Brun v. The Revivalists — Most Song-Ownership Claims Time-Barred by Copyright Registrations

Background

Michael Brun, a former member of The Revivalists, claimed that he helped write and perform eight songs and was entitled to joint ownership, an accounting of profits and royalties, and damages for conversion. Brun left the band in 2008 but alleged that the band did not expressly reject his ownership demand until November 2024. The defendants moved to dismiss, relying on Copyright Office registrations from 2010 and 2014 that named other people—but not Brun—as the authors or copyright claimants.

The Court’s Holding

The court held that the registrations gave Brun constructive notice that others claimed sole ownership, starting the Copyright Act’s three-year limitations period. Following Fifth Circuit authority, the court rejected Brun’s argument that a registration can trigger notice only for an infringement claim and not an ownership dispute. It also rejected his attempt to separate the musical compositions from the registered sound recordings because the relevant registrations covered both the recordings and the underlying music and lyrics.

As a result, the court dismissed with prejudice Brun’s ownership and accounting claims for seven songs and for the underlying composition of Concrete (Fish Out of Water). The claims concerning the studio recording of that song survived because the defendants conceded that the cited registrations did not cover it. The court also dismissed the conversion claim: it depended on the failed ownership claims and, as pleaded, was preempted by the Copyright Act.

Key Takeaways

• A Copyright Office registration naming someone else as sole author or claimant can provide constructive notice that starts the limitations clock on a competing ownership claim.
• A sound-recording registration may also cover the underlying composition when the registration identifies the same claimant for both works.
• Accounting claims between alleged co-owners rise or fall with the claimant’s ownership rights.
• A state-law conversion theory based only on unauthorized exploitation of intellectual property is vulnerable to Copyright Act preemption.

Why It Matters

The ruling is a practical warning for collaborators in bands and other creative ventures: waiting to assert authorship after public registrations identify different owners can extinguish otherwise plausible ownership and royalty claims. It also illustrates how courts may resolve a copyright-ownership limitations defense at the pleading stage when registrations incorporated into the dispute establish constructive notice.