Roberto and Erasmo Carlos face defeat at the STJ over copyright issues for their songs
IN SUMMARY
|
Recently, the iconic singer Roberto Carlos and the estate of Erasmo Carlos faced a significant defeat in the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) regarding the copyright of their music. The 3rd panel of the STJ decided, unanimously, that the contracts signed more than 50 years ago with a music publisher constituted a irrevocable assignment of copyright, making the unilateral termination requested by the artists impossible. This decision highlights the complexity of contractual relationships existing in the music scene and their legal implications over time.
In the recent trial, the 3rd class of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) unanimously decided that the singers Roberto Carlos and Erasmo Carlos were unsuccessful in their request to terminate copyright contracts that were signed with a music publisher more than five decades ago.
The STJ’s Decision
In a context in which artists sought to declare the possibility of exploring their songs independently, the STJ concluded that the contracts signed by them characterized a definitive assignment of rights. This decision reaffirms the understanding of previous court instances, which had already considered that contracts could not be terminated unilaterally by artists.
Sur le meme sujet
The Question of Contracts
The dispute arose when Roberto and Erasmo argued that the agreements with the publisher referred to music publishing, where the publisher merely publishes the work without acquiring ownership. However, it was demonstrated that the artists’ original intention, as well as the contractual terms at the time, indicated a full assignment of copyright to the publisher.
Sur le meme sujet
Distinction between Assignment and Edition
The case rapporteur, minister Nancy Andrighi, presented a thorough analysis of the difference between copyright assignment and publishing contracts. While the assignment involves a complete or partial transfer of the author’s economic rights, edition are limited to the commitment to publish for a specific time and print run.
Sur le meme sujet
The Application of Copyright Law
The minister highlighted the copyright law (law 9,610/98), specifically article 49, item V, which ensures protections for authors. However, these protections do not apply to contracts drawn up before the law came into force, in compliance with the principle of non-retroactivity. Therefore, the analysis decided that the current provisions could not be applied to the old contracts signed by Roberto and Erasmo.
Sur le meme sujet
Implications of the Decision
The STJ’s decision confirmed the validity of the contracts, considering them as an irrevocable assignment. Although the appeal was partially accepted to eliminate a previous fine, the publisher’s right to commercially exploit the works, including streaming and digital platforms, was maintained in accordance with the original contractual terms.
Sur le meme sujet
Additional Information and Related Links
For more information about this process, you can access the links below:
- Threads – Roberto Carlos has another defeat at the STJ
- Portal Leodias – Roberto Carlos and Erasmo face defeat
- JuriNews – Publisher holds rights to music
- Erasmus Centro – Defeat of Roberto and Erasmo at the STJ
- Conjur – Publisher owns the songs and can exploit them
Sur le meme sujet
Comparison of the STJ Decision
| Aspects | Description |
| Party involved | Roberto Carlos and estate of Erasmo Carlos |
| Decision | Rejection of contract termination request |
| Type of contract | Assignment of copyright |
| Term | Contracts signed more than 50 years ago |
| Rapporteur | Minister Nancy Andrighi |
| Old contract | Not reviewable under current law |
| Publisher’s action | Commercial exploitation of songs permitted |
| Fine | Partial exclusion of the fine imposed |
| Impact | Continuity of use of works on digital platforms |
Recently, the 3rd class of the STJ (Superior Court of Justice) unanimously decided to maintain copyright contracts that singers Roberto Carlos and Erasmo Carlos signed with a publisher more than 50 years ago. The decision means that artists will not be able to unilaterally terminate these contracts, which were considered a irrevocable assignment of copyright.
Minister Nancy Andrighi’s analysis
The case rapporteur, minister Nancy Andrighi, presented a detailed analysis of the difference between copyright assignment and publishing contracts. In assignment contracts, the total or partial transfer of economic rights occurs, while in publishing contracts, the publisher undertakes to publish the author’s work for a certain period and print run.
Artists’ intentions in original contracts
Although Roberto and Erasmo claimed that the contracts were edition, the minister’s analysis indicated that the original intention of the artists in the 1960s and 1970s pointed to a definitive assignment of copyright, transferring them entirely to the publisher. This was a crucial factor in the court’s decision.
Limits of Copyright Law
The minister highlighted that article 49, item V of the copyright law (law 9,610/98) offers specific protections to authors, but does not apply to contracts signed before this law came into force. Thus, the principle of non-retroactivity was maintained, which makes it impossible to apply current rules to old contracts.
