Difference between revisions of "Tams-Witmark Music Library v. New Opera Co."
From Conservapedia
(New page: In ''Tams-Witmark Music Library v. New Opera Co.'', 81 N.E.2d 70, 74-75 (N.Y. 1948), the New York Court of Appeals held that a licensee is entitled to recover amounts paid to a [[l...) |
m (bold) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In ''Tams-Witmark Music Library v. New Opera Co.'', 81 N.E.2d 70, 74-75 (N.Y. 1948), the [[New York Court of Appeals]] held that a [[licensee]] is entitled to recover amounts paid to a [[licensor]] if it turns out that the work was actually in the [[public domain]]. Specifically, the Court awarded $50,000 to an opera company because the company had paid that amount for a license to perform "The Merry Widow," a work that was actually in the [[public domain]]. The Court reasoned that license lacked [[consideration]] and the licensor had breached an implied warranty of title. | + | In '''''Tams-Witmark Music Library v. New Opera Co.''''', 81 N.E.2d 70, 74-75 (N.Y. 1948), the [[New York Court of Appeals]] held that a [[licensee]] is entitled to recover amounts paid to a [[licensor]] if it turns out that the work was actually in the [[public domain]]. Specifically, the Court awarded $50,000 to an opera company because the company had paid that amount for a license to perform "The Merry Widow," a work that was actually in the [[public domain]]. The Court reasoned that license lacked [[consideration]] and the licensor had breached an implied warranty of title. |
| + | |||
[[category:State Court Cases]] | [[category:State Court Cases]] | ||
[[category:Copyright]] | [[category:Copyright]] | ||
Revision as of 16:06, June 2, 2008
In Tams-Witmark Music Library v. New Opera Co., 81 N.E.2d 70, 74-75 (N.Y. 1948), the New York Court of Appeals held that a licensee is entitled to recover amounts paid to a licensor if it turns out that the work was actually in the public domain. Specifically, the Court awarded $50,000 to an opera company because the company had paid that amount for a license to perform "The Merry Widow," a work that was actually in the public domain. The Court reasoned that license lacked consideration and the licensor had breached an implied warranty of title.
