SDNY: Copyright Transfer Termination Notices Subject California Copyright Heirs To Jurisdiction In New York

Kirby & Roussos Courtesy Wikipedia

In Marvel Worldwide, Inc. v. Kirby, 2010 WL 1655253 (April 14, 2010), SDNY Judge Coleen McMahon found that two defendants, heirs of comic artist Jack Kirby, submitted themselves to transactional jurisdiction under New York's long-arm statute by sending copyright transfer termination notices pursuant to 17 USC 304(c).   The decision discusses acts by non-domiciliaries that may trigger jurisdiction over foreign defendants for the purposes of being subjected to claims relating to the transaction in New York and uses the "minimum contacts" of International Shoe and Worldwide Volkswagen.

The Kirby heirs sent a notice of termination and Marvel responded with a declaratory judgment action.  The heirs moved to dismiss and simultaneously filed an action in California.   The court distinguished transfer termination notices from cease and desist letters which, if properly drafted and addressed (see Copyright Litigation Handbook Chapter 6) ordinarily (there are exceptions and murky case law), absent other contacts with the forum, should not, standing alone, subject the sender to personal jurisdiction in a foreign jurisdiction.

The Marvel v. Kirby decision does not discuss the copyright venue statute, 28 U.S.C. 1400 which provides:

§ 1400. Patents and copyrights, mask works, and designs

(a) Civil actions, suits, or proceedings arising under any Act of Congress relating to copyrights or exclusive rights in mask works or designs may be instituted in the district in which the defendant or his agent resides or may be found.

(b) Any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.

Copyright Recapture By Authors and Heirs (Ch 7)

An exciting period of negotiating and litigating is starting to pick up: authors and heirs of authors are starting to exercise their rights to "recapture" copyrights that had already been sold to publishers, record companies and other content owners. Content owners will come under increasing pressure to squeeze value from copyrights in their waning years - - and projects involving recaptured properties will dot our cultural landscape for the coming years.

The cases to date have dealt with such important properties as Winnie-the-Pooh, Lassie, Captain America and certain Steinbeck works

For a great article on copyright termination from a living author's perspective (17 U.S.C. 203 - Termination of transfers and licenses granted by the author), check out Margo E. Crespin's "A Second Bite of the Apple: A Guide To Terminating Transfers under Section 203 of the Copyright Act" which is found at the Authors Guild website.

For a cookbook/questionnaire type approach that has a useful discussion of how to figure out whether or when you can get your client's copyright back, check out Creative Commons' ccLabs Termination of Transfer Tool. Read the FAQ - these are the questions that your clients will be asking you in coming years. 17 U.S.C. 304 governs terminations of grants of pre-1978 copyrights by authors and their heirs.

The Crespin article and the Tool are very helpful since the language and meaning of Sections 203 and 304 is very difficult to master.

Trusts and estates attorneys take note! The Copyright Act has a number of succession provisions that trump the language of an author's will. Federal law is said to "preempt" state law in this area.