assignment on copyrights

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Assignment of Copyrights & Legal Implications

Copyright gives authors a bundle of personal property or economic rights in an original work of authorship. These rights include the rights to reproduce, create derivative works, distribute work to the public, publicly perform a work, publicly display visual works, and digitally transmit sound records. They belong exclusively to a copyright holder.

Usually, the copyright holder is the person who created the work. However, any of these economic rights, or any part of these economic rights, can be transferred. Under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), an artist’s moral rights in a work of fine art can be waived but not assigned.

An original owner who assigns their copyright to someone else will not retain any right to control how the work is used.

The transfer of economic rights may be on an exclusive basis, which requires a written agreement, or a non-exclusive basis, which does not require a written agreement. Most commonly, this transfer is accomplished by assignment or license. Unlike a license in which the copyright owner maintains their ownership, an assignment is similar to a sale. The original copyright owner sells the rights to a third party and cannot control how the rights are used, just as they would not be able to control how personal property that they sold was used once it was transferred.

Generally, a license is preferable if a copyright holder expects to continue exercising interests and control over the work. For example, if you assign your copyright in a song to a music producer, the decision about whether to allow a film studio to use your song in a film will belong to the producer, not to you. If you license your copyright in a song in a limited capacity to a music producer, however, you will continue to be able to license your copyright in the song to a film producer.

Assignments can be used for many different purposes, such as security for debt, as an asset passed to heirs, or as part of the distribution of assets after a bankruptcy proceeding. Once you assign your rights to somebody else, however, you are permanently giving away your right to control the work. That means if you try to exercise any of the rights you have assigned, you are committing copyright infringement even though you created the work. If you assign your copyright to somebody else and regret the loss, you may be able to buy your copyright back from that person, but whether or not to sell it back to you is up to the assignee.

How Is Copyright Assigned?

Under Section 204 , a transfer of ownership is only valid if the instrument, note, or memorandum of transfer is in writing, signed by the copyright owner or their duly authorized agent. Generally, a certificate of acknowledgment is not required for the transfer to be valid, but it can be used as prima facie evidence that a transfer was executed if it is issued by someone authorized to administer oaths in the United States or, if the transfer is executed abroad, if the certificate is issued by a United States diplomatic or consular official, or a person authorized to administer oaths who also provides a certificate.

Formally recording an assignment with the Copyright Office is not required but can be advantageous.

You do not have to record an assignment in order to assign the interest. However, there are advantages to recording the assignment, such as creating a public record of the transfer details, giving constructive notice to members of the public, establishing priority of rights when there are conflicting transfers of ownership, validating the transfer of the copyright against a third party, or in some cases perfecting a security interest.

Last reviewed October 2023

Intellectual Property Law Center Contents   

• Intellectual Property Law Center
• Copyright Infringement & Related Lawsuits
• Copyright Ownership Under the Law
• Assignment of Copyrights & Legal Implications
• Copyright Licensing Under the Law
• Copyright Registration Under the Law
• Safe Harbors for Online Service Providers Under Copyright Law
• Criminal Copyright Infringement Laws
• Enforcement of Copyrights Through Lawsuits & Criminal Charges
• Fair Use Defense to Copyright Infringement Lawsuits
• Software Development Agreements & Related Legal Concerns
• End-User License Agreements Imposing Legal Restrictions on Software
• Lists, Directories, and Databases Under Copyright Law
• Photos of Buildings and Architecture Under Copyright Law
• Photos of Copyrighted or Trademarked Works & the Fair Use Defense to Infringement Lawsuits
• Works in the Public Domain After Copyrights Legally Expire
• Copyrights and Credits for Songwriters Under the Law
• Music Samples and Copyright Infringement Lawsuits
• Playing Music in Stores or Restaurants — How to Avoid Copyright Infringement Lawsuits
• Consignment Sales by Artists to Stores & Legal Protections
• Destruction of Copyrighted Works & Limited Legal Protections
• Copyright Legal Forms
• Trademark Law
• Trade Secret Law
• Choosing Among Patent, Copyright, and Trademark for Legal Protection
• Intellectual Property Law FAQs
• Find an Intellectual Property Lawyer

Related Areas   

• Small Business Legal Center
• Entertainment Law Center
• Communications and Internet Law Center
• Sports Law Center
• Related Areas
• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Copyright Licenses and Assignments

One of the primary benefits of copyright ownership is the ability to transfer some or all of those rights to third parties. These transfers can be for all of the copyright rights in a work (which is generally referred to as an outright assignment), or can be for a limited portion of the rights provided by the Copyright Act (which usually takes the form a copyright license).

The BitLaw discussion of assignments and licenses is divided into the following four sections:

• transfers in general
• implied licenses
• termination of transfers
• recordation of transfers

Transfers in General

Copyright is a personal property right, and it is subject to various state laws and regulations that govern the ownership, inheritance, or transfer of personal property. It is probably best to view copyright as a bundle of rights. The rights included in that bundle are the rights granted by the U.S. Copyright Act, as described in the BitLaw discussion on the scope of copyright protection . Any or all of these rights, or any subdivision of those rights, may be transferred.

A transfer of one of these rights may be made on an exclusive or nonexclusive basis. The transfer of exclusive rights is not valid unless that transfer is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed. Transfer of a right on a nonexclusive basis does not require a written agreement. For example, the author of a novel, as the original copyright owner of the novel, could transfer to a publisher the exclusive right to copy and distribute a novel (under the right of reproduction and distribution ), and also grant a screen play writer the nonexclusive right to create a movie script based on that novel (under the right to create derivative works ). The author's agreement with the publisher would have to be in writing to be valid. However, the agreement with the screen play writer could be oral and still be enforceable.

A transfer of copyright rights is usually either an assignment or a license. An assignment of copyright rights is like the sale of personal property. The original owner sells its rights to a third party, and can no longer exercise control over how the third party uses those rights. A license (or more properly "an express license") is an agreement where the copyright owner maintains its ownership of the rights involved, but allows a third party to exercise some or all of those rights without fear of a copyright infringement suit. A license will be preferred over an assignment of rights where the copyright holder wishes to maintain some ownership over the rights, or wishes to exercise continuing control over how the third party uses the copyright holder's rights.

