I revere the Everly Brothers. As any music fan knows, their unique style of
harmony singing forms the basis for modern rock music and their albums are full
of fabulous songs. I was happy when they
reunited in the 1980s after their acrimonious split and they made some more
great records. Sadly, Phil Everly passed
away 4 years ago on January 3, 2014.
Now the Everly Brothers saga appears to be continuing in a courtroom which is tragic but fascinating
from a copyright standpoint.
In November
2017, Don Everly filed suit against his late brother's widow and sons, seeking
a declaratory judgment as to his sole authorship of the song "Cathy’s
Clown". The facts of the lawsuit are
really complicated.
In March
1960, Don and Phil signed an agreement transferring the copyright to the song
"Cathy’s Clown" to their publisher Acuff-Rose. According to the complaint, Don contacted
Phil in 1979 (during their split) and
asked him to recognize that he (Don) was the sole author of the song. Phil apparently agreed to this request because
in June 1980 he executed a "Release and Assignment" releasing any
interest he had in the musical composition, among others. Publishing records were changed and for the
next 36 years Don Everly was recognized as the sole author of "Cathy’s
Clown" (don't feel too bad for Phil, he was the sole author of "When
Will I Be Loved". On March 11,
2011 Don served a notice of termination of assignment of copyright on Sony/ATV
seeking to terminate the assignment of copyright to "Cathy’s Clown",
which under Sec. 304(c) of the Copyright Act, he is entitled to do as
author. However, Don learned that Phil's
widow and one of his sons filed a similar notice of intention to terminate on
November 17, 2014 and that on August 11, 2016 served a notice to terminate
the 1980 release.
If I
understand this correctly, Phil's heirs are now attempting to terminate not
only the original 1960 grant as well as the 1980 document wherein Phil Everly released "his claims as co‑composer".
Predictably,
Don's complaint has been met with an answer and a counterclaim. Interestingly many of the defenses are
equitable in nature – unclean hands, laches, failure of consideration. As sad as all of this is, there are some
really interesting issues being presented here.
For example, if Phil was not an author did he have the right to
terminate the assignment to Sony/ATV? On
the other hand nowhere in the 1980 Release and Assignment does Phil admit that
he was not the co-author of "Cathy’s Clown". He simply released "his claim as co‑composer". Can Phil's current claim withstand a statute
of limitations defense? Did the estate
act with unclean hands?
I can only
imagine that if this case does not settle it will delve into some murky issues
that need to be addressed under the termination provisions of the Copyright
Act. Part of me wishes, though, that this dispute was being argued by anyone other than the Everly Brothers.
2 comments:
Would love to read your thoughts on the settlement of this case.
https://www.adamsandreese.com/news-knowledge/adams-and-reese-earns-summary-judgment-victory-for-don-everly-in-copyright-and-royalty-case
family lawyer in pakistan
children marriage
Christian court marriage
Post a Comment