Decades after writing “The Devil Went Down to Georgia,” Charlie Daniels is still chasing his own shiny fiddle made of gold: full rights to that classic song and dozens of others he wrote when his career was heating up.
The country and Southern rock icon is waging an attempt to regain his copyrights decades after he signed them away — placing Nashville at the forefront of a simmering legal issue that stands to put countless writers at odds with publishing companies over when a song, story or other work returns to its creator.
That potential has federal officials considering reform of U.S. copyright law that could have a sweeping impact on who gets legal control and financial rights over reams of written work in future years.
For songwriters such as Daniels — who said he wrote lyrics to the feverish fiddle tune in a creative flash during a 1979 recording session break — the issue is clear.
“It’s time for them to come back to me,” Daniels, 73, said of the disputed songs in an interview with the Nashville Business Journal. “It’s time for me to be able to do with those copyrights as I see fit.”
If his desires seem simple, remedying an apparent inconsistency in copyright law could be far from it. Daniels’ Nashville attorney, Casey Del Casino of Adams and Reese LLP, was among the first to complain to the U.S. Copyright office about what he considers a “gap” between two sections of the law that cover when writers can “terminate” agreements in which they gave up, for commercial purposes, the rights to their work. Music publishers say they strive to work with writers, but it’s unclear how they’ll handle the prospect of giving up valuable intellectual property they secured under previous law.
It’s an area of the law, with a broad financial impact, that changed in 1978 and, at this point, seems unclear. Previously, writers gave publishers their copyright for 28 years and had the chance to renew their agreement or own the copyright themselves for another 28 years before their work entered the public domain. Some agreements were circumventing the renewal period by stipulating that writers hand over initial and renewal rights, Del Casino said.
The law that took effect in 1978, along with a later amendment, makes a copyright good for the life of the writer plus 70 years and gives him or her the chance to take it back from publishers after either 35 years or 40 years, depending on the situation. Copyrights initiated before 1978 wouldn’t be eligible for artists to take back for 56 years.
The “gap” comes into play for a song like “The Devil Went Down to Georgia,” a song Daniels said he wrote in 1979 chronicling a fiddle battle between a boy named “Johnny” who bets his soul for a golden fiddle in a battle with the Devil. But that song and others under ownership by Universal Music Publishing Group could be subject to agreements signed before 1978 — making it unclear when or if Daniels is legally entitled to take them back.
The issue is coming to a head as many songs written around 1978 come up for their first 35-year termination period. U.S. Copyright spokesman Peter Vankevich said the office plans this month to publish a “notice of inquiry” to collect public input on the issue after hearing from Del Casino and other attorneys. That’s the first step in a process that can lead to regulatory tweaking by copyright officials, or even a request for action by the U.S. Congress.
In the meantime, Daniels, countless other writers from the 1970s and the publishers who worked with them are operating in uncharted territory. Writers argue they have a right to benefit more fully from their work under current law, now that the value has been established over time, and have full control over use of their work.
Daniels, for example, is unhappy with the way “Devil” appeared on the popular video game Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock. He also estimates he’d make roughly double the financial return on that song with full rights, though he declined to provide numbers. He said he’s willing, but not yet ready, to take legal action to get his songs back.
Some publishers, meanwhile, could argue that they’re entitled to the copyright agreements they negotiated under previous laws, or that neither section of the law applies to the songs in question. Large and small music publishers emphasized their shared goals with writers, despite the potential for looming legal disputes.
Pat Higdon, president of Universal’s Nashville division, said the company couldn’t comment on the situation involving Daniels, or how it plans to handle the issue going forward.
“We’re still in the early stages of trying to determine how we handle these things,” he said.
Other publishing companies also are hesitant to discuss hypothetical legal dealings, though some are vocally supportive of artists’ “termination rights.”
Still, there could be plenty of time for open legal disputes to surface. Daniel Gervais, a law professor at Vanderbilt University, said that full reform by Congress can “take years” given the intricacies of copyright law, though a small corrective measure might be quicker.
“Anything having to do with copyright in Congress tends to be especially complex,” he said.
Copyright conundrum
• The law: Section 203 of the U.S. Copyright law applies to songs or other works created on or after Jan. 1, 1978, and states that a writer can terminate his or her grant of a copyright to a publisher either 35 or 40 years later, depending upon certain factors. Section 304 applies to songs or other works created before 1978 and states that a writer can terminate his or her grant of a copyright 56 years later.
• The concerns: If a song was written after 1978, but is part of an agreement signed before 1978, which section of the law applies? What if neither applies?
• The next step: The U.S. Copyright Office is collecting public input on the way toward a possible change to the copyright law.
You can reach Brian Reisinger at breisinger@bizjournals.com or 615-846-4251.