assignment of copyright cases

Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

The Copyright Act: Standing and “Right to Sue” Assignments

• Post author: Emil Ovbiagele
• Post published: November 1, 2017
• Post category: Intellectual Property Law / Public
• Post comments: 6 Comments

Enforcement Action Rights under the Copyright Act

According to the federal Copyright Act, only “[t]he legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright is entitled , subject to the requirements of section 411, to institute an action for any infringement of that particular right committed while he or she is the owner of it.”  17 U.S.C. § 501(b) (emphasis added).

The Copyright Act lists the following exclusive rights of the owner of a copyright:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work; (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; (4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly; (5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and (6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

17 U.S.C. § 106. But “a person holding a non-exclusive license is not entitled to complain about any alleged infringement of the copyright.”  HyperQuest, Inc. v. N’Site Sols., Inc., 632 F.3d 377, 382 (7th Cir. 2011).  In order words, to have the requisite standing to sue, a plaintiff must exclusively own one of the enumerated rights listed above.  Consequently, enforcement actions are limited to the specific rights exclusively owned.   For example, a plaintiff who owns the exclusive rights to perform a literary work can only sue to enforce that specific rights. Such a plaintiff, cannot go after alleged infringers making unauthorized copies of the literary work.

Bare “Right to Sue” Assignments

Most federal courts have concluded that Congress did not intend for the “right to sue” to be a separate right because it was not included as a divisible right under the Act.  The Copyright Act does not contemplate any transfer other than an ownership interest along with the enumerated six exclusive rights.

In Righthaven v. Democratic Underground , the imprudence of allowing assignments of such bare rights were made clear. 791 F. Supp. 2d 968 (D. Nev. 2011) In 2011, Righthaven LLC sued Democratic Underground for a five-sentence excerpt of a Las Vegas Review Journal news story that a user posted on the forum, with a link back to the Journal’s website. At the same time this lawsuit was going on, Righthaven had developed quite the litigious reputation. They brought over 200 similar suits.

But Righthaven never created, produced, or distributed any content.  Instead, all they did was scour the internet looking for Review-Journal stories posted on blogs and online forums. They brought these suits under a “right to sue” assignment. Righthaven never actually owned an exclusive right to any of the copyrighted materials.  They were copyright trolls.

The court stated “Righthaven and Stephens Media have attempted to create a cottage industry of filing copyright claims, making large claims for damages and then settling claims for pennies on the dollar, with defendants who do not want to incur the costs of defending the lawsuits.” Righthaven, LLC v. Democratic Underground, LLC , No. 2:10-cd-1356-RLH-GWF (D. Nev. Apr. 14, 2011), ECF No. 94.  Judges who are confronted with these bare “right to sue” cases usually award significant attorney fees to the prevailing defendants, even at the motion to dismiss phase.

Parties intending to convey enforceable exclusive rights to a copyright must shore up their agreements to make the intent clear. And merely sprinkling the “exclusive license” lingo within a licensing or assignment agreement doesn’t suffice. See HyperQuest, Inc. v. N’Site Sols., Inc. 632 F.3d 377 (7th Cir. 2011).  Thus, an exclusive right must be exclusive. An assignment is not exclusive if some form of right to limited use and distribution to other third parties is reserved.

In the copyright world, the “substance and effect” of any written assignment must reflect a true, even if temporary, transfer of complete ownership of a copyright interest.  Overly aggressive plaintiffs who ignore this simple but important axiom of copyright law, do so at their own peril.

You Might Also Like

Us supreme court review: statutory interpretation in criminal cases, 3l shannon strombom wins state bar outstanding public interest law student of year award, israel reflections 2015: day 7 — the rabin center, this post has 6 comments.

I have an overly aggressive defendant who has lots of money, is an internet pirate, has no exclusive or beneficial rights and want to be a defendant real bad!

Rita Hutchens

I represent the exclusive owner of the legal rights in a literary work that has been infringed. My client who is resident abroad intends to give me a Power of Attorney to institute legal proceedings against the infringer. Does my client have the right to do this ?

I practice family law, so I don’t know 100%, but what seems logical to me is that if you sue in your name based on the POA, that would not work. If you sue with your client, the copyright holder, under the Copyright Act but you can execute litigation documents based on the POA, that would be acceptable.

I had a registered copyright to the software I created for 15 years, but a federal judge found (and the Ninth Circuit affirmed) that my company (no longer under my control) owned my copyrights even though there was no written agreement transferring ownership. See Johnson v. Storix (2017). Storix recorded the judgment with the Copyright Office, but not the actual ownership transfer because it has no written assignment. A federal court has no authority to invalidate a copyright registration or order a copyright transfer except involving common law (and I’m not bankrupt, divorced or dead.)

How can Storix enforce any rights under the Copyright Act if the copyright is still registered to me? Does the Ninth Circuit ruling establish Storix as the copyright owner in other circuits, or would they defer to the 2018 Supreme Court decision in Fourth Estate v. Wallstreet.com requiring a valid registration before instituting an infringement action?

Serious issues, what really is copyright? And why would anybody want to copy other people’s way of thinking. I’ve never had to copyright nobody’s work. A person fails to be a leader but yet a follower. I’m not a business person and then again I lead my own actions. Thank you

Communication key word: The world fails to understand this. Take control of been yourself, trust yourself to do right with whoever you encounter. Thank you

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Assignment of Copyrights & Legal Implications

Copyright gives authors a bundle of personal property or economic rights in an original work of authorship. These rights include the rights to reproduce, create derivative works, distribute work to the public, publicly perform a work, publicly display visual works, and digitally transmit sound records. They belong exclusively to a copyright holder.

Usually, the copyright holder is the person who created the work. However, any of these economic rights, or any part of these economic rights, can be transferred. Under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), an artist’s moral rights in a work of fine art can be waived but not assigned.

An original owner who assigns their copyright to someone else will not retain any right to control how the work is used.

The transfer of economic rights may be on an exclusive basis, which requires a written agreement, or a non-exclusive basis, which does not require a written agreement. Most commonly, this transfer is accomplished by assignment or license. Unlike a license in which the copyright owner maintains their ownership, an assignment is similar to a sale. The original copyright owner sells the rights to a third party and cannot control how the rights are used, just as they would not be able to control how personal property that they sold was used once it was transferred.

Generally, a license is preferable if a copyright holder expects to continue exercising interests and control over the work. For example, if you assign your copyright in a song to a music producer, the decision about whether to allow a film studio to use your song in a film will belong to the producer, not to you. If you license your copyright in a song in a limited capacity to a music producer, however, you will continue to be able to license your copyright in the song to a film producer.

