Musician did not hold producer rights to sound recordings
Supreme Court judgment 5 December 2023, HR-2023-2282-A, (case no. 23-033460SIV-HRET) civil case, appeal against judgment.
Mutual Intentions AS (Counsel Ketil Reidar Sellæg Ramberg), FONO (intervener), IFPI Norge (intervener) (Counsel Steffen Asmundsson) v. A (Counsel Ole Edvard Tokvam)
A musician who had received three sound sketches for new songs, composed single tracks in the form of bass lines and melody lines based on the melody sketches, and recorded these single tracks with his own equipment. The tracks were then incorporated into three songs that a record label released on an album in 2019. Unlike the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court found that the musician was not entitled to producer royalties for the single tracks, see section 20 of the Copyright Act. It was assumed that the "producer of sound recordings" is the person who is in charge of – in the sense of facilitating and paying for – the production of the recordings. The musician had made the sound recordings as an integrated part of his role as a composer and artist in a project initiated, facilitated and paid for by the record label. Thus, it was the record label that held the rights as a producer under section 20 of the Copyright Act. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the record label.
Area of law: Copyright. Section 20 of the Copyright Act.
Key paragraphs: 64, 80
Justices: Justitiarius Øie, dommerne Normann, Noer, Falch og Thyness