User:TJRC/Sandbox/Page22

Termination of transfers under the Copyright Act of 1976


 * (saved as 500flspub9616.pdf)
 * (saved as King Kirby and the Amazin' Terminatin' Copyrights_ Who Will Preva.pdf)
 * (saved as Patry.pdf)
 * (saved as 24-321-340.pdf)
 * (Saved as Note-CRISIS-OF-INDEFINITE-CONSEQUENCE-HOW-THE-DERIVATIVE-WORKS-EXCEPTION-AND-THE-LANHAM-ACT-UNDERCUT-THE-REMUNERATIVE-VALUE-OF-TERMINATION-OF-TRANSFERS.pdf)
 * (saved as King Kirby and the Amazin' Terminatin' Copyrights_ Who Will Preva.pdf)
 * (saved as Patry.pdf)
 * (saved as 24-321-340.pdf)
 * (Saved as Note-CRISIS-OF-INDEFINITE-CONSEQUENCE-HOW-THE-DERIVATIVE-WORKS-EXCEPTION-AND-THE-LANHAM-ACT-UNDERCUT-THE-REMUNERATIVE-VALUE-OF-TERMINATION-OF-TRANSFERS.pdf)


 * Copyright Office
 * Statutes:
 * 17 U.S.C. § 203
 * 17 U.S.C. § 304
 * Regulation: 37 U.S.C. § 201.10, Notices of termination of transfers and licenses. Note: explanation of October 26, 1939 date at
 * ( some historical background; practice of assignee to appoint himself atty-in-fact and register the renewal and re-assign himself at page 167)
 * (commentary on renewal system not working)
 * (on renewal: "in practice, however, the second chance did not materialize because the author assigned the contingent rights in the renewal term well before his or her rights vested, and the assignee reaped the benefits of the renewal term if the author survived until the renewal vested. Moreover, failure to comply with the registration formality led to many forfeitures." (page 6-1, page 32 of the PDF)
 * Fred Fisher Music Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons, 318 U.S. 643 (1943), (text at ; Dist Ct. at ) has discussion of policy of renewal starting around p. 653)
 * (on renewal: "in practice, however, the second chance did not materialize because the author assigned the contingent rights in the renewal term well before his or her rights vested, and the assignee reaped the benefits of the renewal term if the author survived until the renewal vested. Moreover, failure to comply with the registration formality led to many forfeitures." (page 6-1, page 32 of the PDF)
 * Fred Fisher Music Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons, 318 U.S. 643 (1943), (text at ; Dist Ct. at ) has discussion of policy of renewal starting around p. 653)