Assignments can be used for many different purposes, such as security for debt, as an asset passed to heirs, or as part of the distribution of assets after a bankruptcy proceeding. Once you assign your rights to somebody else, however, you are permanently giving away your right to control the work. That means if you try to exercise any of the rights you have assigned, you are committing copyright infringement even though you created the work. If you assign your copyright to somebody else and regret the loss, you may be able to buy your copyright back from that person, but whether or not to sell it back to you is up to the assignee.

How Is Copyright Assigned?

Under Section 204 , a transfer of ownership is only valid if the instrument, note, or memorandum of transfer is in writing, signed by the copyright owner or their duly authorized agent. Generally, a certificate of acknowledgment is not required for the transfer to be valid, but it can be used as prima facie evidence that a transfer was executed if it is issued by someone authorized to administer oaths in the United States or, if the transfer is executed abroad, if the certificate is issued by a United States diplomatic or consular official, or a person authorized to administer oaths who also provides a certificate.

Formally recording an assignment with the Copyright Office is not required but can be advantageous.

You do not have to record an assignment in order to assign the interest. However, there are advantages to recording the assignment, such as creating a public record of the transfer details, giving constructive notice to members of the public, establishing priority of rights when there are conflicting transfers of ownership, validating the transfer of the copyright against a third party, or in some cases perfecting a security interest.

Last reviewed October 2023

Intellectual Property Law Center Contents   

• Intellectual Property Law Center
• Copyright Infringement & Related Lawsuits
• Copyright Ownership Under the Law
• Assignment of Copyrights & Legal Implications
• Copyright Licensing Under the Law
• Copyright Registration Under the Law
• Safe Harbors for Online Service Providers Under Copyright Law
• Criminal Copyright Infringement Laws
• Enforcement of Copyrights Through Lawsuits & Criminal Charges
• Fair Use Defense to Copyright Infringement Lawsuits
• Software Development Agreements & Related Legal Concerns
• End-User License Agreements Imposing Legal Restrictions on Software
• Lists, Directories, and Databases Under Copyright Law
• Photos of Buildings and Architecture Under Copyright Law
• Photos of Copyrighted or Trademarked Works & the Fair Use Defense to Infringement Lawsuits
• Works in the Public Domain After Copyrights Legally Expire
• Copyrights and Credits for Songwriters Under the Law
• Music Samples and Copyright Infringement Lawsuits
• Playing Music in Stores or Restaurants — How to Avoid Copyright Infringement Lawsuits
• Consignment Sales by Artists to Stores & Legal Protections
• Destruction of Copyrighted Works & Limited Legal Protections
• Copyright Legal Forms
• Trademark Law
• Trade Secret Law
• Choosing Among Patent, Copyright, and Trademark for Legal Protection
• Intellectual Property Law FAQs
• Find an Intellectual Property Lawyer

Related Areas   

• Small Business Legal Center
• Entertainment Law Center
• Communications and Internet Law Center
• Sports Law Center
• Related Areas
• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Copyright Licenses and Assignments

One of the primary benefits of copyright ownership is the ability to transfer some or all of those rights to third parties. These transfers can be for all of the copyright rights in a work (which is generally referred to as an outright assignment), or can be for a limited portion of the rights provided by the Copyright Act (which usually takes the form a copyright license).

The BitLaw discussion of assignments and licenses is divided into the following four sections:

• transfers in general
• implied licenses
• termination of transfers
• recordation of transfers

Transfers in General

Copyright is a personal property right, and it is subject to various state laws and regulations that govern the ownership, inheritance, or transfer of personal property. It is probably best to view copyright as a bundle of rights. The rights included in that bundle are the rights granted by the U.S. Copyright Act, as described in the BitLaw discussion on the scope of copyright protection . Any or all of these rights, or any subdivision of those rights, may be transferred.

A transfer of one of these rights may be made on an exclusive or nonexclusive basis. The transfer of exclusive rights is not valid unless that transfer is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed. Transfer of a right on a nonexclusive basis does not require a written agreement. For example, the author of a novel, as the original copyright owner of the novel, could transfer to a publisher the exclusive right to copy and distribute a novel (under the right of reproduction and distribution ), and also grant a screen play writer the nonexclusive right to create a movie script based on that novel (under the right to create derivative works ). The author's agreement with the publisher would have to be in writing to be valid. However, the agreement with the screen play writer could be oral and still be enforceable.

A transfer of copyright rights is usually either an assignment or a license. An assignment of copyright rights is like the sale of personal property. The original owner sells its rights to a third party, and can no longer exercise control over how the third party uses those rights. A license (or more properly "an express license") is an agreement where the copyright owner maintains its ownership of the rights involved, but allows a third party to exercise some or all of those rights without fear of a copyright infringement suit. A license will be preferred over an assignment of rights where the copyright holder wishes to maintain some ownership over the rights, or wishes to exercise continuing control over how the third party uses the copyright holder's rights.

A typical software license agreement is a copyright license agreement. The owner of the copyright in the software wishes to grant the end-user the right to utilize the software in a restricted manner. In return, the end-user may agree to limit its use of the software in a variety of ways and to pay a license fee payment to the copyright owner.

Implied Licenses

An implied copyright license is a license created by law in the absence of an actual agreement between the parties. Implied licenses arise when the conduct of the parties indicates that some license is to be extended between the copyright owner and the licensee, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license. This differs from an express license in that the parties never actually agree on the specific terms of the license. The purpose of an implied license is to allow the licensee (the party who licenses the work from the copyright owner) some right to use the copyrighted work, but only to the extent that the copyright owner would have allowed had the parties negotiated an agreement. Generally, the custom and practice of the community are used to determine the scope of the implied license.

Implied licenses have been used to grant licenses in situations where a copyrighted work was created by one party at the request of another. In one case, a special effects company was hired to create a specific effect for a horror movie. The contract through which the special effects company was hired did not assign the copyright in the effect, and did not provide for a license for the effect to be used in the horror movie. The court ruled that the effect could be used in the horror movie through an implied license, since the effect was created with the intent that it be used and distributed in the movie.