A typical software license agreement is a copyright license agreement. The owner of the copyright in the software wishes to grant the end-user the right to utilize the software in a restricted manner. In return, the end-user may agree to limit its use of the software in a variety of ways and to pay a license fee payment to the copyright owner.

Implied Licenses

An implied copyright license is a license created by law in the absence of an actual agreement between the parties. Implied licenses arise when the conduct of the parties indicates that some license is to be extended between the copyright owner and the licensee, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license. This differs from an express license in that the parties never actually agree on the specific terms of the license. The purpose of an implied license is to allow the licensee (the party who licenses the work from the copyright owner) some right to use the copyrighted work, but only to the extent that the copyright owner would have allowed had the parties negotiated an agreement. Generally, the custom and practice of the community are used to determine the scope of the implied license.

Implied licenses have been used to grant licenses in situations where a copyrighted work was created by one party at the request of another. In one case, a special effects company was hired to create a specific effect for a horror movie. The contract through which the special effects company was hired did not assign the copyright in the effect, and did not provide for a license for the effect to be used in the horror movie. The court ruled that the effect could be used in the horror movie through an implied license, since the effect was created with the intent that it be used and distributed in the movie.

A commonly discussed scenario where implied licenses are destined to play a major role is on the World Wide Web. When a Web page is viewed in a Web browser, the page is downloaded through the Internet and placed on the user's screen. It is clear that a copy of the Web page is being made by the user. It is also clear that the Web page is protected against unauthorized copying by copyright law. But it would not make sense to allow the author of a Web page to sue a user who viewed her page, since the author intended that the page be viewed by others when she placed it on the World Wide Web. Rather, attorneys argue, courts should find that the Web page author has given end users an implied license to download and view the Web page. The extent of this implied license is unclear, and may someday be defined by the courts.

Termination of Transfers

Although a copyright owner is free to transfer her copyright rights as she sees fit, the Copyright Act contains a non-revocable right for a copyright owner to terminate any copyright transfer. The purpose for this is to give the creator of the work or the creator's heirs a second chance to exploit the work in situations where the value of the work may have been significantly enhanced since the original transfer. Generally, there is a five year window of time to accomplish the termination beginning either at

• 35 years from the assignment if the transfer was made on or after January 1, 1978; or
• 56 years from the date copyright was originally secured if the transfer was made before January 1, 1978.

The ability to terminate a transfer cannot be negotiated away. Thus, the author of a valuable book has the right to reclaim the copyright in the book by terminating the transfer, even if the agreement signed by the author stated that the assignment of her copyright rights was permanent and irrevocable. Exceptions to this ability to terminate a transfer are made for those parties who created derivative works prior to the termination (see the BitLaw discussion on derivative works for more information on this subject). In addition, works made for hire are not subject to this termination of transfer right (works made for hire are discussed in the BitLaw section on copyright ownership ).

Recordation of Transfers

A document that transfers copyright ownership or any other document pertaining to a copyright may be recorded in the Copyright Office. Although recordation is not required to make a valid transfer of a copyright, recordation of the transfer document does provide certain legal advantages and may be required to validate the transfer as against third parties.

Latest Blogs

Practical guidance offers help with workplace issues during mental....

According to recent studies, over 20% of Americans struggle with some form of mental illness. To help advise employers on legal and practical workplace mental health issues, see this superb practice note...

A Rose by Any other Color. Municipal Bond Interest Can Be Ta...

Under IRC § 103(b)(2) , interest which would otherwise be excluded from gross income under IRC § 103(a) is instead subject to federal income taxation if the obligation is classified as an arbitrage...

Rent Reductions for Commercial Tenants

Landlords and tenants often negotiate rent abatement clauses. These clauses are used as a lease incentive and also as a remedy when tenants are prevented from using or profiting from the premises due to...

FinCEN Adds New Commentary to Corporate Transparency Act FAQ

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) recently updated its Frequently Asked Questions page regarding beneficial ownership information reporting under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). The...

Demystifying Means-Plus-Function: The Ins and Outs to MPF St...

Explore the law on means-plus-function claiming with this practice note describing when a utility patent claim should be interpreted as a means-plus-function or step-plus-function claim (functional claims...

Today’s Assignment: How to Assign a Copyright

This practice note covers the fundamentals of copyright assignments and rules for works made for hire, assignments from independent contractors or freelancers, partial copyright assignments, and recordation of copyright assignments. It includes links to the Nimmer on Copyright sections on transfer formalities, recordation of transfers, and construing the scope of assignments and other transfers for additional guidance and to help you continue your research and deepen your understanding of key tasks and areas of law.

READ NOW »

Related Content

• Copyright Assignment Checklist Brush up on the provisions that must be included in a copyright assignment for the assignment to be valid and enforceable.
• Copyright Assignment Use this template to assign rights in and to a work of authorship to another person, organization, or corporate entity.
• Nimmer on Copyright § 10.03 Deepen your understanding of transfer formalities with expert analysis from the leading authority on copyright law.
• Nimmer on Copyright § 10.07 Broaden your understanding of recordation of transfers with expert analysis from the leading authority on copyright law.
• Nimmer on Copyright § 10.10 Expand your understanding of construing the scope of assignments and other transfers with expert analysis from the leading authority on copyright law.

Practical Guidance Updates   Featuring the latest updates from your Practical Guidance account.    

• Check out the new Practical Guidance Author Center ! Learn about the 1500+ leading attorney authors contributing to our 21 practice areas, and find out how you can Become a Practical Guidance Author .
• Legal Developments provide the latest updates and analyses of emerging topics impacting your practice area. Visit the Legal Developments page to see the latest topics, which also include breaking legal news and related Practical Guidance content.
• Document alerts  allow you to stay current on legal developments that affect your practice.  Find out how to set up your document alerts.        

Experience results today with practical guidance, legal research, and data-driven insights—all in one place. Experience Lexis+

• Intellectual Property & Technology

Published By Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center

Copyright ownership and transfers faqs.

