Re: SCIENCE TODAY?

On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Michael Seadle <seadle[_at_]mail.lib.msu.edu> wrote:
>
> Can any of the joint authors also transfer (sell) the copyright to (for
> example) a publisher, or must each of them agree? From what I know about
> other forms of joint property, I'd guess that any one of them could sign
> away the rights, but I'm no lawyer. ... I'm referring mainly to US
> law, but I'd also be interested if there were any difference in Canada,
> Australia, or the UK.

In Australia, assignment of any copyright requires a written instrument signed by or on behalf of the copyright owner. Where more than one owner is involved, the assignment's validity would depend upon whose signatures were on the document and how they got there. I can't see how a fraudlent assignment document could have legal effect given the words of the statute.

Agency, fraud and misrepresentation etc. could be issues if not all of the signatures were legitimately procured. The would-be buyer may have claims against the purported vendor but the transfer itself would seem to be a nullity if it does not have all the joint-owners' signatures validly affixed.

There is an iteresting case which comes to mind as joint-ownership and sale by one of them is an issue, It is being decided in the UK High Court, and relates to a purported sale in Australia, of film footage (and associated copyrights) of the 1956 Olympics. One of the parties is, I believe, Big Fights Inc. The IOC is also involved. The sale is being disputed on several grounds and has been made more complicated by the fact that the IOC got involved and says IT owns the copyright - not the would-be vendor.

If anyone has news as to progress in the case, would appreciate hearing about it.

Years ago, I was involved in a dispute between co-writers of a musical work. One had consented to the first recording fo the song (it was his own recording) but before it was released, the co-writer announced he did not consent to the first recording. Fortunately it was resolved without resort to litigation because any damages for breach would have been the statutory mechanical copyright royalty and there was no diminution of the chose in action (I still choke on that arcane expression) which would justify an injunction, so the objection really did not have much practical basis anyway.

"Galvanising Ideas"

Colin Seeger, Consultant, Management of Intellectual Property. P.O Box 3227, Tamarama, Sydney, Australia 2026 Tel: (61) (02) 9365 1186, Fax (61) (02) 9365 1286 <seeger[_at_]ozemail.com.au> Received on Sat Feb 20 1999 - 12:26:26 GMT