Industry & Advocacy News

Court of Appeals Agrees with Authors Guild, Rules That Authors’ Copyright Termination Rights Apply Worldwide

Copyright

January 16, 2026

• Share
• on Twitter (opens in a new tab)
• on Facebook (opens in a new tab)
• on Linkedin (opens in a new tab)
• via email

This week, in a landmark decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision and agreed with the Authors Guild and other creator groups that authors may terminate foreign grants of copyright when they terminate a U.S. grant under the U.S. Copyright Act.

The case, Vetter v. Resnik, involves a complex but critically important part of the copyright law known as copyright termination, which gives authors or their heirs the right to terminate any license or assignment of copyrights, notwithstanding the contract terms, several decades (generally 35–40 years) after the grant or publication date. In this case, the court ruled that these provisions apply not only to U.S. copyright grants but also allow authors to reclaim foreign rights that they transferred to the publisher, so long as the copyright arose under U.S. law.

This is a big win for authors and aligns with the arguments made by the Guild in a “friend of the court” brief that it organized with other creator groups—the Dramatists Legal Defense Fund, Novelists, Inc., the Romance Writers of America, the Society of Composers & Lyricists, and the Songwriters Guild of America. In our brief (pdf), we explained that Congress adopted these provisions to ensure that authors and other creators are not perpetually locked into one-sided contracts that they entered into early in their careers when they had little bargaining power. We advised the court that limiting termination to U.S. law would undermine that intent by giving publishers free rein to continue exploiting authors’ works abroad after the grant is terminated, significantly weakening the value of the recaptured rights.

Case Background

The case arose out of a dispute over rights in a song, “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love),” written by Cyril Vetter and Donald Smith in 1962. At that time, the relevant law was the Copyright Act of 1909, which provided for an initial copyright term of 28 years and the opportunity to renew the copyright for an additional 28 years. The year after it was written, in 1963, Vetter and Smith transferred their copyright interests in the song throughout the world to the music publisher Windsong for one dollar.

Decades later, after Smith died, Vetter was able to acquire a 50 percent interest in the song by purchasing Smith’s renewal rights from his heirs. Then, in 2022, Vetter terminated his 1963 transfer of rights to the music publisher, meaning that he now held 100 percent of the copyright—at least in the United States. Vetter claimed that he was also terminating the rights that had been granted to the music publisher abroad. Robert Resnik, who had purchased Windsong, disagreed and continued to claim an interest in the song’s foreign rights. The litigation ensued.

The Court’s Decision

The district court agreed with Vetter that he had terminated worldwide rights, and the court of appeals affirmed. It agreed that limiting the termination provisions to U.S. rights “would deprive Vetter of the full set of rights he originally conveyed to [the publisher], which is counter to the purpose of the statute.” And it concluded that this reading is consistent with the United States’ obligations under international copyright treaties: “[A] copyright may be granted under the laws of one country and still be recognized by other member countries to the Berne Convention and Universal Copyright Convention.”

(In addition, the court ruled that Vetter’s renewal rights (i.e., the 50 percent interest he purchased from Smith’s heirs) also apply globally. That aspect of the decision will have less significance for most authors, as it is based on the court’s reading of the 1909 Copyright Act, which covers only works created before 1978.)

Significance for Authors

The significance of the decision for authors will depend on whether their publishing contracts grant any foreign rights to the publisher. If you granted any foreign rights and intend to terminate those foreign rights as well as domestic rights, make sure that the notice clearly states that it applies to both U.S. and foreign rights.

Authors should also bear in mind that this case involves the statutory termination provisions under the copyright law; it does not relate to contractual reversion clauses that may be included in your agreement. If your contract provides that rights revert to you if the book goes out of print, you should follow the procedures laid out in the contract to revert your rights, which will generally occur decades before you can exercise copyright termination under the Copyright Act. For more information on termination and rights reversion, see our recent webinar.

Finally, although we are extremely pleased with the court’s decision, it may not be the end of the story. The defendants in this case may still try to challenge it before the full court of appeals or the Supreme Court. As always, the Guild will continue to advocate for a broad termination right to ensure that authors have the full scope of protections Congress intended.