Re: [ARSCLIST] The Naxos case (was Re: [ARSCLIST] Copyright wrongs ...)

[James L Wolf <jwol@xxxxxxx>]

Actually, I think that both Capitol-EMI US and Naxos have (had) NY offices. Even if you're right Mike, the Naxos case only applies to activities in NY, correct? All the courts involved in that case were state courts, up to the NY Supreme Court, but that just covers NY. A big market, to be sure, but it's just one state.

It seems that Naxos miscalculated about 1) the primacy of state vs. national law within the states in these cases, and 2) the import vis-a-vis NY law of EMI's letter forfeiting rights to pre-1956 recordings. The first judge (Jdg. Sweet) seemed to favor national and international law, while the NYSC favored NY's restrictive state law, probably correctly. Whatever NYSC ruling re: #2,  none of its rulings can possibly figure beyond NY state borders. To apply beyond NY, this case would have to be appealed (by one party or the other) to the Supreme Court for a nationally applicable  ruling, but most likely the SCOTUS would decline to hear it, since state law was followed/interpreted.

Copyright law is big bucks, no doubt about it. Pre-1972 sound recordings "copyright" though formally similar, is an entirely different game at the legal level. Capitol played their cards within NY state law and won. What they could do to a company that only sold 78 re-issues/remasters in friendly states (probably most) is beyond anyone at this point. I notice they don't go after Yazoo, Archeophone (sp?) and other domestics. Why not? To what extent to could a company situated in e.g. Colorado, and which now included a "Not for sale in NY State" disclaimer, put out old Victor and Columbia's? I don't know, but I'd like to.

My General Council Hates Me,

James

P.S Usual disclaimers apply, my own thoughts and opinions only. Not trying to break any laws, just see what the laws are, etc.



>>> mrichter@xxxxxxx 06/21/05 2:14 PM >>>
At 01:51 PM 6/21/2005 -0400, James L Wolf wrote:
>Mike is right, but all this applies to New York only! New York courts in a
>New York case. Beyond that , who knows?

It's not quite so simple, I'm afraid. (Remember, intellectual property
rights get the big legal bucks.)

Capitol brought the case in New York because that state has the broadest
law and interpretation. I do not know where Capitol Records is
incorporated, but doubt that it is New York (perhaps California since the
headquarters are here; more probably, Delaware). The case was brought in
New York because Capitol chose to do so; anyone selling in New York state
may be sued there. I do not know whether it would be enough to have someone
in New York buy from out of state (e.g., mail order, Internet), but even
that is possible.


Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx 
http://www.mrichter.com/