Main Content

Casebook Credits

Content from the following sources has been used in the creation of this casebook:

    • 1: INTRODUCTION: Copyright Basics and Incentives for Creation (Spring 2019) original
    • 1.1: Lawrence Lessig, Remix, Bloombsbury Academic (2008) (CC BY-NC 3.0), Ch. 1, "Introduction" original
    • 1.2: Eldred v. Ashcroft original
    • 1.3: 17 USC § 102 original
    • 1.4: 17 USC § 106 original
    • 1.5: 17 USC § 501 original
    • 1.6: 17 USC § 107 original
    • 1.7: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 1.7.1: Rick Carnes, "Has Music Piracy Killed the 'Recording Artist'?," The Huffington Post (January 3, 2011) original
    • 1.7.2: "Copyright Criminals," Independent Lens (PBS), PBS "Community Classroom" Video Module 1: "Hip-Hop Sampling" (video) original
    • 1.7.3: Ben Sisario, "Chief Defends Spotify After Snub by Taylor Swift," The New York Times (November 11, 2014) original
    • 1.7.4: Kutiman, "Give It Up," Through You Too (YouTube, September 12, 2014) (video) (4:24) original
    • 1.7.5: Michele Catalano, "Jonathan Coulton vs. Glee: It's About the Ethics," Forbes (January 27, 2013) original
    • 1.8: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 1.8.1: U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 1, "Copyright Basics" (.pdf) original
    • 1.8.2: Peter B. Hirtle, "Copyright Term and Public Domain in the United States, 1 January 2017," Cornell University Copyright Information Center (CC BY 3.0) original
    • 1.8.3: Neil W. Netanel, "Copyright and the First Amendment; What Eldred Misses - and Portends," from Neil Weinstock Netanel, Copyright and Free Speech: Comparative and International Analyses, Oxford University Press (2005) (available at SSRN) original
    • 1.8.4: Jonathan Coulton, "Baby Got Back," YouTube (Uploaded by YouTube User Enzemo, January 12, 2009) (video) original
    • 2: RIGHTS FRAMEWORK AND SCOPE OF PROTECTION (1 OF 2): Musical Compositions (Originality / Similarity / Infringement / Fair Use) (Spring 2019) original
    • 2.1: Tisi v. Patrick original
    • 2.2: Tisi v. Patrick, Case No. 00 CIV. 0882 (RWS) (S.D.N.Y.), Lawrence Ferrara, Report re: Sell Your Soul and Take a Picture (March 6, 2000) original
    • 2.4: Repp v. Lloyd Webber original
    • 2.5: Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin, C.D. Cal. W. Div. Case No. 2:15-cv-03462 RKG (AGRx), Declaration of Lawrence Ferrara, Ph.D. (February 23, 2016) original
    • 2.6: Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin: "Taurus" Sheet Music Deposit Copy original
    • 2.7: Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin: "Taurus" Deposit Copy, Comparative w/"Michelle" original
    • 2.8: Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin: "To Catch a Shad" and "Stairway," Comparative Transcription original
    • 2.10: Newton v. Diamond, Case No. 00-04909 (NM) (MANx) (C.D. Cal.), Rule 26 Expert Disclosure by Defendants Michael Diamond, Adam Horovitz, Adam Yauch, Beastie Boys, Capitol Records, Inc., Grand Royal Records, Inc., Universal Polygram Int'l Pub., Inc., Brooklyn Dust Music and Mario Caldato, Jr. (July 30, 2001), read pp. 1 - 9 and 12 - 13 original
    • 2.11: Newton v. Diamond original
    • 2.12: Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (June 10, 2010) (.pdf), read Section I (pp. 1 - 3) and Sections III(A)(1), III(A)(1)(i) (pp. 5 - 19) original
    • 2.13: Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Declaration of Lawrence Ferrara in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (April 8, 2010) (.pdf), read Pars. 1 - 5; 31 - 33; 44 - 47 original
    • 2.14: Bourne v. Twentieth Century Fox original
    • 2.15: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 2.15.1: Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd. original
    • 2.15.2: Jorgensen v. Epic/Sony Records original
    • 2.15.3: Jean v. Bug Music original
    • 2.15.4: Randy Lewis, "Beach Boys vs. Katy Perry? A warning, not a lawsuit," Pop & Hiss, The L.A. Times Music Blog (August 5, 2010) original
