Supertramp songwriter clashes  bandmates in song royalty dispute due to…

In a fight over music royalties, Supertramp songwriter triumphs against former bandmates.
In the court struggle over Supertramp music royalties, a decision has been made. In a 1970s agreement, the band’s songwriters agreed to split song profits with their other musicians; however, they ceased doing so in 2018.

The court decided that they had the right to terminate that contract.
A Californian court decided yesterday that Supertramp co-founder Roger Hodgson had the right to revoke a previous agreement he had with three of his former bandmates to split songwriter royalties. This was because the agreement from the 1970s had not been explicitly stated to apply indefinitely, so it could be terminated at any time after a “reasonable time.”

The case’s opposing parties agreed that greed was at the heart of the dispute, but they disagreed as to exactly who the greedy party was. After a week-long trial, Hodgson’s attorney, Alan S. Gutman, concluded by summarizing the case, saying, “This is about a pack of wolves coming after my client for a piece of the songwriting royalties – for the songs that he wrote, that came from his soul, that he developed.” This is according to Law360.

David M. Given, who was speaking on behalf of the late Supertramp members John Helliwell, Robert Siebenberg, and Douglas Thomson, said, gesturing toward the aging performers, “Pack of wolves? Do these people remind you of a group of wolves? This has to do with being greedy and honoring your word.”

During Supertramp’s peak in the 1970s, Hodgson and fellow founding member Rick Davies co-wrote the songs. However, the two co-writers decided to split the songwriting earnings with Thomson, Siebenberg, and Helliwell in a 1977 agreement.

Despite their popularity in the charts at the time, the band’s label kept the majority of the money made from their records, according to every member of the band who testified during the trial. As a result, the agreement was made to assist the other three band members financially. So at least they agreed on who had been greedy in the past. But now, who is being avaricious?

For many years, Helliwell, Siebenberg, and Thomson were paid a portion of the music royalties; but, in 2018, those payments ceased. In 2021, they filed lawsuits against Hodgson and Davies; however, Davies later came to an out-of-court settlement. Nonetheless, Hodgson and his business Delicate Music maintained that they had the right to unilaterally revoke the 1977 contract at any time, allowing the disagreement to go to court.

Despite being a jury trial, Hodgson’s case benefited tremendously from a ruling the judge made during the trial. According to Judge André Birotte Jr., either party may end the 1977 agreement at any moment after a “reasonable time” because it neither included an explicit expiration date nor stated that the royalties would be paid indefinitely. The jury’s task was to determine if 41 years was an appropriate sentence. which they carried out.

Given, who represented the three musicians during the trial, contended that since perpetuity agreements are typical in the music business, or at least they were, it was assumed that the 1977 agreement would remain in effect until the copyrights that produced the royalties that Given’s clients were paid expired.

“The judge made a grievous error” in his finding, the attorney told reporters after the verdict, adding that “the duration of the contract should be implied to extend to as long as the asset is generating revenues.”

As for his client, Gutman was addressing to the media and stated, “I want to applaud Mr. Hodgson’s courage of convictions.” He firmly felt that doing this was morally required, because these are his songs, and that he should be able to get them back. And, in my opinion, to use his legacy to rectify certain historical errors.