I certainly wouldn't do what the attorney says. I'd hire my own attorney. The other side is playing hardball.
That said, what is the loophole and how does it affect the contract? If the contract is still valid, you are 50% co-owner of the copyright and so is the other guy. If the loophole somehow makes the ownership clause of the contract invalid, "whoever writes it, owns it" would likely be true.
RE registering the work with the Copyright Office, if your 50% ownership is valid, you have the right to register the entire work. However, registration won't be proof of anything other than that you registered the work. The Copyright Office doesn't evaluate the truth of a registration, so it can't be used to prove your claims. Still, I'd register it. It will strengthen your hand in negotiating because it qualifies you for reimbursement of legal fess and higher damages should there be a lawsuit, and if it turns out later that you lost the co-ownership because of the loophole, the other side will just file an amended registration.
PS
Say, this contract isn't a work for hire contract, is it? Lots of
collaborations are written as WFH contracts, but the work for hire
clauses are almost always invalid. In your case, an invalid WFH clause
wouldn't endanger your 50% ownership, though.
Received on Fri Jun 24 2005 - 00:55:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:55 GMT