    • 2.15.5: Ben Sheffner, "Henley, DeVore settle lawsuit; Henley rails against remixes and mash-ups, YouTube, 'dark side' of Internet; songs are not 'toys or playthings'," Copyrights & Campaigns (August 5, 2010) original
    • 2.15.6: Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Lawrence Ferrara, Report re: (1) "The Boys of Summer" as recorded by Don Henley and "The Hope of November" and (2) "All She Wants to Do Is Dance" as recorded by Don Henley and "All She Wants to Do is Tax," read pp. 1 - 5 and 13 - 18 original
    • 2.15.7: Henley v. Devore, Case No. 8:09-cv-00481-JVS-RNB (C.D. Cal.), Declaration of Lawrence Ferrara in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (April 8, 2010) (.pdf), read Pars. 1 - 5; 31 - 33; 44 - 47 original
    • 3: RIGHTS FRAMEWORK AND SCOPE OF PROTECTION (2 OF 2): Sound Recordings (Originality / Similarity / Infringement / Fair Use) (Spring 2019) original
    • 3.1: Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films LLC original
    • 3.2: Saregama India Ltd. v. Mosley, 687 F. Supp. 2d 1325 (S.D. Fl. 2009) original
    • 3.3: 17 USC § 412 original
    • 3.4: 17 USC § 504 original
    • 3.5: Capitol Records, Inc. v. Naxos of America, Inc. original
    • 3.6: EMI v. Premise Media, Index No. 610209/08 (NY Sup. Ct., NY Co.), Order (August 13, 2008) (.pdf), read pp. 1 - 3; 6 - 19 original
    • 3.7: United States Copyright Office, "Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings: A Report of the Register of Copyrights," Executive Summary (December 2011) original
    • 3.8: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 3.8.1: Eriq Gardner, "Madonna Gets Victory Over 'Vogue" Sample at Appeals Court," The Hollywood Reporter, (June 2, 2016) original
    • 3.8.2: Leigh Beadon, "Grooveshark Loses Latest Round In Court, In A Ruling That Could Gut The DMCA's Safe Harbors," TechDirt (April 23, 2013) original
    • 3.8.3: Loeb & Loeb, Cases of Interest: Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio, Inc. (NY Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2016) original
    • 3.8.4: Todd Spangler, "Sirius XM to Pay $210 Million to Record Companies for Pre-1972 Songs," Variety (June 26, 2015) original
    • 3.8.5: Tyler Ochoa, "A Seismic Ruling On Pre-1972 Sound Recordings and State Copyright Law – Flo & Eddie v. Sirius XM Radio (Guest Blog Post)," Technology & Marketing Law Blog (October 1, 2014), read all original
    • 3.9: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 3.9.1: VMG Salsoul, LLC v. Ciccone, 824 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. 2016) original
    • 3.9.2: American University Center for Social Media, "Documentary Filmmakers’ Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use" (Issued: November 18, 2005) (.pdf) original
    • 3.9.3: GateHouse Media Massachusetts, I, Inc. v. New York Times Company Civil Action No. 08-12114-WGY (D. Mass. 2008), Expert Report of Douglas Gary Lichtman Professor of Law UCLA School of Law (January 19, 2009) (.pdf) original
    • 3.9.4: Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, Case No. 02-6521 (6th Cir.), Brief of Amici Curiae Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and the Electronic Frontier Foundation in Support of Appellee (January 20, 2005) (.pdf), read Argument Sec. II, pp. 12 - 17 original
    • 3.9.5: United States Copyright Office, "Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings: A Report of the Register of Copyrights" (December 2011) original
    • 3.9.6: Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress, Washington, DC, "Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings under State Law and Its Impact on Use by Nonprofit Institutions: A 10-State Analysis," (September 2009) (.pdf) original
    • 3.9.7: Joshua Crum, "The Day the (Digital) Music Died: Bridgeport, Sampling Infringement, and a Proposed Middle Ground" 3 BYU Law Rev 943 (2008) (.pdf) original
