assignment of rights usa

• assignments basic law

Assignments: The Basic Law

The assignment of a right or obligation is a common contractual event under the law and the right to assign (or prohibition against assignments) is found in the majority of agreements, leases and business structural documents created in the United States.

As with many terms commonly used, people are familiar with the term but often are not aware or fully aware of what the terms entail. The concept of assignment of rights and obligations is one of those simple concepts with wide ranging ramifications in the contractual and business context and the law imposes severe restrictions on the validity and effect of assignment in many instances. Clear contractual provisions concerning assignments and rights should be in every document and structure created and this article will outline why such drafting is essential for the creation of appropriate and effective contracts and structures.

The reader should first read the article on Limited Liability Entities in the United States and Contracts since the information in those articles will be assumed in this article.

Basic Definitions and Concepts:

An assignment is the transfer of rights held by one party called the “assignor” to another party called the “assignee.” The legal nature of the assignment and the contractual terms of the agreement between the parties determines some additional rights and liabilities that accompany the assignment. The assignment of rights under a contract usually completely transfers the rights to the assignee to receive the benefits accruing under the contract. Ordinarily, the term assignment is limited to the transfer of rights that are intangible, like contractual rights and rights connected with property. Merchants Service Co. v. Small Claims Court , 35 Cal. 2d 109, 113-114 (Cal. 1950).

An assignment will generally be permitted under the law unless there is an express prohibition against assignment in the underlying contract or lease. Where assignments are permitted, the assignor need not consult the other party to the contract but may merely assign the rights at that time. However, an assignment cannot have any adverse effect on the duties of the other party to the contract, nor can it diminish the chance of the other party receiving complete performance. The assignor normally remains liable unless there is an agreement to the contrary by the other party to the contract.

The effect of a valid assignment is to remove privity between the assignor and the obligor and create privity between the obligor and the assignee. Privity is usually defined as a direct and immediate contractual relationship. See Merchants case above.

Further, for the assignment to be effective in most jurisdictions, it must occur in the present. One does not normally assign a future right; the assignment vests immediate rights and obligations.

No specific language is required to create an assignment so long as the assignor makes clear his/her intent to assign identified contractual rights to the assignee. Since expensive litigation can erupt from ambiguous or vague language, obtaining the correct verbiage is vital. An agreement must manifest the intent to transfer rights and can either be oral or in writing and the rights assigned must be certain.

Note that an assignment of an interest is the transfer of some identifiable property, claim, or right from the assignor to the assignee. The assignment operates to transfer to the assignee all of the rights, title, or interest of the assignor in the thing assigned. A transfer of all rights, title, and interests conveys everything that the assignor owned in the thing assigned and the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor. Knott v. McDonald’s Corp ., 985 F. Supp. 1222 (N.D. Cal. 1997)

The parties must intend to effectuate an assignment at the time of the transfer, although no particular language or procedure is necessary. As long ago as the case of National Reserve Co. v. Metropolitan Trust Co ., 17 Cal. 2d 827 (Cal. 1941), the court held that in determining what rights or interests pass under an assignment, the intention of the parties as manifested in the instrument is controlling.

The intent of the parties to an assignment is a question of fact to be derived not only from the instrument executed by the parties but also from the surrounding circumstances. When there is no writing to evidence the intention to transfer some identifiable property, claim, or right, it is necessary to scrutinize the surrounding circumstances and parties’ acts to ascertain their intentions. Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs., 295 Ill. App. 3d 17 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1998)

The general rule applicable to assignments of choses in action is that an assignment, unless there is a contract to the contrary, carries with it all securities held by the assignor as collateral to the claim and all rights incidental thereto and vests in the assignee the equitable title to such collateral securities and incidental rights. An unqualified assignment of a contract or chose in action, however, with no indication of the intent of the parties, vests in the assignee the assigned contract or chose and all rights and remedies incidental thereto.

More examples: In Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs ., 295 Ill. App. 3d 17 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1998), the court held that the assignee of a party to a subordination agreement is entitled to the benefits and is subject to the burdens of the agreement. In Florida E. C. R. Co. v. Eno , 99 Fla. 887 (Fla. 1930), the court held that the mere assignment of all sums due in and of itself creates no different or other liability of the owner to the assignee than that which existed from the owner to the assignor.

And note that even though an assignment vests in the assignee all rights, remedies, and contingent benefits which are incidental to the thing assigned, those which are personal to the assignor and for his sole benefit are not assigned. Rasp v. Hidden Valley Lake, Inc ., 519 N.E.2d 153, 158 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988). Thus, if the underlying agreement provides that a service can only be provided to X, X cannot assign that right to Y.

Novation Compared to Assignment:

Although the difference between a novation and an assignment may appear narrow, it is an essential one. “Novation is a act whereby one party transfers all its obligations and benefits under a contract to a third party.” In a novation, a third party successfully substitutes the original party as a party to the contract. “When a contract is novated, the other contracting party must be left in the same position he was in prior to the novation being made.”

A sublease is the transfer when a tenant retains some right of reentry onto the leased premises. However, if the tenant transfers the entire leasehold estate, retaining no right of reentry or other reversionary interest, then the transfer is an assignment. The assignor is normally also removed from liability to the landlord only if the landlord consents or allowed that right in the lease. In a sublease, the original tenant is not released from the obligations of the original lease.

Equitable Assignments:

An equitable assignment is one in which one has a future interest and is not valid at law but valid in a court of equity. In National Bank of Republic v. United Sec. Life Ins. & Trust Co. , 17 App. D.C. 112 (D.C. Cir. 1900), the court held that to constitute an equitable assignment of a chose in action, the following has to occur generally: anything said written or done, in pursuance of an agreement and for valuable consideration, or in consideration of an antecedent debt, to place a chose in action or fund out of the control of the owner, and appropriate it to or in favor of another person, amounts to an equitable assignment. Thus, an agreement, between a debtor and a creditor, that the debt shall be paid out of a specific fund going to the debtor may operate as an equitable assignment.

In Egyptian Navigation Co. v. Baker Invs. Corp. , 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30804 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 14, 2008), the court stated that an equitable assignment occurs under English law when an assignor, with an intent to transfer his/her right to a chose in action, informs the assignee about the right so transferred.

An executory agreement or a declaration of trust are also equitable assignments if unenforceable as assignments by a court of law but enforceable by a court of equity exercising sound discretion according to the circumstances of the case. Since California combines courts of equity and courts of law, the same court would hear arguments as to whether an equitable assignment had occurred. Quite often, such relief is granted to avoid fraud or unjust enrichment.

Note that obtaining an assignment through fraudulent means invalidates the assignment. Fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters. It vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments. Walker v. Rich , 79 Cal. App. 139 (Cal. App. 1926). If an assignment is made with the fraudulent intent to delay, hinder, and defraud creditors, then it is void as fraudulent in fact. See our article on Transfers to Defraud Creditors .

But note that the motives that prompted an assignor to make the transfer will be considered as immaterial and will constitute no defense to an action by the assignee, if an assignment is considered as valid in all other respects.

Enforceability of Assignments:

Whether a right under a contract is capable of being transferred is determined by the law of the place where the contract was entered into. The validity and effect of an assignment is determined by the law of the place of assignment. The validity of an assignment of a contractual right is governed by the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the assignment and the parties.

In some jurisdictions, the traditional conflict of laws rules governing assignments has been rejected and the law of the place having the most significant contacts with the assignment applies. In Downs v. American Mut. Liability Ins. Co ., 14 N.Y.2d 266 (N.Y. 1964), a wife and her husband separated and the wife obtained a judgment of separation from the husband in New York. The judgment required the husband to pay a certain yearly sum to the wife. The husband assigned 50 percent of his future salary, wages, and earnings to the wife. The agreement authorized the employer to make such payments to the wife.

After the husband moved from New York, the wife learned that he was employed by an employer in Massachusetts. She sent the proper notice and demanded payment under the agreement. The employer refused and the wife brought an action for enforcement. The court observed that Massachusetts did not prohibit assignment of the husband’s wages. Moreover, Massachusetts law was not controlling because New York had the most significant relationship with the assignment. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the wife.

Therefore, the validity of an assignment is determined by looking to the law of the forum with the most significant relationship to the assignment itself. To determine the applicable law of assignments, the court must look to the law of the state which is most significantly related to the principal issue before it.

Assignment of Contractual Rights:

Generally, the law allows the assignment of a contractual right unless the substitution of rights would materially change the duty of the obligor, materially increase the burden or risk imposed on the obligor by the contract, materially impair the chance of obtaining return performance, or materially reduce the value of the performance to the obligor. Restat 2d of Contracts, § 317(2)(a). This presumes that the underlying agreement is silent on the right to assign.

If the contract specifically precludes assignment, the contractual right is not assignable. Whether a contract is assignable is a matter of contractual intent and one must look to the language used by the parties to discern that intent.

In the absence of an express provision to the contrary, the rights and duties under a bilateral executory contract that does not involve personal skill, trust, or confidence may be assigned without the consent of the other party. But note that an assignment is invalid if it would materially alter the other party’s duties and responsibilities. Once an assignment is effective, the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor and assumes all of assignor’s rights. Hence, after a valid assignment, the assignor’s right to performance is extinguished, transferred to assignee, and the assignee possesses the same rights, benefits, and remedies assignor once possessed. Robert Lamb Hart Planners & Architects v. Evergreen, Ltd. , 787 F. Supp. 753 (S.D. Ohio 1992).

On the other hand, an assignee’s right against the obligor is subject to “all of the limitations of the assignor’s right, all defenses thereto, and all set-offs and counterclaims which would have been available against the assignor had there been no assignment, provided that these defenses and set-offs are based on facts existing at the time of the assignment.” See Robert Lamb , case, above.

The power of the contract to restrict assignment is broad. Usually, contractual provisions that restrict assignment of the contract without the consent of the obligor are valid and enforceable, even when there is statutory authorization for the assignment. The restriction of the power to assign is often ineffective unless the restriction is expressly and precisely stated. Anti-assignment clauses are effective only if they contain clear, unambiguous language of prohibition. Anti-assignment clauses protect only the obligor and do not affect the transaction between the assignee and assignor.

Usually, a prohibition against the assignment of a contract does not prevent an assignment of the right to receive payments due, unless circumstances indicate the contrary. Moreover, the contracting parties cannot, by a mere non-assignment provision, prevent the effectual alienation of the right to money which becomes due under the contract.

A contract provision prohibiting or restricting an assignment may be waived, or a party may so act as to be estopped from objecting to the assignment, such as by effectively ratifying the assignment. The power to void an assignment made in violation of an anti-assignment clause may be waived either before or after the assignment. See our article on Contracts.