When performing copyright research, you may have questions about copy­right rules or terminology. For example, you may uncover a registration indicating the work is “made for hire,” or you may find a document indicating that the copyright has been “reclaimed” by the author. Below are some answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs) about copyright ownership and transfers.

Ignore Heading – Content

Ignore heading – sub heading content, ignore heading – sub table content, what is a work made for hire.

Usually, the person who creates a work is also the initial owner of the copy­right in the work. But this isn’t always the case. Under some circumstances, a person who pays another to create a work becomes the initial copyright owner, not the person who actually created it. The resulting works are called “works made for hire” (or sometimes simply “works for hire”). There are two distinct types of work that will be classified as made for hire:

• a work created by an employee within the scope of employment, or
• a commissioned work that falls within a certain category of works and that is the subject of a written agreement. (The types of works that qualify and other relevant requirements are explained in more detail in Chapter 15.)

If the work qualifies under one of these two methods, the person paying for the work (the hiring party) is the author and copyright owner. If you want to use the work, you should seek permission from the employer or hiring party, not the person who created the work. If in doubt, you may be able to determine work-for-hire status by examining the copyright registration.

What Is a Transfer of Title?

The person who owns a copyright is sometimes referred to as having “title” to the copyright. A “title” is the document that establishes ownership to property, like the title to your car or house. But even in the absence of an official document, the owner of a copyright is often said to have title to it.

Just like title to your car or house, title to a copyright can be sold or otherwise transferred. A person or company can have ownership (title) of a copyright transferred to it by means of an assignment (a sale in which all or part of a copyright is transferred) or through a will or bankruptcy proceedings. Since title to a copyright can be transferred, you may have to search copyright records to determine the current owner of a work you want to use.

There are two ways to determine if copyright ownership has been transferred: by reviewing the copyright registration certificate issued by the Copyright Office, or by locating an assignment or transfer agreement. By reviewing the copyright registration certificate, you can find out who currently claims copyright and on what basis. For example, if a publisher has been assigned copyright to a work, it will file a copyright registration in its own name and indicate on the registration that it acquired copyright through a legal transfer. Also, many companies file the agreement that establishes the assignment, license, or transfer with the Copyright Office. For example, if an artist assigned his work to a company, the company could file the assignment document with the Copyright Office.

What Is a Termination of a Transfer?

Sometimes an author transfers copyright to someone and then later the author reacquires it through a process known as “terminating a transfer.” Copyright laws provide a method by which authors can reclaim rights after a number of years. This termination and reclamation process is complex, and the rules differ depending on when the work was first published. As a very general rule, transfer terminations occur between 28 and 56 years after the first publication. Terminations are filed with the Copyright Office and can be located by researching Copyright Office records.

For more information on terminations of transfers, see Chapter 9 of The Copyright Handbook by attorney Stephen Fishman (Nolo).

What If More Than One Person Owns a Copyright?

A common question is whom to ask for permission if several people jointly own a copyright. Co-ownership of copyright can occur in various ways. 
For example, if:

• two people jointly create a work
• the author transfers portions of the rights to different people 
(for example, giving half to each child), or
• the author sells a portion of the copyright to someone and keeps 
the remainder.

Co-owners of copyright have a legal status known as “tenants in common.” When a co-owner dies, his or her share goes to his or her beneficiaries or heirs, not to the other co-owner. Each co‑owner has an independent right to use or non exclusively license the work—provided that he or she accounts to the other co‑owners for any profits. What this means for our purposes is that if you obtain the permission of any one co-owner, you can use the work. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule, as explained in the next section.

You can determine whether there is co-ownership of a certain work by reviewing Copyright Office documents. For example, a registration for a song might indicate that a composer and a lyricist co-own a song.

When Must You Get Multiple Permissions?

There are several situations in which you must obtain permission from all the co-owners of a work instead of just one. All co-owners must consent to an assignment of the work (a transfer of copyright ownership) or to an exclusive license (an agreement granting rights solely to one person).

Is There a Difference Between an Author and a Copyright Owner?

The author is the first owner of copyright. The author is either the creator of the work or the person who employs someone to create the work (see work-for-hire rules discussed above). Many authors do not retain their copyright ownership; they sell or transfer it to someone else in return for a lump sum payment or periodic payment known as a royalty. In this way, the author and copyright owner (sometimes referred to as “copyright claimant”) may be two different people. Even if you do not know the name of the current copyright owner, knowing the name of the author will help you find the owner in the Copyright Office records.

What If a Work Does Not Contain a Copyright Notice?

It’s common to start copyright research by examining the copyright notice. However, in some cases, the notice may be missing from the work. One reason you may not find a notice is because notice is not required on works first published after March 1, 1989. In addition, for works published prior to that date, notice is required only on visually perceptible copies—that is, copies that can be seen directly or with the aid of a device such as a film projector. Printed books, paintings, drawings, films, architecture, and computer programs are all visually perceptible. However, some works are not visually perceptible, such as a song on a compact disc. But copyright notice would be required if the song lyrics were printed on the album cover.

Another reason that a work may not include notice is that the owner failed to affix it, which may result in the loss of copyright. For works first published before 1978, for example, the absence of a copyright notice from a published copy generally indicates that the work is not protected by copyright. The absence of notice on works published between January 1, 1978 and March 1, 1989 may or may not result in the loss of copyright, depending on whether the owner corrected the error within five years of the publication and met other copyright law requirements.

What If There Is a Copyright Notice for an Entire Magazine but Not for the Specific Article You Want to Use?

If a story or a photograph is used in a magazine, there may be a copyright notice for the magazine but not for the specific story or photo that you want to use. That’s because the owners of magazines, anthologies, or greatest hits collections in which many different copyrighted works are collected (referred to as “collective works”) can use one copyright notice to protect all the works in the collection. This does not necessarily mean that the magazine owns the copyright in all of the works. It may or may not, depending on the contract with the author or photographer. Copyright Office research may not necessarily help you locate copyright information for these works because they may not be listed separately by title in the records. You may be better off contacting the owner of the collective work directly. The principles for contacting copyright owners are explained in the chapters dealing with specific media (text, artwork, photographs, and so on).

