James Newton v. Michael Diamond, et al.
Published: Jun. 22, 2002 | Result Date: May 22, 2002 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: CV0004909NM Bench Decision – $0
Judge
Court
USDC Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Christopher Dobrian
(technical)
Oliver Wilson
(technical)
Defendant
Lawrence Ferrara
(technical)
Facts
This case involves The Beastie Boys who won on all grounds a motion for summary judgment in U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California in a copyright action which has significant consequences. The case
is believed to be the first music sampling case in which a court has analyzed the differences between
copyrights in sound recordings and musical compositions, where a license was obtained for the former but not
the latter. It is also the first case in the 9th Circuit in which sampling has been found not to constitute
infringement.
In 1992, the Beastie Boys obtained a license from ECM Records to sample a copyrighted sound recording of a
critically acclaimed multi-phonic flute composition, Choir, composed and performed by James W. Newton Jr.
The group copied a six-second, three-note vocal sequence over a sustained flute harmonica containing
additional multi-phonic pitches and looped it throughout the song Pass the Mic. The group did not seek a
license from the composer for the use of the four-minute, 30-second composition from which the notes were
taken. In 2000, the composer filed suit alleging copyright infringement in violation of the Copyright Act and
the Universal Copyright Convention, and reverse passing-off and misappropriation of identity in violation of
the Lanham Act. In granting the Beastie BoysÆ motion for summary judgment, and denying the plaintiffs,
Judge Nora Manella concluded that the six-second, musical sequence was not protected by copyright law and
that even if it were, Beastie BoyÆsÆ use was de minimis, as the recognizable sample was neither quantitatively
nor qualitatively significant to Choir.
The court held that the unique sounds of James NewtonÆs particular performance of the
musical composition were subsumed in the sound recording, which had been licensed, rather
than the unlicensed musical composition, and that the plaintiff, Newton, could not rely on those
sounds in attempting to establish the originality or qualitative significance of the six-second
musical sequence.
Settlement Discussions
According to the defendant: Before filing suit, the plaintiff demanded $750,000. The defendant offered $25,000. According to the plaintiff: Before filing suit, the plaintiff demanded $500,000. According to the plaintiff: After filing, the plaintiff attempted to obtain sales figures to determine a reasonable mechanical royalty, but the defendants repeatedly refused. According to the defendant: After the plaintiff filed, the defendant offered $100,000 and the plaintiff insisted that it would take "millions" to settle the case; the plaintiff never moved off of that position.
Other Information
According to the plaintiff: The court decision has been appealed to the 9th Circuit. The plaintiff contends the District Court decision sets a dangerous precedent for composers and music publishers because it is the first case to rule it is only necessary to obtain a sound recording license for purposes of sampling a recognizable six- second musical motif. The plaintiff also contends this decision is troubling because it is the first time a court has analyzed a musical work without considering its rhythm, harmony structure, orchestration or sound, creating a standard that is less protective of non-notated 20th-century musical forms, including jazz, avant- garde, electronic and ethnic music. According to the defendant: The court decision should be of benefit to composers, musical performers, their publishers and record companies in reaffirming the principle that certain quotations of prior common or de minimis musical phrases are not, per se, infringement and can be a necessary part of musical authorship, even if accomplished through sampling.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390