Tresóna Multimedia, LLC v. Burbank High School Vocal Music Ass'n - 953 F.3d 638 (9th Cir. 2020)

Rule:

Under the Copyright Act of 1976, only the legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright is entitled to institute an action for any infringement of that particular right committed while he or she is the owner of it. Although copyrights are divisible, and can be freely transferred, the question of standing to sue depends on the nature of the interest transferred. 

Facts:

Plaintiff, Tresóna Multimedia, LLC, a licensing company, claimed that the defendants, Burbank High School student show choirs failed to obtain licenses for their use of copyrighted sheet music in arranging a show choir performance. The panel concluded that plaintiff lacked standing under 17 U.S.C. § 501(b) to sue as to three of the four musical works at issue because it received its interests in those songs from individual co-owners of copyright, without the consent of the other co-owners, and therefore held only non-exclusive licenses in those works. Affirming in part on different grounds from the district court, the panel held that the defense of fair use rendered the use of the fourth musical work non-infringing. The panel concluded that the educational purpose of the use was an enumerated fair use purpose. In addition, the purpose and character of the use weighed strongly in favor of a finding of fair use. The nature of the copyrighted work weighed against fair use because the original arrangement of the song was creative. The panel concluded that the music director's use of a small portion of the song, along with portions of other songs, to create sheet music for a new and different high school choir showpiece performance was a fair use.

Issue:

Did the district court err in holding that plaintiff lack standing to sue defendants under the Copyright Act for Infringement of the songs?  

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court held that defendants were properly granted summary judgment in plaintiff’s copyright infringement action because plaintiff lacked standing under 17 U.S.C.S. § 501(b) to sue as to three of the four musical works at issue, and that the defense of fair use rendered the use of the fourth non-infringing under 17 U.S.C.S. § 107 as it fell plainly within the enumerated fair use purposes of teaching and nonprofit education and the portions of the song taken were used in a highly transformative work. However, the court ruled that the district court abused its discretion in denying defendants' motion for attorney’s fees under 17 U.S.C.S. § 505 because they prevailed and the company's arguments were objectively unreasonable.