Comments are closed.

Assignment of Copyright – Explained With Modes and Disputes

Original work may not be reproduced, distributed, or sold by anybody other than the copyright owner without that owner’s consent. As a result, the law allows the copyright owner to assign ownership to a third party.

The term “copyright assignment” describes the transfer of ownership or rights in a work that has been granted copyright from the original copyright holder (the “ assignor “) to a different party (the “ assignee “). Through a legal procedure, the assignor gives up their ownership of the work and gives the assignee the only authority to reproduce, distribute, display, perform, or alter it.

This article discusses the concept of copyright assignment, which involves the transfer of ownership or rights in a copyrighted work from the original copyright holder (assignor) to another party (assignee). The article also explains the various aspects of copyright assignment, including its mode of assignment and disputes with respect to the assignment of copyright.

Assignment of Copyright

(Section 18 of the Copyright Act, 1957 )

The owner of the current work or the potential owner of the future work may assign the copyright. It may be fully or partially allocated. Limitations may apply to all or a portion of the copyright.

Additionally, if future work is assigned, the assignment will become effective when the new work is created. In future works, “assignee” includes the assignee’s legal representative if they die before the work is created.

The court ruled in  Saregama India Ltd. vs Suresh Jindal And Ors.  that the copyright owner to a future work has the right to assign the copyright, in whole or in part, to a third party. This indicates that the owner may assign the copyright ownership for the entire term or only a portion.

The assignee is regarded as the legal owner of the copyright after the assignment is made, and the Copyright Act recognises all associated rights and benefits. As mentioned above, the ruling affirms that copyright ownership can be transferred by assignment, enabling people or organisations to obtain and exercise control over the rights connected to the copyrighted work.

Mode of Assignment of Copyright

(Section 19 of the Copyright Act, 1957)

Every assignment of the copyright to a work must be made in writing and be signed by the assignor or an authorised representative. Only that assignment will be accepted. Any assigned work must include all relevant information, including the assignment, length, rights, and geographic scope.

The amount of any royalties or other payments made to the author or his legal heirs during the assignment should also be specified. Any revisions, extensions, or terminations of the assignment are subject to the mutually agreed-upon terms and circumstances.

Let’s say the assignee fails to utilise the right granted during the assignment within a year of receiving it. If such a thing occurs, the assignment of those rights will be presumed to have terminated unless otherwise specified in the assignment. When the assignment time and geographical scope are not specified, they will be assumed to be five years from the date of the assignment and inside India, respectively.

The Bombay High Court considered whether the assignment of video rights included the right of satellite transmission in the case of  Video Master vs Nishi Production . The court accepted the defendant’s claim that several public communication channels, such as satellite broadcasting, video TV, and terrestrial television broadcasting, each constituted a distinct copyright.

As a result, the film’s owner may transfer these rights to other people or companies. The court concluded that the video copyright granted to the plaintiff was separate from the copyright for the satellite transmission of the movie. Consequently, the satellite broadcast right was not part of the assignment.

Disputes With Respect to the Assignment of Copyright

(Section 19A of the Copyright Act, 1957)

After receiving a complaint from the assignor and completing an investigation, the appellate board has the authority to revoke the assignment or issue any orders it sees suitable when the assignee fails to execute the powers granted to him if such failure is not a result of any action or inaction on the part of the assignor.

If the assignor is also the author, the appellate board should hold off on issuing any revocation unless it is established that the terms of the assignment are harsh to the assignor. Additionally, no revocation may be made for five years if an assignment has been made.

The appellate board should handle copyright assignment complaints promptly and with diligence. They have a time limit of six months from the date of receiving the complaint to reach a final decision. If, for any reason, there is a delay beyond this period, the appellate board must explain the reasons for the delay. The goal is to ensure that copyright disputes are resolved promptly and transparently.

In this evolving world, copyright assignment is an unavoidable need. People are not always able to rely on themselves. The ownership of the work must be transferred to properly frame the art and realise the original piece’s full creative potential.

Furthermore, copyright assignment aids in the seamless development of the creative process when several creative minds collaborate or when a work is adapted across various media. It allows for fresh viewpoints, interpretations, and variations that could improve the original work or investigate other creative paths.

Read Next: Doctrine of Merger Under Copyright Law

• Latest Posts

• What Is Misappropriation of Trade Secrets and Its Defences? - 15th May 2024
• 7 Important Types of Mediation Briefly Defined - 14th May 2024
• Whirlpool India vs Videocon Industries – Case Explained - 13th May 2024

How to Start Studying Law – For New, Existing, and Old Students

How to Study and Prepare for Judiciary Exams (13 tips)

11 Tips to Pass AIBE With Bare Acts and MCQ Tests in 2024

How to Write the Best Answer in Judiciary Mains Exam

10 Legal Jobs and Career Options After Law in 2024

Best Books for Judiciary Exam Preparation in 2024

My name is Ankur . I am a law graduate. I was my college topper for five years. In March 2018, I started WritingLaw.com . The main motive was to make a modern law website that is clean and comfortable.

Everything is going well . This is because of law students, advocates, judges and professors like you, who give me satisfaction, hope and the motivation to keep working. Thank you for your love and support. I hope you have a fruitful time here.

Law Study Material

© 2018-2024 | About Us |  Contact Us | Privacy Policy | T&C | Disclaimer | Cookies | Sitemap

An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know keyboard_arrow_down

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Jump to main content

Copyright basics

Copyright is a form of intellectual property that protects original works of authorship. In today’s global digital economy, artists, authors, and companies have unprecedented opportunities to disseminate their creative works and products to a worldwide audience. They also face daunting challenges from infringement and piracy. To take advantage of these opportunities and to respond to the challenges, creators and creative industries depend more than ever on their ability to protect and enforce their copyrights.

In order to understand the importance of copyright and how to protect it, it is important to examine the basics of copyright law: what it is, what it protects, and how to secure it. The primary purpose behind copyright law is to foster the creation and dissemination of works for the benefit of the public. By granting authors the exclusive right to authorize certain uses of their works, copyright provides economic incentives to create new works and to make them available in the marketplace.