    • 3.9.8: Olufunmilayo Arewa, "From J.C. Bach to Hip Hop: Musical Borrowing, Copyright and Cultural Context," Case Legal Studies Research Paper No. 04-21, 84 North Carolina Law Rev 547 (2006) (available at SSRN) original
    • 3.9.9: In the Matter of: Federal Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972, Docket No. 2010-4, Comments of Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) (January 31, 2011) (.pdf), read pp. 22 - 31 original
    • 3.9.10: Comments of EFF in Response to Notice of Inquiry: Federal Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972 (January 31, 2011) (.pdf), read pp. 2 - 4; 10 - 17 original
    • 3.9.11: Flo & Eddie Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., et al., Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ (C.D. Cal. Sept. 22, 2014), read Sec. I (Background) and Sec. III (Discussion) original
    • 4: INDUSTRY STRUCTURE AND LEGAL / BUSINESS ARRANGEMENTS (1 OF 2): Music Publishers, Publishing Agreements, Licenses, and PROs (Spring 2019) original
    • 4.1: Anita Wadhwani, "Hitched to a Star," The Tennessean (January 2, 2011) (.pdf) original
    • 4.2: Al Kohn and Bob Kohn, "Kohn on Music Licensing, 4th Ed." (Aspen Publishers 2010) , read pp. 103-138, 159-175; skim remaining pages (.pdf) original
    • 4.3: "Copyright and the Music Marketplace: A Report of the Register of Copyrights," United States Copyright Office (February 2015), read "Licensing Musical Works," Section II(B), pp. 25 - 43 original
    • 4.4: Recording Industry Ass'n v. Lib. of Congress original
    • 4.5: United States Copyright Office, "Mechanical License Royalty Rates" (.pdf) original
    • 4.6: Comments of the National Music Publishers’ Association, the Nashville Songwriters Association International, SESAC, Inc., and the Church Music Publishers Association in response to the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Request for Comments on the Department of Commerce’s Internet Policy Task Force Green Paper, Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy, 78 Fed. Reg. 61337. original
    • 4.7: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 4.7.1: Ed Christman, "NMPA Claims Victory: CRB Raises Payout Rate from Music Subscription Services," Billboard (January 27, 2018), read all original
    • 4.8: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 4.8.1: Statement of Rick Carnes, President The Songwriters Guild of America Before the Subcommittee on Courts, the Intern and Intellectual Property of the House Committee on the Judiciary, "The Section 115 Reform Act of 2006" (May 16, 2005) (.pdf) original
    • 4.8.2: U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 73, "Compulsory License for Making and Distributing Phonorecords" (.pdf) original
    • 4.8.3: In Re: Mechanical and Digital Phonorecord Rate Adjustment Proceeding , Docket No. RF 2006-1, Delivery Rate Adjustment Proceeding, US Copyright Office (October 16, 2006) (.pdf) original
    • 4.8.4: Live365, Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Board, 698 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2010) original
    • 4.8.5: "Music Publishers to Join YouTube Suit," The New York Times (August 7, 2007) original
    • 4.8.6: ASCAP's Survey and Distribution System: Rules & Policies (.pdf) original
    • 4.8.7: Jacqui Cheng, "Judge: ringtones aren’t performances, so no royalties," Ars Technica (October 15, 2009) original
    • 4.8.8: Evan Brown, "Downloading a song is not a performance under the Copyright Act," Internet Cases (September 29, 2010) original
    • 4.8.9: US v. ASCAP (In re Cellco Partnership), 663 F.Supp.2d 363 (SDNY 2009) original
    • 4.8.10: US v. ASCAP (In Re AT&T Wireless f/k/a Cingular Wireless), 599 F.Supp.2d 415 (SDNY 2009) original
    • 4.8.11: Whitney Broussard, "The Promise and Peril of Collective Licensing," 17 Journal of Intellectual Property Law 1 (2009) (.pdf) original
    • 5: INDUSTRY STRUCTURE AND LEGAL / BUSINESS ARRANGEMENTS (2 OF 2): Record Companies, Record Deals, and Master Use Licenses (Spring 2019) original
