Martinis, Persistence, and a Smile



June 2006

S M T W T F S

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

 

All Archives by Title


Recent Entries

Shiloh
Rude
Genius
Fugly
Things That Make You Go Hmm
Marc Loves Lola
D-Day
This Is What Happens When You Don't Eat
Margene Cheats On Bill
Coors' New Marketing Initiative
Alba Gets Sloppy Seconds
Duets
Life Imitating Art?
What Would Danny Think?
Clooney and Pitt's Project Is a Bust
Janice Tells All
Brit To Design Baby Clothes
Calvin Is Technosexual
Pee Wee's Back!
Jen Weeps


Monthly Archives

June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003


Search




My Blogroll



The WeatherPixie

Giving Credit

Powered by:
Moveable Type 2.63
Template by:
Elegant Webscapes


Other


« Kiss and Tell | Main | Mirror Mirror On the Wall »


November 09, 2005

Spears Suit Dismissed


An Indiana songwriter's copyright infringement lawsuit against singer Britney Spears over the song "Sometimes" has been dismissed because she was able to show it wasn't copied, her attorney said Tuesday.

"I cannot emphasize enough this was not a settlement but a dismissal," said David R. Baum, an attorney for Spears and her co-defendants. No money will change hands, he said.

U.S. District Judge John D. Tinder in Indianapolis last week dismissed the lawsuit by Steve Wallace.

Wallace sued Spears, her album promoter, Sony/BMG Music Publishing Inc., and recording and publishing companies affiliated with the singer, claiming he had written the song 15 years ago.

The complaint acknowledged Wallace did not formally copyright his song until 2003. A few weeks after writing it in 1990, he executed what's commonly known as a "poor man's" copyright in which he placed his work in a sealed envelope and obtained a postmark. He shopped the song to publishers in 1994.

--Judge Tinder is a great judge. I'm sure this was the right decision.

UPDATE: A keen legal eye pointed out to me after some legal investigation was done, that Judge Tinder didn't actually dismiss the case himself. The parties signed a stipulated order for dismissal. So, in essence, the parties agreed to the dismissal themselves.


Posted by Lawren at November 9, 2005 09:04 AM | Trackbacks (0)

You Said

...which means that this guy was THE songwriter but unfortunately did NOT get it published. Every 1st Jew Lawyer will tell you that in songwrting this is the number one reason so many Black singers and songwriters got screwed out of royalties by the White man!

The rights to the song are the most important thing, look at the Nip Yoko Ono, she leases out John Lennon's/the Beatles crap tunes out all the time!

Nice!

Says: Johnny Chicago at November 9, 2005 07:44 PM

as a lawyer, I can assure you that if the parties stipulated to a dismissal, that means that the case settled, which means that brit paid the guy off...

Says: at November 10, 2005 09:03 AM

Post a comment






Remember personal info?