A commonly discussed scenario where implied licenses are destined to play a major role is on the World Wide Web. When a Web page is viewed in a Web browser, the page is downloaded through the Internet and placed on the user's screen. It is clear that a copy of the Web page is being made by the user. It is also clear that the Web page is protected against unauthorized copying by copyright law. But it would not make sense to allow the author of a Web page to sue a user who viewed her page, since the author intended that the page be viewed by others when she placed it on the World Wide Web. Rather, attorneys argue, courts should find that the Web page author has given end users an implied license to download and view the Web page. The extent of this implied license is unclear, and may someday be defined by the courts.

Termination of Transfers

Although a copyright owner is free to transfer her copyright rights as she sees fit, the Copyright Act contains a non-revocable right for a copyright owner to terminate any copyright transfer. The purpose for this is to give the creator of the work or the creator's heirs a second chance to exploit the work in situations where the value of the work may have been significantly enhanced since the original transfer. Generally, there is a five year window of time to accomplish the termination beginning either at

• 35 years from the assignment if the transfer was made on or after January 1, 1978; or
• 56 years from the date copyright was originally secured if the transfer was made before January 1, 1978.

The ability to terminate a transfer cannot be negotiated away. Thus, the author of a valuable book has the right to reclaim the copyright in the book by terminating the transfer, even if the agreement signed by the author stated that the assignment of her copyright rights was permanent and irrevocable. Exceptions to this ability to terminate a transfer are made for those parties who created derivative works prior to the termination (see the BitLaw discussion on derivative works for more information on this subject). In addition, works made for hire are not subject to this termination of transfer right (works made for hire are discussed in the BitLaw section on copyright ownership ).

Recordation of Transfers

A document that transfers copyright ownership or any other document pertaining to a copyright may be recorded in the Copyright Office. Although recordation is not required to make a valid transfer of a copyright, recordation of the transfer document does provide certain legal advantages and may be required to validate the transfer as against third parties.

Latest Blogs

Practical guidance offers help with workplace issues during mental....

According to recent studies, over 20% of Americans struggle with some form of mental illness. To help advise employers on legal and practical workplace mental health issues, see this superb practice note...

A Rose by Any other Color. Municipal Bond Interest Can Be Ta...

Under IRC § 103(b)(2) , interest which would otherwise be excluded from gross income under IRC § 103(a) is instead subject to federal income taxation if the obligation is classified as an arbitrage...

Rent Reductions for Commercial Tenants

Landlords and tenants often negotiate rent abatement clauses. These clauses are used as a lease incentive and also as a remedy when tenants are prevented from using or profiting from the premises due to...

FinCEN Adds New Commentary to Corporate Transparency Act FAQ

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) recently updated its Frequently Asked Questions page regarding beneficial ownership information reporting under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). The...

Demystifying Means-Plus-Function: The Ins and Outs to MPF St...

Explore the law on means-plus-function claiming with this practice note describing when a utility patent claim should be interpreted as a means-plus-function or step-plus-function claim (functional claims...

Today’s Assignment: How to Assign a Copyright

This practice note covers the fundamentals of copyright assignments and rules for works made for hire, assignments from independent contractors or freelancers, partial copyright assignments, and recordation of copyright assignments. It includes links to the Nimmer on Copyright sections on transfer formalities, recordation of transfers, and construing the scope of assignments and other transfers for additional guidance and to help you continue your research and deepen your understanding of key tasks and areas of law.

READ NOW »

Related Content

• Copyright Assignment Checklist Brush up on the provisions that must be included in a copyright assignment for the assignment to be valid and enforceable.
• Copyright Assignment Use this template to assign rights in and to a work of authorship to another person, organization, or corporate entity.
• Nimmer on Copyright § 10.03 Deepen your understanding of transfer formalities with expert analysis from the leading authority on copyright law.
• Nimmer on Copyright § 10.07 Broaden your understanding of recordation of transfers with expert analysis from the leading authority on copyright law.
• Nimmer on Copyright § 10.10 Expand your understanding of construing the scope of assignments and other transfers with expert analysis from the leading authority on copyright law.

Practical Guidance Updates   Featuring the latest updates from your Practical Guidance account.    

• Check out the new Practical Guidance Author Center ! Learn about the 1500+ leading attorney authors contributing to our 21 practice areas, and find out how you can Become a Practical Guidance Author .
• Legal Developments provide the latest updates and analyses of emerging topics impacting your practice area. Visit the Legal Developments page to see the latest topics, which also include breaking legal news and related Practical Guidance content.
• Document alerts  allow you to stay current on legal developments that affect your practice.  Find out how to set up your document alerts.        

Experience results today with practical guidance, legal research, and data-driven insights—all in one place. Experience Lexis+

• Intellectual Property & Technology

Published By Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center

Chapter 2. copyright ownership and transfer.

Copyright Ownership and Transfer

• 201. Ownership of copyright
• 202. Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material object
• 203. Termination of transfers and licenses granted by the author
• 204. Execution of transfers of copyright ownership
• 205. Recordation of transfers and other documents

§ 201. Ownership of copyright 1

(a) Initial Ownership. — Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work. The authors of a joint work are coowner of copyright in the work.

(b) Works Made for Hire. — In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright.

(c) Contributions to Collective Works. — Copyright in each separate contribution to a collective work is distinct from copyright in the collective work as a whole, and vests initially in the author of the contribution. In the absence of an express transfer of the copyright or of any rights under it, the owner of copyright in the collective work is presumed to have acquired only the privilege of reproducing and distributing the contribution as part of that particular collective work, any revision of that collective work, and any later collective work in the same series.

(d) Transfer of Ownership. —

(1) The ownership of a copyright may be transferred in whole or in part by any means of conveyance or by operation of law, and may be bequeathed by will or pass as personal property by the applicable laws of intestate succession.

(2) Any of the exclusive rights comprised in a copyright, including any subdivision of any of the rights specified by section 106, may be transferred as provided by clause (1) and owned separately. The owner of any particular exclusive right is entitled, to the extent of that right, to all of the protection and remedies accorded to the copyright owner by this title.

(e) Involuntary Transfer. — When an individual author’s ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, has not previously been transferred voluntarily by that individual author, no action by any governmental body or other official or organization purporting to seize, expropriate, transfer, or exercise rights of ownership with respect to the copyright, or any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, shall be given effect under this title, except as provided under title 11. 2

§ 202. Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material object

Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object.

