## Facts

- Two consolidated federal actions arose from a failed joint venture between Mike Curb (through related music entities) and MCA Records involving commercial exploitation of recordings by the musical duo “The Judds.”
- The ownership dispute concerned rights in the master sound recordings (the recorded performances fixed in RCA studios), not the underlying musical compositions.
- During the 1980s, The Judds recorded 67 songs for RCA, and the parties treated the masters as commercially valuable joint assets.
- MCA moved for partial summary judgment seeking a determination that certain master-recording rights did not revert solely to Curb upon expiration of a distribution arrangement.
- Separately, MCA asserted a copyright-infringement counterclaim alleging Curb sublicensed certain sound recordings in foreign territories after expiration of a licensing agreement.
- The parties’ licensing arrangement permitted sales in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, and identified Warner/Elektra/Asylum (WEA) as the worldwide licensee whose permission was required for licensing outside those territories.
- After the agreement expired, Curb allegedly issued sublicenses in Japan, Finland, Malaysia, Austria, South Africa, and Hong Kong without WEA’s permission.
- Curb sought judgment on the pleadings or, alternatively, summary judgment, arguing the Copyright Act could not reach the foreign sublicensing conduct.

## Issues

1. Whether the governing joint-venture and related agreements required that specified master-recording rights revert solely to Curb after expiration of a distribution arrangement.
2. Whether a federal copyright-infringement claim under 17 U.S.C. § 106 is barred at the pleading/summary-judgment stage when the alleged sublicensing occurred in foreign territories.

## Decision

- The court granted MCA’s motion for partial summary judgment on the discrete ownership question, rejecting Curb’s claimed sole reversion of the specified master-recording rights.
- The court denied Curb’s motion for judgment on the pleadings or summary judgment on MCA’s copyright-infringement counterclaim.
- On ownership, the court found the relevant agreements unambiguous and determined they preserved MCA’s contractual interest in the masters after the distribution term ended.
- On infringement, the court declined to dismiss the claim solely on extraterritoriality grounds, concluding MCA alleged a sufficient connection to U.S. rights and conduct to proceed.

## Legal Principles

- Ownership and post-expiration control of master sound recordings in a label joint venture are determined by the parties’ contracts; no automatic “reversion” follows merely from expiration of a distribution term.
- Summary judgment is appropriate on ownership of recording assets where contract language is unambiguous and no genuine dispute of material fact exists.
- Although the Copyright Act is generally not applied to wholly foreign acts, a claim may proceed where the alleged foreign exploitation is tied to U.S.-based rights or domestic conduct (including authorization) implicating exclusive rights under 17 U.S.C. § 106.
- A defendant is not entitled to judgment on the pleadings merely by characterizing alleged infringement as “foreign” when the pleadings and record indicate a plausible U.S. nexus requiring factual development.

## Conclusion

The court enforced the parties’ written joint-venture arrangements to resolve master-recording ownership in MCA’s favor and permitted MCA’s § 106 counterclaim to continue because the alleged foreign sublicensing was plausibly connected to U.S. licensing rights and conduct, making dismissal on extraterritoriality grounds unwarranted at that stage.


Curb v. MCA Records, Inc., 898 F. Supp. 586 (M.D. Tenn. 1995)