James A. Rose

Or perhaps even (pun intended) "Dark Horse". Whatever side you take in this copyright infringement situation that seems to be trending in the direction of plaintiffs will be somewhat controversial.  In the Ninth federal Circuit, to state a claim for copyright infringement, a plaintiff must plausibly allege two things: Ownership of a valid copyright in the subject work Defendants copied protected aspects of the subject work's expression Malibu Textiles, Inc. vs. Label Lane International, Inc. , 922 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2019) Some would say that there is no way a Christian rapper like Marcus Gray p/k/a Flame could make this happen against an artist like Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson p/k/a Katy Perry, associated songwriters, and Capitol Records, LLC. But following five years of pretrial litigation and seven days of proof, that is exactly what happened. "Joyful Noise" appears on the album Our World: Redeemed , which received a Grammy nomination fo

In my entertainment law practice, the one subject that seems to generate the most confusion is trademarks. I am going to take the term "confusion" to a legal point in this blog post. "Likelihood of confusion" is a major hurdle to achieving a registration in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Many music industry people have false impressions about the process of filing and registering a federal trademark. Some are savvy enough to file their own applications. However, when the application is reviewed by an examining attorney at the USPTO in Alexandria, Virginia, the fearless pro se  applicant will call and request help. Many times it is too late to help. Application fees and the time spent filing the online application are wasted. So it is best to be informed about the basics of the process before beginning. A mark must  be in use in commerce before it can register. It is possible (and sometimes advisable) to file an application based on t

John Rich initially became popular in country music as a part of the duo "Big & Rich". This name also accurately describes his approach to trademark applications for a name he has been quoted as prizing and that now graces Lower Broadway in downtown Nashville - REDNECK RIVIERA and RR REDNECK RIVIERA (In the latter stylized design mark, the two letters "R" are stacked vertically on top of one another. The bottom "R" is upside down".). Celebrities are always helpful case studies for entertainment law. Taylor Swift made news in her early years of popularity with a merchandise trademark enforcement bust at some sort of concert event. Frankly, some celebrities' legal teams handle branding and trademark issues better than others. I applaud Mr. Rich and his team on their investment into the two above-referenced marks. But I wouldn't necessarily recommend this approach to my clientele. It is intriguing to see how developing creatives in N

Trying to reverse actions from decades ago when one's career was in a much different place can be cumbersome in the legal world of copyright. Just ask John Waite, Joe Ely, Syd Straw, and others who have filed suit against UMG Recordings, Inc. in the Southern District of New York and requested certification of their suit as a class action. All such plaintiffs had recording contracts with companies who are predecessors in interest to UMG and assigned sound recording copyrights to the respective companies. Section 203 of the Copyright Act of 1976 sets forth conditions for termination of a transfer, license, or grant of copyright. Such termination may occur during a period of five years beginning at the end of thirty-five years from the date of execution of the transfer unless the transfer covers the right of publication of the work. In the latter case, the termination period begins at the end of thirty-five years from the date of publication of the work or the end of forty years

The year is 2019, and the writer of "Lady Marmalade" has filed suit in the month of April in the federal Central District of California: Copyright infringement, breach of contract, accounting, and declaratory relief. The publishing agreement and other documents included as exhibits are from 1973 and 1974. And the sum of damages being requested is astronomical - as in $20 million. But at issue are simple principles of copyright law, whether you consider the 1909 law that governed us when Kenny Nolan first signed off on agreements regarding his catalog or whether you consider the 1978 law that is in effect today. When you split a copyright, the two parties who split must account to one another for the royalties received and must be accountable to each other regarding any transfer in shared interest of copyright. It seems somewhat far-fetched to imagine that a writer and publisher would believe for a moment that they could enter in to a split publishing agreement, divid

So were you surprised when you woke up on Thursday, June 20, 2019, to the news that Carrie Underwood & Co. are defendants in a federal copyright infringement action over the theme song to Sunday Night Football ? Some would say that it is no surprise given that Underwood's team has been dragged into court before for the same reasons. Reports are that the most recent action ended in dismissal. But this time the court may be playing a different tune. Of course, we are just learning about this case. All we have to consider for the time being is the Billboard  analysis (which builds a case for infringement) and the complaint. The smart money says that this will not be my final blog post on this case, and there is certain to be a strong defense from all defendants. All that having been said, here is what I think based on what I know: The four plaintiffs are writers Heidi Merrill of California, Alex Wong of Nashville, Jeff Cohen of Nashville, and Niclas Lundin of Sweden.