Noncompete Clauses and Assignments:

Of critical import to most buyers of businesses is the ability to ensure that key employees of the business being purchased cannot start a competing company. Some states strictly limit such clauses, some do allow them. California does restrict noncompete clauses, only allowing them under certain circumstances. A common question in those states that do allow them is whether such rights can be assigned to a new party, such as the buyer of the buyer.

A covenant not to compete, also called a non-competitive clause, is a formal agreement prohibiting one party from performing similar work or business within a designated area for a specified amount of time. This type of clause is generally included in contracts between employer and employee and contracts between buyer and seller of a business.

Many workers sign a covenant not to compete as part of the paperwork required for employment. It may be a separate document similar to a non-disclosure agreement, or buried within a number of other clauses in a contract. A covenant not to compete is generally legal and enforceable, although there are some exceptions and restrictions.

Whenever a company recruits skilled employees, it invests a significant amount of time and training. For example, it often takes years before a research chemist or a design engineer develops a workable knowledge of a company’s product line, including trade secrets and highly sensitive information. Once an employee gains this knowledge and experience, however, all sorts of things can happen. The employee could work for the company until retirement, accept a better offer from a competing company or start up his or her own business.

A covenant not to compete may cover a number of potential issues between employers and former employees. Many companies spend years developing a local base of customers or clients. It is important that this customer base not fall into the hands of local competitors. When an employee signs a covenant not to compete, he or she usually agrees not to use insider knowledge of the company’s customer base to disadvantage the company. The covenant not to compete often defines a broad geographical area considered off-limits to former employees, possibly tens or hundreds of miles.

Another area of concern covered by a covenant not to compete is a potential ‘brain drain’. Some high-level former employees may seek to recruit others from the same company to create new competition. Retention of employees, especially those with unique skills or proprietary knowledge, is vital for most companies, so a covenant not to compete may spell out definite restrictions on the hiring or recruiting of employees.

A covenant not to compete may also define a specific amount of time before a former employee can seek employment in a similar field. Many companies offer a substantial severance package to make sure former employees are financially solvent until the terms of the covenant not to compete have been met.

Because the use of a covenant not to compete can be controversial, a handful of states, including California, have largely banned this type of contractual language. The legal enforcement of these agreements falls on individual states, and many have sided with the employee during arbitration or litigation. A covenant not to compete must be reasonable and specific, with defined time periods and coverage areas. If the agreement gives the company too much power over former employees or is ambiguous, state courts may declare it to be overbroad and therefore unenforceable. In such case, the employee would be free to pursue any employment opportunity, including working for a direct competitor or starting up a new company of his or her own.

It has been held that an employee’s covenant not to compete is assignable where one business is transferred to another, that a merger does not constitute an assignment of a covenant not to compete, and that a covenant not to compete is enforceable by a successor to the employer where the assignment does not create an added burden of employment or other disadvantage to the employee. However, in some states such as Hawaii, it has also been held that a covenant not to compete is not assignable and under various statutes for various reasons that such covenants are not enforceable against an employee by a successor to the employer. Hawaii v. Gannett Pac. Corp. , 99 F. Supp. 2d 1241 (D. Haw. 1999)

It is vital to obtain the relevant law of the applicable state before drafting or attempting to enforce assignment rights in this particular area.

Conclusion:

In the current business world of fast changing structures, agreements, employees and projects, the ability to assign rights and obligations is essential to allow flexibility and adjustment to new situations. Conversely, the ability to hold a contracting party into the deal may be essential for the future of a party. Thus, the law of assignments and the restriction on same is a critical aspect of every agreement and every structure. This basic provision is often glanced at by the contracting parties, or scribbled into the deal at the last minute but can easily become the most vital part of the transaction.

As an example, one client of ours came into the office outraged that his co venturer on a sizable exporting agreement, who had excellent connections in Brazil, had elected to pursue another venture instead and assigned the agreement to a party unknown to our client and without the business contacts our client considered vital. When we examined the handwritten agreement our client had drafted in a restaurant in Sao Paolo, we discovered there was no restriction on assignment whatsoever…our client had not even considered that right when drafting the agreement after a full day of work.

One choses who one does business with carefully…to ensure that one’s choice remains the party on the other side of the contract, one must master the ability to negotiate proper assignment provisions.

Founded in 1939, our law firm combines the ability to represent clients in domestic or international matters with the personal interaction with clients that is traditional to a long established law firm.

Read more about our firm

© 2024, Stimmel, Stimmel & Roeser, All rights reserved  | Terms of Use | Site by Bay Design

Assignment Of Rights Agreement

Jump to section, what is an assignment of rights agreement.

​​An assignment of rights agreement is a written document in which one party, the assignor, assigns to another party all or part of their rights under an existing contract. The most common example of this would be when someone wants to sell their shares of stock in a company.

When you buy shares from someone else (the seller), they agree to transfer them over and give up any control they had on that share. This way, another party can take ownership without going through the trouble of trying to buy the whole company themselves.

Common Sections in Assignment Of Rights Agreements

Below is a list of common sections included in Assignment Of Rights Agreements. These sections are linked to the below sample agreement for you to explore.

Assignment Of Rights Agreement Sample

Reference : Security Exchange Commission - Edgar Database, EX-99.(H)(7) 5 dex99h7.htm FORM OF ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT , Viewed December 20, 2021, View Source on SEC .

Who Helps With Assignment Of Rights Agreements?

Lawyers with backgrounds working on assignment of rights agreements work with clients to help. Do you need help with an assignment of rights agreement?

Post a project  in ContractsCounsel's marketplace to get free bids from lawyers to draft, review, or negotiate assignment of rights agreements. All lawyers are vetted by our team and peer reviewed by our customers for you to explore before hiring.

ContractsCounsel is not a law firm, and this post should not be considered and does not contain legal advice. To ensure the information and advice in this post are correct, sufficient, and appropriate for your situation, please consult a licensed attorney. Also, using or accessing ContractsCounsel's site does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and ContractsCounsel.

Meet some of our Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers

A seasoned attorney dedicated to navigating complex legal issues and devising strategic solutions for my clients.

Richard A. Mathurin is as a member of the professional team at Sage Law. Since graduating cum Laude from The University of Notre Dame and UCLA School of Law, Rich has enjoyed an exciting and diversified career in the practice of law. In his early career, he assisted several energy companies all over the world in the development and funding of major wind energy and other green technology projects. Following an assignment by his firm to their Far East offices in Tokyo and Singapore, Rich represented global corporations such as Hitachi, UPS, and Fuji-Xerox in major commercial transactions. More recently, Rich returned to his native San Diego to care for an ill family member and work in the local community. Rich specializes in tax resolution, bankruptcy and small business services helping clients get in compliance with complex tax laws and manage their personal and business finances. When he is not working servicing his valued clients, Rich is an ardent golfer and enjoys rooting for his favorite Boston sports teams.

Ernestas P.

I am a broadly skilled legal professional. I am highly drawn to technology, fintech, intellectual property, privacy law, contracts. I am also experienced in business litigation and business transactions. I have been told to have the following skills perfect time management, critical thinking, problem solving, attention to detail, communication and decision making. As a former flight attendant, I am well versed and acquired many of those skills in a fast faced multicultural/multilingual setting. I am able to work solo or as a team member and quickly adapt to changes. Finally, I am fluent in English, Lithuanian, Russian.

Scott Bowen, Esq brings legal experience in family law, special education law, and healthcare law matters. Scott also has over 20 years of expertise in healthcare compliance, medical coding, and healthcare consulting to the firm.

Damian is a founding partner of Holon Law Partners. He began his career as an officer in the Marine Corps, managing legal affairs for his command in Okinawa, Japan. In this role, he conducted investigations, assembled juries for courts martial, and advised his commander on criminal justice matters. Damian was twice selected to serve as his unit’s liaison to the Japanese government and self-defense forces. Damian later worked as a transactional attorney in New York, where he handled commercial real estate, finance, and restructuring matters. He has also participated in insider trading investigations at the SEC, worked on compliance at a private equity firm, and managed legal operations and special projects at a vertically integrated cannabis company in New Mexico. Damian draws on these diverse experiences to provide his clients with creative solutions to thorny legal issues – from negotiating commercial leases to managing complex securities offerings. In addition to practicing law, Damian volunteers as a research assistant at the University of New Mexico Medical School’s McCormick Lab – studying the microbiology of longevity and aging. When not working, he enjoys spending time with his two pit bulls and pursuing his passions for foreign languages, art, philosophy, and fitness. Damian resides in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Jonathan F.

Trial and transactional attorney with over 30 years experience with complex business transactions and disputes.

My passion is protecting the passions of others. I have 5+ years of contract review, and all aspects of entertainment law including negotiation, mediation, intellectual property, copyright, and music licensing. I also have experience working with nonprofits, and small businesses helping with formation, dissolution, partnerships, etc. I am licensed in both Texas and California.

Find the best lawyer for your project

Quick, user friendly and one of the better ways I've come across to get ahold of lawyers willing to take new clients.

How It Works

Post Your Project

Get Free Bids to Compare

Hire Your Lawyer

Business lawyers by top cities

• Austin Business Lawyers
• Boston Business Lawyers
• Chicago Business Lawyers
• Dallas Business Lawyers
• Denver Business Lawyers
• Houston Business Lawyers
• Los Angeles Business Lawyers
• New York Business Lawyers
• Phoenix Business Lawyers
• San Diego Business Lawyers
• Tampa Business Lawyers

Assignment Of Rights Agreement lawyers by city

• Austin Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Boston Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Chicago Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Dallas Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Denver Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Houston Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Los Angeles Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• New York Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Phoenix Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• San Diego Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Tampa Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers

Contracts Counsel was incredibly helpful and easy to use. I submitted a project for a lawyer's help within a day I had received over 6 proposals from qualified lawyers. I submitted a bid that works best for my business and we went forward with the project.

I never knew how difficult it was to obtain representation or a lawyer, and ContractsCounsel was EXACTLY the type of service I was hoping for when I was in a pinch. Working with their service was efficient, effective and made me feel in control. Thank you so much and should I ever need attorney services down the road, I'll certainly be a repeat customer.

I got 5 bids within 24h of posting my project. I choose the person who provided the most detailed and relevant intro letter, highlighting their experience relevant to my project. I am very satisfied with the outcome and quality of the two agreements that were produced, they actually far exceed my expectations.

Want to speak to someone?

Get in touch below and we will schedule a time to connect!