§ 203. Termination of transfers and licenses granted by the author 3

(a) Conditions for Termination. — In the case of any work other than a work made for hire, the exclusive or nonexclusive grant of a transfer or license of copyright or of any right under a copyright, executed by the author on or after January 1, 1978, otherwise than by will, is subject to termination under the following conditions:

(1) In the case of a grant executed by one author, termination of the grant may be effected by that author or, if the author is dead, by the person or persons who, under clause (2) of this subsection, own and are entitled to exercise a total of more than one-half of that author’s termination interest. In the case of a grant executed by two or more authors of a joint work, termination of the grant may be effected by a majority of the authors who executed it; if any of such authors is dead, the termination interest of any such author may be exercised as a unit by the person or persons who, under clause (2) of this subsection, own and are entitled to exercise a total of more than one-half of that author’s interest.

(2) Where an author is dead, his or her termination interest is owned, and may be exercised, as follows:

(A) The widow or widower owns the author’s entire termination interest unless there are any surviving children or grandchildren of the author, in which case the widow or widower owns one-half of the author’s interest.

(B) The author’s surviving children, and the surviving children of any dead child of the author, own the author’s entire termination interest unless there is a widow or widower, in which case the ownership of one-half of the author’s interest is divided among them.

(C) The rights of the author’s children and grandchildren are in all cases divided among them and exercised on a per stirpes basis according to the number of such author’s children represented; the share of the children of a dead child in a termination interest can be exercised only by the action of a majority of them.

(D) In the event that the author’s widow or widower, children, and grandchildren are not living, the author’s executor, administrator, personal representative, or trustee shall own the author’s entire termination interest.

(3) Termination of the grant may be effected at any time during a period of five years beginning at the end of thirty-five years from the date of execution of the grant; or, if the grant covers the right of publication of the work, the period begins at the end of thirty-five years from the date of publication of the work under the grant or at the end of forty years from the date of execution of the grant, whichever term ends earlier.

(4) The termination shall be effected by serving an advance notice in writing, signed by the number and proportion of owners of termination interests required under clauses (1) and (2) of this subsection, or by their duly authorized agents, upon the grantee or the grantee’s successor in title.

(A) The notice shall state the effective date of the termination, which shall fall within the five-year period specified by clause (3) of this subsection, and the notice shall be served not less than two or more than ten years before that date. A copy of the notice shall be recorded in the Copyright Office before the effective date of termination, as a condition to its taking effect.

(B) The notice shall comply, in form, content, and manner of service, with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation.

(5) Termination of the grant may be effected notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, including an agreement to make a will or to make any future grant.

(b) Effect of Termination. — Upon the effective date of termination, all rights under this title that were covered by the terminated grants revert to the author, authors, and other persons owning termination interests under clauses (1) and (2) of subsection (a), including those owners who did not join in signing the notice of termination under clause (4) of subsection (a), but with the following limitations:

(1) A derivative work prepared under authority of the grant before its termination may continue to be utilized under the terms of the grant after its termination, but this privilege does not extend to the preparation after the termination of other derivative works based upon the copyrighted work covered by the terminated grant.

(2) The future rights that will revert upon termination of the grant become vested on the date the notice of termination has been served as provided by clause (4) of subsection (a). The rights vest in the author, authors, and other persons named in, and in the proportionate shares provided by, clauses (1) and (2) of subsection (a).

(3) Subject to the provisions of clause (4) of this subsection, a further grant, or agreement to make a further grant, of any right covered by a terminated grant is valid only if it is signed by the same number and proportion of the owners, in whom the right has vested under clause (2) of this subsection, as are required to terminate the grant under clauses (1) and (2) of subsection (a). Such further grant or agreement is effective with respect to all of the persons in whom the right it covers has vested under clause (2) of this subsection, including those who did not join in signing it. If any person dies after rights under a terminated grant have vested in him or her, that person’s legal representatives, legatees, or heirs at law represent him or her for purposes of this clause.

(4) A further grant, or agreement to make a further grant, of any right covered by a terminated grant is valid only if it is made after the effective date of the termination. As an exception, however, an agreement for such a further grant may be made between the persons provided by clause (3) of this subsection and the original grantee or such grantee’s successor in title, after the notice of termination has been served as provided by clause (4) of subsection (a).

(5) Termination of a grant under this section affects only those rights covered by the grants that arise under this title, and in no way affects rights arising under any other Federal, State, or foreign laws.

(6) Unless and until termination is effected under this section, the grant, if it does not provide otherwise, continues in effect for the term of copyright provided by this title.

§ 204. Execution of transfers of copyright ownership

(a) A transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner’s duly authorized agent.

(b) A certificate of acknowledgment is not required for the validity of a transfer, but is prima facie evidence of the execution of the transfer if —

(1) in the case of a transfer executed in the United States, the certificate is issued by a person authorized to administer oaths within the United States; or

(2) in the case of a transfer executed in a foreign country, the certificate is issued by a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or by a person authorized to administer oaths whose authority is proved by a certificate of such an officer.

§ 205. Recordation of transfers and other documents 4

(a) Conditions for Recordation. — Any transfer of copyright ownership or other document pertaining to a copyright may be recorded in the Copyright Office if the document filed for recordation bears the actual signature of the person who executed it, or if it is accompanied by a sworn or official certification that it is a true copy of the original, signed document.

(b) Certificate of Recordation. — The Register of Copyrights shall, upon receipt of a document as provided by subsection (a) and of the fee provided by section 708, record the document and return it with a certificate of recordation.

(c) Recordation as Constructive Notice. — Recordation of a document in the Copyright Office gives all persons constructive notice of the facts stated in the recorded document, but only if —

(1) the document, or material attached to it, specifically identifies the work to which it pertains so that, after the document is indexed by the Register of Copyrights, it would be revealed by a reasonable search under the title or registration number of the work; and

(2) registration has been made for the work.

(d) Priority between Conflicting Transfers. — As between two conflicting transfers, the one executed first prevails if it is recorded, in the manner required to give constructive notice under subsection (c), within one month after its execution in the United States or within two months after its execution outside the United States, or at any time before recordation in such manner of the later transfer. Otherwise the later transfer prevails if recorded first in such manner, and if taken in good faith, for valuable consideration or on the basis of a binding promise to pay royalties, and without notice of the earlier transfer.

(e) Priority between Conflicting Transfer of Ownership and Nonexclusive License. — A nonexclusive license, whether recorded or not, prevails over a conflicting transfer of copyright ownership if the license is evidenced by a written instrument signed by the owner of the rights licensed or such owner’s duly authorized agent, and if

(1) the license was taken before execution of the transfer; or

(2) the license was taken in good faith before recordation of the transfer and without notice of it.

