 The question presented was whether the owner of a legal derivative work infringes the rights of the successor copyright owner, by continued distribution and publication of the derivative work during the renewal term of the pre-existing work.The Court held that the assignment was an unfulfilled contingency that died with the author; the successor can prevent continued use of the derivative work.In justifying its decision, the Court noted that control of the work reverts to the author—or author’s successors—when renewal comes up.