As far as I'm concerned, I'd have been happier if the case were fully litigated with a precedent set, and damages against Warner Music being as disproportionate as what the music industry wants against random file sharers.
Unclear. What is clear is that Warner/Chappell don't have a valid copyright claim, but due to the history of the song/lyrics/tune other claimants could come forward and claim to own the copyright.
Happy Birthday will DEFINITELY be in the public domain in 2030, because claims of ownership seem to end in 1935, however as the Warner/Chappell claim has been debunked it might be public domain as early as 2022.
Keep in mind that "unknown owner" and "public domain" aren't the same thing. At the moment Happy Birthday isn't old enough to be public domain, there just may not be a known or established owner, so it could be "de facto public domain."
In concede that. And I'd love to say "that could never happen" but if they want to keep Mickey Mouse out of the public domain then they need to extend the 1928 copyright yet again...
In the out of court settlement, Warner agrees to allowing a judge to declare the song to be in the public domain, however, the judge will have to agree to it.
"the settlement stipulates a proposed final judgment and order that would declare the song to be in the public domain" ... "An agreement to have a judge declare the song in the public domain is no doubt unusual and will likely command some attention by the judge on review"
Why is Warner suddenly graciously agreeing to this, you may wonder: "By agreeing to the settlement, Warners avoids going to trial to determine whether it should be punished for collecting licensing money for many decades"
$14M? They got off too easy.