Chapter 2 Endnotes

1 In 1978, section 201(e) was amended by deleting the period at the end and adding “, except as provided under title 11.”

2 Title 11 of the United States Code is entitled “Bankruptcy.”

3 In 1998, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act amended section 203 by deleting “by his widow or her widower and his or her grandchildren” from the first sentence in paragraph (2) of subsection (a) and by adding subparagraph (D) to paragraph (2). Pub. L. No. 105-298, 112 Stat. 2827, 2829.

4 The Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 amended section 205 by deleting subsection (d) and redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections (d) and (e), respectively. Pub. L. No. 100-568, 102 Stat. 2853, 2857.

17 U.S. Code § 204 - Execution of transfers of copyright ownership

Section 204 is a somewhat broadened and liberalized counterpart of sections 28 and 29 of the present statute [sections 28 and 29 of former title 17]. Under subsection (a), a transfer of copyright ownership (other than one brought about by operation of law) is valid only if there exists an instrument of conveyance, or alternatively a “note or memorandum of the transfer,” which is in writing and signed by the copyright owner “or such owner’s duly authorized agent.” Subsection (b) makes clear that a notarial or consular acknowledgment is not essential to the validity of any transfer, whether executed in the United States or abroad. However, the subsection would liberalize the conditions under which certificates of acknowledgment of documents executed abroad are to be accorded prima facie weight, and would give the same weight to domestic acknowledgments under appropriate circumstances.

The IPThink-Tank

Where ideas meet success....

• Jun 27, 2021

Assignment, Transmission, And Relinquishment Of Copyright : An Overview

Signifying the objective of copyright as being the step towards safeguarding the interest of a creator alongside the dispersal of knowledge, the protection that was rendered initially with recognizing and identifying the rights of authors in their books, is with time and evolution in technology, witnessing a major change in the nature of work and its mode of exploitation. Therefore, the association of monetary benefits and copyright work introduces the aspect of economic rights. The Copyright Act, 1957 as amended in 2012, sets quite the bandwidth for creators and authors for acquiring pecuniary benefits alongside success, in the process of encouraging continuous creativity and innovation from creators in the future.

When talking of assigning copyright, it certainly bears a purpose. That is, in this process, the assignee gets the right to exploit the innovation for a stipulated time within a particular region. The assignor, on the other hand, receives a royalty. The owner of the copyright of a work is vested with the authority to assign his copyright to another person. Thereafter, the assignee of the copyright becomes entitled to any right falling within the ambit of the copyright and shall be treated as the owner of the copyright in respect of those rights. When the owner of a copyright dies, if he dies intestate then his copyright passes on to his representatives. Section 18 thereafter, also goes on to throw light upon the aspect of an owner of copyright assigning the right in an existing work as well. As per Section 18, a prospective owner, the person who is not the first owner in the future work, can assign the copyright. But, again, as laid down by the proviso of this section, the assignment can only take place after that particular work comes into existence, not before that.

But assignment directly doesn't indicate an absolute assignment. The intention of the parties associated with the nature and extent of the assignment has to be worked out from the agreement. It was seen in the case of Saregama India Ltd. vs. Suresh Jindal (2007) , that if an assignment has been made for a limited period in line with the agreement, then, one cannot contend on the basis of the assignment of copyright rendering absolute ownership for an unlimited period.

The conditions for assigning a copyright have been laid under Section 19 of the Copyright Act, 1957. It is quite significant to be aware of the fact that the assignment has to be rendered in writing and signed by the assignor or an authorized agent, otherwise, it shall not be valid. A careful reading of the agreement and straining out the intentions of the parties are quite crucial since the copyright grants are often misused by the owners.

Relinquishment of the copyright requires the author to give notice as per the set form to the Registrar of Copyrights or via public notice. The Registrar then publishes the notice in the Official Gazette or in a different way. Within 14 days from the publication of the notice in the Official Gazette shall post the notice on the official website so that it remains in the public domain for not less than 3 years. As per Section 21 (1) and (2), the relinquishment of copyright shall not affect any pre-existing rights in favour of any person on the date of the notice. Section 21 goes on to provide the owner of a work the right to relinquish all or any of the rights in a work. Relinquishment indicates the handing over of the rights in the copyrighted work, also meaning the author would no more have the rights surrendered and cannot claim ownership over it. The author can determine the rights that they want to relinquish.

https://selvams.com/india/copyrights/relinquishment-of-copyright-in-india/

https://blog.ipleaders.in/concept-assignment-copyright/

https://taxguru.in/corporate-law/assignment-copyrights.html

https://www.mondaq.com/india/copyright/854828/assignment-and-licensing-of-copyright

Recent Posts

Design holder and the associated rights: an insight

Breezer vis a vis Freez: the alcoholic tussle

Infringement vis a vis passing off action in trademark

Comentários

• Practical Law

Transfer or assignment of intellectual property rights

Get full access to this document with a free trial.

Try free and see for yourself how Practical Law resources can improve productivity, efficiency and response times.

About Practical Law

This document is from Thomson Reuters Practical Law, the legal know-how that goes beyond primary law and traditional legal research to give lawyers a better starting point. We provide standard documents, checklists, legal updates, how-to guides, and more.

650+ full-time experienced lawyer editors globally create and maintain timely, reliable and accurate resources across all major practice areas.

83% of customers are highly satisfied with Practical Law and would recommend to a colleague.

81% of customers agree that Practical Law saves them time.

Understanding Assignment of Copyright

Copyright is a bundle of rights and can be exploited in several ways independently from each other. Each work has various rights, such as theatrical rights, distribution rights, rental rights, broadcasting rights, rights related to adoption and translation, rights to prepare derivative works, and so on, each of which can be exploited separately. These rights can be disjointedly assigned for a limited term or perpetually.

What is an Assignment of Copyright?

An assignment is, in spirit, a transfer of ownership, even if it is partial. The copyright owner in an existing work or the future owner of the copyright in a further work may assign to any person the copyright either wholly or partially, either generally or subject to limitation, either for the whole of copyright or any part thereof. In case the assignment of copyright is for any future work, the assignment will take effect only when the work is in an expressed form and not just an idea.

No one has the right to copy, reproduce, sell, or publish an original work without the permission of the creator. It means that only the owner of the copyright can transfer the ownership of the copyright to a third party. Another important thing to note is that with the assignment of a copyright, the assignee shall also enjoy all the rights related to the copyright of the assigned work.

