A Federal Judge Rules Copyright Termination Is Worldwide

By Celeste Moy

A U. S. District Court issued a final ruling on a controversial decision involving the 1963 hit “Double Shot (Oh My Baby’s Love”), and reaffirmed its earlier opinion that termination of copyright applies worldwide. (Vetter v. Resnik, No. 3:23-cv-01369-SDD-EWD (M.D. La. Jan. 29, 2025)).

The court stood by its conclusion that the recovery of the renewal term of a pre-1976 copyright under the termination provision of the U.S. Copyright Act, covers global rights as well. Allow me to relate this ruling more specifically to my clients who are “songwriters”. Under the Copyright Act, the songwriters of a musical composition may under certain circumstances terminate an earlier assignment of copyright and recapture the renewal right for himself./herself and heirs. But the Act specifies that termination “affects only those rights covered by the grant that arise under this title, and in no way affects rights arising under any other Federal, State, or foreign laws.”

The Vetter case court acknowledged that other courts—most notably, Siegel v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., 542 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (C.D. Cal. 2008)—had found that this language limited the termination right to U.S. rights.” But the court, in this initial decision, found it “plausible” that the termination right applied more broadly. As it read the statute, the court noted, foreign rights to a work also “arise under” U.S. law, as opposed to the domestic laws of each individual country where the Song may be exploited. Thus, the Court opined that termination rights could covered foreign rights as well as domestic rights.

Please review my earlier post for more details about the Vetter case titled:

Recent U.S. District Court Holding
Reinterprets U.S. Copyright Act, Sec. 304
And Could Result In Termination and Recapture of both
US and Foreign Copyright Rights

Those hoping that the Court would reconsider its initial decision at a later stage of the case were disappointed. But, the Vetter plaintiffs encouraged by the Court’s initial decision denying the defendants motion to dismiss, filed a motion for summary judgment and the Court, in granting the motion for summary judgment, was unpersuaded by arguments for further analysis, and instead “adopt[ed] by reference in the explanatory and legal analysis of th[e] dispute” set forth in the prior ruling. (Vetter v. Resnik, No. 3:23-cv-01369-SDD-EWD (M.D. La. Jan. 29, 2025)).