This overarching goal is stated in the U.S. Constitution, Article I section 8, clause 8, “The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

This language gives Congress broad authority to advance knowledge (“Science” in 18th century parlance) by providing authors with certain exclusive rights over their works for limited times.

The framers of the Constitution were convinced that the dissemination of knowledge was of critical importance to the new nation and that establishing a national copyright system was an efficient means to advance that goal.

More than 200 years later, the purpose of U.S. copyright law remains fundamentally the same: to provide the economic incentives for creativity that ultimately promote the public welfare. The Supreme Court put it this way in its 1975 decision in Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken : “The immediate effect of our copyright law is to secure a fair return for an ‘author’s’ creative labor. But the ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for the general public good” [ Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken , 422 U.S. 151, 156 (1975)].

Copyright protects markets for American creative works not only in the United States, but also internationally. The United States is a party to several international agreements establishing minimum standards of copyright protection that member countries must adopt. These agreements—which include the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty , the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty , and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)—help to ensure that American creators have adequate legal protections against infringement of their works in foreign countries.

A copyright is a federally granted property right that protects rights holders from certain unauthorized uses of their original works of authorship. The subject matter eligible for protection is set forth in the Copyright Act of 1976 . Copyrightable works include literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works such as books, plays, music, lyrics, paintings, sculptures, video games, movies, sound recordings, and software.

To be eligible for protection under the Copyright Act, a work must be fixed in a “tangible medium of expression.” A literary work, for example, can be fixed in a book or on the back of an envelope. A musical work can be fixed in sheet music, on tape, or in a digital file. A work of visual art can be fixed on a canvas, and a sculptural work in stone.

Copyright protection does not extend to ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries. Copyright protects only the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. This principle, sometimes called the “idea-expression dichotomy,” ensures that protection will extend only to the original elements that the author has contributed to a work, not to the work’s underlying ideas, which remain freely available to the public.

Under the Copyright Act, a copyright owner has the exclusive right to reproduce, adapt, distribute, publicly perform, and publicly display the work (or to authorize others to do so). In the case of sound recordings, the copyright owner has the right to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission. These exclusive rights are freely transferable, and may be licensed, sold, donated to charity, or bequeathed to heirs.

Limitations and exceptions

The exclusive rights of copyright are limited in a number of important ways. It has long been recognized that properly crafted limitations on the exclusive rights of copyright owners help to fulfill copyright’s basic goal by allowing the use of copyrighted works for certain publicly beneficial purposes.

International copyright agreements to which the United States is a party set forth a number of specific exceptions and limitations that member states may recognize. Any additional exceptions or limitations must satisfy the so-called “three-step” test, which provides that a permitted use must (1) be limited to “certain special cases,” (2) “not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work,” and (3) “not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.”

U.S. copyright law contains numerous exceptions and limitations to the exclusive rights of copyright owners, including in the following areas:

• Library and archival copying
• Educational and nonprofit broadcasting for purposes of distance learning
• Nonprofit live performances and displays
• Reproductions for visually impaired persons
• Making copies of computer programs for archival and/or maintenance purposes

In addition, section 107 of the Copyright Act codifies the doctrine of fair use, which permits certain other uses that are not covered by a specific statutory exception. While the doctrine is flexible and case-specific, section 107 sets forth an illustrative list of the types of uses that generally are considered appropriate for a finding of fair use. These include uses for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. In determining whether a particular use is a fair use, section 107 specifies four factors that courts must consider: (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

While many people believe that you must register your work with the U.S. Copyright Office before you can claim a copyright, no registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure a copyright. A copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, as long as the work contains a sufficient degree of originality, and a work comes into being when it is fixed in a “copy or a phonorecord for the first time.” This is consistent with the Berne Convention, which states that the “enjoyment and exercise” of copyright “shall not be subject to any formality.”

Although registration with the Copyright Office is not required to secure protection, it does provide a number of benefits:

• Registration establishes a public record of the copyright claim.
• Registration is necessary before an infringement suit may be filed in court (for works of U.S. origin).
• If made before or within 5 years of publication, registration establishes prima facie evidence in court of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the registration certificate.
• If registration is made within 3 months after first publication of the work or prior to an infringement of the work, statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an award of actual damages and profits is available to the copyright owner.
• Registration allows the owner of the copyright to record the registration with the U.S. Customs Service for protection against the importation of infringing copies.

To register a claim to copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office, the claimant must: (1) submit a properly completed application; (2) pay a nonrefundable fee; and (3) deposit the required number of copies of the works to be registered.

The international minimum standard for the protection of copyright, as set forth in the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement , is the life of the author plus another 50 years. Berne Union members are free to exceed the minimum standard. The United States, the European Union, and a number of other countries have elected to do so.

Under current U.S. law, for works created by individual authors on or after January 1, 1978, copyright protection begins with the creation of the work and lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years.

For anonymous works or pseudonymous works (if the name of the author is not revealed), and for works made for hire, copyright lasts for 95 years from the date of first publication, or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever expires first. The copyright in joint works lasts for the life of the last surviving author plus 70 years.

There is no such thing as an “international copyright” that will automatically protect an author’s works in countries around the world. Instead, copyright protection is territorial in nature, which means that copyright protection depends on the national laws where protection is sought. However, most countries are members of the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement, which provide important protections for foreign authors.

Under these agreements, a member country generally must afford the nationals of other member states no less favorable copyright protection than it provides its own nationals. This bedrock principle of international copyright law is called “national treatment.”

U.S. Copyright Office

The United States Copyright Office registers copyright claims, records information about copyright ownership, provides information to the public about copyright, and assists Congress and other parts of the government on a wide range of copyright issues.

• View copyright registration tutorials
• View a video on the copyright registration process and its benefits to creators
• Browse the Copyright Office’s Circulars to learn more about copyright

STOPfakes.gov

STOPfakes.gov is a one-stop shop for U.S. government tools and resources on intellectual property rights, including copyright. The federal agencies behind STOPfakes.gov have developed a number of resources to educate and assist businesses—particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as consumers, government officials, and the general public—on how to protect and enforce their intellectual property rights. Visit STOPfakes.gov to learn more.