Find lawyers and attorneys by city

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Bill of Rights

By: History.com Editors

Updated: July 28, 2023 | Original: October 27, 2009

After the Declaration of Independence in 1776, the Founding Fathers turned to the composition of the states’ and then the federal Constitution. Although a Bill of Rights to protect the citizens was not initially deemed important, the Constitution’s supporters realized it was crucial to achieving ratification. Thanks largely to the efforts of James Madison , the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution —were ratified on December 15, 1791.

Influence of Magna Carta

The roots of the Bill of Rights lie deep in Anglo-American history. In 1215 England’s King John, under pressure from rebellious barons, put his seal to Magna Carta , which protected subjects against royal abuses of power. Among Magna Carta’s more important provisions are its requirement that proceedings and prosecutions be according to “the law of the land”–the forerunner of “due process of law”–and a ban on the sale, denial, or delay of justice.

In response to arbitrary actions of Charles I, Parliament in 1628 adopted the Petition of Right, condemning unlawful imprisonments and also providing that there should be no tax “without common consent of parliament.” In 1689, capping the Glorious Revolution (which placed William and Mary on the throne), Parliament adopted the Bill of Rights. Not only does its name anticipate the American document of a century later, the English Bill of Rights anticipates some of the American bill’s specific provisions—for example, the Eighth Amendment’s ban on excessive bail and fines and on cruel and unusual punishment.

The idea of written documents protecting individual liberties took early root in England’s American colonies. Colonial charters (such as the 1606 Charter for Virginia ) declared that those who migrated to the New World should enjoy the same “privileges, franchises, and immunities” as if they lived in England. In the years leading up to the break with the mother country (especially after the Stamp Act of 1765), Americans wrote tracts and adopted resolutions resting their claim of rights on Magna Carta, on the colonial charters, and on the teachings of natural law.

Constitutional Convention

Once independence had been declared in 1776, the American states turned immediately to the writing of state constitutions and state bills of rights. In Williamsburg, George Mason was the principal architect of Virginia 's Declaration of Rights. That document, which wove Lockean notions of natural rights with concrete protections against specific abuses, was the model for bills of rights in other states and, ultimately, for the federal Bill of Rights. (Mason’s declaration was also influential in the framing , in 1789, of France’s Declaration of Rights of Man and the Citizen).

In 1787, at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Mason remarked that he “wished the plan had been prefaced by a Bill of Rights.” Elbridge Gerry moved for the appointment of a committee to prepare such a bill, but the delegates, without debate, defeated the motion. They did not oppose the principle of a bill of rights; they simply thought it unnecessary, in light of the theory that the new federal government would be one of enumerated powers only. Some of the Framers were also skeptical of the utility of what James Madison called “parchment barriers” against majorities; they looked, for protection, to structural arrangements such as separation of powers and checks and balances .

Opponents of ratification quickly seized upon the absence of a bill of rights and Federalists, especially Madison, soon realized that they must offer to add amendments to the Constitution after its ratification. Only by making such a pledge were the Constitution’s supporters able to achieve ratification in such closely divided states as New York and Virginia.

James Madison Drafts Amendments

In the First Congress, Madison undertook to fulfill his promise. Carefully sifting amendments from proposals made in the state ratifying conventions, Madison steered his project through the shoals of indifference on the part of some members (who thought the House had more important work to do) and outright hostility on the part of others (Antifederalists who hoped for a second convention to hobble the powers of the federal government). In September 1789 the House and Senate accepted a conference report laying out the language of proposed amendments to the Constitution.

Within six months of the time the amendments–the Bill of Rights–had been submitted to the states, nine had ratified them. Two more states were needed; Virginia’s ratification, on December 15, 1791, made the Bill of Rights part of the Constitution. (Ten amendments were ratified; two others, dealing with the number of representatives and with the compensation of senators and representatives, were not.)

On their face, it is obvious that the amendments apply to actions by the federal government, not to actions by the states. In 1833, in Barron v. Baltimore, Chief Justice John Marshall confirmed that understanding. Barron had sued the city for damage to a wharf, resting his claim on the Fifth Amendment’s requirement that private property not be taken for public use “without just compensation.” Marshall ruled that the Fifth Amendment was intended “solely as a limitation on the exercise of power by the government of the United States, and is not applicable to the legislation of the states.”

Post-Bill of Rights Amendments

The Civil War and Reconstruction brought, in their wake, the Fourteenth Amendment, which declares, among other things, that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” In those few words lay the seed of a revolution in American constitutional law. That revolution began to take form in 1947, in Justice Hugo Black’s dissent in Adamson v. California. Reviewing the history of the Fourteenth Amendment’s adoption, Black concluded that history “conclusively demonstrates” that the amendment was meant to ensure that “no state could deprive its citizens of the privileges and protections of the Bill of Rights.”

Justice Black’s “wholesale incorporation” theory has never been adopted by the Supreme Court . During the heyday of the Warren Court, in the 1960s, however, the justices embarked on a process of “selective incorporation.” In each case, the Court asked whether a specific provision of the Bill of Rights was essential to “fundamental fairness”; if it was, then it must apply to the states as it does to the federal government. 

Through this process, nearly all the important provisions of the Bill of Rights now apply to the states. A partial list would include the First Amendment’s rights of speech, press, and religion; the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination; and the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel, to a speedy and public trial, and to trial by jury.

The original Constitution has been amended a number of times—for example, to provide for direct election of senators and to give the vote to eighteen-year-olds . The Bill of Rights, however, has never been amended. There is, of course, sharp debate over Supreme Court interpretation of specific provisions, especially where social interests (such as the control of traffic in drugs) seem to come into tension with provisions of the Bill of Rights (such as the Fourth Amendment). Such debate notwithstanding, there is no doubt that the Bill of Rights, as symbol and substance, lies at the heart of American conceptions of individual liberty, limited government and the rule of law.

The Bill of Rights

Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Amendment III No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

HISTORY Vault: U.S. Presidents

Stream U.S. Presidents documentaries and your favorite HISTORY series, commercial-free

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Assignment of Rights Example: Everything You Need to Know

A good assignment of rights example is if a party was entitled to collect $100 for painting, they can transfer the right to receive payment to another party. 3 min read updated on February 01, 2023

Updated October 28, 2020:

A good assignment of rights example is if a party was entitled to collect $100 for painting, they can transfer the right to receive payment to another party. An assignment contract takes place when one party to an existing contract (the assignor) transfers the contract's obligations and benefits to another party (the assignee). 

What Is an Assignment Agreement?

A contract assignment occurs when a party assigns its contractual rights to a third party. The benefit the issuing party would have received from the contract is now assigned to the third party. The party appointing their rights is referred to as the assignor, while the party obtaining the rights is the assignee. Essentially, the assignor prefers that the assignee reverses roles and assumes the contractual rights and obligations as stated in the contract.

Before this can occur, all parties to the original contract must be notified. The party creating the assignment usually does so with the motive of profit. Generally, assignments are perfectly legal. In specific situations, they may be illegal when they have been prohibited by a clause in the contract or prohibited by law.

Use of an Assignment Agreement

In situations where you don't have the staff to perform a task, it may be necessary to outsource the work to another party. Assignment agreements are created to formally transfer the contractual responsibilities and rights to a third party, while also making sure to preserve your own obligations and legal rights. The use of an assignment agreement is appropriate when you're:

• Handing over your contractual responsibilities to a third party
• Taking over contracts or responsibilities held by another party

A contract assignment may also be referred to as an assignment agreement. An assignment agreement should include the:

• Name of the party transferring their contractual duties
• Name of the party receiving the contractual obligations and rights
• Third-party, or obligor, to the original contract
• Name of the actual contract, along with the expiration date
• If and when the obligor's approval has been received
• Specific date the contract will take effect
• State laws that govern the contract

Parties Involved in a Contract Assignment

Generally, a contract assignment is made up of the following parties:

• Obligor: The party that is committed to transferring benefits or rights to the party specified in the contract. The obligor is most likely the party that initially makes the contract.
• Assignor: The party that is the initial beneficiary of the benefits or rights. They are responsible for making the assignment. In other words, they will be handing over the rights they were initially going to receive.
• Assignee:  The party that will be accepting the benefits and rights from the assignor. A transfer may have multiple assignees.

The steps in an assignment are:

• The obligor creates a contract with the assignor.
• The rights are transferred from the assignor to the assignee.
• The assignee is paid the benefits from the obligor.

How Is a Contract Assignment Created?

In most cases, it is not necessary to notify the obligor of an assignment. The assignor needs to definitively establish their intent in assigning rights to the assignee. Generally speaking, assignment contracts can be both written and oral. However, it is recommended that the contract is written. 

It is important that the contract is written in the present tense. If any past or future tense is used, it will make the contract legally nonbinding.

How Assignments Work

The specific language used in the contract will determine how the assignment plays out. For example , one contract may prohibit an assignment, while another contract may require that all parties involved agree to it before proceeding. Remember, an assignment of a contract does not necessarily alleviate an assignor from all liability. Many contracts include an assurance clause guaranteeing performance. In other words, the initial parties to the contract guarantee the assignee will achieve the desired goal.

When Assignments Will Not Be Enforced

The following situations indicate when an  assignment of a contract is not enforced:

• The contract specifically prohibits the assignment.
• The assignment drastically changes the expected outcome.
• The assignment is against public policy or illegal.
• The contract contains a no-assignment clause.
• The assignment is for a future right that would only be attainable in a contract in the future.
• The contract hasn't been finalized or written yet.

If you need help with an assignment of rights, you can  post your job  on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.

Hire the top business lawyers and save up to 60% on legal fees

Content Approved by UpCounsel

• Assignment Contract Law
• Assignment of Rights and Obligations Under a Contract
• Legal Assignment
• Assignment Law
• What Is the Definition of Assigns
• Assignment Of Contracts
• Partial Assignment of Contract
• Assignment of Contract Rights
• Delegation vs Assignment
• Consent to Assignment

America's Founding Documents

The Bill of Rights: What Does it Say?

The bill of rights.

The Bill of Rights is the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution. It spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government. It guarantees civil rights and liberties to the individual—like freedom of speech, press, and religion. It sets rules for due process of law and reserves all powers not delegated to the Federal Government to the people or the States. And it specifies that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The First Amendment

The First Amendment provides several rights protections: to express ideas through speech and the press, to assemble or gather with a group to protest or for other reasons, and to ask the government to fix problems. It also protects the right to religious beliefs and practices. It prevents the government from creating or favoring a religion.

The Second Amendment

The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms.

The Third Amendment

The Third Amendment prevents government from forcing homeowners to allow soldiers to use their homes . Before the Revolutionary War, laws gave British soldiers the right to take over private homes.

The Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment bars the government from unreasonable search and seizure of an individual or their private property.

