Close Menu
Legal MagLegal Mag
  • Home
  • Legal News
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Regulation
  • Technology
  • More
    • Firms
    • Law Practice
    • Trending
    • Press Release
What's On

Seven charged in $100M California jewelry heist, largest in US history

June 19, 2025

States challenge bankrupt 23andMe’s right to auction genetic information

June 11, 2025

Jimmy Buffett’s widow battles co-trustee over $275 million trust

June 6, 2025

Longtime Hardee’s franchisee sues chain over franchise agreement dispute

May 29, 2025

Apple warns ruling in App Store case may cost ‘substantial sums annually’

May 8, 2025
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Legal MagLegal Mag
Newsletter
  • Home
  • Legal News
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Regulation
  • Technology
  • More
    • Firms
    • Law Practice
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Legal MagLegal Mag
Home » I Got Royalties, Babe: L.A. Federal Court Sides With Cher On Income from Sonny’s Song Interests
Intellectual Property

I Got Royalties, Babe: L.A. Federal Court Sides With Cher On Income from Sonny’s Song Interests

News RoomBy News RoomJune 27, 20241 Min Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest WhatsApp Email

After Beach Boy Brian Wilson’s ex-wife Marilyn filed a request in Los Angeles Superior Court for an accounting and for payment, under the couple’s 1981 divorce judgment, of 50% of the monies Brian received from his 2021 sale of his song rights to Universal Music, Brian’s counsel had the case removed to Los Angeles federal court citing federal question jurisdiction. This was because the songs sale occurred after Brian had recaptured his copyrights under the 17 U.S.C. §304(c) copyright-assignment termination provision of the U.S. Copyright Act. Wilson v. Rutherford, 2:22-cv-01982 (C.D.Calif. 2022).

But Central District of California federal Judge Josephine L. Staton decided in Wilson that federal copyright law didn’t preempt Marilyn’s state law claim, then remanded the case back to the state superior court. In doing so, District Judge Staton noted, “Marilyn does not assert that she has a right to terminate any grants of copyrights in the [songs] ….” Judge Staton added: “Section 304(c) provides that ‘[t]ermination of a grant under this subsection affects only those rights covered by the grant that arise under this title, and in no way affects rights arising under’ state law.”

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Previous ArticleFreshfields Hires Skadden’s New York Head of Tax
Next Article ‘GoodPop, Bad Pop’: Hueston Hennigan Files Suit Against Freezer Pop-Maker Alleging False Advertising

Related Posts

Who Got the Work: Saul Ewing Team Appears for Samsung Bioepis in Amgen Patent Case

August 22, 2024

E-Commerce Company Alleges Albertsons Stole Trade Secrets to Develop Own Platform

August 20, 2024

How ‘In re Cellect’ and a Proposed Rule Could Affect Double Patenting

August 20, 2024
Latest Articles

States challenge bankrupt 23andMe’s right to auction genetic information

June 11, 20250 Views

Jimmy Buffett’s widow battles co-trustee over $275 million trust

June 6, 20252 Views

Longtime Hardee’s franchisee sues chain over franchise agreement dispute

May 29, 20253 Views

Apple warns ruling in App Store case may cost ‘substantial sums annually’

May 8, 20253 Views
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Vimeo
Don't Miss

The 2024 Am Law 100: Ranked by Gross Revenue

By News RoomApril 16, 2024

For the full 2024 Am Law 100 report, click here. For more ways to analyze the…

The 2024 A-List: Top 20 Firms

August 6, 2024

Defending Claims Where Extreme Weather Is to Blame: Our Changing Climate’s Impact on Civil Litigation

July 18, 2024
© 2025 Legal Mag. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Advertise
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.