Shabba Ranks asks the court to declare that his section 203 notice terminated his 1989 song grant now claimed by Greensleeves Publishing

The complaint

Gordon p/k/a Shabba Ranks v. Greensleeves Publishing, Ltd., No. 1:26-cv-07933 (S.D.N.Y.), is a seven-page complaint filed September 11, 2026, ECF No. 1. The complaint describes the plaintiff, Rexton Gordon, as an internationally famous musician, songwriter and recording artist and a resident of Coram, New York. It alleges, upon information and belief, that Greensleeves Publishing, Ltd. is a limited liability company in the music publishing business with a registered office in London. The complaint brings the action under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. 2201-02, and pleads jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. The docket shows the case is assigned to Judge Colleen McMahon.

The grant and the notice

According to the complaint, the compositions listed in Exhibit A were written wholly or in part by Gordon, and on or about September 1, 1989, he assigned all of his worldwide right, title and interest in them, including the copyrights and the rights of renewal and extension, to a company that the complaint calls Greensleeves' predecessor in interest. The complaint alleges that Gordon served a notice of termination on that predecessor under section 203(a) on September 28, 2023, and that the notice was recorded in the Copyright Office on October 2, 2025, before the first claimed effective date. It says the effective dates of termination for some of the compositions, which it calls the Earlier Compositions, have already occurred, and that those for the rest, the Later Compositions, had not occurred when the action was filed. Exhibit A is a schedule listing each work title with its album title, original copyright registration number where given, date of publication under the grant, and effective date of termination.

The works made for hire dispute

The complaint alleges that on or about November 11, 2025, counsel for Greensleeves sent a letter, attached as Exhibit D, asserting that the notice was invalid and that the compositions were works made for hire under the Copyright Act because the 1989 assignment characterized them as such. The complaint alleges that the compositions "are not and could not have been works made for hire" under the Copyright Act, regardless of that language, because Gordon was never an employee of Greensleeves or its predecessor and because musical compositions are not a type of work that can be made a work made for hire by agreement with a non-employee author.

According to the complaint, a second letter from Greensleeves' counsel on or about January 14, 2026, attached as Exhibit E, repeated those arguments and relied on a U.K. court decision to argue that, even if the notice were deemed effective, Gordon would be in breach of the assignment if he exercised his termination rights under U.S. law. The complaint responds that an author may exercise statutory termination rights "notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary," citing 17 U.S.C. 304(c)(5), and alleges that no U.S. court has followed the U.K. decision.

Count and relief

The complaint pleads one count, Count I: Declaratory Judgment of Copyright Ownership. It alleges an actual and justiciable controversy over the parties' rights in the compositions and that Gordon has no adequate remedy at law.

The prayer for relief asks the court to enter judgment (A) declaring that Gordon is the owner of the U.S. copyright interests in the Earlier Compositions; (B) declaring that he will become the owner of the U.S. copyright interests in the Later Compositions on the effective date for each; (C) declaring that Gordon, and not Greensleeves, is entitled to quiet title to the ownership of the U.S. copyright interests in the compositions; (D) restraining and enjoining Greensleeves from claiming rights of ownership inconsistent with those declarations or from otherwise infringing Gordon's rights; (E) awarding costs and disbursements, including reasonable attorneys' fees under 17 U.S.C. 505; and (F) awarding "such damages and other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper."

On the docket

The clerk sent the AO 121 copyright report to the Register of Copyrights on September 14, 2026. The court entered an order for an initial pretrial conference on September 17, 2026, ECF No. 10, and a waiver of service was filed the same day, ECF No. 11. A proposed case management plan was filed on October 19, 2026, ECF No. 12, and a case management plan was entered on October 21, 2026, ECF No. 13. A motion for admission pro hac vice was filed on November 6, 2026, ECF No. 14, and an order on that motion was entered on November 9, 2026, ECF No. 15.