The Fifth Amendment

The Fifth Amendment provides several protections for people accused of crimes. It states that serious criminal charges must be started by a grand jury .  A person cannot be tried twice for the same offense ( double jeopardy ) or have property taken away without just compensation . People have the right against self-incrimination and cannot be imprisoned without due process of law (fair procedures and trials).

The Sixth Amendment

The Sixth Amendment provides additional protections to people accused of crimes, such as the right to a speedy and public trial, trial by an impartial jury in criminal cases, and to be informed of criminal charges. Witnesses must face the accused, and the accused is allowed his or her own witnesses and to be represented by a lawyer. 

The Seventh Amendment

The Seventh Amendment extends the right to a jury trial in Federal civil cases.

The Eighth Amendment

The Eighth Amendment bars excessive bail and fines and cruel and unusual punishment.

The Ninth Amendment

The Ninth Amendment states that listing specific rights in the Constitution does not mean that people do not have other rights that have not been spelled out.

The Tenth Amendment

The Tenth Amendment says that the Federal Government only has those powers delegated in the Constitution. If it isn’t listed, it belongs to the states or to the people.

Back to Main Page How Did it Happen?

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

US government and civics

Course: us government and civics   >   unit 3.

• The Bill of Rights: an introduction

The Bill of Rights: lesson overview

• The Bill of Rights

Rights and liberties protected in the Bill of Rights

Key takeaways

Review questions, want to join the conversation.

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

• 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

Kluwer Patent Blog

A cautionary tale for assignment of rights in u.s. patents.

In Omni MedSci, Inc. v. Apple Inc. , ___ F.4th ___, Nos. 2020-1715, -1716 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 2, 2021), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the University of Michigan’s technology transfer bylaws did not constitute an automatic assignment of a professor’s patent rights. This decision has important implications for the drafting of employee agreements as they relate to the ownership of inventions, which in the U.S. vest initially in the inventors.

In 2012, Dr. Islam, a tenured professor at University of Michigan (“UM”), took an unpaid leave-of-absence in order to start a new company, Omni. During his leave, Dr. Islam filed several provisional patent applications that he expected to form the backbone of the IP portfolio for the new company. In 2013, after resuming work at UM, Dr. Islam assigned the issued patents to Omni.

Omni subsequently brought suit against Apple for infringement of two patents descended from the provisional applications filed by Dr. Islam during his leave. Apple moved to dismiss alleging that Omni lacked standing because UM was the real patent owner. Apple argued that UM’s bylaws automatically transferred legal title to the patents to UM, leaving Dr. Islam with no rights to assign to Omni. The district court rejected Apple’s arguments and denied the motion; in a split decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed.

Did UM’s Bylaws Effectuate an Automatic Assignment?

Like all professors at UM, Dr. Islam signed an employment agreement when he was first hired in 1995 in which he agreed to abide by UM’s bylaws.  Those bylaws provided that patents “resulting from activities which have received no support … from the University shall be the property of the inventor,” whereas patents based on activities supported by the University “shall be the property of the University.” The question for the court was whether the bylaws created an obligation to assign or constituted an automatic assignment of the patents at issue, which would have automatically transferred title to UM and left Dr. Islam with no rights in the invention to assign to Omni.

The distinction between automatic assignments and obligations to assign is nicely illustrated by the Stanford v. Roche case. There, Professor Holodniy, a Stanford professor, conducted research at Cetus pursuant to a confidentiality agreement. After his return to Stanford, Professor Holodniy assigned the resulting patent applications to Stanford. When Stanford subsequently sued Roche, Roche raised an ownership defense based on the language in the confidentiality agreement with Cetus. The Cetus agreement stated that Holodniy “will assign and do[es] hereby assign” his rights to Cetus for inventions made “as a consequence of [his] access” to Cetus. By contrast, Holodiny’s employment agreement with Stanford stated that he “agree[d] to assign” rights in inventions resulting from his employment. The Federal Circuit held that the Cetus contract, by virtue of its present-tense “do[es] hereby assign” language, automatically assigned rights to Cetus, but the Stanford contract’s future-tense language did not.

In Omni , the Federal Circuit observed that UM’s bylaws did “not unambiguously constitute either a present automatic assignment or a promise to assign in the future.” The express purpose of the bylaws was, however, to determine under which conditions employees were obliged to assign their inventions to UM and when they would own it themselves. Moreover, after disclosing an invention to the Office of Technology Transfer, employees at UM were asked to sign an Invention Report, which referenced the bylaws and provided: “As required, I/we hereby assign.” The Federal Circuit contrasted the “unambiguous present assignment” in the Invention Report with the language in the bylaws, noting that “[e]ach case in which [the] court found a present automatic assignment examined contractual language with a present tense executing verb. Such present-tense active verbs effectuate a present action.” Thus, the Federal Circuit concluded that the bylaws were “most naturally read as a statement of intended disposition and a promise of a potential future assignment, not as a present automatic transfer.”

Takeaways: How to Play it Safe

While the Federal Circuit noted that there are no “magic words,” the following language has been held to constitute an automatic assignment: “the Employee assigns all of his or her right, interest, or title in any invention to the Employer” ( SiRF Tech v. Int’l Trade Comm’n ); “agrees to and does hereby grant and assign” ( DDB Techs. ); “hereby conveys, transfers, and assigns” ( Speedplay v. Bebop ); and “agrees to grant and does hereby grant” ( FilmTec Corp. v. Allied-Signal ). By contrast, passive verbs in indefinite or future tense are less likely to effectuate a present assignment.  Indeed, agreements providing that an invention “shall be the property of … and all rights thereto will be assigned” to an employer have been held not to be an automatic assignment, but rather, an obligation to assign in the future. By following the language of these precedents, employers and employees can ensure their agreements provide for the desired ownership of inventions.

Concluding Remarks

In dissent, Judge Newman argued that the holding “overturns decades of unchallenged understanding and implementation of the University’s employment agreement and policy documents.” Whether or not this is true, institutions and corporations would be well-advised to review the language used in their employment agreements to ensure it achieves the intended purpose.

_____________________________

To make sure you do not miss out on regular updates from the Kluwer Patent Blog, please subscribe here .

Kluwer IP Law

The 2022 Future Ready Lawyer survey showed that 79% of lawyers think that the importance of legal technology will increase for next year. With Kluwer IP Law you can navigate the increasingly global practice of IP law with specialized, local and cross-border information and tools from every preferred location. Are you, as an IP professional, ready for the future? Learn how Kluwer IP Law can support you.

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Copyrightlaws.com: Copyright courses and education in plain English

Copyrightlaws.com is the place for copyright education. Online eTutorials and Certificate programs to demystify copyright law.

• Certificate Programs
• Join Our List

8 January 2023

Moral Rights in U.S. Copyright Law

Moral rights in U.S. copyright law benefit authors or creators of select copyright-protected materials: certain works of visual art. The purpose of moral rights is to attribute the author of a work and protect their reputation.

Economic rights (such as the rights of reproduction and public performance), which are more commonly understood than moral rights, provide creators with control over their copyright-protected materials and a way to earn compensation from exploiting their works.

We're here to help if you're interested in more in-depth information about economic rights, moral rights, and copyright law in general in the U.S.

Moral Rights in International Copyright Law

Moral rights originate from the French droit moral and are often described as being personal to the author or creator of a work.

Moral rights have a long history in international copyright law. Article 6bis of the leading international copyright treaty, the Berne Convention , states:

(1) Independently of the author’s economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation.

The 181 Berne member states, including the U.S., must meet the minimum standards set out in Berne, including those for moral rights. Thus, each Berne member state must provide for at least the moral rights of paternity and integrity. Countries are free to go beyond these minimum moral rights and provide further rights, such as the right of association, or the right to withdraw permission to use a work.

Interesting Facts About Moral Rights

Some facts you should know about moral rights:

• In some countries, authors may waive their moral rights (e.g., Canada) whereas in other countries (e.g., France) they may not.
• The duration of moral rights varies from country to country. In the U.S., moral rights expire upon the death of the author, in Canada they generally last 70 years after the author's death, and in France they are perpetual.

Right of Paternity

The right of paternity refers to the author’s right to have their name on a work, to use a pseudonym and to remain anonymous. For example, an author has the right to have their name on the cover of their book (this is true even if they've assigned copyright to someone else). This right is often referred to as the right of attribution.

Right of Integrity

The second component of moral rights, as set out in Berne, is the right of integrity. This is the right of the author to object to any changes to their work that may harm their reputation as an author. Witness testimony about this harm would determine this question of fact in a courtroom.

For example, manipulating a scanned photograph may be a violation of moral rights (the right of integrity), if prejudicial to the honor or reputation of the author of the photograph.

The U.S. amended its Copyright Act to include moral rights when it joined the Berne Convention in 1989. However, while the moral rights set out in Berne are intended to apply to all types of copyright-protected works, the U.S. took a narrower interpretation of the moral rights requirements. In some circles, there is controversy as to whether the U.S. is in fact complying with Berne.

Professor Roberta Rosenthal Kwall states in her book, The Soul of Creativity , that "the United States is out of step with global norms by not recognizing more substantial authors' rights."

In the U.S., various federal and state laws arguably protect moral rights, in addition to explicit protection through an amendment to the U.S. Copyright Act by the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) of 1990. Some states, such as New York and California, also have moral rights protection for visual artists.

U.S. Moral Rights Apply to Specific Works of Visual Art

Unlike Berne, VARA protects only one group of authors: visual artists, more accurately those who create “works of visual art.” These works include:

• Photographs, existing in a single copy or a limited edition of 200 or fewer signed and numbered copies

VARA explicitly excludes:

• Motion pictures
• Electronic publications
• Applied art

VARA gives visual artists the right to claim authorship in their work, and to prevent the use of their name in association with a work. In addition, VARA grants artists the right to prevent the intentional distortion, mutilation or other objectionable modification of their works. Artists who qualify for federal moral rights protection can also prevent any destruction of certain works.

Read the moral rights provisions in 17 U.S. Code S 106A, Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity .

U.S. Moral Rights Waivers and Duration

Under VARA, moral rights are not transferable by license or assignment, but are waivable (in writing). The rights end with the life of the author (unlike economic rights, which endure for 70 years after the death of the author).

Study on U.S. Moral Rights

On 23 January 2017, the United States Copyright Office announced its study on U.S. moral rights for authors. The study focused on the moral rights of attribution and integrity. It examined how the U.S. Copyright Act and other federal and state laws protect these moral rights and whether it's necessary to provide further moral rights protection in the U.S.

