box1 header1
Entry Detail
Terms of Use The data on this site is for education, insights, and entertainment, and is not to be used for commercial purposes. If you want to use content for noncommercial purposes, be kind and give us due credit. To read the full Terms of Use, click here.
Options Conduct New Search
Copy Permalink to this Item
Battle Over "Hound Dog" Rights
Highest Court S.D. New York
Year Ended 1957
Plaintiffs Music Publisher(s)
Otis, Johnny
Defendants Leiber & Stoller
Music Publisher(s)
Other Presley, Elvis
Short Description Johnny Otis was a band leader, producer, and--relevant here--the owner of a music publishing company, which is the Plaintiff in this suit. Otis arranged for a recording of the R & B classic, "Hound Dog, " wtitten by in infamous Jewish songwriting duo Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, performed by Big Mama Thornton, and released by Peacock Records. This version was published through Spin Music, in which Otis had an interest. By arranging the session, Otis said he was granted a 1/3 interest in royalties the song, which was relatively standard practice at the time. However, he also incorrectly included himself as a "co-author," also relatively standard at the time, and represented himself as such in dealings with a third-party publisher, Lion Music. When Lion noticed that the three signatures on the contract matched Otis's, Lion inquired of Leiber & Stoller, and were told Otis was in fact not a co-author, but merely owed 1/3 of the royalties received by Spin Music. An agreement was reached in which Otis admitted as much and received $750 in release of all claims he may have regarding the song. Lion licensed the song to Elvis Presley's publisher for his well-known iteration, which was released crediting only Leiber & Stoller as this song's authors. The version was obviously very successful, and Otis's publishing company sued, alleging Otis co-authored of the song and thus Plaintiff was owed royalties. The court, based on the facts of the song's composition and the signed release, refused Otis's claim, and the credit and royalties went to Leiber & Stoller. - LSW

Legal Issues
Copyrights Ownership Assignments, Licenses & Renewal Rights
    Declaratory Judgment
    Joint Authorship, Works-for-Hire & Derivative Creations

Opinions Valjo Music Pub. Corp. v. Elvis Presley Music, Inc.
156 F. Supp. 568
S.D. New York , December 04, 1957 ( _ )

Errors Do you see something that is not correct?
The Discography is an ongoing project. Some entries in the database are displayed in various stages of completion. If you see spelling or grammar issues, they are likely to be corrected in the near future as they're noticed by editors (they're on the "To Do" list, we promise). But If you notice errors regarding facts, legal conclusions, or other information, please contact us to let us know. We've done our best, but can't assure perfection. Thank you.

Related Searches Parties
Leiber & Stoller ( Defendant )
Music Publisher(s) ( Plaintiff )
Music Publisher(s) ( Defendant )
Otis, Johnny ( Plaintiff )
Presley, Elvis ( Other )

Legal Issues
Copyrights / Ownership / Assignments, Licenses & Renewal Rights
Copyrights / Ownership / Declaratory Judgment
Copyrights / Ownership / Joint Authorship, Works-for-Hire & Derivative Creations

S.D. New York (highest court)

permalink to this entry