An assignment has two objectives:

• Where an assignee is concerned, it confers on him the right of exploitation of work for a specified period in the specified territory; and;
• For the assignor, it confers on him the right to receive a royalty on the work assigned.

Mode of Assignment of Copyright

The owner of the copyright in the existing or future work may assign it to any person. It can be assigned either wholly or partially and with or without limitation on the whole or any part of the copyright. Assignment of copyright in any work shall not be valid unless it is in writing and signed by the assignor or by his authorized agent. Oral assignment of copyright is usually neither permissible nor valid. It shall identify the work and specify the rights assigned, the duration, the territorial extent of such assignment, and the amount of royalty payable to the author.

Difference between Assignment and Licensing of Copyright

Copyright license and assignment of copyright are two dissimilar terms that cannot be used interchangeably. Each of them is different in its own way. A license provides approval of an act, and without it, the authorization would amount to infringement. Licensing usually involves authorizing some of the rights out of many. It can either be exclusive or non-exclusive. In the case of assignment, it includes the disposal of the copyright, which in simple terms means the assignor assigns the copyright to another person or the transfer of ownership of the copyright to some other person, whereas in the case of a license, only some Intellectual Property (IP) is transferred and the ownership is not transferred to the licensee. A license does not confer any right to the licensee against a third party or licensor, but an exclusive licensee has substantial rights against the licensor and even a right to sue the licensor.

A licensee also has the right to make amendments provided that his license does not restrict that right. In case there is a failure in paying the royalties, the licensor can revoke the license. When it comes to the assignment, the same is not possible. However, if there is anything harsh that can affect the author, it may lead to revocation in the event of a complaint made to the copyright board.

A copyright license, unlike a copyright assignment, needs to be in writing. It can be oral or implied after considering all the facts and circumstances relating to the transaction between the owner of the copyright and the licensee. Thus, if an individual who is the owner of a copyrighted work thinks about assigning the copyright, he can consider licensing his copyright instead of assigning it. It would help in retaining ownership, thereby licensing only certain rights to another party.

Essential Features of a Copyright Assignment Agreement

• The assignment must specify the amount of copyright. The creator shall not assign or waive the right to receive royalties to be shared on an equal basis with the assignee of copyright, subject to certain conditions.
• The ownership may be assigned either wholly or partially.
• The assignment should also specify the duration.
• The territorial extent of such assignment should be specified.
• The assignment shall be subject to revision, extension, or termination on terms mutually agreed upon by the parties.
• The creator is entitled to subsequent royalties in the course of future exploitation of a work.
• The assignee has the rights of translation, abridgment, adaptation, and dramatic and filmmaking in the work after obtaining the rights via assignment deed.

The main objective of the assignment process is to give financial and distribution benefits to the original work. Copyright assignment can prove to be a necessity in this world as it may lead to enhancing the potential of the original work by reaching several individuals as they may add their creativity to the original work. However, the practicality of copyright assignment has been controversial on several occasions due to the increasing number of Copyright Infringement cases. ✅ For more visit:  https://www.kashishipr.com/

leave a Comment Cancel reply

Post Comment

Subscribe to our newsletter

Recent posts.

• Here’s How You Can Maintain Your Trademark Registration in India
• Understanding the Essentials & Attributes of a Trademark
• Here’s Why You Should Handle a Trademark Assignment Properly
• Intellectual Property Rights Involved in Advertising Campaigns
• Exploring the Top Four Ways to Stop Brand Counterfeiting

Recent Comments

• November 2022  (1)
• October 2022  (3)
• September 2022  (4)
• August 2022  (5)
• July 2022  (4)
• June 2022  (5)
• May 2022  (4)
• April 2022  (4)
• March 2022  (5)
• February 2022  (4)
• January 2022  (4)
• December 2021  (5)
• November 2021  (4)
• October 2021  (4)
• September 2021  (6)
• August 2021  (5)
• July 2021  (4)
• June 2021  (6)
• May 2021  (3)
• April 2021  (5)
• March 2021  (6)
• February 2021  (4)
• January 2021  (4)
• December 2020  (5)
• November 2020  (4)
• October 2020  (3)
• August 2020  (2)
• July 2020  (9)
• June 2020  (6)
• May 2020  (4)
• April 2020  (7)
• March 2020  (3)
• February 2020  (8)
• January 2020  (16)
• December 2019  (15)
• November 2019  (12)
• October 2019  (21)
• September 2019  (16)
• August 2019  (12)
• July 2019  (20)
• June 2019  (14)
• May 2019  (18)
• April 2019  (1)
• Copyright (50)
• Domain Names (2)
• Geographical Indications (15)
• Industrial Design (18)
• Intellectual Property Rights (140)
• IP Portfolio Review and Management (1)
• Patent (80)
• Trademark (93)

Like Us On Facebook

Copyright © 2019 KIPG All rights reserved.

Designed and Developed by K-erda

Assignment of Copyright – Explained With Modes and Disputes

Original work may not be reproduced, distributed, or sold by anybody other than the copyright owner without that owner’s consent. As a result, the law allows the copyright owner to assign ownership to a third party.

The term “copyright assignment” describes the transfer of ownership or rights in a work that has been granted copyright from the original copyright holder (the “ assignor “) to a different party (the “ assignee “). Through a legal procedure, the assignor gives up their ownership of the work and gives the assignee the only authority to reproduce, distribute, display, perform, or alter it.

This article discusses the concept of copyright assignment, which involves the transfer of ownership or rights in a copyrighted work from the original copyright holder (assignor) to another party (assignee). The article also explains the various aspects of copyright assignment, including its mode of assignment and disputes with respect to the assignment of copyright.

Assignment of Copyright

(Section 18 of the Copyright Act, 1957 )

The owner of the current work or the potential owner of the future work may assign the copyright. It may be fully or partially allocated. Limitations may apply to all or a portion of the copyright.

Additionally, if future work is assigned, the assignment will become effective when the new work is created. In future works, “assignee” includes the assignee’s legal representative if they die before the work is created.

The court ruled in  Saregama India Ltd. vs Suresh Jindal And Ors.  that the copyright owner to a future work has the right to assign the copyright, in whole or in part, to a third party. This indicates that the owner may assign the copyright ownership for the entire term or only a portion.

The assignee is regarded as the legal owner of the copyright after the assignment is made, and the Copyright Act recognises all associated rights and benefits. As mentioned above, the ruling affirms that copyright ownership can be transferred by assignment, enabling people or organisations to obtain and exercise control over the rights connected to the copyrighted work.

