Siegel

Siegel v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.

Good Law
658 F. Supp. 2d 1036·2009 WL 2512842·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78193
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 12, 2009Case CV-04-8400-SGL (RZx)California28,592 words

Opinion

Opinion

Larson, J.

ORDER RESOLVING ADDITIONAL ISSUES

The 1976 Copyright Act contains many intricate formalities that an author (or his or her heirs) must navigate to successfully terminate the grant to the copyright in an original work of authorship, but perhaps none is more fundamental an impediment than the one excluding from the reach of termination the copyright “in a work made for hire.” 17 U.S.C. § 304 (c); see 1 Melville B. Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright § 5.03[A] at 5-12 (2008) (commenting that the exclusion “relating to termination of transfers is probably the most important feature of the work for hire doctrine with respect to works created at present”); 3 William F. Patry, Patry on Copyright § 7:42 (2008) (labeling as a “significant exclusion” to the right to terminate the grant in “work-for-hire creations”). The complexity of the 1976 Act’s termination procedures stems as much from the fact that those provisions intersect with and must be construed in light of the body of copyright law that existed at the time the works were created (here, the 1909 Copyright Act) as from the intricacies set forth in the 1976 Act itself.

This is particularly true when applying the “work made for hire” bar…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.