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 hav...

In the crazy business of music that we love, attention to detail is always important. And as the world of showbiz takes many unpredictable turns, an otherwise harmless occurrence of lack of attention can be magnified to one of big-time harmful proportion. It's a pretty good bet that Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corporation, a producer of online journalism content, never saw itself as a petitioner in the Supreme Court of the United States. The vast majority of lawyers and litigants of all kinds never see one of their cases be granted writ of certiorari and go before the nine justices for briefing and argument. But in Fourth Estate vs. Wall-Street.com, LLC , the justices of our nation's highest court saw the opportunity to clarify the legal standard for the right to sue for copyright infringement. And it didn't take long for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to lay down the law in a unanimous opinion - Formal registration by the U.S. Copyright Office is required before an ...

If you're in the music industry in Nashville, you likely have heard something about the appeals filed by Spotify, Amazon, and Pandora. And although you have heard plenty from strong activist organizations such as Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI) regarding recent rate determinations, it is perfectly normal to wonder exactly what has been determined and why appeals have been filed.  A big part of the answer comes from a publication rarely read by most but full of information about a recent finalization of rate determinations by a vote of 2-1 from Copyright Royalty Judges. These judges are appointed by the Librarian of Congress, who must consult with the Register of Copyrights regarding such appointments. Decisions by the judges may be appealed (and, in this instance, are being appealed) to the U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. These determined rates are for the payment of royalties for compulsory licenses. An owner of a copyright has th...

Well, in case you are following the Kane Brown federal litigation saga and my analysis from 3/18/2019, mediation is now officially OUT as a remedy from the vantage point of this entertainment lawyer. At least for now. It seemed that someone on Kane's legal team was reading my blog and rebutting it all in one fell swoop. Just as my spiel on the complaint filed by Zone 4, Inc. went live, the answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaim of Kane Allen Brown went to the court clerk in Atlanta. So read backward to March 18 of this year. But read forward, too. Because this litigation is not going to end soon. The upshot is that Jamal Jones p/k/a Polow Da Don ("Polow") has some explaining to do regarding his prior relationship with Sony Music Nashville via Epic Records. The answer from Brown indicates a "Secret 2013 Epic/Sony Deal" by which Polow and his company Zone 4 were obligated to bring any identified artist talent to Epic/Sony. This secret deal pro...

If you have been in the music industry for any significant time period, you already get the title line from this post. You've seen it or done it or been on the "out" side looking in. The business may be one we love, but it also has its dark, cutthroat side. Maybe that is why no one in showbiz is eager to know a lawyer. Unless you need one, that is. My first reaction on social media when I learned from The Tennessean  that Zone 4, Inc. had sued Kane Allen Brown in the Northern District of Georgia was to suggest that the parties head for mediation. Given the nature of federal litigation, it is a good bet that mediation will at least be attempted. Probably judicial settlement conferences of some sort, as well. Given the nature of the expense of federal litigation, it is not a bad idea for either party. A director and officer of Zone 4 is producer Jamal Jones p/k/a Polow Da Don. According the the complaint filed by the corporation, the professional resume is quit...

I get it. The intricacies of compulsory licensing are not as cool of a read as analyses of litigation and other subjects that an entertainment attorney might choose to write about. And the metrics of this blog reflect that. And yet I follow my train of thought from the last blog post on section 115 of the Copyright Act and encourage industry professionals to read on. The Music Modernization Act is now law. If songwriters, publishers, and artists want to get paid for their music, basic knowledge of licensing and how this new system works are essential. And so we go to blanket licensing. A digital music provider that qualifies for a compulsory license may obtain a blanket license through the mechanical licensing collective, also known as the MLC.  The MLC has not yet been put formally into place. A recent editorial in Billboard magazine frames the quest of the American Music Licensing Collective to have authorization to name directors. This ultimately will be decided by ...