Additional information about this page

The IPThink-Tank

Where ideas meet success....

• Jun 27, 2021

Assignment, Transmission, And Relinquishment Of Copyright : An Overview

Signifying the objective of copyright as being the step towards safeguarding the interest of a creator alongside the dispersal of knowledge, the protection that was rendered initially with recognizing and identifying the rights of authors in their books, is with time and evolution in technology, witnessing a major change in the nature of work and its mode of exploitation. Therefore, the association of monetary benefits and copyright work introduces the aspect of economic rights. The Copyright Act, 1957 as amended in 2012, sets quite the bandwidth for creators and authors for acquiring pecuniary benefits alongside success, in the process of encouraging continuous creativity and innovation from creators in the future.

When talking of assigning copyright, it certainly bears a purpose. That is, in this process, the assignee gets the right to exploit the innovation for a stipulated time within a particular region. The assignor, on the other hand, receives a royalty. The owner of the copyright of a work is vested with the authority to assign his copyright to another person. Thereafter, the assignee of the copyright becomes entitled to any right falling within the ambit of the copyright and shall be treated as the owner of the copyright in respect of those rights. When the owner of a copyright dies, if he dies intestate then his copyright passes on to his representatives. Section 18 thereafter, also goes on to throw light upon the aspect of an owner of copyright assigning the right in an existing work as well. As per Section 18, a prospective owner, the person who is not the first owner in the future work, can assign the copyright. But, again, as laid down by the proviso of this section, the assignment can only take place after that particular work comes into existence, not before that.

But assignment directly doesn't indicate an absolute assignment. The intention of the parties associated with the nature and extent of the assignment has to be worked out from the agreement. It was seen in the case of Saregama India Ltd. vs. Suresh Jindal (2007) , that if an assignment has been made for a limited period in line with the agreement, then, one cannot contend on the basis of the assignment of copyright rendering absolute ownership for an unlimited period.

The conditions for assigning a copyright have been laid under Section 19 of the Copyright Act, 1957. It is quite significant to be aware of the fact that the assignment has to be rendered in writing and signed by the assignor or an authorized agent, otherwise, it shall not be valid. A careful reading of the agreement and straining out the intentions of the parties are quite crucial since the copyright grants are often misused by the owners.

Relinquishment of the copyright requires the author to give notice as per the set form to the Registrar of Copyrights or via public notice. The Registrar then publishes the notice in the Official Gazette or in a different way. Within 14 days from the publication of the notice in the Official Gazette shall post the notice on the official website so that it remains in the public domain for not less than 3 years. As per Section 21 (1) and (2), the relinquishment of copyright shall not affect any pre-existing rights in favour of any person on the date of the notice. Section 21 goes on to provide the owner of a work the right to relinquish all or any of the rights in a work. Relinquishment indicates the handing over of the rights in the copyrighted work, also meaning the author would no more have the rights surrendered and cannot claim ownership over it. The author can determine the rights that they want to relinquish.

https://selvams.com/india/copyrights/relinquishment-of-copyright-in-india/

https://blog.ipleaders.in/concept-assignment-copyright/

https://taxguru.in/corporate-law/assignment-copyrights.html

https://www.mondaq.com/india/copyright/854828/assignment-and-licensing-of-copyright

Recent Posts

Design holder and the associated rights: an insight

Breezer vis a vis Freez: the alcoholic tussle

Infringement vis a vis passing off action in trademark

Assignment and Licensing of Copyrights under Copyrights Act

• Intellectual Property Rights Subject-wise Law Notes
• January 8, 2021

Introduction

IP is an intellectual work which is produced by intellectual human brain. For e.g. literary work, musical work, inventions, etc. it is an intangible property. It is described as property because it is capable of sale, purchase, mortgage, etc. the owner if IP has rights over his intangible property. No one can make use of IP without the consent of the owner. IP is made to protect their rights and the infringement.

Copyright is a protection given to the creators of certain types of works as an acknowledgment to their intellectual input [1] . The objective of copyright has always been the protection of the interest of a creator, coupled with dissemination of knowledge. Though this protection started with the recognition of rights of authors in their books, but modern technology has substantially changed the nature of work and its mode of exploitation.

Economic rights allow an owner to reap economic benefits from his intellectual creations. According to section 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957, different rights are recognised with respect to the nature of the work. As per this section, it is the exclusive right of the owner to do or authorise the doing of the acts provided thereunder.

Today copyright includes a variety of industries like: the information industry and the entertainment industry and industrial design.

Assignment of Copyrights : Section 18 of Copyrights Act

The owner of the copyright of a work has the right to assign his copyright to any other person. The effect of assignment is that the assignee becomes entitled to all the rights related to the copyright to the assigned work. [2] However, mere grant of right to publish and sell the copyrighted work amounts to publishing right and not assignment of copyright.

Where the assignee of a copyright becomes entitled to any right comprised in the copyright, he shall be treated as the owner of the copyright in respect of those rights. The assignor shall also be treated as the owner of copyright with respect to unassigned rights. The legal representatives of the assignee shall be entitled to the benefits of assignment, if the assignee dies before the work comes into existence.

In  Video Master v. Nishi  Production [3] , the Bombay High Court considered the issue whether assignment of video rights would include the right of satellite broadcast as well. The Court agreed with the contentions of defendant that there were different modes of communication to the public such as terrestrial television broadcasting (Doordarshan), satellite broadcasting and video TV. The owner of the film had separate copyright in all those modes, and he could assign it to different persons. Thus, satellite broadcast copyright of film was a separate right of the owner of the film and the video copyright assigned to the plaintiff would not include this.

Mode of Assignment: Section 18 of Copyrights Act

As per section 19, assignment of copyright is valid only if it is in writing and signed by the assignor or his duly authorized agent. The assignment of a copyright in a work should identify the work and specify kind of rights assigned and the duration and territorial extent of such assignment. Further, it should specify the amount of royalty payable, if any, to the author or his legal heirs during the continuance of assignment and the assignment will be subject to revision, extension or termination on terms mutually agreed upon by the parties.

