We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
SO HAPPY TOGETHER: SHOULD THE CALIFORNIA DECISION BE A BASIS TO RECOGNIZE A RIGHT OF PUBLIC PERFORMANCE IN PRE-1972 SOUND RECORDINGS?
- Authors
FELIÚ, VICENÇ
- Abstract
One of the peculiarities of American copyright law is the way it deals with sound recordings. The federal copyright regime has until now treated the protection afforded sound recordings as different from the protection awarded to other copies. Because of this difference in coverage, pre-1972 sound recordings are not protected by federal law and have only the patchwork protection afforded under state laws. In August of 2013, Mark Volman and Howard Kaylan (Flo & Eddie, Inc.), the founding members of the 1960s rock group "The Turtles," filed a $100 million class action suit in California against SiriusXMsatellite radio, claiming their public performance rights in sound recordings made before 1972.1 Their strategy was file the class action suit in California in coordination with other suits in New York and Florida. Flo & Eddie, Inc. followed their SiriusXMsuit with a suit in California against Pandora internet radio. Satellite and internet radio stations transmit thousands of pre-1972 sound recordings on the understanding that §114 of the Copyright Act of 1976 gives them the protection to do so. This section of the Copyright Act carves out limitations on exclusive rights and outlines the way that compensation accrues to owners of recordings. In their complaint, Flo & Eddie, Inc. argued that SiriusXM engaged in misappropriation, unfair competition, and conversion that affected all members of its class action, and that federal law, in its present form, could not be relied upon for effective relief. This article examines the background of copyright law in the U.S. leading to Flo & Eddie, Inc. 's complaint. The article focuses on examining the specific situation covering protection of sound recordings made prior to February, 15 1972, and looks at the repercussions of the gap in federal coverage. It also examines the New York, Florida, and Pandora cases. Finally, the article looks at the California settlement and at the assertion of whether that case might be used as a springboard to create a federal scheme of protection for pre-1972 sound recordings.
- Subjects
UNITED States. Copyrights (1976); SOUND recording &; reproducing; COPYRIGHT of music
- Publication
IDEA: The Intellectual Property Law Review, 2018, Vol 58, Issue 3, p267
- ISSN
0019-1272
- Publication type
Article