CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854
AEON Law Patent Poetry |2 Live Crew Heirs Win Right to Reclaim Music | Adam Philipp
"Luther Campbell by David Cabrera" by David Cabrera is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.

2 Live Crew Heirs Win Right to Reclaim Music

2 Live Crew heirs win
Right to reclaim copyrights
Despite bankruptcy

Luther Campbell, the former leader of 2 Live Crew, and the heirs of two other group members have won a legal battle over the rights to the group’s music.

Lil’ Joe Records, owned by Joseph Weinberger, bought the group’s catalog in 1996 as part of Campbell’s bankruptcy proceedings. 

Weinberger argued that 2 Live Crew’s music was produced as “works for hire,” which would mean that it belonged to the record label rather than to the artists. 

Campbell and the heirs contended that the members of the group were independent contractors, rather than employees, and thus that they retained certain rights to their music.

As AP reported,

In 2020, the members of 2 Live Crew and the heirs notified Lil’ Joe that they were terminating its copyrights and that ownership of the albums would revert to the artists. In response, Lil’ Joe sued, arguing that it retained the copyrights under the bankruptcy agreement.

As The Seattle Medium explains,

The legal journey began four years ago when Campbell and the heirs of former members Christopher Wong Won (aka Fresh Kid Ice) and Mark Ross (aka Brother Marquis) served a notice of termination to Lil’ Joe Records. Under copyright law, creators can reclaim ownership of their work 35 years after its release. With the backing of the heirs, Campbell sought to regain rights to the group’s groundbreaking albums, The 2 Live Crew Is What We AreMove Somethin’, and As Nasty As They Wanna Be, which were initially released in the late 1980s.

Reversion (or termination) of rights is a little-known copyright provision that allows authors or their heirs to reverse a transfer or license of copyright. Any such transfer or license can be terminated 35 years after the transfer or license was made or, in some cases, 35 years after the work was published, so long as the work was not made for hire.

As the US Copyright Office explains,

These termination provisions are set forth in 17 USC §§ 203304(c), and 304(d), with the applicable provision depending on a number of factors, including when the grant was made, who executed it, and when copyright was originally secured for the work. These provisions are intended to protect authors and their heirs against unremunerative agreements by giving them an opportunity to share in the later economic success of their works by allowing authors or their heirs, during particular periods of time long after the original grant, to regain the previously granted copyright or copyright rights.

The judge in the 2 Live Crew case found that copyright termination rights are personal and cannot be assigned to a third party—even in a bankruptcy sale.

As The Seattle Medium reported,

Weinberger’s defense rested on a 1991 agreement that described 2 Live Crew as employees of Luke Records, but the jury heard evidence indicating that the artists maintained creative independence. Additionally, copyright registrations from the 1980s and 1990s listed the members as individual authors, further supporting the claim that they were not employees at the time of the original recordings.

The jury thus decided in favor of 2 Live Crews and the heirs.

An attorney for Lil’ Joe suggested that there would be an appeal.

A previous IP case involving the group concerned their song “Pretty Woman,” which sampled the similar 1964 Roy Orbison song. That copyright infringement case made it all the way to the US Supreme Court, which found the 2 Live Crew version to be a parody and thus allowed under the doctrine of fair use.

2 Live Crew was famously charged with the crime of obscenity over the lyrics on their album As Nasty As They Wanna Be, which was declared illegal in Florida. A record store owner was even arrested for selling it. Tracks have titles like “Me So Horny” and “The F— Shop.” The obscenity decision was later overturned.


Just like the haiku above, we like to keep our posts short and sweet. Hopefully, you found this bite-sized information helpful. If you would like more information, please do not hesitate to contact us here.

Related Articles

Federal Circuit: Letter Triggers On-Sale Bar in Patent Case

The Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s finding that patents were not invalid under the on-sale bar, finding that a letter sent to ...
Read More

Vibes, Trade Dress, and AI

As the New York Times recently reported, one online influencer is suing another, claiming she stole her “vibes.” As the Times explains, The oversize beige ...
Read More

Jury Awards Netlist $118 Million in Second Samsung Patent Infringement Case

A federal jury in Texas has awarded Netlist $118 million in damages for patent infringement by Samsung. Netlist, founded in 2000, is a Delaware company ...
Read More

Let's work together.

Contact us to set up a meeting with an attorney or team member.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design

call us  206.533.3854