On 23 April 2019, the USCO published its report on moral rights. See Authors, Attribution, and Integrity: Examining Moral Rights in the United States . As stated in the report's executive summary, moral rights has not been the topic of major policy focus and this Report is the first comprehensive review in three decades of the moral rights regime in the U.S.

The report calls the U.S. moral rights landscape "complex" and a "patchwork" of protection. It concludes that the patchwork of the Copyright Act's derivative work right, state moral rights laws and contract law is "generally working well and should not be changed." At the current time, "there is no need for the creation of a blanket moral rights statute."

It then goes on to discuss improvements to the moral rights regime in the U.S. and provides a roadmap for doing so. For an interesting regime of moral rights protection, read about Canada's moral rights that include attribution, integrity and association.

You may also be interested in our article Droit de Suite (right to follow), a unique right for artists that exists in some countries' copyright law, ensures that the creator of an artistic work, or their heirs, receives part of the resale value of a physical work of art.

For an in-depth understanding of copyright principles, plus hands-on application of copyright law, see our fully online  Copyright Leadership Certificate  program.

About Copyrightlaws.com

Copyright Courses

The Government restricts bans on assignment

United Kingdom |  Publication |  November 2018

Legislation now in force preventing parties from prohibiting the assignment of receivables under certain contracts.

At the moment, a contract can prohibit or restrict the parties’ ability to assign or transfer rights created under the contract. The extent of the restriction is a matter of interpretation of the clause concerned. If one of the parties to the contract attempts to assign the benefit of the contract in breach of the restriction, the purported assignment is ineffective.

One of the key assets of any business is its receivables, and restrictions on assignment can prevent the parties from factoring receivables or otherwise raising finance on them. The Government has decided that it should be easier for businesses to raise finance on their receivables. Accordingly the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 allows regulations to be made to invalidate restrictions on the assignment of receivables in particular types of contract. The regulations have now been made. They are contained in The Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018. Draft regulations published in July, have been approved by both Houses of Parliament and are now in force.

What types of contracts do the Regulations apply to?

The Regulations apply to contracts for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets under which the supplier is entitled to be paid money. But there are a number of important exclusions from their application, including the following:

• They only apply to contracts entered into on or after 31 December 2018.
• They only apply where the person who supplies the goods, services or intangible assets concerned, and is therefore entitled to the receivable, is a small or medium-sized enterprise which is not a special purpose vehicle. Whether or not an entity qualifies in any particular case requires a detailed examination of the precise wording of the
• Regulations. Counter-intuitively, the test is not applied at the time the contract is entered into, but at the time the assignment takes place.
• There is a specific exemption for contracts “for, or entered into in connection with, prescribed financial services”: These are widely defined to include “any service of a financial nature”.
• There are specific exclusions for particular types of contract, including certain commodities, project finance, energy, land, share purchase and business purchase contracts and operating leases.
• As a general rule, it would seem that the Regulations only apply to contracts governed by English law or the law of Northern Ireland, but they prevent the parties from choosing a foreign law if it can be established that the purpose of doing so was to evade the Regulations.
• The Regulations do not apply if none of the parties to the contract has entered into it in the course of carrying on a business in the United Kingdom.

What is the effect of the Regulations?

The Regulations provide that “a term in a contract has no effect to the extent that it prohibits or imposes a condition, or other restriction , on the assignment of a receivable arising under that contract or any other contract between the same parties.”

A receivable is the right to be paid any amount under a contract for the supply of goods, services, or intangible assets. The Regulations do not prevent the parties from restricting the assignment of other contract rights.

More difficult is to establish what is meant by assignment. Receivables are transferred in various ways in practice. Sometimes the transfer is outright (for instance by way of sale); and sometimes it is by way of security (for instance to secure a loan). The transfer may be effected by a statutory assignment, an equitable assignment, a charge or a trust. “Assignment” is not defined in the Regulations, and so there is some doubt as to which of these transactions are covered.

Although charges are not expressly referred to, they might be covered by the expression “assignment” if it is given a broad interpretation. But because of the uncertainty, the best course is to take an assignment by way of security over a receivable where there is, or might be, a restriction. That way, it is clear that the Regulations do apply.

Non-assignment clauses come in a variety of forms. They will be covered by the Regulations if they prohibit or impose a condition , or other restriction on the assignment of a receivable. The Regulations expressly invalidate terms which prevent the assignee from determining the validity or value of the receivable or their ability to enforce it. Whether or not the Regulations apply in any particular case will require an analysis of the precise terms of the restriction.

The Regulations will be of particular importance to businesses involved in the financing of receivables. And they will also be of concern to buyers because they will override their contractual protections.

• Financial institutions

Practice area:

• Banking and finance

Recent publications

Publication

Now in effect: New enrollment and renewal requirements for Medicaid, CHIP

Our healthcare lawyers comment on healthcare providers and MCOs that are beginning to experience the financial impacts of the end of continuous Medicaid enrollment and the reductions associated with the enhanced FMAP.

United States | June 06, 2024

Blockchain law: Beyond our borders

Legal developments concerning blockchain and digital assets are not limited to the English-speaking world or to common-law jurisdictions.

United States | May 29, 2024

Pride Month

Over one third of LGBTIQ+ people feel they need to hide who they are at work, and a fifth feel that being LGBTIQ+ limits their job opportunities, according to a recent Stonewall survey.

Global | May 28, 2024

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .

© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023

• Canada (English)
• Canada (Français)
• United States
• Deutschland (Deutsch)
• Germany (English)
• The Netherlands
• Türkiye
• United Kingdom
• South Africa
• Hong Kong SAR
• Marshall Islands
• Nordic region

• Patent Laws, Regulations, Policies & Procedures
• Manual of Patent Examining Procedure
• Chapter 0300
• Section 301

301 Ownership/Assignability of Patents and Applications [R-10.2019]

35 u.s.c. 261   ownership; assignment..

Subject to the provisions of this title, patents shall have the attributes of personal property. The Patent and Trademark Office shall maintain a register of interests in patents and applications for patents and shall record any document related thereto upon request, and may require a fee therefor.

Applications for patent, patents, or any interest therein, shall be assignable in law by an instrument in writing. The applicant, patentee, or his assigns or legal representatives may in like manner grant and convey an exclusive right under his application for patent, or patents, to the whole or any specified part of the United States.

A certificate of acknowledgment under the hand and official seal of a person authorized to administer oaths within the United States, or, in a foreign country, of a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States or an officer authorized to administer oaths whose authority is proved by a certificate of a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or apostille of an official designated by a foreign country which, by treaty or convention, accords like effect to apostilles of designated officials in the United States, shall be prima facie evidence of the execution of an assignment, grant, or conveyance of a patent or application for patent.

An interest that constitutes an assignment, grant, or conveyance shall be void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee for valuable consideration, without notice, unless it is recorded in the Patent and Trademark Office within three months from its date or prior to the date of such subsequent purchase or mortgage.

35 U.S.C. 262   Joint owners.

In the absence of any agreement to the contrary, each of the joint owners of a patent may make, use, offer to sell, or sell the patented invention within the United States, or import the patented invention into the United States, without the consent of and without accounting to the other owners.

37 CFR 3.1  Definitions.

For purposes of this part, the following definitions shall apply:

Application means a national application for patent, an international patent application that designates the United States of America, an international design application that designates the United States of America, or an application to register a trademark under section 1 or 44 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051 or 15 U.S.C. 1126, unless otherwise indicated.

Assignment means a transfer by a party of all or part of its right, title and interest in a patent, patent application, registered mark or a mark for which an application to register has been filed.

Document means a document which a party requests to be recorded in the Office pursuant to § 3.11 and which affects some interest in an application, patent, or registration.

Office means the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Recorded document means a document which has been recorded in the Office pursuant to § 3.11 .

Registration means a trademark registration issued by the Office.

Ownership of a patent gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing into the United States the invention claimed in the patent. 35 U.S.C. 154(a)(1) . Ownership of the patent does not furnish the owner with the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell, or import the claimed invention because there may be other legal considerations precluding same (e.g., existence of another patent owner with a dominant patent, failure to obtain FDA approval of the patented invention, an injunction by a court against making the product of the invention, or a national security related issue).

For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, the original applicant is presumed to be the owner of the application for an original patent. See 37 CFR 3.73(a) . For applications filed before September 16, 2012, the ownership of the patent (or the application for the patent) initially vests in the named inventors of the invention of the patent. See Beech Aircraft Corp. v. EDO Corp., 990 F.2d 1237, 1248, 26 USPQ2d 1572, 1582 (Fed. Cir. 1993). A patent or patent application is assignable by an instrument in writing, and the assignment of the patent, or patent application, transfers to the assignee(s) an alienable (transferable) ownership interest in the patent or application. 35 U.S.C. 261 .

“Assignment,” in general, is the act of transferring to another the ownership of one’s property, i.e., the interest and rights to the property. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office cannot explain or interpret laws that govern assignments and related documents, nor can it act as counselor for individuals. Assignments and other documents are contracts that are governed by the relevant state or jurisdictional law.

In 37 CFR 3.1 , assignment of patent rights is defined as “a transfer by a party of all or part of its right, title and interest in a patent [or] patent application....” An assignment of a patent, or patent application, is the transfer to another of a party’s entire ownership interest or a percentage of that party’s ownership interest in the patent or application. In order for an assignment to take place, the transfer to another must include the entirety of the bundle of rights that is associated with the ownership interest, i.e., all of the bundle of rights that are inherent in the right, title and interest in the patent or patent application. 35 U.S.C. 261 requires transfer of ownership by an assignment to be in writing. See Realvirt, LLC v. Lee, 195 F.Supp.3d 847, 859 (E.D. Va. 2016).

As compared to assignment of patent rights, the licensing of a patent transfers a bundle of rights which is less than the entire ownership interest, e.g., rights that may be limited as to time, geographical area, or field of use. A patent license is, in effect, a contractual agreement that the patent owner will not sue the licensee for patent infringement if the licensee makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, or imports the claimed invention, as long as the licensee fulfills its obligations and operates within the bounds delineated by the license agreement.

An exclusive license may be granted by the patent owner to a licensee. The exclusive license prevents the patent owner (or any other party to whom the patent owner might wish to sell a license) from competing with the exclusive licensee, as to the geographic region, the length of time, and/or the field of use, set forth in the license agreement.

A license is not an assignment of the patent. Even if the license is an exclusive license, it is not an assignment of patent rights in the patent or application.

Individual ownership - An individual entity may own the entire right, title and interest of the patent property. This occurs where there is only one inventor, and the inventor has not assigned the patent property. Alternatively, it occurs where all parties having ownership interest (all inventors and assignees) assign the patent property to one party.

