Publishers urge Supreme Court to scrap global song rights ruling

Four music publishers have asked the US Supreme Court to throw out an appeals court ruling that let a songwriter take back his rights around the world.

The request centres on Cyril Vetter and a US copyright rule called termination rights, which lets authors reclaim rights they signed away after several decades. The publishers say the lower-court decision stretches that American rule far beyond US borders.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled on January 12 in a case listed as No. 25-30108, Vetter v. Resnik. It held that termination under US law returns an author's rights worldwide, not only in the United States, according to Music Business Worldwide.

That ruling was described as a first of its kind. It found that musicians can use US termination rules to win back music rights globally, Billboard reported at the time.

At the heart of the dispute is “Double Shot.” The decision under review declared Vetter the sole owner of the copyright in that song, including the share recaptured through termination.

The publishers’ latest filing came on September 30, 2026. The reply brief was filed by Capitol CMG, Essential Music Publishing, Warner-Tamerlane Publishing and BMG Rights Management. They want the justices to take the case and reverse the Fifth Circuit.

Their argument is blunt. They told the court the appeals court decision should not be left in place because it would radically disrupt copyright practice worldwide.

Vetter opposes Supreme Court review. He filed a brief in opposition on September 14 arguing the legal question should be left to develop through other appeals courts first.

The case is now waiting on the justices. It is docketed as No. 25-1391, BMG Rights Management US LLC v. Vetter, and has been distributed for the justices’ private conference on October 16. That is the closed meeting where they decide whether to hear a case.

It has drawn attention beyond music publishing. Paramount Pictures, the IFPI, the global recorded-music trade body, and the Motion Picture Association have filed amicus briefs, which are submissions from outside groups with an interest in the outcome. The Recording Industry Association of America also filed a brief supporting review.

The road to Washington has been unusual. Major labels used a procedural manoeuvre to take over the case to seek Supreme Court review, Billboard reported in March. They then brought in a specialist Supreme Court advocate to argue the fight over global termination rights, Billboard reported in April.

What makes this stand out is the money question underneath. Catalogue deals, in which funds and companies buy older songs and recordings, depend on knowing who controls a song in each country and for how long. A worldwide US termination rule and a US-only rule give very different answers.

No hearing date has been set. The justices will first decide whether to hear the case at all.