Case 1:18-cv-25474-RAR Document 256 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/04/2021 Page 3 of 14
Defendants also raise three objections to the Report. First, Defendants argue that they are entitled to summary judgment as to all the songs (not just the MSP-Registered Songs) because Plaintiff has not proven copyright ownership of any of the works at issue. See Defs.’ Obj. at 3–8. Second, Defendants contend that Magistrate Judge Becerra should have recommended dismissal of the entire case on statute of limitations grounds. Id. at 10–19. And third, Defendants argue that they are entitled to summary judgment because they obtained licenses from Tony Butler, who Plaintiffs have admitted is a co-owner of the copyrights in three of the works at issue: “Computer Language,” “I Know You Love Me,” and “Jam The Box.” Id. at 18–21.
The Court will discuss each of the parties’ objections in turn.
I. Whether Plaintiffs lack standing to bring suit as to the MSP-Registered Songs
In the Report, Magistrate Judge Becerra concluded that Plaintiffs Music Specialist, Inc. (“MSI”) and Nealy have not established an ownership interest in the copyrights for the MSP-Registered Songs and therefore do not have standing to sue for infringement of those copyrights. See Rep. at 26–27. She reasoned that Plaintiffs are not listed as claimants in the copyright certificates for the MSP-Registered Songs; Plaintiffs only vaguely pleaded that MSP is affiliated with MSI; and there is no evidence in the record to support the allegation that MSP and MSI are affiliated. Id. Plaintiffs object to this finding and maintain they have standing to bring a copyright infringement suit for the MSP-Registered Songs. They argue that “the record is replete with evidence and testimony” showing that MSI has been affiliated with MSP since 1984 and “that MSP was a d/b/a of MSI that administered the publishing rights to, or was the publishing arm of, MSI.” Pls.’ Obj. at 10.
Under the Copyright Act, “only the legal or beneficial owner of an ‘exclusive right’ has standing to bring a copyright infringement action in a United States court.” Saregama India Ltd.
Page 3 of 14
