Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Monday November 11 2019, @06:55AM   Printer-friendly
from the no-take-backseys dept.

Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956

Little-known aspect of US copyright law means creators can reclaim their work

The Hollywood Reporter recently ran an article by Eriq Gardner entitled "Real-Life 'Terminator': Major Studios Face Sweeping Loss of Iconic '80s Film Franchise Rights," which is certainly an attention-demanding headline. Some of the franchise properties referred to in Gardner's piece are worth – without exaggeration – billions of dollars to the studios.

Money, in copyright-land, has the attribute of making things happen. Long story short, the creators of the original works underlying these now-classic films are making use of a relatively little-known (and little understood) aspect of US copyright law, known as "termination of transfers." Through this, creators can reclaim their rights from the studios to whom they sold them long ago (and perhaps sell them again, either to the same studios or to someone else).

Before we dive deeper into those particular film instances, we should back up a bit and look at the larger context of the two termination sections of Title 17 of the U.S. Code (comprising the US copyright statute) and what Congress had in mind when they inserted them.

There's no way, in a brief blog post, to substitute for a full study of this topic, but I'll provide a few helpful links along the way for readers who may wish to wade into the deeper end of this pool.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday November 11 2019, @07:17PM

    by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Monday November 11 2019, @07:17PM (#919024) Journal

    IANAL, but TFA references another post [lawyersrock.com] which seems to express the process well. The timeframe to notify of the intent to terminate requires some calculation, but yeah it reads pretty much like your description. The author sends a notice to the transferee that they intend to reclaim the copyright on the work, and at the 35 year mark that notice becomes valid. (Which gives the transferee time to negotiate a new licensing deal or prepare their revenue streams for the loss of income).

    --
    This sig for rent.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3