Consequences of the STJ decision
With the decision, the publisher has the right to commercially exploit the works of Roberto and Erasmo on various platforms, including streaming. Furthermore, the court only deleted a previously imposed fine, but did not change the publisher’s rights to the artists’ songs.
For more information about the result of this process, access the following links: Crumbs, 180 Degrees, Jota, Value.
Aspects of the STJ Decision on Copyright
- Parties Involved: Roberto Carlos and the estate of Erasmo Carlos.
- Unanimous Decision: The 3rd panel of the STJ rejected the artists’ request.
- Type of Contract: Considered by the court as a copyright assignment contract.
- Limitation on Termination: It was not possible to unilaterally terminate contracts.
- Artists’ Intention: They alleged that the publisher misappropriated the copyright.
- Publisher’s Position: The label continues to exploit the songs commercially.
- Minister’s Analysis: The distinction between assignment and publishing contracts was fundamental to the decision.
- Protections of the Law: Current copyright law does not apply to contracts prior to its enactment.
- Consequences of the Decision: The validity of the contracts was maintained as an irrevocable assignment.
- Excluded Fine: The special appeal was provided partially to exclude a previously imposed fine.
Context of the Decision
The most recent decision of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) brought to light an important debate about the copyright in Brazilian music. The STJ unanimously rejected the singer’s request Roberto Carlos and the estate of Erasmo Carlos to terminate copyright contracts signed with a music publisher more than 50 years ago. The artists argued that these contracts should be considered music publishing contracts, while the court understood that they were contracts for the definitive assignment of copyright.
Nature of Copyright Agreements
The case’s rapporteur, minister Nancy Andrighi, clarified the difference between assignment contracts and publishing contracts. The assignment implies the transfer, in whole or in part, of the author’s financial rights, whereas publishing contracts involve the publisher’s commitment to publish the work for a period of time and with a print run limit. This differentiation was crucial to the STJ’s conclusion that the artists had irrevocably transferred their copyrights to the publisher.
Implications of the Court Decision
The STJ’s decision reinforces the validity of contracts as irrevocable assignment, thus preventing Roberto and Erasmo Carlos from unilaterally terminating these agreements. This result is not only important for the authors involved, but also for the broader picture of copyright in Brazil, as it sets a precedent that could affect future cases involving long-standing contracts.
Copyright Protection
Brazilian copyright law provides a series of protections to the authors, according to article 49, item V of law 9,610/98. However, it is worth noting that this legislation does not apply to contracts established before its validity, which means that agreements signed in the 1960s and 1970s, as is the case in question, are governed by previous provisions that may offer less protection to artists .
The Responsibility of Music Publishers
The confirmation of the publisher’s right to commercially exploit the works of Roberto and Erasmo Carlos, including on digital platforms, highlights the responsibility of publishers to maintain transparent and fair contracts with artists. Publishers must ensure that authors’ rights and intentions are clearly reflected in contracts to avoid similar legal disputes in the future.
Final Considerations
While the current situation represents a defeat for Roberto Carlos and Erasmo Carlos, it also opens up space for reflection on the importance of well-structured contracts in the music industry. Emerging and established artists should always be aware of the clauses in their copyright contracts, seeking assistance from specialized professionals to ensure that your rights are respected and protected in any agreement.
Frequently Asked Questions about the Defeat of Roberto and Erasmo Carlos at the STJ
What was the STJ’s decision in relation to Roberto and Erasmo Carlos’ contracts? The 3rd panel of the STJ unanimously rejected the artists’ request to terminate copyright contracts, understanding that the contracts constituted a definitive assignment of rights.
What did the artists claim about the contracts? They argued that the contracts were for music publishing, in which the publisher only publishes the work, and that the publisher misappropriated the copyright.
What does the assignment of copyright mean? The assignment of copyright refers to the total or partial transfer of the author’s economic rights, which may be definitive or temporary.
Why did the STJ consider that the contracts were definitive assignments? The case’s rapporteur, minister Nancy Andrighi, analyzed the terms and intentions of the artists in the 1960s and 1970s, which indicated a definitive transfer of rights to the publisher.
Does current copyright law apply in this case? No, the minister clarified that the protections of copyright law (law 9,610/98) do not apply to contracts signed before their validity, respecting the principle of non-retroactivity.
What were the artists able to achieve in the special feature? The appeal was partially granted to exclude an imposed fine, but did not alter the publisher’s right to commercially exploit the works.
Post Comment