Mode of Assignment of Copyright

(Section 19 of the Copyright Act, 1957)

Every assignment of the copyright to a work must be made in writing and be signed by the assignor or an authorised representative. Only that assignment will be accepted. Any assigned work must include all relevant information, including the assignment, length, rights, and geographic scope.

The amount of any royalties or other payments made to the author or his legal heirs during the assignment should also be specified. Any revisions, extensions, or terminations of the assignment are subject to the mutually agreed-upon terms and circumstances.

Let’s say the assignee fails to utilise the right granted during the assignment within a year of receiving it. If such a thing occurs, the assignment of those rights will be presumed to have terminated unless otherwise specified in the assignment. When the assignment time and geographical scope are not specified, they will be assumed to be five years from the date of the assignment and inside India, respectively.

The Bombay High Court considered whether the assignment of video rights included the right of satellite transmission in the case of  Video Master vs Nishi Production . The court accepted the defendant’s claim that several public communication channels, such as satellite broadcasting, video TV, and terrestrial television broadcasting, each constituted a distinct copyright.

As a result, the film’s owner may transfer these rights to other people or companies. The court concluded that the video copyright granted to the plaintiff was separate from the copyright for the satellite transmission of the movie. Consequently, the satellite broadcast right was not part of the assignment.

Disputes With Respect to the Assignment of Copyright

(Section 19A of the Copyright Act, 1957)

After receiving a complaint from the assignor and completing an investigation, the appellate board has the authority to revoke the assignment or issue any orders it sees suitable when the assignee fails to execute the powers granted to him if such failure is not a result of any action or inaction on the part of the assignor.

If the assignor is also the author, the appellate board should hold off on issuing any revocation unless it is established that the terms of the assignment are harsh to the assignor. Additionally, no revocation may be made for five years if an assignment has been made.

The appellate board should handle copyright assignment complaints promptly and with diligence. They have a time limit of six months from the date of receiving the complaint to reach a final decision. If, for any reason, there is a delay beyond this period, the appellate board must explain the reasons for the delay. The goal is to ensure that copyright disputes are resolved promptly and transparently.

In this evolving world, copyright assignment is an unavoidable need. People are not always able to rely on themselves. The ownership of the work must be transferred to properly frame the art and realise the original piece’s full creative potential.

Furthermore, copyright assignment aids in the seamless development of the creative process when several creative minds collaborate or when a work is adapted across various media. It allows for fresh viewpoints, interpretations, and variations that could improve the original work or investigate other creative paths.

Read Next: Doctrine of Merger Under Copyright Law

• Latest Posts

• What Is Misappropriation of Trade Secrets and Its Defences? - 15th May 2024
• 7 Important Types of Mediation Briefly Defined - 14th May 2024
• Whirlpool India vs Videocon Industries – Case Explained - 13th May 2024

How to Start Studying Law – For New, Existing, and Old Students

How to Study and Prepare for Judiciary Exams (13 tips)

11 Tips to Pass AIBE With Bare Acts and MCQ Tests in 2024

How to Write the Best Answer in Judiciary Mains Exam

10 Legal Jobs and Career Options After Law in 2024

Best Books for Judiciary Exam Preparation in 2024

My name is Ankur . I am a law graduate. I was my college topper for five years. In March 2018, I started WritingLaw.com . The main motive was to make a modern law website that is clean and comfortable.

Everything is going well . This is because of law students, advocates, judges and professors like you, who give me satisfaction, hope and the motivation to keep working. Thank you for your love and support. I hope you have a fruitful time here.

Law Study Material

© 2018-2024 | About Us |  Contact Us | Privacy Policy | T&C | Disclaimer | Cookies | Sitemap

Assignment and Licensing of Copyrights under Copyrights Act

• Intellectual Property Rights Subject-wise Law Notes
• January 8, 2021

Introduction

IP is an intellectual work which is produced by intellectual human brain. For e.g. literary work, musical work, inventions, etc. it is an intangible property. It is described as property because it is capable of sale, purchase, mortgage, etc. the owner if IP has rights over his intangible property. No one can make use of IP without the consent of the owner. IP is made to protect their rights and the infringement.

Copyright is a protection given to the creators of certain types of works as an acknowledgment to their intellectual input [1] . The objective of copyright has always been the protection of the interest of a creator, coupled with dissemination of knowledge. Though this protection started with the recognition of rights of authors in their books, but modern technology has substantially changed the nature of work and its mode of exploitation.

Economic rights allow an owner to reap economic benefits from his intellectual creations. According to section 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957, different rights are recognised with respect to the nature of the work. As per this section, it is the exclusive right of the owner to do or authorise the doing of the acts provided thereunder.

Today copyright includes a variety of industries like: the information industry and the entertainment industry and industrial design.

Assignment of Copyrights : Section 18 of Copyrights Act

The owner of the copyright of a work has the right to assign his copyright to any other person. The effect of assignment is that the assignee becomes entitled to all the rights related to the copyright to the assigned work. [2] However, mere grant of right to publish and sell the copyrighted work amounts to publishing right and not assignment of copyright.

Where the assignee of a copyright becomes entitled to any right comprised in the copyright, he shall be treated as the owner of the copyright in respect of those rights. The assignor shall also be treated as the owner of copyright with respect to unassigned rights. The legal representatives of the assignee shall be entitled to the benefits of assignment, if the assignee dies before the work comes into existence.

In  Video Master v. Nishi  Production [3] , the Bombay High Court considered the issue whether assignment of video rights would include the right of satellite broadcast as well. The Court agreed with the contentions of defendant that there were different modes of communication to the public such as terrestrial television broadcasting (Doordarshan), satellite broadcasting and video TV. The owner of the film had separate copyright in all those modes, and he could assign it to different persons. Thus, satellite broadcast copyright of film was a separate right of the owner of the film and the video copyright assigned to the plaintiff would not include this.

Mode of Assignment: Section 18 of Copyrights Act

As per section 19, assignment of copyright is valid only if it is in writing and signed by the assignor or his duly authorized agent. The assignment of a copyright in a work should identify the work and specify kind of rights assigned and the duration and territorial extent of such assignment. Further, it should specify the amount of royalty payable, if any, to the author or his legal heirs during the continuance of assignment and the assignment will be subject to revision, extension or termination on terms mutually agreed upon by the parties.

If the period of assignment is not mentioned it will be deemed to be taken as five years from the date of assignment. If the territorial extent of such assignment is not stipulated, it will be taken as applicable in whole of India.