Joint ownership - Multiple parties may together own the entire right, title and interest of the patent property. This occurs when any of the following cases exist:

• (A) Multiple partial assignees of the patent property;
• (B) Multiple inventors who have not assigned their right, title and interest; or
• (C) A combination of partial assignee(s), and inventor(s) who have not assigned their right, title and interest.

Each individual inventor may only assign the interest he or she holds; thus, assignment by one joint inventor renders the assignee a partial assignee. A partial assignee likewise may only assign the interest it holds; thus, assignment by a partial assignee renders a subsequent assignee a partial assignee. All parties having any portion of the ownership in the patent property must act together as a composite entity in patent matters before the Office.

An assignment can be made of record in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) in two different ways, for two different purposes. The differences are important to note:

• (A) An assignment can be made of record in the assignment records of the Office as provided for in 37 CFR Part 3 . Recordation of the assignment provides legal notice to the public of the assignment. It should be noted that recording of the assignment is merely a ministerial act; it is not an Office determination of the validity of the assignment document or the effect of the assignment document on the ownership of the patent property. See 37 CFR 3.54 , MPEP § 317.03 , and Realvirt, LLC v. Lee, 195 F.Supp.3d 847, 862-3 (E.D. Va. 2016). For a patent to issue to an assignee, the assignment must have been recorded or filed for recordation in accordance with 37 CFR 3.11 . See 37 CFR 3.81(a) .
• (B) An assignment can be made of record in the file of a patent application, patent, or other patent proceeding (e.g., reexamination proceeding). This step may be necessary to permit the assignee to “take action” in the application, patent, or other patent proceeding under the conditions set forth in 37 CFR 1.46 and 37 CFR 3.81(a) and MPEP § 325 (for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012) or under the conditions set forth in pre-AIA 37 CFR 3.73 and MPEP § 324 (for applications filed before September 16, 2012). Recordation of an assignment in the assignment records of the Office does not , by itself, permit the assignee to take action in the application, patent, or other patent proceeding.

Additionally, for applications filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) , 363 , or 385 on or after September 16, 2012, an assignment may contain the statements required to be made in an oath or declaration (“assignment-statement”), and if the assignment is made of record in the assignment records of the Office, then the assignment may be utilized as the oath or declaration. See 35 U.S.C. 115(e) , 37 CFR 1.63(e) , and MPEP §§ 302.07 , 317 , and MPEP § 602.01(a) .

301.01 Accessibility of Assignment Records [R-10.2019]

37 cfr 1.12  assignment records open to public inspection..

• (1) Separate assignment records are maintained in the United States Patent and Trademark Office for patents and trademarks. The assignment records, relating to original or reissue patents, including digests and indexes (for assignments recorded on or after May 1, 1957), and published patent applications are open to public inspection at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and copies of patent assignment records may be obtained upon request and payment of the fee set forth in § 1.19 of this chapter. See § 2.200 of this chapter regarding trademark assignment records.
• (2) All records of assignments of patents recorded before May 1, 1957, are maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The records are open to public inspection. Certified and uncertified copies of those assignment records are provided by NARA upon request and payment of the fees required by NARA.
• (b) Assignment records, digests, and indexes relating to any pending or abandoned patent application, which is open to the public pursuant to § 1.11 or for which copies or access may be supplied pursuant to § 1.14 , are available to the public. Copies of any assignment records, digests, and indexes that are not available to the public shall be obtainable only upon written authority of an inventor, the applicant, the assignee or an assignee of an undivided part interest, or a patent practitioner of record, or upon a showing that the person seeking such information is a bona fide prospective or actual purchaser, mortgagee, or licensee of such application, unless it shall be necessary to the proper conduct of business before the Office or as provided in this part.
• (1) Be in the form of a petition including the fee set forth in § 1.17(g) ; or
• (2) Include written authority granting access to the member of the public to the particular assignment records from an inventor, the applicant, the assignee or an assignee of an undivided part interest, or a patent practitioner of record.
• (d) An order for a copy of an assignment or other document should identify the reel and frame number where the assignment or document is recorded. If a document is identified without specifying its correct reel and frame, an extra charge as set forth in § 1.21(j) will be made for the time consumed in making a search for such assignment.

Assignment documents relating to patents, published patent applications, registrations of trademarks, and applications for registration of trademarks are open to public inspection. Records related to assignments of patents, and patent applications that have been published as patent application publications are available on the USPTO website. Images of assignment documents recorded June 1998 and later are also viewable on the Office website. To view images of earlier-recorded assignment documents, members of the public must place an order pursuant to 37 CFR 1.12(d) .

The Office will not open only certain parts of an assignment document to public inspection. If such a document contains two or more items, any one of which, if alone, would be open to such inspection, then the entire document will be open. Thus, if a document covers either a trademark or a patent in addition to one or more patent applications, it will be available to the public ab initio; and if it covers a number of patent applications, it will be so available as soon as any one of them is published or patented. Documents relating only to one or more pending applications for patent which have not been published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b) will not be open to public inspection.

Copies of assignment records relating to pending or abandoned patent applications which are open to the public pursuant to 37 CFR 1.11 or for which copies or access may be supplied pursuant to 37 CFR 1.14 are available to the public. For pending or abandoned applications which are not open to the public pursuant to 37 CFR 1.11 or for which copies or access may not be supplied pursuant to 37 CFR 1.14 , information related thereto is only obtainable upon a proper showing of written authority. For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, the written authority must be from (A) an inventor, (B) an applicant, (C) the assignee or an assignee of an undivided part interest, (D) a patent practitioner of record, or (E) a person with written authority from (A), (B), or (C) or (D). See 37 CFR 1.12 . For applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, the written authority must be from the applicant or applicant’s assignee or from the attorney or agent of either, or upon a showing that the person seeking such information is a bona fide prospective or actual purchaser, mortgagee, or licensee of such application. See pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.12 .

If the application on which a patent was granted is a division, continuation, or continuation-in-part of an earlier application, the assignment records of that earlier application will be open to public inspection because copies or access may be supplied to the earlier application pursuant to 37 CFR 1.14 .

Assignment records relating to reissue applications are open to public inspection because reissue applications are open to public inspection pursuant to 37 CFR 1.11(b) .

Requests for abstracts of title for assignments of patents recorded after May 1, 1957, are provided by the Certification Division upon request and payment of fee required in 37 CFR 1.19 . Requests for copies of pre-1957 records for patents should be directed to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Since these records are maintained by NARA, it is more expeditious to request copies directly from NARA, rather than from the Office, which would then have to route the requests to NARA. Payment of the fees required by NARA should accompany all requests for copies.

All assignment records from 1837 to April 30, 1957 for patents are now maintained and are open for public inspection in the National Archives Research Room located at the Washington National Records Center Building, 4205 Suitland Road, Suitland, Maryland 20746 and at the Civilian Records Division of the National Archives at College Park, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740-6001. Assignment records from before 1837 are not available. Individuals should check the National Archives website, www.archives.gov , for how to obtain information from these locations.

• 301.01-Accessibility of Assignment Records
• 302.01-Assignment Document Must Be Copy for Recording
• 302.02-Translation of Assignment Document
• 302.03-Identifying Patent or Application
• 302.04-Foreign Assignee May Designate Domestic Representative
• 302.05-Address of Assignee
• 302.06-Fee for Recording
• 302.07-Assignment Document Must Be Accompanied by a Cover Sheet 
• 302.08-Mailing Address for Submitting Assignment Documents
• 302.09-Facsimile Submission of Assignment Documents
• 302.10-Electronic Submission of Assignment Documents
• 303-Assignment Documents Not Endorsed on Pending Applications
• 304‑305-[Reserved]
• 306.01-Assignment of an Application Claiming the Benefits of a Provisional Application
• 307-Issue to Non-Applicant Assignee
• 308-Issue to Applicant
• 309-Restrictions Upon Employees of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
• 310-Government License Rights to Contractor-Owned Inventions Made Under Federally Sponsored Research and Development
• 311-Filing of Notice of Arbitration Awards
• 312-[Reserved]
• 313-Recording of Licenses, Security Interests, and Documents Other Than Assignments
• 314-Certificates of Change of Name or of Merger
• 315-Indexing Against a Recorded Certificate
• 316-[Reserved]
• 317.01-Recording Date
• 317.02-Correction of Unrecorded Returned Documents and Cover Sheets
• 317.03-Effect of Recording
• 318-Documents Not to be Placed in Files
• 319-[Reserved]
• 320-Title Reports
• 321‑322-[Reserved]
• 323.01(a)-Typographical Errors in Cover Sheet
• 323.01(b)-Typographical Errors in Recorded Assignment Document
• 323.01(c)-Assignment or Change of Name Improperly Filed and Recorded by Another Person Against Owner’s Application or Patent
• 323.01(d)-Expungement of Assignment Records
• 324-Establishing Right of Assignee To Take Action in Application Filed Before September 16, 2012
• 325-Establishing Right of Assignee To Take Action in Application Filed On or After September 16, 2012

• Accessibility
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Emergencies/Security Alerts
• Information Quality Guidelines
• Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act
• Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation (NoFEAR) Act
• Budget & Performance
• Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
• Department of Commerce NoFEAR Act Report
• Regulations.gov
• STOP!Fakes.gov
• Department of Commerce
• Strategy Targeting Organized Piracy (STOP!)
• USPTO Webmaster

• More Blog Popular
• Who's Who Legal
• Instruct Counsel
• My newsfeed
• Save & file
• View original
• Follow Please login to follow content.

add to folder:

• My saved (default)

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Find out more about Lexology or get in touch by visiting our About page.

Copyright transfer, assignment and licensing in the United States

Use the  Lexology Navigator  tool to compare the answers in this article with those from 20+ other jurisdictions.

Transfer, assignment and licensing

Transfer and assignment

What rules, restrictions and procedures govern the transfer and assignment of copyright? Are any formalities required to secure the legal effect of the transfer or assignment?

Any or all of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights or any subdivision of those rights may be transferred, but the transfer of exclusive rights is not valid unless that transfer is in writing and signed by either the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner’s duly authorised agent. However, the written transfer does not need to be made at the time of assignment, and a later written document confirming the agreement is sufficient to prove the assignment. Transfer of a right on a non-exclusive basis does not require a written agreement. A copyright may also be conveyed by operation of law. Additionally, it may be bequeathed by will or pass as personal property by the applicable laws of intestate succession. Copyright is a personal property right and is subject to the various state laws and regulations that govern the ownership, inheritance or transfer of personal property as well as terms of contracts or conduct of business. The recording of a transfer with the Copyright Office is not required to make the transfer valid between the parties; however, it provides certain legal advantages and may be required to validate the transfer as against third parties. To bring an infringement suit in court, a copyright owner needs proof of an unbroken chain of title going back to the author of the work.

