did you not team that summary judgment by arguing the only party isn't title to bring this copyright infringement claim were the  stop the traditional stop argument of some force that you haven't made that argument and used it successfully got a ruling from the judged on the that basis you're not completely flipping here overlooked was that those novels were in the public domain on the governor at lowell once a word and there's the public domain the owner house no further rights over those works and and you know once it is established that the whole issue of public domain arose during the debate regarding the summary judgment cross summary judgment positions once it was stipulated by the parties that of our opinion is that you we have your argument that kind of daniel was not your agent your client right how does that affect the copyright ownership issue dramatical of patients stemming from the contract between by the time the lower court make this adjudication as responsible to those arguments all the errors were already admitted as such by going to run as parties to the case since early in the case  copyright us copyright law allows for cover as to be transferred by the will where the permission of law which i wrote then you have an adequate ownership tract sufficient enough to sustain a copyright infringement action and that is what happened here question the early ownership or transfer of right needs to come and needed to come forth with evidence to that the only evidence they have always always brought forth has been speculations and we tar competing claims that your new reason he cannot rely on his public domain argument given the history of the case and its present procedural posture what what is your argument against passage of time because these are words that were put out under the ninety nine copyright act so those automatically enter the public domain at a different moment i was that moment and they came and it's been stipulated to that in that to respond to the copyright or if done with permission belong to the original underlying works copyright owner and the new copyright owner the new or the author is new input in the creation of these works however situation such as here the work is already in the public domain then everything that the junior author does to create these the writ of works belongs to him and it does belong to him and as i errors to these to these works we are aware that this has been created by by i think and erroneous interpretation of the lower court as to ownership and the impact of public domain delgado and after that the case was transferred to the magistrate for trial so and so the law of the case at the moment it was transferred to the magistrate for trial ok thank you thank you thank you council attorney rivera if you could please your audio and your video at this time attorney for our guests you have a four minute rebuttal thank you perea have the ownership rights here at he he he has a derivative work that was based on original works that were in the public domain yeah domain were irrelevant that the judge ruled the way she ruled just took into consideration that argument because it was not you for your time thank you to argument in this case attorney for our guests attorney hernandez and attorney rivera you should disconnect from the hearing at this time