Hard as it is to believe, some artists and\/or their agents or representatives have made some pretty crummy business decisions over the years.\u00a0 Deals that seemed great when the Pacers, Vegas and Mavericks ruled the highways now look about as desirable as those departed cars of the ’70s. The Copyright Act of 1976 can be employed under certain circumstances to kill certain licenses or assignments granted by authors, which now have been or have become horrible deals.\u00a0 You say you haven’t been getting any money for decades because you are shackled to a bad contract? Cheer up; you may be able to get a “Get out of Jail Free” card.<\/p>\n
Authors of intellectual property, like musicians and even photographers, may have the ability to \u201crecapture\u201d certain grants of rights which they may have made in the past. Photographers have been known to grant 20+ year licenses for worldwide use of photos for about $1.98 plus royalties, royalties which have yet to arrive.\u00a0 What to do?\u00a0 Are you stuck with a contract from which you receive only agita?<\/p>\n
This is very tricky stuff that must be handled by a lawyer but here is a short primer, a taste if you will of a complicated copyright issue. Remember a license is a grant of rights, your permission to let another use the intellectual property you authored, typically in exchange for money.<\/p>\n
A license to a client to use photographs for a say a book (that has now gone into its 375th edition), can be terminated despite what the terms of the written license or contract may contain. The right to terminate the license is hardly given to everyone and the criteria to break the terms of a bad deal made in the past are narrow.\u00a0 The lawyer’s first inquiry is likely to be something quite elegant like, “Who did what, with what and when did they do it”? Here’s why:<\/p>\n
Made before<\/em> January 1, 1978: Proper notice must be\u00a0given to the licensee (person or entity who received the license) within a specific time window AND that notice must filed with the Copyright Office. The photographer or author himself\/herself who issued a license on or after<\/em> January 1, 1978 may terminate the license between 35 and 40 years after the license was issued but there are\u00a0\u00a0 special rules applying for publishing rights, where the time period may be different.<\/p>\n Certain successors to the photographer may also terminate\u00a0and those with that right are specified by\u00a0the Copyright Act.\u00a0 Again notice must be sent and filed<\/strong> with the Copyright Office<\/strong> two to ten years prior to the effective date of termination.<\/p>\n Sometimes the author\/photographer does not get back all<\/em> rights of the granted. The Copyright Act has rules governing the continuing rights of certain business partners to continue exploiting previously granted rights even after termination. These termination rules only apply to licenses in the United States.\u00a0 A license given to use photos or music in Australia or Brazil cannot be terminated using this technique.\u00a0 Ditto for works made for hire. Essentially, if the author by performs his\/her magic under a WFH agreement, the author gives up all rights under the Copyright Law. Those rights would be retained if usage had just been licensed and no WFH agreement entered into. <\/em>Reason number 2,345 not to get involved with WFH.<\/p>\n This potential right to end a bad deal may exist and work for you regardless of what the dumb agreement you signed while Jimmy Carter was President actually says.\u00a0Even specific language in the license which in effect says that you, “can’t terminate this license\u00a0no matter what and don’t even try cuz if you do we will sue you” may<\/em> now not be worth the price of typewriter ribbon used by the secretary to the big shot lawyer who wrote the “air tight” agreement. Hard as it is to believe, some artists and\/or their agents or representatives have made some pretty crummy business decisions over the years.\u00a0 Deals that seemed great when the Pacers, Vegas and Mavericks ruled the highways now look about as desirable as those departed cars of the ’70s. The Copyright Act of 1976 can be […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-609","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-copyright-info"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/609","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=609"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/609\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":613,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/609\/revisions\/613"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=609"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=609"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=609"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nThe licensor may terminate the license between 56 and 61 years after the copyright was registered.\u00a0\u00a0 The licensor’s estate, heirs or persons who have obtained the author’s rights by death or sale may also\u00a0be able to terminate the license.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nWhether you possess the ability to get a fresh start requires a very dense and precise analysis by a skilled copyright attorney.
\nBottom line, whether you made the dumb deal or you inherited the dumb deal for the licensing of registered works, get thee to a lawyer post haste.\u00a0There may yet be hope that you can finally junk the Yugo and start driving a real car.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"