What rules, restrictions and procedures govern copyright licensing?

Copyright rights can be licensed on an exclusive and non-exclusive basis. An exclusive licence generally occurs when a copyright owner transfers one or more, but not all, of its exclusive rights but retains others. The holder of an exclusive licence becomes the owner of the transferred right and as such is entitled to sue any party that infringes the right while the licensee owns it. A non-exclusive licence gives the licensee the right to exercise one or more of the copyright owner’s rights, but does not prevent the copyright owner from giving others permission to exercise the same right.

Are there any special provisions governing sub-licensing?

Exclusive licensees may sub-license only with the consent of the licensor.

What collective licensing bodies operate in your jurisdiction and how are their activities regulated?

Private organisations such as the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Broadcast Music, Inc and SESAC Inc grant and administer licences for the public performance of musical works on behalf of the copyright owners of such works.

Click here to view the full article.

Filed under

• Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
• Copyright infringement

Organisations

• US Copyright Office
• Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998 (UK)
• US District Court for Central District of California
• US District Court for the Southern District of New York
• US District Court for Northern District of California

Popular articles from this firm

The business case for diversity and corporate diversity legislation *, term sofr: context and latest developments for us dollar lending in the uk *, collection, storage and transfer of data in the usa *, blocking .xxx domain names *, copyright in the united states *.

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected] .

Related practical resources PRO

• How-to guide How-to guide: How to develop a vulnerability disclosure program (VDP) for your organization to ensure cybersecurity (USA)
• How-to guide How-to guide: Practical steps to consider when drafting consumer arbitration agreements (USA)
• How-to guide How-to guide: How to implement a culture of compliance with competition law in your organisation (UK)

Related research hubs

• How to Login
• Use Teams on the web
• Join a meeting in Teams
• Join without a Teams account
• Join on a second device
• Join as a view-only attendee
• Join a breakout room
• Join from Google

Schedule a meeting in Teams

• Schedule from Outlook
• Schedule from Google
• Schedule with registration
• Instant meeting
• Add a dial-in number
• See all your meetings
• Invite people
• Meeting roles
• Add co-organizers
• Hide attendee names
• Tips for large Teams meeting
• Lock a meeting
• End a meeting
• Manage your calendar
• Meeting controls
• Prepare in a green room
• Share content
• Share slides
• Share sound
• Apply video filters
• Mute and unmute
• Spotlight a video
• Multitasking
• Raise your hand
• Live reactions
• Take meeting notes
• Customize your view
• Laser pointer
• Cast from a desktop
• Use a green screen
• Join as an avatar
• Customize your avatar
• Use emotes, gestures, and more
• Get started with immersive spaces
• Use in-meeting controls
• Spatial audio
• Overview of Microsoft Teams Premium
• Intelligent productivity
• Advanced meeting protection
• Engaging event experiences
• Change your background
• Meeting themes
• Audio settings
• Manage attendee audio and video
• Reduce background noise
• Voice isolation in Teams
• Mute notifications
• Use breakout rooms
• Live transcription
• Language interpretation
• Live captions
• End-to-end encryption
• Presenter modes
• Call and meeting quality
• Meeting attendance reports
• Using the lobby
• Meeting options
• Record a meeting
• Meeting recap
• Play and share a meeting recording
• Delete a recording
• Edit or delete a transcript
• Switch to town halls
• Get started
• Schedule a live event
• Invite attendees
• organizer checklist
• For tier 1 events
• Produce a live event
• Produce a live event with Teams Encoder
• Best practices
• Moderate a Q&A
• Allow anonymous presenters
• Attendee engagement report
• Recording and reports
• Attend a live event in Teams
• Participate in a Q&A
• Use live captions
• Schedule a webinar
• Customize a webinar
• Publicize a webinar
• Manage webinar registration
• Manage what attendees see
• Change webinar details
• Manage webinar emails
• Cancel a webinar
• Manage webinar recordings
• Webinar attendance report
• Get started with town hall
• Attend a town hall
• Schedule a town hall
• Customize a town hall
• Host a town hall
• Use RTMP-In
• Town hall insights
• Manage town hall recordings
• Cancel a town hall
• Can't join a meeting
• Camera isn't working
• Microphone isn't working
• My speaker isn’t working
• Breakout rooms issues
• Immersive spaces issues
• Meetings keep dropping

Add co-organizers to a meeting in Microsoft Teams

After you've invited people to your meeting, you can add up to 10 co-organizers to help manage your meeting. Co-organizers are displayed as additional organizers in the meeting participant list and have most of the capabilities of the meeting organizer.

Co-organizer capabilities

To allow co-organizers to change meeting options in a channel meeting, they must be directly invited in the channel meeting invitation.

External users can't be made co-organizers.

To allow co-organizers to manage breakout rooms, they must be from the same organization as the meeting organizer.

Add co-organizers to a meeting

To add co-organizers to a meeting:

Open a meeting in your Teams Calendar.

Make sure the people you want to add as co-organizers have already been added as required attendees.

In Choose co-organizers , select their names from the dropdown menu.

Select Save .

Note:  Co-organizers must be in the same organization as the meeting organizer, or be using a guest account in the same org.

Want to learn more? See Overview of meetings in Teams .

Related topics

Invite people to a meeting in Teams

Need more help?

Want more options.

Explore subscription benefits, browse training courses, learn how to secure your device, and more.

Microsoft 365 subscription benefits

Microsoft 365 training

Microsoft security

Accessibility center

Communities help you ask and answer questions, give feedback, and hear from experts with rich knowledge.

Ask the Microsoft Community

Microsoft Tech Community

Windows Insiders

Microsoft 365 Insiders

Was this information helpful?

Thank you for your feedback.

Opinion: The issue of human rights is on life support. Here’s how to save it

• Show more sharing options
• Copy Link URL Copied!

I once heard Jimmy Carter say that in a war there are no human rights. With the fighting in Ukraine and in Gaza front and center, that observation seems more profound than ever. Human rights as an issue may be on life support.

There are so few great examples of progress to look to. Maybe just one — Northern Ireland, finally.

In addition to major war zones, human rights are being trampled in so many places that it requires an effort to keep up with the havoc. Old alliances are cracking if not broken. Displaced people clamor for shelter and safety. The number of deaths is enormous, the disruption epic.

Opinion: How can the U.S. renew Mideast peace talks? Recognize Palestinian statehood

The Oslo accords failed. As Gaza faces Israel’s bombardment, it’s time to radically reimagine how the two sides can negotiate.

Dec. 14, 2023

The Council on Foreign Relations maintains a conflict tracker — its orange markers dot the globe. Wikipedia maps an even broader set of armed conflicts . Hostile actions are killing folks in Sudan and western New Guinea, Haiti is near collapse, criminal violence pervades Mexico, thousands die in Syria year by year.

Some of the violence is especially barbaric, as at the music festival in Israel on Oct. 7. Hostages are held for long periods of time in Russia, China, Egypt and now Gaza. Nearly a million Palestinians are fleeing any which way, seeking safety from the promised invasion of Rafah.

The consequences are obvious but hard to fathom. The old and the very young die first. Famine follows war; disease follows famine, and young adults and the middle-aged die too. Women are especially vulnerable to sexual violence, with effects that can last for a lifetime. Scores are left homeless.

Decency and sanity demand that we address these catastrophes, however massive and intransigent.

Opinion: Today’s protests are tamer than the campus unrest of the 1960s. So why the harsh response?

College presidents in the Vietnam era would have thanked their lucky stars to face the relatively low disruptions caused by student movements in 2024.

May 14, 2024

We can start by reminding ourselves about the goal. Reread the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , adopted by the United Nations in 1948, written under the leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt. It remains a clear call for how the world should treat its people. Or look to Pope Francis’ “ Dignitas Infinita ,” the Catholic Church’s call to, “without fanfare, in concrete daily life, fight and personally pay the price for defending the rights of those who do not count.”

But how? Support those who run toward conflict and danger, who document events, who demand accountability: volunteers and U.N. workers, journalists on the ground and peace negotiators. Groups such as Doctors without Borders, the World Kitchen, the Red Cross/Red Crescent and Amnesty International, where I once worked. (Do your homework; not every group has staying power.)

Column: A meeting of Cal State L.A. student encampments, 55 years apart

Fifty-five years ago, a student encampment stood on the very spot at Cal State L.A. where pro-Palestinian students have set up tents now. Their asks were different, their spirits the same.

May 21, 2024

Find a part of the world you want to help and don’t forget that it might be next door. Talk to people you disagree with. Seek things you can agree on.

Simply put, the world is shaking from violence. It needs to shake from decency. We need to regain our hope and confidence for the future.

Is this foolishness, an impossibility given the metastasizing violence? I think not. Wherever you are, whatever else your responsibilities and commitments, you can vote, meet, organize, listen, donate time and money.

We must get human rights out of intensive care, resurrect our commitment to it. We need it home safe to protect us all.

Jack Healey, a former director of Amnesty International USA, is the founder of the Human Rights Action Center. He is the author of “Create Your Future: Lessons from a Life in Civil and Human Rights.”

More to Read

Opinion: The world community needs to put two-state facts on the ground and give Palestinians hope

May 22, 2024

This 5-year-old from Gaza is learning to live with one leg and untold loss

April 24, 2024

After a year of war, Sudan is world’s ‘forgotten crisis.’ Aid groups warn of mass death from hunger

April 14, 2024

World & Nation

For families of hostages, it’s a race against time as Israel’s war reaches six-month mark

April 7, 2024

People in Gaza are starving. Why is it so hard to get aid to them?

March 30, 2024

Editorial: The humanitarian aid Gaza needs most is a cease-fire

March 26, 2024

Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor: Genocide isn’t just about deaths. Israel is destroying Palestinian life in Gaza

March 10, 2024

Opinion: I’m an American doctor who went to Gaza. What I saw wasn’t war — it was annihilation

Feb. 16, 2024

Letters to the Editor: Why the World Court’s Gaza war ruling wasn’t a major blow to Israel

Jan. 31, 2024

A cure for the common opinion

Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

More From the Los Angeles Times

Centrist Benny Gantz, a member of Israel’s war Cabinet, resigns citing frustrations with Netanyahu

June 9, 2024

274 Palestinians killed in Israeli rescue of 4 hostages, say Gaza health officials

The U.N. will declare that Israel and Hamas are violating children’s rights in armed conflict

Opinion: Interracial marriage went from criminal to commonplace. Could it go back?

