Liszt:

I'll try to make this brief.

When I stated I would go into Federal court initially, based on the scenerio you provided, under common law, I would be seeking an injunction while party A registered the published work with accelerated process.

After the registration issues, I would then be in a position to rely on the remedies provided under Title 17.

Ultimately, the issue before the court will be who wrote what and when did they write it. Even though after five years from first publication, it MAY be interpreted that registration is "proof" of the validity of all statements made in the registration, the court still focusses its attention on the issue of who wrote what and when did they write it. Both parties must provide convincing proof, and a mere registration is not sufficient.

My advice was initially addressed to the aspiring songwriter and not Sony Music. If a megabuck production is in the works on a soon to be published song, by all means, Sony might as well drop a few more bucks on a copyright registration once the song is released.

But for the aspiring songwriter, money spent on sending in countless copyright registrations could be better spent elsewhere.

The three month rule you mentioned is true, no doubt, but it only applies to certain remedies I mentioned in an earlier post.

The new copyright law, effective January 1, 1977 states: Although registration is not required to create a copyright, the copyright must be registered if the artist wishes to sue for copyright infringement. The new statute provides for registration "at any time during the subsistence of the copyright in any published or unpublished work."

At any time is the key. I, personally, prefer to wait until infringement ACTUALLY occurs before filing a copyright registration in MOST cases.

Alas, nothing is ever certain in any matter before the court, but statute or no, the duty of the court is to get to the truth of the matter and determine who, in fact, has superior rights over another. That's how the system is suppose to work, at least.

The major concern, aside from obvious blatant copying, continues to be whether one writer is "inspired" by another or takes another's music as their own, consciously or otherwise. The difference between one song and another can be miniscule and still be different in the eyes of the court.

The more songs that are written, the harder it becomes to make the distinction between a new song and all that came before it or those that come thereafter, so the Copyright office defers that impossible task to the courts, as usual.

Bet you're glad I didn't go into all the misinformation associated with trademarks while I was on the subject of intellectual property.



[This message has been edited by songwriterman (edited 09-09-2003).]