R. Guy Cole, Jr.

“ Further, because we are remanding the case for a determination as to whether Sony can raise its argument that it is the owner of the renewal copyrights in the 1964 songs, we need not decide whether the district court correctly determined that Sony has an implied, non-exclusive license in Miller’s 1964 songs. A determination as to whether Sony has an implied license in the 1964 songs is relevant only if the district court concludes that Sony is not the owner of the renewal copyrights in those songs, because a license is a defense to a claim of copyright infringement. ”

“ Plaintiffs-Appellants Mary Arnold Miller and Roger Miller Music, Inc. (the “Appellants”) brought this copyright-infringement-and-ownership action against Defendant-Appellee Sony/ATV Publishing, LLC (“Sony”) . Mary Miller is the wife of the late Roger Miller, a renowned country-music singer and songwriter, and Roger Miller Music, Inc. (“RMMI”) is an assignee. Sony is the successor-in-interest to Tree Publishing Co., Inc. (“Tree”) , the publishing company Miller contracted with from 1958 until his death in 1992. ”

“ In contrast, a claim for copyright infringement can accrue more than once because each infringement is a distinct harm. Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Rhyme Syndicate Music, 376 F.3d 615, 621 (6th Cir. 2004) . In Ritchie, we noted that “each new infringing act causes a new three year statutory period to begin.” 395 F.3d at 288 n.5.
(a) Appellants’ Ownership Claim The district court’s conclusion that the Appellants’ ownership claim is not time-barred is correct because there was no plain and express repudiation of ownership by Sony or Appellants as required by Ritchie. ”