← Wrivid News

U.S.

Quorum order leaves Fifth Circuit music copyright ruling in place

A statute allowed the court to affirm the judgment after it found the case could not be heard next term. The order does not resolve the copyright question nationally or explain why four justices did not participate.

By Wrivid News Desk
The exterior of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. Contextual file photo; it does not depict the reported event.
The exterior of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. Contextual file photo; it does not depict the reported event.File photo: TgsVenom / Wikimedia Commons · CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/); unchanged file photo

Executive summary

  • The lower-court judgment remains in force: The Supreme Court said it lacked a quorum in BMG Rights Management v. Vetter and that the qualified justices believed the case could not be heard next term. It affirmed the Fifth Circuit judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, with the effect specified for an affirmance by an equally divided court.[1][2]
  • The dispute concerns one song and reclaimed rights: The Fifth Circuit held that songwriter Cyril Vetter and his company owned worldwide copyright interests in “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love)” after termination and renewal. The Supreme Court issued no opinion on that copyright question, so the order does not create a national merits ruling.[3][1]
  • The docket gives no reason for four justices’ absence: The docket lists Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson as taking no part, but does not explain why. Bloomberg Law reported a publishing connection involving BMG’s parent company and the justices’ book publisher; the court’s docket does not say that connection was the reason.[1][4]

The Supreme Court on Oct. 19 affirmed the judgment in BMG Rights Management (US) LLC v. Vetter after saying it lacked a quorum of qualified justices. The docket says the qualified justices concluded the case could not be heard and decided in the next term. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, the court affirmed with the same effect as an affirmance by an equally divided court. It did not issue a written opinion deciding the copyright question presented by the petition.[1][2]

The order leaves the Fifth Circuit’s judgment in force in the dispute. That is consequential for the parties, but it should not be described as a Supreme Court merits decision establishing a nationwide rule. The Court’s docket identifies four justices who took no part in considering or deciding the petition; it does not state why they did not participate.[1][3]

Cyril Vetter and Donald Smith wrote “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love)” in 1962 and assigned their copyright interests to a publisher the following year, according to the Fifth Circuit. Vetter later gave notice terminating the grant under Section 304(c) of the Copyright Act. The case also involved renewal rights connected to Smith, who died before the renewal term began, and rights later acquired by Vetter Communications.[3]

The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court judgment declaring Vetter and Vetter Communications the sole owners of the song’s copyright throughout the world in the two interests at issue. Its January opinion interpreted federal termination and renewal provisions alongside treaty principles. The Supreme Court’s October order leaves that specific judgment intact; it does not itself decide how other courts must resolve different works, contracts or statutory claims.[3][1]

The Supreme Court docket names Justices Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Barrett and Jackson as taking no part, without giving a reason. Bloomberg Law reported that BMG is owned by Bertelsmann, which also owns Penguin Random House, a publisher of books by the four justices. The docket does not identify that relationship as the reason for their nonparticipation, and the order supplies no further explanation.[1][4]

Bloomberg Law also reported that the case had drawn attention because federal appeals courts disagree over whether creators can recover foreign rights through U.S. copyright termination provisions. Monday’s order did not settle that disagreement in a Supreme Court opinion. For the parties, the Fifth Circuit result stands; beyond that circuit, the legal question remains open to further litigation and review.[4][3]