD is printed and sold, there is a new independent act of copyright infringement potentially violating the heir's copyrights. Every new DVD that is printed, every time the film is broadcast on television or the film is re-mastered or re-released, is effectively a new act of infringement subject to the 3-year window going forward, not backward.
The end result is that copyright disputes that originated thirty or forty years ago -- or even in the more distant past -- can be resurrected and instituted now.
Justices Stephen Breyer, Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice Roberts dissented, holding that the precedent would upset settled doctrine, and open up years of litigation over old wounds.
70-year old Jimmy Page, Robert Plant and others in Led Zeppelin presumably agree with the dissent's point of view.
In 1971, Zeppelin released the now iconic "Stairway to Heaven." According to some estimates, the song has earned at least $562 million since its release, a number poised to rise higher since Zeppelin is set to release new versions of its albums this summer.
Relying on Monday's Raging Bull decision from the U.S. Supreme Court, Time magazine reports that a new copyright infringement lawsuit has now been filed by representatives of the band Spirit, which released an instrumental song "Taurus" in 1968. According to the newly-filed lawsuit, Zeppelin opened for Spirit in the late 1960's, and was inspired to write the now famous guitar introduction to Stairway.
Direct evidence of copying may nonetheless be difficult to gather. Spirit's lead guitarist Randy California died in 1997 and documents showing copying, if any, were presumably lost to the mists of time.
Showing posts with label statute of limitations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label statute of limitations. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Opening Pandora's Box: Supreme Court Allows Archaic Copyright Infringement Cases to Proceed
Friday, October 4, 2013
Jay-Z, Kanye West, Run D.M.C. and Others Sued for Past Sampling
Unauthorized
"sampling" of catchy melodies used in modern music is heating up as a recurring legal issue.
Several high-profile copyright cases have been filed in recent months against major performers, accusing them of taking a portion, or "sample," of one sound recording and reusing it as an instrument or a sound recording in a different song or piece, without authorization.
Several high-profile copyright cases have been filed in recent months against major performers, accusing them of taking a portion, or "sample," of one sound recording and reusing it as an instrument or a sound recording in a different song or piece, without authorization.
As
discussed in detail on Wikipedia, sampling was originally developed
by experimental musicians in the 1960's. However, hip hop
music was the first popular music genre based around the art of
sampling - being born from 1970's DJs who experimented with
manipulating vinyl on two turntables.
Sampling
is now most often done today with a computer program. However, vinyl
emulation software may also be used, and turntablists continue
to sample using traditional methods. The inclusion of sampling tools in
modern digital production methods increasingly introduced sampling into many
genres of popular music, as well as genres predating the invention of sampling,
such as classical music, jazz and various forms
of traditional music.
Several recent cases have been filed against established performers, premised on allegations that such activity constitutes a clear form of copyright infringement -- even when the alleged infringement occurred decades ago, and was only recently discovered.
It is likely that sophisticated software tools have allowed performers to go back and analyze musical catalogs to locate potential infringement that may have been harder to audibly detect with the "naked ear."
Jay-Z, Kanye West, Mark Wahlberg, Run D.M.C. and many others face a new copyright infringement lawsuit brought by Twilight Records and Syl-Zel Music which claim that the 1967 song "Different Strokes" that was performed and recorded by Syl Johnson was sampled without permission in a variety of derivative works in the 1990's.
Several recent cases have been filed against established performers, premised on allegations that such activity constitutes a clear form of copyright infringement -- even when the alleged infringement occurred decades ago, and was only recently discovered.
It is likely that sophisticated software tools have allowed performers to go back and analyze musical catalogs to locate potential infringement that may have been harder to audibly detect with the "naked ear."
Jay-Z, Kanye West, Mark Wahlberg, Run D.M.C. and many others face a new copyright infringement lawsuit brought by Twilight Records and Syl-Zel Music which claim that the 1967 song "Different Strokes" that was performed and recorded by Syl Johnson was sampled without permission in a variety of derivative works in the 1990's.
According
to the suit which was filed in federal district court in Chicago, Usher
infringed upon the Different Strokes copyright with his 1993 song "Call Me
a Mack," while Public Enemy allegedly made use of a copyrighted riff
without authorization on multiple hit songs including Fight the Power.
Both Mark
and Donnie Wahlberg are accused of sampling the same tunes on "The Last
Song on Side B." Run D.M.C. faces similar allegations for its songs
"Naughty" and "Beats to the Rhyme." All of the
accused songs were released in the 1990's.
The
Different Strokes melody has previously been the subject of similar litigation
against more recent music performed by Jay-Z and Kanye West. A lawsuit filed in 2011 had claimed that those performers improperly sampled
the tune on their "Watch the Throne" album. That
suit was settled confidentially.
Putting
aside the merits of the factual allegations, the latest cases may face an interesting
legal problem.
The U.S.
Copyright Act imposes a three year statute of limitations on civil copyright infringement claims from when the claim "accrued," barring a copyright owner from seeking damages for infringement that occurred in the past.
However,
where alleged infringement is ongoing, federal courts have split on whether any
bar applies, and whether the more flexible and
equitable "estoppel by laches" defense should apply.
Furthermore, there is some dispute as to when the statute of limitations begins to run, given modern technology. Usher's song "Call Me a Mack" was released in 1993, two decades ago. However, the use of iTunes and cell tone ringtones have created a robust new marketplace for such a song.
Furthermore, there is some dispute as to when the statute of limitations begins to run, given modern technology. Usher's song "Call Me a Mack" was released in 1993, two decades ago. However, the use of iTunes and cell tone ringtones have created a robust new marketplace for such a song.
The Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals, based in California, ruled in 2012 that an admitted 13-year delay in filing a copyright lawsuit after infringement had been discovered, barred all relief against the defendant.
Other
courts have held that the doctrine does not apply in this context, because
there is nothing in the text or legislative history of the U.S. Copyright Act
that suggests that Congress ever intended for an equitable defense to apply. It is unclear if the Supreme Court
will resolve this split among the federal appeal courts on how to measure a purported delay.
Injunctions against further use of the song by these third parties could present a concern, but equally worrisome to these defendants is the fact that the copyright owner has sought an accounting for all past profits, as well as reimbursement of its' attorneys' fees.
Injunctions against further use of the song by these third parties could present a concern, but equally worrisome to these defendants is the fact that the copyright owner has sought an accounting for all past profits, as well as reimbursement of its' attorneys' fees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)