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

FACT SHEET: President   Biden Issues Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence

Today, President Biden is issuing a landmark Executive Order to ensure that America leads the way in seizing the promise and managing the risks of artificial intelligence (AI). The Executive Order establishes new standards for AI safety and security, protects Americans’ privacy, advances equity and civil rights, stands up for consumers and workers, promotes innovation and competition, advances American leadership around the world, and more. As part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s comprehensive strategy for responsible innovation, the Executive Order builds on previous actions the President has taken, including work that led to voluntary commitments from 15 leading companies to drive safe, secure, and trustworthy development of AI. The Executive Order directs the following actions: New Standards for AI Safety and Security

As AI’s capabilities grow, so do its implications for Americans’ safety and security.  With this Executive Order, the  President directs the  most sweeping  actions  ever taken  to protect Americans from  the potential  risks  of  AI  systems :

• Require that developers of the most powerful AI systems share their safety test results and other critical information with the U.S. government.  In accordance with the Defense Production Act, the Order will require that companies developing any foundation model that poses a serious risk to national security, national economic security, or national public health and safety must notify the federal government when training the model, and must share the results of all red-team safety tests. These measures will ensure AI systems are safe, secure, and trustworthy before companies make them public. 
• Develop standards, tools, and tests to help ensure that AI systems are safe, secure, and trustworthy.  The National Institute of Standards and Technology will set the rigorous standards for extensive red-team testing to ensure safety before public release. The Department of Homeland Security will apply those standards to critical infrastructure sectors and establish the AI Safety and Security Board. The Departments of Energy and Homeland Security will also address AI systems’ threats to critical infrastructure, as well as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and cybersecurity risks. Together, these are the most significant actions ever taken by any government to advance the field of AI safety.
• Protect against the risks of using AI to engineer dangerous biological materials  by developing strong new standards for biological synthesis screening. Agencies that fund life-science projects will establish these standards as a condition of federal funding, creating powerful incentives to ensure appropriate screening and manage risks potentially made worse by AI.
• Protect Americans from AI-enabled fraud and deception by establishing standards and best practices for detecting AI-generated content and authenticating official content . The Department of Commerce will develop guidance for content authentication and watermarking to clearly label AI-generated content. Federal agencies will use these tools to make it easy for Americans to know that the communications they receive from their government are authentic—and set an example for the private sector and governments around the world.
• Establish an advanced cybersecurity program to develop AI tools to find and fix vulnerabilities in critical software,  building on the Biden-Harris Administration’s ongoing AI Cyber Challenge. Together, these efforts will harness AI’s potentially game-changing cyber capabilities to make software and networks more secure.
• Order the development of a National Security Memorandum that directs further actions on AI and security,  to be developed by the National Security Council and White House Chief of Staff. This document will ensure that the United States military and intelligence community use AI safely, ethically, and effectively in their missions, and will direct actions to counter adversaries’ military use of AI.

Protecting Americans’ Privacy

Without safeguards, AI can put Americans’ privacy further at risk. AI not only makes it easier to extract, identify, and exploit personal data, but it also heightens incentives to do so because companies use data to train AI systems.  To better protect Americans’ privacy, including from the risks posed by AI, the President calls on Congress to pass bipartisan data privacy legislation to protect all Americans, especially kids, and directs the following actions:

• Protect Americans’ privacy by prioritizing federal support for accelerating the development and use of privacy-preserving techniques— including ones that use cutting-edge AI and that let AI systems be trained while preserving the privacy of the training data.  
• Strengthen privacy-preserving research   and technologies,  such as cryptographic tools that preserve individuals’ privacy, by funding a Research Coordination Network to advance rapid breakthroughs and development. The National Science Foundation will also work with this network to promote the adoption of leading-edge privacy-preserving technologies by federal agencies.
• Evaluate how agencies collect and use commercially available information —including information they procure from data brokers—and  strengthen privacy guidance for federal agencies  to account for AI risks. This work will focus in particular on commercially available information containing personally identifiable data.
• Develop guidelines for federal agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of privacy-preserving techniques,  including those used in AI systems. These guidelines will advance agency efforts to protect Americans’ data.

Advancing Equity and Civil Rights

Irresponsible uses of AI can lead to and deepen discrimination, bias, and other abuses in justice, healthcare, and housing. The Biden-Harris Administration has already taken action by publishing the  Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights  and issuing an  Executive Order directing agencies to combat algorithmic discrimination , while enforcing existing authorities to protect people’s rights and safety.  To ensure that AI advances equity and civil rights, the President directs the following additional actions:

• Provide clear guidance to landlords, Federal benefits programs, and federal contractors  to keep AI algorithms from being used to exacerbate discrimination.
• Address algorithmic discrimination  through training, technical assistance, and coordination between the Department of Justice and Federal civil rights offices on best practices for investigating and prosecuting civil rights violations related to AI.
• Ensure fairness throughout the criminal justice system  by developing best practices on the use of AI in sentencing, parole and probation, pretrial release and detention, risk assessments, surveillance, crime forecasting and predictive policing, and forensic analysis.

Standing Up for Consumers, Patients, and Students

AI can bring real benefits to consumers—for example, by making products better, cheaper, and more widely available. But AI also raises the risk of injuring, misleading, or otherwise harming Americans.  To protect consumers while ensuring that AI can make Americans better off, the President directs the following actions:

• Advance the responsible use of AI  in healthcare and the development of affordable and life-saving drugs. The Department of Health and Human Services will also establish a safety program to receive reports of—and act to remedy – harms or unsafe healthcare practices involving AI. 
• Shape AI’s potential to transform education  by creating resources to support educators deploying AI-enabled educational tools, such as personalized tutoring in schools.

Supporting Workers

AI is changing America’s jobs and workplaces, offering both the promise of improved productivity but also the dangers of increased workplace surveillance, bias, and job displacement.  To mitigate these risks, support workers’ ability to bargain collectively, and invest in workforce training and development that is accessible to all, the President directs the following actions:

• Develop principles and best practices to mitigate the harms and maximize the benefits of AI for workers  by addressing job displacement; labor standards; workplace equity, health, and safety; and data collection. These principles and best practices will benefit workers by providing guidance to prevent employers from undercompensating workers, evaluating job applications unfairly, or impinging on workers’ ability to organize.
• Produce a report on AI’s potential labor-market impacts , and  study and identify options for strengthening federal support for workers facing labor disruptions , including from AI.

Promoting Innovation and Competition

America already leads in AI innovation—more AI startups raised first-time capital in the United States last year than in the next seven countries combined.  The Executive Order ensures that we continue to lead the way in innovation and competition through the following actions:

• Catalyze AI research across the United States  through a pilot of the National AI Research Resource—a tool that will provide AI researchers and students access to key AI resources and data—and expanded grants for AI research in vital areas like healthcare and climate change.
• Promote a fair, open, and competitive AI ecosystem  by providing small developers and entrepreneurs access to technical assistance and resources, helping small businesses commercialize AI breakthroughs, and encouraging the Federal Trade Commission to exercise its authorities.
• Use existing authorities to expand the ability of highly skilled immigrants and nonimmigrants with expertise in critical areas to study, stay, and work in the United States  by modernizing and streamlining visa criteria, interviews, and reviews.

Advancing American Leadership Abroad

AI’s challenges and opportunities are global.  The Biden-Harris Administration will continue working with other nations to support safe, secure, and trustworthy deployment and use of AI worldwide. To that end, the President directs the following actions:

• Expand bilateral, multilateral, and multistakeholder engagements to collaborate on AI . The State Department, in collaboration, with the Commerce Department will lead an effort to establish robust international frameworks for harnessing AI’s benefits and managing its risks and ensuring safety. In addition, this week, Vice President Harris will speak at the UK Summit on AI Safety, hosted by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
• Accelerate development and implementation of vital AI standards  with international partners and in standards organizations, ensuring that the technology is safe, secure, trustworthy, and interoperable.
• Promote the safe, responsible, and rights-affirming development and deployment of AI abroad to solve global challenges,  such as advancing sustainable development and mitigating dangers to critical infrastructure.

Ensuring Responsible and Effective Government Use of AI

AI can help government deliver better results for the American people. It can expand agencies’ capacity to regulate, govern, and disburse benefits, and it can cut costs and enhance the security of government systems. However, use of AI can pose risks, such as discrimination and unsafe decisions.  To ensure the responsible government deployment of AI and modernize federal AI infrastructure, the President directs the following actions:

• Issue guidance for agencies’ use of AI,  including clear standards to protect rights and safety, improve AI procurement, and strengthen AI deployment.  
• Help agencies acquire specified AI products and services  faster, more cheaply, and more effectively through more rapid and efficient contracting.
• Accelerate the rapid hiring of AI professionals  as part of a government-wide AI talent surge led by the Office of Personnel Management, U.S. Digital Service, U.S. Digital Corps, and Presidential Innovation Fellowship. Agencies will provide AI training for employees at all levels in relevant fields.

As we advance this agenda at home, the Administration will work with allies and partners abroad on a strong international framework to govern the development and use of AI. The Administration has already consulted widely on AI governance frameworks over the past several months—engaging with Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, the UAE, and the UK. The actions taken today support and complement Japan’s leadership of the G-7 Hiroshima Process, the UK Summit on AI Safety, India’s leadership as Chair of the Global Partnership on AI, and ongoing discussions at the United Nations. The actions that President Biden directed today are vital steps forward in the U.S.’s approach on safe, secure, and trustworthy AI. More action will be required, and the Administration will continue to work with Congress to pursue bipartisan legislation to help America lead the way in responsible innovation. For more on the Biden-Harris Administration’s work to advance AI, and for opportunities to join the Federal AI workforce, visit AI.gov .

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

moral rights

Primary tabs.

The concept of “moral rights” refers to certain rights of authors, granted under copyright law and recognized most prevalently in civil law countries.  As defined by the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works , an international agreement governing copyright law, moral rights are the rights “to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation.”  After the U.S. became a signatory to the Berne Convention in 1989, the U.S. Congress passed the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA), codified at 17 U.S.C. § 106A , granting moral rights in relation to works of visual art, as defined at 17 U.S.C. § 101 .  Several states have passed moral rights laws, such as the California Art Preservation Act, codified at California Civil Code §987 .  Where there are conflicts between such laws and VARA, the state laws may be preempted .

In continental Europe, moral rights are “ inalienable and cannot be transferred or waived .” However, in the U.S., the moral rights applicable to works of visual art “ may not be transferred, but those rights may be waived if the author expressly agrees to such waiver in a written instrument signed by the author .”

[Last updated in July of 2020 by the Wex Definitions Team ]

• intellectual property
• copyright law
• wex definitions