    • 5.1: M. William Krasilovsky and Sydney Shemel, with Contributions by John M. Gross and Jonathan Feinstein, This Business of Music, 10th Ed. , Billboard Books (2007), read Ch. 3, “Contracts with Minors,” pp. 30 - 32 original
    • 5.2: M. William Krasilovsky and Sydney Shemel, with Contributions by John M. Gross and Jonathan Feinstein, This Business of Music, 10th Ed. , Billboard Books (2007), read Ch. 2, “Recording Artist Contracts," pp. 14 - 28 original
    • 5.3: California Labor Code Section 2855 original
    • 5.4: Senate Judiciary Committee Report on the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995, to Accompany S. 227 (August 4, 1995), read "Section 115(c)(3)(E)," pp. 41 - 42 (.pdf) original
    • 5.5: "Copyright and the Music Marketplace: A Report of the Register of Copyrights," United States Copyright Office (February 2015), read "Licensing Sound Recordings," Section III(C), pp. 43 - 55 original
    • 5.6: FBT Productions, LLC v. Aftermath Records original
    • 5.7: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 5.7.1: Larry Rohter, "Record Industry Braces for Artists' Battles Over Song Rights," The New York Times (August 15, 2011) original
    • 5.7.2: Eric Boehlert, "Four Little Words," Salon.com (August 28, 2000) original
    • 5.7.3: Jeff Leeds, "The New Deal: Band as Brand," The New York Times (November 11, 2007) original
    • 5.7.4: Bob Lefsetz, "360 Deals," The Lefsetz Letter (November 11, 2007) original
    • 5.7.5: Form / Template "360 Deal," focus on Pars. 10 - 14, skim remaining provisions original
    • 5.8: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 5.8.1: "Major Label Contract Clause Critique," Future of Music Coalition (October 3, 2001) original
    • 5.8.2: Mary LaFrance, "Authorship and Termination Rights in Sound Recordings," 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 375 (2002) (.pdf) original
    • 5.8.3: Peter S. Menell and David Nimmer, "Sound Recordings, Works for Hire, and the Termination-of-Transfers Time Bomb" (June 17, 2010) (available at SSRN) original
    • 5.8.4: "The Terminator: Rights Reversion and Musicians," Future of Music Coalition (April 21, 2010) original
    • 5.8.5: Douglas Okorocha, "A Full 360: How the 360 Deal Challenges the Historical Resistance towards Establishing a Fiduciary Duty between Recording Artist and Record Label," UCLA Entertainment Law Review, Vol. 18, 2011 (November 11, 2010) (available at SSRN ) original
    • 6: ANTI-PIRACY AND RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT: Intermediaries, the DMCA Safe Harbor, Individual Infringers, and New Legislative Efforts (Spring 2019) original
    • 6.1: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 6.1.1: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. original
    • 6.1.2: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. v. Grokster original
    • 6.1.3: Darren Waters, "Napster: 10 years of change," BBC (June 8, 2009) original
    • 6.1.4: Geoff Taylor, "Napster -- 10 years of turmoil," BBC (June 26, 2009) original
    • 6.1.5: UMG v. Escape Media Group, No. 11 Civ. 8407, Opinion (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2014), read .pdf pp. 2-14 (“Facts”), 42-56 (“Plaintiffs’ Copyright Claims”) original
    • 6.1.6: Sony BMG Music Entertainment, et al. v. Joel Tenenbaum original
    • 6.1.7: Pamela Samuelson and Ben Sheffner, Debate, "Unconstitutionally Excessive Statutory Damage Awards in Copyright Cases," 158 U.PA. L. Rev. Pennumbra 53 (2009) (.pdf), read Samuelson opening statement (pp. 54-57) and Sheffner Rebuttal (pp. 58-61) original
    • 6.1.8: Pio Szamel, "District Court Grants Summary Judgment to YouTube in Viacom v. YouTube (Again)" (JOLT Digest May 2, 2013) original
    • 6.1.9: Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Alicia Solow-Niederman, "A Close Look at SOPA," The Future of the Internet Blog (December 2, 2011) original
    • 6.1.10: Cary Sherman, "What Wikipedia Won't Tell You," NY Times (February 7, 2012) original
