James A. Rose

The practice of law is full of irony and surprise on many fronts. In about fifteen years of filing and prosecuting trademark applications, mostly in various areas of entertainment and many in the music industry, I have been surprised about the identity of those who want to trademark their goods or services. Many of those who seemed to be at an ideal stage of their career or business development were reluctant to spend the money necessary to protect their name and increase the value of their brand. Those who needed to focus efforts elsewhere came to me and hired me. This hasn't happened every time and with every client, but it has been a trend in past years. Lawyers may not be the most prominent professionals in the business of music we love in Nashville, but industry players would do well to follow our advice and counsel in our areas of expertise. For this blog post I decided to summarize my experience with trademark consultations and applications. Hopefully, it is somethi

As you have been reading in plenty of places (including this blog), the Music Modernization Act of 2018 and the reforms put into place by it will continue to have a positive impact on those who create music. In recent months, discussion regarding possible termination of the ASCAP and BMI federal consent decrees has begun. This was noted in an article by Nate Rau in  The Tennessean  on March 3, 2019. So just exactly what are these consent decrees? And why should we even want to see them terminated? The answer lies in monopoly and price-fixing litigation initiated by the United States Department of Justice over 80 years ago in the Southern District court of New York. In 1941, agreed orders, also known as decrees, were presented to and approved by the court. ASCAP has the most recent modified decree on its web site. This was signed in 2001. The BMI decree was amended last in 1994. If you can find the BMI decree, please send me the link. Executives from both ASCAP and BMI have declare