May 18, 2022

Volume XII, Number 138

Advertisement
Advertisement

May 18, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

May 17, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

May 16, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Florida Now Follows New York to Find No Common Law Public Performance Right For Pre-1972 Sound Recordings

A few months ago, we brought to your attention a case initiated by The Turtles, seeking royalties in New York for the unauthorized performance of their pre-1972 sound recordings. In that decision, the Court of Appeals of New York decided, on a question certified to it by the Second Circuit, that New York state law did not recognize a public performance right in pre-1972 sound recordings. We observed that other courts considering this issue, most notably the Supreme Courts of California and Florida (likewise on certified questions respectively from the Ninth and 11th Circuits) may decide likewise, namely, that under their own state laws, there is no public performance right in pre-1972 sound recordings. We now have the most recent pronouncement from the Florida Supreme Court, handed down on October 26, 2017, confirming our observation by failing to find a public performance right in pre-1972 sound recordings under Florida state law. The Court found that Florida never recognized such a right and that it would be inappropriate for a state court to create a new common law right that should normally be the province of the legislature.

Although the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted summary judgment in favor of The Turtles, finding that such a right existed under California state law, the Ninth Circuit certified this question in March 2017 to the California Supreme Court which has yet to rule. Because the California Civil Code arguably has an express provision that may be controlling, the California Supreme Court could potentially find a public performance right in pre-1972 sound recordings, putting California at odds with both New York and Florida, and potentially creating confusion in a marketplace that requires nationwide clearance. On the hand, the California Supreme Court could apply a similar public policy rationale that would deny such performance right protection under a California statute that is arguably ambiguous.

At this juncture, regardless of how the California Supreme Court decides this issue, only Congress can untie this Gordian Knot by extending federal copyright protection to pre-1972 sound recordings, thus providing a uniform system that reasonably balances the respective interests of both the owners and users of sound recording regardless of the happenstance of when they were actually recorded.

Copyright © 2022, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP.National Law Review, Volume VII, Number 301
Advertisement

About this Author

Edwin Komen Entertainment, attorney, Advertising law, Intellectual Property law Sheppard Mullin Washington DC
Partner

Mr. Komen is a partner in the Entertainment, Media & Communications and Intellectual Property Practice Groups in the firm's Washington, D.C. office while spending significant time in the Century City office. His global practice includes all aspects of copyright, trademark and unfair competition law, with a particular emphasis on motion picture, media, advertising and technology companies. He practices extensively before the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the United States Copyright Office.

Mr. Komen maintains a full spectrum worldwide copyright and trademark...

202-772-5328
Chidera N. Anyanwu, Sheppard Mullin, Labor Policy Lawyer, Union Employment Attorney
Associate

Chidera N. Anyanwu is an associate in the Labor and Employment Practice Group in the firm's Washington, D.C. office.

  • J.D., The George Washington University, Law School, 2016, with honors

  • B.A., The George Washington University, 2012, cum laude

202-747-2651
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement