The Second Chance Congress Built Into the Law — How It Works, Who Qualifies, and What Can Take It Away
In 1978, Congress built a second chance directly into copyright law.
The reason was straightforward. Creators (writers, composers, filmmakers, artists) routinely sign deals before anyone knows what their work will be worth. The novelist who sells her first book for $5,000 has no idea it will become a franchise. The screenwriter who takes $25,000 for an original script has no leverage to demand more. The songwriter who assigns publishing rights early in their career cannot predict which songs will define a generation.
Congress recognized that creative labor and business leverage are almost never equal at the moment a deal is signed. So it created an inalienable right for creators to reclaim their work after a defined period of time, regardless of what the original contract said.
That right is copyright termination. Most filmmakers, screenwriters, and composers have never heard of it.
This guide explains how copyright termination works, which provision applies to your situation, what the exact timing windows are, what can eliminate the right entirely, and what the law means practically for filmmakers working today. It includes a full key dates reference table so you can calculate your own termination window from any grant date.
What Copyright Termination Is
Copyright termination is a statutory right that allows the original creator of a work or their heirs to reclaim copyright ownership that was previously transferred or licensed to someone else, after a defined waiting period.
It is not a renegotiation. It is not a request. It is a unilateral right granted by federal law that the grantee cannot prevent, cannot waive contractually, and cannot negotiate away. The statute says explicitly that termination may be effected notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.
That phrase “notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary” is the most important language in copyright termination law. No matter what the original contract says, no matter what rights the creator signed away, and no matter how much the grantee invested in developing the work, the creator has the right to reclaim it after the statutory period expires.
There is no equivalent right in contract law. The termination right exists only because Congress put it in the Copyright Act.
Why Congress Created This Right
The legislative history of the 1976 Copyright Act states the purpose directly. Congress recognized that creators of works of authorship have generally bargained from positions of relative weakness and have assigned their rights in exchange for less than fair value. Copyright termination exists to give creators or their heirs a second chance to share in the long-term value of their work after the market has had a chance to assess it.
The Two Termination Provisions: Section 203 and Section 304
There are two separate copyright termination provisions in the Copyright Act. Which one applies depends entirely on when the grant — the transfer or license of the copyright — was executed.
Section 203: Grants Made On or After January 1, 1978
Section 203 applies to virtually every deal signed in the entertainment industry today and for the past 48 years. If you signed a writer agreement, a distribution agreement, a music publishing deal, or any other copyright transfer or license on or after January 1, 1978, Section 203 is your termination right.
| Element | Rule Under Section 203 |
| When the window opens | 35 years after the date the grant was executed. The clock starts when you signed the deal — not when the work was created, published, or released. |
| Length of the window | Five years. Beginning at year 35 and closing at year 40. Miss the window entirely and the right is gone. |
| When to serve notice | Between two and ten years before the termination date you specify. To terminate at year 35, you must serve notice between years 25 and 33. |
| Who can terminate | The author who made the grant, or if the author is deceased, a majority of the author’s statutory heirs — spouse, children, grandchildren, or the estate as defined by the Act. |
| What can be terminated | Any grant of copyright or exclusive license — including assignments, exclusive publishing deals, and exclusive distribution agreements. |
| Can it be waived | No. The statute says termination may be effected notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary. |
| Works made for hire | Section 203 does not apply. There is no termination right for works made for hire because the hiring party is legally considered the author. |
| Recording requirement | The termination notice must be recorded with the US Copyright Office before the effective date of termination. |
Bob Dylan, Paul McCartney, Bruce Springsteen, and Tom Petty’s estate have all used Section 203 to file termination notices for early catalog transfers. These are not legal technicalities — they are the law operating exactly as Congress intended.
The Timing Is Critical
The five-year window under Section 203 is strict. If you do not serve proper written notice on the grantee within the five years beginning at year 35, the right expires permanently. For any significant rights transfer, tracking the termination window and serving timely notice requires advance planning, often years before the window opens. See the Key Dates Calculator in Section 5 of this guide.
Section 304(c): Grants Made Before January 1, 1978
Section 304(c) covers copyright transfers and licenses executed before January 1, 1978. This is the provision relevant to deals made in the 1960s and 1970s — including Sylvester Stallone’s assignment of Rocky in 1975.
Under Section 304(c), the termination window opens 56 years after the copyright in the work was originally secured — not 35 years after the grant. For a film copyrighted in 1976, the termination window opens approximately 56 years later, around 2032.
Section 304(c) is subject to the same work-for-hire exception, derivative works exception, and notice requirements that apply to Section 203.
| Section 203 | Section 304(c) | |
| Applicable grants | Executed on or after January 1, 1978 | Executed before January 1, 1978 |
| Window opens | 35 years after the grant date | 56 years after copyright was secured |
| Window length | 5 years | 5 years |
| Works for hire | Not eligible | Not eligible |
| Can it be waived | No | No |
| Notice requirements | 2-10 years before effective date, recorded with Copyright Office | Same requirements apply |
The Exceptions: What Can Eliminate the Termination Right
Copyright termination is powerful but not absolute. Three specific circumstances can eliminate the right entirely or significantly limit its practical value.
Exception 1: Works Made for Hire
This is the most significant exception and the one most directly relevant to filmmakers.
Under the Copyright Act, a work made for hire is either a work created by an employee within the scope of their employment, or a work specially ordered or commissioned that falls into one of nine specific statutory categories and is accompanied by a written agreement stating the work is made for hire. Motion pictures are one of the nine enumerated categories that can qualify as works made for hire under a written agreement.
When a work qualifies as work made for hire, the hiring party is legally considered the author from the moment of creation. The actual human who created the work is not the copyright author. Because there is no author-creator to reclaim the copyright, there is no termination right.
This is why Marvel and DC have consistently prevailed over comic book creators in termination disputes. Those works were created under work-for-hire arrangements from the beginning, which eliminates the termination right entirely.
For filmmakers and screenwriters, the work-for-hire question is the most important question in any rights transaction. If you write a screenplay as an independent contractor and assign the copyright, you likely retain termination rights. If you write it as an employee of a production company, or as a specially commissioned work under a written work-for-hire agreement, you may have no termination right at all.
The Friday the 13th Case — Horror Inc. v. Miller
Victor Miller wrote the Friday the 13th screenplay in 1979 as an independent contractor. Forty years later he filed a Section 203 termination notice. The production company argued the screenplay was work made for hire, which would have eliminated his termination right entirely. After five years of litigation through the US District Court for Connecticut and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, both courts ruled that Miller was an independent contractor, not an employee. His termination was effective. As of December 2021, when the deadline for a Supreme Court appeal passed without a petition being filed, the case was officially over. Miller owns the domestic US rights to the original Friday the 13th screenplay. The case established that registering a copyright as work made for hire creates a presumption in favor of WFH status, but that presumption can be rebutted by evidence that the creator was actually an independent contractor.
For a complete explanation of work-for-hire and what agreements are required to properly establish or avoid it, see Thoolie’s Work-for-Hire Complete Guide.
Exception 2: The Derivative Works Exception
When a copyright is successfully terminated, the grantee loses the right to continue exploiting the original work. But they do not lose the right to continue exploiting derivative works they created under the grant before the termination became effective.
A derivative work is a work based on or derived from the original. A sequel is a derivative work. A television series based on a film is a derivative work. A remake is a derivative work. Merchandise based on characters is a derivative work.
The Friday the 13th case illustrates this clearly. Miller reclaimed the original screenplay. But the production company retained the right to continue exploiting the sequels because those sequels are derivative works created under the original grant before termination. Miller owns the original screenplay and the characters introduced in it, including child Jason as he appears at the end of the first film. The production company retains rights in the adult Jason Voorhees (the hockey-masked version) because that character was developed in sequels, not in Miller’s original screenplay.
For filmmakers seeking to use copyright termination to reclaim their work, the derivative works exception means that existing sequels, remakes, and adaptations made before the termination date may continue to be exploited by the grantee, potentially competing with the creator’s own exploitation of the reclaimed original.
Exception 3: Missing the Five-Year Window
The termination window under both Section 203 and Section 304(c) is five years. It does not extend if you miss it and it cannot be reopened. The right is lost permanently.
Serving a valid termination notice requires strict compliance with formal requirements. The notice must be in writing, signed by the person entitled to terminate or their authorized agent, and must identify the grant being terminated, the effective date of termination, and the work covered. It must be served on the grantee or their successor in title. Service must occur within the two-to-ten year window before the specified effective date. And it must be recorded with the Copyright Office before the effective date.
Missing any of these requirements (serving notice too early, too late, in the wrong form, or to the wrong party) can invalidate the termination notice and cause the creator to lose the window entirely.
What Copyright Termination Means for Filmmakers Today
Most filmmakers are not thinking about copyright termination when they sign their first distribution deal, their first writer agreement, or their first option-purchase agreement. The 35-year horizon seems abstract when you are trying to get your film made and distributed.
But the decisions made in those early deals determine whether copyright termination will be available at all, or whether the work-for-hire exception eliminated it before the work was even created.
Know Your Work-for-Hire Status Before You Sign
If you are writing a screenplay as an independent contractor and assigning the copyright, you likely retain termination rights under Section 203. If you are signing a work-for-hire agreement that designates your screenplay as a work made for hire, you are eliminating your termination right before the work is even created. Many production companies include work-for-hire designations in writer agreements routinely, without calling attention to what that designation means for the creator’s long-term rights.
For a complete explanation of when work-for-hire applies and what agreements are required, see Thoolie’s Work-for-Hire Complete Guide.
Track Your Grant Dates
Copyright termination rights are tied to the date the grant was executed, not when the work was created, registered, or released. Every significant copyright transfer or exclusive license you enter into is a grant with a termination window that begins running from the date you signed. Most filmmakers have no systematic record of when they signed their writer agreements, distribution agreements, or music publishing deals. Building and maintaining that record is the prerequisite for eventually exercising termination rights. The Key Dates Calculator in Section 5 gives you the specific window for any grant year from 1978 forward.
Understand What Termination Actually Reclaims
A successful termination reclaims the original copyright in the work. It does not automatically undo every deal made by the grantee during the period of the grant. Existing sublicenses survive to the extent they were made before the termination date. Derivative works continue to be exploitable by the grantee. The termination gives you back the right to exploit the original work, it does not reverse the entire commercial history of the grantee’s exploitation.
Consider Contractual Reversion as an Alternative
Copyright termination operates on a 35-year horizon. A contractual reversion clause can return your rights much earlier, on clearly defined terms, without the procedural requirements of statutory termination. For filmmaker-distributor relationships, a well-drafted reversion clause tied to performance minimums or exploitation obligations is a more immediate protection. Copyright termination is most valuable for deals where no contractual reversion was negotiated, which describes most deals made under pressure, without legal representation, or early in a creator’s career.
For a guide to contractual reversion provisions in distribution agreements, see Thoolie’s Indie Distribution Deal Guide.
Build a Clean Chain of Title
Copyright termination changes the chain of title. When a termination becomes effective, ownership reverts to the creator, and any subsequent deals must reflect that reversion. For a terminated copyright to be commercially exploitable, the chain of title must be clean and clearly documented from the original grant through the termination and into any new agreements.
Thoolie’s Film Chain of Title Guide covers what chain of title is and how to build and document it from development through distribution.
Section 203 Key Dates Calculator
Use this table to calculate your copyright termination window under Section 203. Find the year you signed the grant in the left column. The table shows when your five-year termination window opens and closes, and the range of years during which you must serve the termination notice.
How to Read This Table
Window Opens = the earliest date your termination can become effective. Window Closes = the last year your termination can become effective. Notice Must Be Served Between = the range of years during which you must serve written notice on the grantee. Rows in light gray indicate grants whose window has already closed. Highlighted rows indicate grants whose window is currently open in 2026
| Year Grant Was Signed | Section 203 Window Opens | 5-Year Window Closes | Notice Must Be Served Between |
| 1978 | 2013 | 2018 | 2003 — 2011 |
| 1979 | 2014 | 2019 | 2004 — 2012 |
| 1980 | 2015 | 2020 | 2005 — 2013 |
| 1981 | 2016 | 2021 | 2006 — 2014 |
| 1982 | 2017 | 2022 | 2007 — 2015 |
| 1983 | 2018 | 2023 | 2008 — 2016 |
| 1984 | 2019 | 2024 | 2009 — 2017 |
| 1985 | 2020 | 2025 | 2010 — 2018 |
| 1986 | 2021 | 2026 | 2011 — 2019 |
| 1987 | 2022 | 2027 | 2012 — 2020 |
| 1988 | 2023 | 2028 | 2013 — 2021 |
| 1989 | 2024 | 2029 | 2014 — 2022 |
| 1990 | 2025 | 2030 | 2015 — 2023 |
| 1991 | 2026 | 2031 | 2016 — 2024 |
| 1992 | 2027 | 2032 | 2017 — 2025 |
| 1993 | 2028 | 2033 | 2018 — 2026 |
| 1994 | 2029 | 2034 | 2019 — 2027 |
| 1995 | 2030 | 2035 | 2020 — 2028 |
| 1996 | 2031 | 2036 | 2021 — 2029 |
| 1997 | 2032 | 2037 | 2022 — 2030 |
| 1998 | 2033 | 2038 | 2023 — 2031 |
| 1999 | 2034 | 2039 | 2024 — 2032 |
| 2000 | 2035 | 2040 | 2025 — 2033 |
| 2001 | 2036 | 2041 | 2026 — 2034 |
| 2002 | 2037 | 2042 | 2027 — 2035 |
| 2003 | 2038 | 2043 | 2028 — 2036 |
| 2004 | 2039 | 2044 | 2029 — 2037 |
| 2005 | 2040 | 2045 | 2030 — 2038 |
| 2006 | 2041 | 2046 | 2031 — 2039 |
| 2007 | 2042 | 2047 | 2032 — 2040 |
| 2008 | 2043 | 2048 | 2033 — 2041 |
| 2009 | 2044 | 2049 | 2034 — 2042 |
| 2010 | 2045 | 2050 | 2035 — 2043 |
| 2011 | 2046 | 2051 | 2036 — 2044 |
| 2012 | 2047 | 2052 | 2037 — 2045 |
| 2013 | 2048 | 2053 | 2038 — 2046 |
| 2014 | 2049 | 2054 | 2039 — 2047 |
| 2015 | 2050 | 2055 | 2040 — 2048 |
| 2016 | 2051 | 2056 | 2041 — 2049 |
| 2017 | 2052 | 2057 | 2042 — 2050 |
| 2018 | 2053 | 2058 | 2043 — 2051 |
| 2019 | 2054 | 2059 | 2044 — 2052 |
| 2020 | 2055 | 2060 | 2045 — 2053 |
| 2021 | 2056 | 2061 | 2046 — 2054 |
| 2022 | 2057 | 2062 | 2047 — 2055 |
| 2023 | 2058 | 2063 | 2048 — 2056 |
| 2024 | 2059 | 2064 | 2049 — 2057 |
| 2025 | 2060 | 2065 | 2050 — 2058 |
| 2026 | 2061 | 2066 | 2051 — 2059 |
Important Note on This Table
This table calculates windows based solely on the date the grant was executed. Actual termination rights depend on additional factors including whether the work qualifies as work made for hire, whether the notice was properly served and recorded, and whether the specific grant is eligible for termination under Section 203. This table is a reference tool, not legal advice. Consult an entertainment attorney before serving any termination notice.
Real Examples of Copyright Termination in Action
| Creator / Work | What Happened |
| Victor Miller / Friday the 13th (1979) | Miller wrote the screenplay as an independent contractor. In 2016 he filed a Section 203 termination notice. The production company argued work-for-hire. After five years of litigation, both the District Court and the Second Circuit ruled Miller was an independent contractor. His termination was effective. As of December 2021 the case is officially over — Miller owns the domestic US rights to the original screenplay. The franchise remains in limbo because Miller controls the original and the production company controls subsequent derivative works including the adult Jason Voorhees character. |
| Bob Dylan | Dylan filed Section 203 termination notices for his early catalog recordings. Standard practice for artists who assigned publishing rights before understanding the long-term value of their work. |
| Tom Petty Estate | The Tom Petty estate filed Section 203 termination notices for early catalog songs. The termination right survives the creator’s death and passes to statutory heirs — which is why estates file these notices even after the creator is gone. |
| Paul McCartney | McCartney pursued copyright termination for early Beatles recordings under Section 203, alongside his UK copyright reclamation process. One of the highest-profile uses of the statutory termination right by any creator. |
| Sylvester Stallone / Rocky (1975) | Stallone assigned Rocky screenplay rights in 1975, before the current Copyright Act came into effect. Section 203 does not apply. Section 304(c) may give Stallone a termination window opening approximately 56 years after the copyright was secured, around 2032. Whether he can exercise it depends on work-for-hire language in a 50-year-old contract that has not been made public. |
| James Cameron / Titanic (1997) | Cameron voluntarily gave up his $8 million directing and producing salary and his entire gross participation to keep production alive. He was not legally required to. He retained his screenplay fee and authorship credit. His situation illustrates that voluntary surrenders of contractual rights are different from work-for-hire designations — but the practical result can be similar if no contractual reversion or statutory termination right was preserved. |
| Marvel and DC Comic Creators | Multiple comic book creators and their estates have filed termination notices. These cases have generally not succeeded because the works were created under work-for-hire arrangements, eliminating the termination right entirely. The work-for-hire structure is precisely why Marvel and DC designed their creator relationships the way they did. |
Frequently Asked Questions
No. The Copyright Act states explicitly that termination may be effected notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary. No contract provision can eliminate your termination right under Section 203 or Section 304(c). This is one of the rare areas of contract law where a statutory right cannot be waived by private agreement.
It depends on what the distribution agreement grants. If you assigned the copyright in your film to the distributor — transferred ownership — Section 203 may apply to that assignment. If the distribution agreement is a license rather than a full assignment, the license may also be terminable under Section 203. Review the specific language of your agreement with an entertainment attorney to determine whether and when termination rights apply.
The termination notice must be served on the grantee or their successor in title. If the original grantee no longer exists, you need to identify who currently holds the rights — through merger, acquisition, bankruptcy, or asset purchase — and serve notice on that entity. This can require research and legal assistance to identify the correct successor.
Yes. The derivative works exception allows the grantee to continue exploiting derivative works — sequels, remakes, adaptations — that were created and made available to the public before the termination became effective. You reclaim the original work. You do not prevent the grantee from continuing to exploit legitimately derived work made before your termination.
In most cases, yes — especially for distribution agreements. A contractual reversion clause can return your rights much earlier than 35 years, on clearly defined terms, without the procedural requirements of statutory termination. Copyright termination is most valuable for deals where no contractual reversion was negotiated. For current deals, building reversion rights into the agreement from the beginning is better than waiting decades for the statutory window.
Yes. The formal requirements for a valid termination notice are specific and strict. Errors in timing, form, or the identity of the party being served can invalidate the termination and cause the creator to lose the window entirely. For any significant copyright termination, involving an entertainment attorney experienced in this practice area is strongly recommended. Marc Toberoff, who represented Victor Miller in the Friday the 13th case, is one of the most prominent attorneys in copyright termination.
Not necessarily. As the Friday the 13th case established, registering a copyright as work made for hire creates a presumption in favor of that status — but the presumption can be rebutted by evidence that the creator was actually an independent contractor. Whether the WFH registration holds up depends on the specific facts of your relationship with the production company, including factors like control, employee benefits, tax treatment, and whether you worked exclusively for them. This is a fact-specific analysis that requires legal guidance.
Related Thoolie Resources
- Work-for-Hire Complete Guide: The complete guide to work-for-hire for filmmakers — when it applies, what agreements are required, and why work-for-hire status determines whether copyright termination rights exist at all.
- Film Chain of Title Guide: What chain of title is, what it must include, and how to build a complete documented chain from development through distribution — including how a copyright termination affects the chain.
- How to Copyright Your Script: Step-by-step guide to registering your screenplay and finished film with the US Copyright Office — the foundational registration that supports any future termination claim.
- Indie Distribution Deal Guide: A comprehensive guide to distribution agreement provisions — including contractual reversion clauses that can return your rights much earlier than the 35-year statutory termination window.
- Film LLC Guide for Filmmakers: How to form and structure a production entity that holds your film’s rights properly — including how entity structure affects copyright ownership and termination rights.
