Songwriter Tells Supreme Court Universal, Sony, Warner and BMG Are Overstating Copyright ‘Emergency’

Songwriter Cyril Vetter is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reject a challenge backed by Universal, Sony, Warner and BMG, arguing that the music giants are overstating the fallout from a ruling that allowed him to reclaim worldwide rights to “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love).”

Vetter filed his opposition Monday after publishing companies tied to the four major music groups asked the justices to overturn a January decision from the Fifth Circuit. That ruling held that Vetter’s exercise of his federal copyright termination rights returned the worldwide interests he had originally transferred, rather than only his U.S. rights.

The publishers say the decision upends decades of industry practice and threatens agreements worth billions of dollars across music and other creative industries. Vetter’s attorneys counter that the companies are trying to manufacture urgency around a legal issue that no other federal appeals court has yet decided.

“Petitioners try to depict this case as some sort of copyright emergency,” Vetter’s brief states, arguing that publishers “are doing just fine” and can continue operating even with less leverage over creators seeking to reclaim successful works.

The dispute reaches back more than six decades. Vetter and Don Smith wrote “Double Shot” in 1962 and transferred their copyright interests to a publisher the following year. The Swingin’ Medallions later recorded the best-known version, which reached No. 17 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1966.

Federal copyright law allows creators, under certain circumstances, to terminate older grants after a set period and regain rights they previously transferred. Vetter invoked that process decades later, setting off a dispute over whether the termination returned only rights governed by U.S. copyright law or the full worldwide interest covered by the original agreement.

The Fifth Circuit sided with Vetter in January, finding that the rights he originally granted returned to him without a geographic limitation. The decision marked the first time a federal appeals court had directly answered the question.

After the ruling, BMG Rights Management, Universal affiliate Capitol CMG, Sony affiliate Essential Music Publishing and Warner-Tamerlane Publishing acquired the disputed copyright interest from Resnik Music Group and took its place in the litigation.

Vetter’s Supreme Court filing highlights that move, arguing that the companies “bought the rights in dispute just to file this petition.” The publishers have asked the justices to reverse the Fifth Circuit and restore what they describe as a longstanding understanding that U.S. termination rights cannot determine ownership of foreign copyrights.

Their petition argues that the Fifth Circuit disrupted established licensing practices and created uncertainty for music, film, television and publishing companies whose contracts divide copyright rights across multiple countries.

Vetter’s attorneys say Supreme Court review is premature because no split exists among the federal appeals courts. They note that the publishers do not identify another circuit that has reached the opposite conclusion on the same question.

The brief calls the absence of a circuit conflict “something of a tell,” arguing that other courts should have an opportunity to address the issue before the Supreme Court steps in.

Vetter also disputes the industry’s predictions of widespread disruption. His lawyers argue that many modern music agreements already return rights to creators after a set number of years, including worldwide rights, and say the Fifth Circuit’s approach increasingly resembles current licensing practices.

The fight ultimately comes down to who controls successful works decades after an artist signs away the original rights. Vetter argues Congress created termination rights because creators often transfer copyrights before anyone knows how valuable a song, book or other work will become. The publishers maintain that applying U.S. termination law to foreign copyrights stretches the statute beyond its territorial limits.

Vetter’s filing says the ruling could require publishers to compete for rights on the open market after creators reclaim them, giving songwriters and other artists more bargaining power over works that became valuable long after their original deals were signed.

His attorneys also argue the current dispute is a poor vehicle for Supreme Court review because the Fifth Circuit separately gave Vetter worldwide ownership of another 50% interest in the song, a ruling the publishers are not challenging. According to the brief, that could limit what the companies gain even if they persuade the justices to reverse the disputed termination ruling.

The Supreme Court has discretion over whether to hear the appeal, and at least four justices would have to vote to take the case. The court has yet to act on the publishers’ petition, leaving the Fifth Circuit’s worldwide-rights ruling in place while review is considered.