On August 23, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined that the California copyright statute's protections for the "exclusive ownership" of sound recordings made before 1972 did not include the right of public performance. In so doing, the Ninth Circuit reversed a District Court decision that I wrote about in a March 2015 blog post. Back in 2015, state copyright claims regarding public performances of pre-72 sound recordings had fared well in court. But as the Ninth Circuit observed in Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. SiriusXM Radio, Inc., those claims did not find favor at the appellate level.
In sum, the Ninth Circuit panel in Flo & Eddie determined that the there was no common law recognition of public performances in sound recordings when California first used the term "exclusive ownership" into its 1872 copyright statute. And the Ninth Circuit panel concluded there was no evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption that the common law rule of no public performance rights was changed by the statute's use of that term in 1872 – or in 1982, when California revised the statute.The legal question about whether public performance rights in pre-72 sound recordings is offered under state law seemed to be a strong candidate for resolution by California's highest court of law rather than by federal courts. In fact, that question was certified to the California Supreme Court in a related case called Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. Pandora Media, Inc. But the California Supreme Court dismissed that case before deciding the question. That dismissal was prompted by Congress's passage of the Music Modernization Act of 2018 (MMA).
The MMA, signed into law by President Donald Trump, finally recognized public performance rights in copyrighted sound recordings pressed before 1972. Thus, on a prospective basis, copyright owners of pre-72 sound recordings enjoy public performance rights when their creative works are digitally transmitted on satellite radio or by Internet webcasters. And most claims regarding public performances of pre-72 sound recordings prior to the MMA were resolved in a major class action settlement. Although the MMA preempted most state law claims regarding pre-72 sound recordings, Flo & Eddie's claims remained alive – at least until the Ninth Circuit's decision. But in light of the MMA and the legal settlement, the Ninth Circuit's decision ultimately is a narrow one.