Court Decision: Worldwide Rights Lost When a Songwriter Terminates Under US Copyright Law

In its ruling in the case Cyril E. Vetter, Et Al. v. Robert Resnik, No. 23-1369-SDD-EWD (M.D. La. Jan. 29, 2025), the US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana ruled that the US songwriter-plaintiff Vetter recaptured worldwide rights — not just US rights — by exercising his termination rights under Section 304 of the Copyright Act of 1976 (US Copyright Law).

On

The musical work at issue is “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love),” a work that Vetter co-authored in the United States. The court’s reasoning discarded decades of US copyright jurisprudence, including previous interpretations by other courts of the following provision in Section 304 of the US Copyright Law:

“Termination of a grant under this subsection affects only those rights covered by the grant that arise under this title, and in no way affect rights arising under any other Federal, State, or foreign laws.”

In its ruling, which was in favor of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, the court adopted by reference the explanation and analysis contained in its earlier decision denying the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. In that decision, the court concluded, “the Plaintiffs have advanced a legally plausible claim that the right to exploit the Song in foreign countries does not ‘arise under’ the domestic law of each individual country where the work may be exploited, but instead ‘arises under’ the Copyright Act, which is recognized and protected by the domestic law of other countries pursuant to the Berne Convention.”

In addition, in its ruling, the court ruled that under the Copyright Act of 1909, if a US author (in this case, Vetter’s co-author, Don Smith) of a work created in the United States dies prior to the end of the initial term of copyright, the author’s heirs obtain all right, title, and interest throughout the world — not just the United States — for the renewal term of copyright in the work. That decision is based, in large part, on what the court described as a “plausible” legal theory: “there is only one copyright, afforded in the work’s country of origin and then recognized by the international community pursuant to treaty obligations.” Such a theory contradicts the long-held notion in the music industry that a single musical work has separate domestic and foreign copyrights.

The court’s rulings may be accessed here: Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss.

We expect the defendant will appeal. ArentFox Schiff’s Copyright and Music practices will continue to monitor developments in this case.

Contacts

Continue Reading