Warner Has Invalid Copyright to Happy Birthday Song, Judge Rules

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Last week, a judge ruled against Warner/Chappell Music Inc. in the class action lawsuit accusing the company of relying on an invalid copyright while collecting fees for the use of the popular tune “Happy Birthday.”

Lead plaintiff Good Morning to You Productions Corp. (GMTY), a production company that is currently creating a documentary film about the song, alleged in the class action lawsuit that Warner wrongfully claimed to own exclusive right to control the distribution, reproductions and performances of the song. Good Morning filed the class action lawsuit after Warner demanded that it pay a licensing fee of $1,500 to use the song in its documentary.

According to his order issued last week, U.S. District Judge George H. King found that Warner had never acquired the rights to the song’s lyrics. Judge King pointed out that although some records mention the melody or piano arrangement, the lyrics of the song were never discussed in copyright records, court records and several agreements over the use of the song

According to the Happy Birthday song class action lawsuit, Warner’s copyright is based on the rights the song’s composers, the Hill sisters, sold to a music publisher, Summy Co., at the turn of the last century. “Because Summy Co. never acquired the rights to the Happy Birthday lyrics, defendants, as Summy Co.’s purported successors-in-interest, do not own a valid copyright in the Happy Birthday lyrics,” Judge King noted in his order.

“Nowhere in the agreement is there any discussion of the Happy Birthday lyrics; nor is there any suggestion that the Hill sisters transferred their common law rights in the Happy Birthday lyrics to Summy Co,” the judge continued.

According to the order, the parties agreed that the melody to the tune came from the Hill sister’s song “Good Morning To All,” which entered the public domain years ago. In 1935, Summy Co. had registered the song for a federal copyright; however, that registration listed a different author and claimed an “arrangement as easy piano solo, with text.”

“Obviously, pianos do not sing,” Judge King explained in his order. Additionally, the judge pointed out that the 1935 registration did not list the Hill sisters as the author of the song and does not clearly indicate that the “Happy Birthday” lyrics were included in the registration.

In the class action lawsuit, Good Morning to You alleged that “Happy Birthday” was copyrighted in 1893 and the copyright had expired. The class action lawsuit accused Warner/Chappell of collecting millions of dollars in licensing fees for the tune under the allegedly invalid 1935 copyright.

In a motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit filed two years ago, Warner contended that it has uncovered documentary evidence that shows “Happy Birthday” sprang out of “Good Morning to All,” composed by the Hill sisters. According to the motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit, the Hill sisters sold their rights to more than 70 songs in 1893, including “Good Morning to All,” to a predecessor of Warner, who published it in the songbook, then filed the first of six copyright applications related to the song “Happy Birthday to You” in 1934.

The plaintiffs are represented by Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, Donahue Gallagher Woods LLP and Randall S. Newman PC.

The Happy Birthday Song Class Action Lawsuit is Good Morning to You Productions Corp., et al. v. Warner/Chappell Music Inc., et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-04460, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

UPDATE: On Feb. 9, 2016, Warner/Chappel Music Inc. and others agreed to pay $14 million and give up all claims that the song is copyrighted in order to settle the class action lawsuit.