Also, Section 19(8) contemplates that the assignment of copyright work against the terms and conditions on which rights have been assigned to a particular copyright society where the author of the work is a member shall be void. Further, Section 19(9) and section 19(10) opine that the assignment of copyright for making cinematograph film or sound recording shall not affect the right of the author to claim an equal share of the royalties and consideration payable with respect to use of his protected work.

In  Saregama India Ltd v. Suresh  Jindal [4] , it was held that the owner of the copyright in a future work may assign the copyright to any person either wholly or partially for the whole of the copyright or any part thereof and once the assignment is made the assignee for the purpose of this Act is treated as the owner of the copyright.

Licensing of Copyright

The owner of copyright may grant a license to do any of the act in respect of which he has an exclusive right to do. The license can be classified into following categories:

Voluntary license: : Section 18 of Copyrights Act

The author or the copyright owner has exclusive rights in his creative work and he alone has right to grant license with respect to such work. According to section 30 of the Copyright Act 1957, the owner of the copyright in a work may grant any interest in his copyright to any person by license in writing, which is to be signed by him or by his duly authorised agent. A license can be granted not only in existing work but also in respect of the future work, in this situation assignment shall come into force when such future work comes into existence. Where a licensee of the copyright in a future work dies before such work comes into existence, his legal representatives shall be entitled to the benefit of the license if there is no provision to contrary.

The mode of license is like an assignment deed, with necessary adaptations and modifications in section 19 (section 30A). Therefore, like an assignment, a license deed in relation to a work should comprise of following particulars:

• Duration of license
• The rights which have been licensed
• Territorial extent of the licensed
• The quantum of royalty payable
• Terms regarding revision
• Extension and termination

Voluntary licenses can be:

Exclusive –  The term exclusive license has been defined in Section 2(j) as a license which confers on the licensee and persons authorized by him, to the exclusion of all other persons, any right comprised in the copyright work.

Non-exclusive  – It does not confer right of exclusion. It is mere grant of an authority to do a particular thing which otherwise would have constituted an infringement. When owner grants an exclusive right, he denudes himself of all rights and retains no claim on the economic rights so transferred.

Co-exclusive –  Here the licensor grants a license to more than one licensee but agrees that it will only grant licences to a limited group of other licensees.

Sole license  – Where only the licensor and the licensee can use it to the exclusion of any other third party.

Implied license –  Author impliedly allows or permits the use of his work. For example, he had knowledge that someone is using his work but he did not take any action.

Compulsory Licenses

 Compulsory and statutory licenses can impact both the identity of the licensee who the owner chooses to deal with and the terms, including rates of royalty, that the owner may stipulate for such dealing. Viewed from this perspective, compulsory licenses are less of an infraction on owner autonomy, on both these counts. The owner does retain a fair bit of autonomy to enter into appropriate licensing arrangements with those who he may deem fit, and he is also permitted to negotiate on the terms of the license within the zone of reasonableness. Normally, it is an unreasonable refusal to deal with a person that gives rise to a compulsory license. This brings us to the third important distinction between a compulsory and statutory license. The former is always granted upon specific application by an individual to the competent authority. The latter, on the other hand, is a blanket fixation of rates of royalty by the authority and a grant of standardised licenses to all those who are interested in availing the same. The owner, as a necessary corollary, has no autonomy on the identity of those who obtain the license, or what they pay as royalty for the same.

 Categories of Compulsory Licenses

There are five main categories of compulsory licenses currently operating in India.

 These are:

1. Licenses in respect of works unreasonably withheld from the public;

 2. Licenses in respect of orphan works;

 3. Licenses in respect of works for the differently abled;

 4. Licenses in respect of translations;

5. Licenses in respect of reproduction and sale of works unavailable in India.

Statutory Licenses

 As seen from the above discussion of compulsory licenses, such licenses can be understood as a particularised expropriation of owner autonomy in respect of the copyrighted work. The need for such expropriation arises only upon acts or inaction on the part of the owner that render the work unavailable to the public or differently abled persons. Statutory licenses, on the other hand, do not require any examination into the conduct of the owner. It attempts a wholesale expropriation of owner autonomy, once the work fits within the broader class of works that can be so licensed.

There are two such categories of statutory licenses, namely cover version recording licenses (Section 31C) and broadcasting licenses (Section 31D).

 The first has existed, though as part of the fair dealing exceptions in Section 52, from the very beginning. The second is a very recent addition to the Act vide the 2012 amendment.

The term ‘assignment’ and ‘license’ are not interchangeable. An assignment is different from a license. Generally, in absence of any provision to the contrary the assignee becomes the owner of the assigned work, whereas in case of a license the licensee gets the right to exercise particular rights only.

An assignment may be general, i.e. without limitation or an assignment may be subject to limitations. It may be for the whole term of copyright or any part thereof. An assignment transfers an interest in and deals with copyright itself as provided under section 14 of the Act, but license does not convey the copyright but only grants a right to do something, which in absence of license would be unlawful. An assignment transfers title in copyright, a license merely permits certain things to be done by licensee. The assignee being invested with the title in the copyright may reassign [5] .

[1] This is known as the ‘Doctrine of Sweat of the Brow’, whereby a work is given copyright protection if the author has applied ‘labour, skill or judgment’ in creating the work irrespective of the level of originality in the work. Evolved from the decision in Ladbroke v William Hill, [1964] 1 All E.R. 465.

[2] Section 18(2); Copyright Act, 1957.

[3] 23 IPLR 388 (1998).

[4] 2007 (34) PTC 522 (Cal).

[5] Deshmukh & co (publishers) pvt ltd v/s avinash vishnu khadekar 2006 (32) PTC 358 (Bom)

Author Name: Muskaan Mathur [Student, Savitribai Phule, Pune University (SPPU)]

You might like

Nature and Scope of Cyber Crime

Adequacy of Consideration

Narmada Bachao Andolan vs Union of India and Ors.

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name  *

Email  *

Add Comment  *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Post Comment

US Supreme Court rules against Warner Music in copyright damages case

• Medium Text

• Company Warner Music Group Corp Follow

Sign up here.

Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington; Editing by Will Dunham

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

Thomson Reuters

Blake Brittain reports on intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets, for Reuters Legal. He has previously written for Bloomberg Law and Thomson Reuters Practical Law and practiced as an attorney.

Read Next / Editor's Picks

Industry Insight Chevron

Mike Scarcella, David Thomas

Karen Sloan

Henry Engler

Diana Novak Jones