If the period of assignment is not mentioned it will be deemed to be taken as five years from the date of assignment. If the territorial extent of such assignment is not stipulated, it will be taken as applicable in whole of India.

Also, Section 19(8) contemplates that the assignment of copyright work against the terms and conditions on which rights have been assigned to a particular copyright society where the author of the work is a member shall be void. Further, Section 19(9) and section 19(10) opine that the assignment of copyright for making cinematograph film or sound recording shall not affect the right of the author to claim an equal share of the royalties and consideration payable with respect to use of his protected work.

In  Saregama India Ltd v. Suresh  Jindal [4] , it was held that the owner of the copyright in a future work may assign the copyright to any person either wholly or partially for the whole of the copyright or any part thereof and once the assignment is made the assignee for the purpose of this Act is treated as the owner of the copyright.

Licensing of Copyright

The owner of copyright may grant a license to do any of the act in respect of which he has an exclusive right to do. The license can be classified into following categories:

Voluntary license: : Section 18 of Copyrights Act

The author or the copyright owner has exclusive rights in his creative work and he alone has right to grant license with respect to such work. According to section 30 of the Copyright Act 1957, the owner of the copyright in a work may grant any interest in his copyright to any person by license in writing, which is to be signed by him or by his duly authorised agent. A license can be granted not only in existing work but also in respect of the future work, in this situation assignment shall come into force when such future work comes into existence. Where a licensee of the copyright in a future work dies before such work comes into existence, his legal representatives shall be entitled to the benefit of the license if there is no provision to contrary.

The mode of license is like an assignment deed, with necessary adaptations and modifications in section 19 (section 30A). Therefore, like an assignment, a license deed in relation to a work should comprise of following particulars:

• Duration of license
• The rights which have been licensed
• Territorial extent of the licensed
• The quantum of royalty payable
• Terms regarding revision
• Extension and termination

Voluntary licenses can be:

Exclusive –  The term exclusive license has been defined in Section 2(j) as a license which confers on the licensee and persons authorized by him, to the exclusion of all other persons, any right comprised in the copyright work.

Non-exclusive  – It does not confer right of exclusion. It is mere grant of an authority to do a particular thing which otherwise would have constituted an infringement. When owner grants an exclusive right, he denudes himself of all rights and retains no claim on the economic rights so transferred.

Co-exclusive –  Here the licensor grants a license to more than one licensee but agrees that it will only grant licences to a limited group of other licensees.

Sole license  – Where only the licensor and the licensee can use it to the exclusion of any other third party.

Implied license –  Author impliedly allows or permits the use of his work. For example, he had knowledge that someone is using his work but he did not take any action.

Compulsory Licenses

 Compulsory and statutory licenses can impact both the identity of the licensee who the owner chooses to deal with and the terms, including rates of royalty, that the owner may stipulate for such dealing. Viewed from this perspective, compulsory licenses are less of an infraction on owner autonomy, on both these counts. The owner does retain a fair bit of autonomy to enter into appropriate licensing arrangements with those who he may deem fit, and he is also permitted to negotiate on the terms of the license within the zone of reasonableness. Normally, it is an unreasonable refusal to deal with a person that gives rise to a compulsory license. This brings us to the third important distinction between a compulsory and statutory license. The former is always granted upon specific application by an individual to the competent authority. The latter, on the other hand, is a blanket fixation of rates of royalty by the authority and a grant of standardised licenses to all those who are interested in availing the same. The owner, as a necessary corollary, has no autonomy on the identity of those who obtain the license, or what they pay as royalty for the same.

 Categories of Compulsory Licenses

There are five main categories of compulsory licenses currently operating in India.

 These are:

1. Licenses in respect of works unreasonably withheld from the public;

 2. Licenses in respect of orphan works;

 3. Licenses in respect of works for the differently abled;

 4. Licenses in respect of translations;

5. Licenses in respect of reproduction and sale of works unavailable in India.

Statutory Licenses

 As seen from the above discussion of compulsory licenses, such licenses can be understood as a particularised expropriation of owner autonomy in respect of the copyrighted work. The need for such expropriation arises only upon acts or inaction on the part of the owner that render the work unavailable to the public or differently abled persons. Statutory licenses, on the other hand, do not require any examination into the conduct of the owner. It attempts a wholesale expropriation of owner autonomy, once the work fits within the broader class of works that can be so licensed.

There are two such categories of statutory licenses, namely cover version recording licenses (Section 31C) and broadcasting licenses (Section 31D).

 The first has existed, though as part of the fair dealing exceptions in Section 52, from the very beginning. The second is a very recent addition to the Act vide the 2012 amendment.

The term ‘assignment’ and ‘license’ are not interchangeable. An assignment is different from a license. Generally, in absence of any provision to the contrary the assignee becomes the owner of the assigned work, whereas in case of a license the licensee gets the right to exercise particular rights only.

An assignment may be general, i.e. without limitation or an assignment may be subject to limitations. It may be for the whole term of copyright or any part thereof. An assignment transfers an interest in and deals with copyright itself as provided under section 14 of the Act, but license does not convey the copyright but only grants a right to do something, which in absence of license would be unlawful. An assignment transfers title in copyright, a license merely permits certain things to be done by licensee. The assignee being invested with the title in the copyright may reassign [5] .

[1] This is known as the ‘Doctrine of Sweat of the Brow’, whereby a work is given copyright protection if the author has applied ‘labour, skill or judgment’ in creating the work irrespective of the level of originality in the work. Evolved from the decision in Ladbroke v William Hill, [1964] 1 All E.R. 465.

[2] Section 18(2); Copyright Act, 1957.

[3] 23 IPLR 388 (1998).

[4] 2007 (34) PTC 522 (Cal).

