Reclaiming Your Songs Worldwide: What the Vetter Case Means

In 1963, two young Louisiana songwriters signed away the rights to a song that would become a 1966 hit for the Swingin’ Medallions: “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love).” Nearly sixty years later, co-writer Cyril Vetter used federal copyright termination to take the song back. The question that followed has big money riding on it: when a songwriter reclaims a song, does he get back only the U.S. rights, or the rights everywhere in the world?

On October 19, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a Fifth Circuit ruling that answered “everywhere.” Here is what happened, what it does and does not settle, and what it could mean for songwriters, artists, estates and publishers on Music Row.

A quick refresher on copyright termination

The Copyright Act gives authors and their heirs a one-time chance to undo old deals. For grants signed on or after January 1, 1978, Section 203 opens a termination window that generally starts 35 years after the grant. For songs whose copyrights were secured before 1978 under a pre-1978 grant, Section 304(c) opens a window 56 years after the copyright was secured.

The process is strict. A written notice must be served at least two and no more than ten years before the effective date, and it must be recorded with the U.S. Copyright Office before that date. Works made for hire and grants made by will cannot be terminated. Derivative works made before termination, such as an existing master recording, can generally keep being used under the old deal, but new uses revert to the author or heirs.

What happened in the Vetter case

According to court records and press coverage, Vetter served his termination notice in 2019 with a 2022 effective date, then sued the publisher that had acquired the song’s original publishing company. A federal court in Louisiana ruled that Vetter and his company owned the song worldwide. On January 12, 2026, the Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that terminations under Section 304(c), together with renewal rights under the 1909 Act, return worldwide ownership, not just U.S. rights, and that this is consistent with international treaty obligations.

Major publishers, by then holding the other side of the dispute, asked the Supreme Court to step in, arguing the ruling upended decades of industry practice. Four Justices (Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Barrett and Jackson) took no part, leaving the Court without its six-Justice quorum. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, when the Court cannot reach a case in the next Term, it must affirm the lower court’s judgment, with the same effect as an affirmance by an equally divided Court.

What the order does and does not settle

For Mr. Vetter, the ruling stands: he owns his share of “Double Shot” worldwide. But the Supreme Court did not decide the legal question on the merits, and an affirmance of this kind does not create nationwide precedent. The Fifth Circuit’s opinion is binding in federal courts in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. Courts elsewhere, including the Sixth Circuit, which covers Tennessee, are not bound by it and could reach a different answer in a future case. Contract language, choice-of-law clauses and foreign courts’ views of U.S. termination may also come into play.

Why it matters on Music Row

International income is a growing share of what a song earns, from foreign performance royalties to streaming in markets around the globe. If termination brings back foreign rights too, a reclaimed catalog can be worth considerably more to a writer or estate. On the other side, publishers and catalog buyers may need to rethink how they value older songs whose termination windows are open or approaching, and they may look harder at deal terms and forum choices.

Practical steps

• Inventory your old deals. List every publishing, co-publishing and administration agreement, with signing dates and the songs each one covers.
• Map your termination windows. Calculate when each window opens and the earliest date a notice can be served. Missing the window can mean losing the right.
• Look at the “for hire” question. Termination does not apply to works made for hire, so check how each agreement characterized the work.
• Think about where you would sue. Until another appeals court or the Supreme Court weighs in, where a dispute is heard may matter.
• Estates, coordinate early. When an author has died, a majority interest of the statutory heirs generally must act together.
• Buyers and publishers, update diligence. Factor termination timing and possible worldwide reversion into catalog valuations and deal terms.

Thinking about getting your songs back?

Termination is one of the most valuable rights a songwriter has, and one of the easiest to lose through a missed deadline or a defective notice. If you are a writer, an heir, or a business that owns older catalog, our Nashville team is glad to review your agreements and help you plan. Contact Shrum Disney & Associates to start the conversation.

Related video

Barry Neil Shrum breaks down the Supreme Court’s Vetter order on the Music Row Dealmakers Gavel Drop: Breaking: 5 Justices and a Double Shot: The Supreme Court, a $1 Song & Who Gets the World Rights.

Further reading

• Supreme Court docket, BMG Rights Management (US) LLC v. Vetter, No. 25-1391
• U.S. Copyright Office: Notice of Termination
• IPWatchdog: SCOTUS Summarily Affirms Fifth Circuit Judgment on Worldwide Copyright Reversion

This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your situation, contact Shrum Disney & Associates or call 615.338.5130.