Published Articles

Not in it For the Long Run: China’s Solution to TRIPs Compliance Requires More Than a Nine-Month Campaign

Publication: University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

Volume: 19, Issue: 2

In 2009, infringement of intellectual property rights in China were at an all time high. As part of its accession into the World Trade Organization (“WTO”), China was required to implement many basic protections for intellectual property rights under the agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (also known as “TRIPs”). While China made certain amendments to its laws to meet the minimum requirements under TRIPs, many believed China’s enforcement of these rights lacked the force necessary to truly bring it into compliance with TRIPs. After failing to curb infringement, many member countries of the WTO, including the United States, brought disputes against China using the measures available through the WTO. Thereafter, China was found to be in violation and was thus required to take action to bring the protection offered by it up to par with those required under TRIPs. As a result, China developed a plan that was met with much skepticism from the same member countries of the WTO who brought the disputes. This article examines the process by which China attempts to bring its laws for the protection of intellectual property rights in line with the minimum requirements of TRIPS, all the while examining the impact on the film, music and television industries, and how those industries can work together with China to help cure the high infringement levels.

Sound Recordings in 2013:

A Legal Brief

mbj

Publication: The Berklee Music Business Journal

Volume: 7, Issue: 2

When an artist signs a deal with a record label, they give the label many rights with respect to their work, and most notably, transfers ownership in their master recordings (also known as a sound recording). By signing away ownership, they not only lose the accompanying rights, but also future opportunities to exploit those recordings; but at that time, artists are more enamored with large advances and are not aware of the future implications. Many labels believed they would own these rights forever, but this may not necessarily be true. Under the Copyright Act of 1976 (the “Act”), 2013 marked the first year in which trasnferees (i.e., artist) may exercise their termination right under Section 203 of the Act. The looming issue is whether or not a sound recording will be deemed to be a work-made-for-hire, (“WMFH”) as this will determine if the transfers made by artist will be terminable or not. If sound recordings are deemed to be a WMFH, then the transfers will be effective and the artists will not be able to reclaim ownership; however, if they are not deemed to be a WMFH, then the artist will be able to terminate the transfers and reclaim ownership in accordance with the Act. This article provides a brief overview of the legal arguments to be presented by both sides as well as the public policy considerations to be taken into account due to the current state of the music industry