[5] Deshmukh & co (publishers) pvt ltd v/s avinash vishnu khadekar 2006 (32) PTC 358 (Bom)

Author Name: Muskaan Mathur [Student, Savitribai Phule, Pune University (SPPU)]

You might like

Makhan Singh vs. State of Punjab [1964 AIR 381]

Mahboob Shah vs Emperor

Mens Rea in Statutory Offences

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name  *

Email  *

Add Comment  *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Post Comment

Sony Music Group warns more than 700 companies against using its content to train AI

One of the biggest record labels in the world is issuing notices warning hundreds of companies not to train artificial intelligence models on its content without permission.

Sony Music Group — which owns such well-known labels as Columbia Records, RCA Records and Epic Records — has started sending formal letters to more than 700 generative AI companies and streaming platforms prohibiting them from mining text or data, web scraping or otherwise using any SMG content without explicit licensing agreements.

That covers a wide variety of content, including audio recordings, musical compositions (including lyrics), cover artwork and metadata, according to a copy of the letter obtained by NBC News.

In its letter, SMG said it recognizes the “significant potential and advancement” of AI.

"However, unauthorized use of SMG Content in the training, development or commercialization of AI systems deprives SMG Companies and SMG Talent of control over and appropriate compensation for the uses of SMG Content, conflicts with the normal exploitation of those works, unreasonably prejudices our legitimate interests, and infringes our intellectual property and other rights," it wrote.

Such activity “conflicts with the normal exploitation of those works, unreasonably prejudices our legitimate interests, and infringes our intellectual property and other rights," the letter says.

Asked for comment, a spokesperson for SMG referred NBC News to a declaration the company posted online Thursday.

“Evolutions in technology have frequently shifted the course of creative industries. AI will likely continue that long-standing trend,” it wrote in the post. “However, that innovation must ensure that songwriters’ and recording artists’ rights, including copyrights, are respected.”

The letter asks companies either to confirm that they have not used SMG content without permission or, if they have, to provide details about how the content was used in AI training.

The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act, the world’s first comprehensive AI law, which passed in March, includes a clause requiring providers of general-purpose AI models to make public a “sufficiently detailed” summary of the content used to train those models.

Concerns around the use of AI have plagued the music industry in recent months as the rapid proliferation of generative AI tools makes it easier than ever for anyone to scrape copyrighted content to produce AI-generated music.

While regulations protecting human-made work still lag in the U.S., many companies have begun to negotiate their own agreements around the licensing of their content for AI model training. Some have also sued AI companies , claiming their AI models were trained on copyrighted materials.

Some tracks that appear to use AI-generated vocals have already popped up online. Last year, a viral song called “heart on my sleeve,” created by an anonymous musician who goes by "ghostwriter,” featured vocals that sound like those of Drake and The Weeknd. It was quickly taken down from streaming services because of a copyright claim by Universal Music Group.

(UMG has no relationship to NBCUniversal, the parent company of NBC News.)

In April, Drake released “Taylor Made Freestyle,” which featured the AI-generated voice of the late rapper Tupac Shakur . The diss track was removed from Drake’s X and Instagram accounts days after Shakur’s estate  threatened to sue him .

Warner Music Group CEO Robert Kyncl testified last month before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on intellectual property to advocate for legislation that would protect against using nonconsensual deepfakes.

“Our fundamental position on AI is simple. Everyone should have the right to decide how their own name, likeness and voice is used,” Kyncl said in prepared remarks . “These characteristics are the very foundations of our individuality — they are not simply data to be taken and used by others. Each person’s identity must not be used in ways that they would never condone or wish to participate in.”

Artists are also pushing for protections against AI. More than 200 artists signed an open letter last month calling on AI developers, tech companies and digital music services to pledge not to use AI in ways that “undermine or replace the human artistry of songwriters and artists.”

Angela Yang is a culture and trends reporter for NBC News.

Concord terminates $1.51 bln offer for Hipgnosis

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by Anchal Rana in Bengaluru; Editing by Devika Syamnath

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

U.S. fund General Atlantic and Canadian pension fund CPPIB are readying a 3 billion euro ($3.26 billion) offer to buy Spain's largest online real estate company Idealista, Spanish newspaper Expansion reported on Friday, citing unidentified market sources.

Waste management firm WM is exploring a sale of its renewable natural gas business that could be worth about $3 billion, according to people familiar with the matter.

Markets Chevron

Stocks drift, China unveils 'historic' steps for property

Global stocks eased on Friday after Federal Reserve officials hinted U.S. interest rates may not fall any time soon, while commodities rallied on the back of optimism over a series of measures in China to stabilise its beleaguered property sector.

Sitewide search

The UCLA Center for Health Policy Research (CHPR) is one of the nation's leading health policy research centers and the premier source of health policy information for California.

Browse Publications

Find an expert, view all projects.

California Adults With Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Are at Greater Risk for Serious Psychological Distress and Report Perceived and Unmet Need for Mental Health Care Services

Summary: This policy brief uses data from the 2022 California Health Interview Survey to analyze the distribution of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and positive childhood experiences (PCEs) and their relationship to mental health issues such as serious psychological distress (SPD) and to perceived need and unmet need for mental health care among California adults.

Findings: About 1 in 5 California adults had high exposure to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) in childhood (had four or more). Compared to adults ages 65 and older, greater proportions of young- (ages 18 to 35) and middle-aged adults (ages 36 to 49) had four or more ACEs. Adults who identified as Native American or Alaska Native, Latinx, Black or African American, or as belonging to two or more racial or ethnic groups, were more likely to have had high exposure to ACEs. Relative to California adults without any ACEs, a larger proportion of adults with four or more ACEs experienced SPD and had a perceived and unmet need for mental health services in the past year.

A larger proportion of older adults had four or more positive childhood experiences (PCEs) compared to young - and middle-aged adults.  Compared to other racial and ethnic categories, adults identifying as Latinx, Black or African American, or as belonging to two or more racial and ethnic categories were more likely to report not having had any PCEs. Adults who did not have any PCEs were more likely to report experiencing SPD in the past year.

Read the Publication:

• Policy Brief: California Adults With Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Are at Greater Risk for Serious Psychological Distress and Report Perceived and Unmet Need for Mental Health Care Services
• Infographic

Social media links

Copied to clipboard