Quote:
Originally Posted by Quentin
I see what you're getting at, but I'm not so sure the court is going to accept the clubs as meeting the definition of "supplier" here, particularly since the clubs in question do not own the copyright to the songs they play, and therefor the songs cannot be considered their "property."
Interesting stuff at any rate. If this case doesn't settle without full adjudication... a few years from now we may have our answers. Hehe.
|
that doesn't declare the club as the owner, the assigned record company would still own the copyright in that context
the club would only represent the duly authorized distributor.
the supplier would still be the record company. and the song would most certainly be thier property.