After a Long and Winding Road, Beatle Reclaims Publishing Rights

freeimages.com/christythompson

Paul McCartney is using a US Copyright provision to right a wrong he feels occurred many years ago.  As you may recall, the bulk of the Beatles tunes were attributed to the duo of John Lennon and Paul McCartney.  However, in the 1960’s, Paul McCartney and the other Beatles lost their publishing rights to many of their songs when ATV, a publishing company created by the Beatles, their manager and some of their investors, was sold without the knowledge of the band members.

At one time Yoko Ono, John Lennon’s widow and McCartney tried to purchase ATV for 20 million dollars.  The deal fell through and Michael Jackson purchased ATV for 47.5 million in 1985.  McCartney may now be able to reclaim those rights 56 years later.

Rather than let it be, McCartney filed a “notice of termination” with the US Copyright Office.  This enables a songwriter to reclaim ownership in publishing rights for a song anywhere between 2 to 10 years before the 56 year lapse of time after the publication rights were originally sold.  Some of the songs won’t be eligible for release until the singer is 83. 

What’s the take away here.  Any artist, author or creator of a work protected under copyright law should understand those rights .  In addition, anyone who may have an interest subject to copyright law should think carefully about corporate structure and where the ownership of the intellectual property should be held when forming a new business.  This often takes the form of an IP holding company.  Situations may vary, but who will own the rights in the copyright and how the business will be structured should be well thought out when setting up any business.

 Protecting your innovative developments is critical to any organization.  Having the right person to help you make that decision is important.  The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game.   The first telephone consultation is free.  Email us at klynch@kliplaw.com.

Court Finds Possible Copyright Protection Available in Cheer Leading Uniform

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that cheer leading uniforms may be subject to copyright protection.  In particular, in Varsity Brands vs. Star Athletica, the court overruled a district court’s holding that the Varsity Brand uniforms were not separable from the utilitarian aspects of the uniform and thus not eligible for copyright protection. 

The appellate court found that the design aspects of a cheer leading uniform can exist independently from the utilitarian ones.  The court found that Varsity’s designers “arrange various graphic elements, including stripes, lines, chevrons, angles, curves, coloring, and shapes.”  Id. at 28.  The court concluded that the arrangement of design aspects to be totally separable from the garment’s functional aspects, namely “ to cover the body, permit free movement, and wick moisture.”

What is the take away here?  Well for the fashion industry, this is good news.  The appellate court is recognizing the separation of the functional aspects of a garment from the design elements.  If that can be shown in this case, Varsity Brands may prevail on its copyright infringement claims against Star Athletica and companies moving forward may obtain copyright protection for their garments.   

Protecting your innovative developments is critical to any organization.  Having the right person to help you make that decision is important.  The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game.   The first telephone consultation is free.  Email us at klynch@kliplaw.com.

Holy Registration, Batman: The Batmobile is Copyrighted!

freeimages_alanvoorhees

It is now settled: the Batmobile is subject to copyright protection.  In a recent appellate court decision, the Batmobile was determined to have sufficient distinguishing features to entitle it to copyright protection. 

The appeal was the result of a case brought by DC Comics against the owner of a garage in Los Angeles specializing in selling Batmobile replicas.  DC Comics alleged that the garage committed copyright infringement when it sold cars that looked like the car in the 1966 television show and in the 1989 movie. 

The court agreed.  To find whether a character in a comic book, TV or movie is entitled to copyright protection, it must be shown that: (1) that the character has “physical as well as conceptual qualities”; (2) the character must be recognizable to people over time; and (3) the character is “especially distinctive”.   The Batmobile passed the court’s test and DC Comics succeeded in stopping the sale of Batmobile replicas.

What’s the take away here?  Think outside the box about how to best protect your intellectual property.  While the Batmobile may not be considered under conventional standards as a “character”, the court found it was, and its shape and likeness are now subject to protection under copyright law.

Protecting your innovative developments is critical to any organization.  Having the right person to help you make that decision is important.  The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game.   The first telephone consultation is free.  Email us at klynch@kliplaw.com.