tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post111578415400578912..comments2024-03-15T11:42:21.265-04:00Comments on The Patry Copyright Blog: Statute of Limitations: Part One, InfringementWilliam Patryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-1147958927963718312006-05-18T09:28:00.000-04:002006-05-18T09:28:00.000-04:00Counselor Patry's analysis is of course unexceptio...Counselor Patry's analysis is of course unexceptionable, but what about the raft of recent cases from the music world where thefts of creativity (infringements) of decades ago were recompensed.<BR/><BR/>I refer, for examples, to THE LION SLEEPS TONIGHT (OK, maybe South African copyright law has no statute of limitations), which was about 75 years old when the creators daughters got a hefty settlement.<BR/><BR/>100 Miles and Runnin’ by a band called NWA sampled a much earlier song called GET OFF YOUR ASS AND JAM in 1990, and there was a judgment against NWA a couple years ago.<BR/><BR/>It was in 1994 that Notorious BIG sampled a then 20 year old Ohio Players song Singing in the Morning but the jury verdict against BIG wasn’t until 2006.<BR/><BR/>And it was not until 1987 that one of the co-writers of WHY DO FOOLS FALL IN LOVE sued Frankie Limon’s widow, et al. for an accounting of royalties for a rip-off that took place in the 50s.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that when justice requires Courts have been quite willing to ignore section 507(b). I just have not seen the pleadings and motion decisions to see how and whether there is a pattern. Is it a ready willingness to find fraudulent concealment so justice can triumph over statute? Are judges that softhearted?Phil Marcus-the Negotiation Prohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09856501732595473665noreply@blogger.com