A Federal Judge Rules Copyright Termination is Worldwide
Insights 
Celeste Moy · February 4, 2025
A U.S. District Court issued a final ruling on a controversial decision involving the 1963 hit “Double Shot (Oh My Baby’s Love”), and reaffirmed its earlier opinion that termination of copyright applies worldwide. (Vetter v. Resnik, No. 3:23-cv-01369-SDD-EWD (M.D. La. Jan. 29, 2025).
The court stood by its conclusion that the recovery of the renewal term of a pre-1976 copyright under the termination provision of the U.S. Copyright Act, covers global rights as well. Allow me to relate this ruling more specifically to my clients who are “songwriters”. Under the Copyright Act, the songwriters of a musical composition may under certain circumstances terminate an earlier assignment of copyright and recapture the renewal right for himself./herself and heirs. But the Act specifies that termination “affects only those rights covered by the grant that arise under this title, and in no way affects rights arising under any other Federal, State, or foreign laws.”
The Vetter case court acknowledged that other courts—most notably, Siegel v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., 542 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (C.D. Cal. 2008)—had found that this language limited the termination right to U.S. rights.” But the court, in this initial decision, found it “plausible” that the termination right applied more broadly. As it read the statute, the court noted, foreign rights to a work also “arise under” U.S. law, as opposed to the domestic laws of each individual country where the Song may be exploited. Thus, the Court opined that termination rights could covered foreign rights as well as domestic rights.
Review previous post for more details about the Vetter case titled:
Those hoping that the Court would reconsider its initial decision at a later stage of the case were disappointed. But, the Vetter plaintiffs encouraged by the Court’s initial decision denying the defendants motion to dismiss, filed a motion for summary judgment and the Court, in granting the motion for summary judgment, was unpersuaded by arguments for further analysis, and instead “adopt[ed] by reference in the explanatory and legal analysis of th[e] dispute” set forth in the prior ruling. (Vetter v. Resnik, No. 3:23-cv-01369-SDD-EWD (M.D. La. Jan. 29, 2025)).
This summary is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create an attorney-client relationship with Rimon, P.C. or its affiliates.
Celeste Moy is a Partner in Rimon’s Entertainment Sports & Media practice group. Ms. Moy has extensive music and entertainment law experience primarily representing songwriters, and their successors-in-interest, in disputes over royalty payments and royalty monetization transactions, copyright assignment terminations and recaptures, as well as negotiating and drafting various types of entertainment contracts for recording and performing artists and music producers. She also helps her clients to obtain trademark registrations and trademark license agreements for use of their logos, and creative works in connection with advertising, marketing materials and merchandise. Read more here.