    • 6.1.11: Cary Sherman, "Comments, Questions, Concerns: RIAA CEO Reflects On Responses To His New York Times Op-Ed," RIAA Blog (February 23, 2012) original
    • 6.1.12: Mike Masnick, "RIAA Totally Out of Touch: Lashes Out At Google, Wikipedia And Everyone Who Protested SOPA/PIPA," TechDirt (February 8, 2012) original
    • 6.1.13: Open Rights Group, "Neil Gaiman on Copyright, Piracy and the Commercial Value of the Web" (February 3, 2011) original
    • 6.2: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 6.2.1: Arista Records LLC v. Lime Group LLC original
    • 6.2.2: 17 U.S.C. § 512 (.pdf), read §§ 512(c), (d), (f), and (g) original
    • 6.2.3: Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 572 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (N.D. Cal. 2008) original
    • 7: DIGITAL SALES AND DISTRIBUTION (1 of 2): Streaming Media, New Digital Services, and Emerging Digital Business Models (Spring 2019) original
    • 7.1: United States Copyright Office, "Copyright and the Music Marketplace" (February 2015), read pp. 133-202 original
    • 7.2: David Pakman, "The Price of Music," Disruption (David Pakman's Blog) (Mar 18, 2014) original
    • 8: DIGITAL SALES AND DISTRIBUTION (2 OF 2): Revenues and Accounting Practices, Transparency in Royalty Accounting, Rightsowner Identification, Rights Registries, and Challenges to the Licensing Paradigm (Spring 2019) original
    • 8.1: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 8.1.1: Ben Sisario, "David Lowery Sues Spotify for Copyright Infringement," The New York Times (December 29, 2015) original
    • 8.1.2: Mike Masnick, "Understanding David Lowery's Lawsuit Against Spotify: The Insanity of Music Licensing," Techdirt (January 5, 2015), read all original
    • 8.1.3: Rethink Music (an Initiative of Berklee Institute for Creative Entrepreneurship), "Fair Music: Transparency and Payment Flows in the Music Industry," Berklee College of Music (July 2015), skim all original
    • 8.1.4: Klementina Milosic, "GRD's Failure," Music Business Journal (August 2015), read all original
    • 8.1.5: Benji Rogers, "How the Blockchain and VR Can Change the Music Industry (Part 1)," Medium -- Cuepoint (November 23, 2015), read all original
    • 8.1.6: Benji Rogers, "Benji Rogers, "How the Blockchain and VR Can Change the Music Industry (Part 2)", Medium -- Cuepoint (February 24, 2016), read all original
    • 9: CHALLENGES TO THE PARADIGM: Law, Policy, and Business Transformations in the Digital Age (Spring 2019) original
    • 9.1: ONLINE ONLY (Spring 2019) original
    • 9.1.1: "Artist Revenue Streams," Future of Music Coalition, skim all original
    • 9.1.2: "42 Revenue Streams," Future of Music Coalition, skim all original
    • 9.1.3: David Pakman, "The Price of Music," Disruption (David Pakman's Blog) (Mar 18, 2014) , read all original
    • 9.1.4: Kevin Gray, "Kobalt Changed the Rules of the Music Industry Using Data -- And Saved It," Wired.co.uk (May 1, 2015) original
    • 9.1.5: William Fisher, Promises to Keep, Stanford University Press (2004), Chapter 6: "An Alternative Compensation System," (CC BY 3.0), read pp. 1 - 22 original
    • 9.1.6: Amanda Palmer, "The Art of Asking," TED2013 (February 2013), watch original
    • 9.1.7: Amanda Palmer, "The Dirty Inbox of a Touring Musician, Revealed," blog.amandapalmer.net (May 15, 2010), read all original
    • 9.1.8: Jenna Wortham, "A Few Dollars at a Time, Patrons Support Artists on the Web," The New York Times (August 9, 2009) original
    • 9.2: OPTIONAL (Spring 2019) original
    • 9.2.1: Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture, The Penguin Press (2004) (CC BY-NC 2.0), "Rebuilding Free Culture: One Idea," read pp. 282-286 original
    • 9.2.2: Amanda Palmer, "The new RECORD, ART BOOK, and TOUR," Kickstarter (Funding Ended May 31, 2012) original
    • 9.2.3: Creative Commons, "Defining 'Noncommercial': A Study of How the Online Population Understands “Noncommercial Use," "Executive Summary," pp. 10 - 13 original