According to the rock legend's rep, McCartney filed a lawsuit in New York on Wednesday "to confirm his ownership in his U.S. reversionary copyrights, which are granted to him by U.S. copyright law, in the songs he wrote with John Lennon and recorded with The Beatles." In 1976, Congress increased the period that works are under copyright protection, and, in recognition of authors who had signed over their rights to publishers and studios without much bargaining power, allowed such authors 35 years hence to reclaim rights in the latter stages of a copyright term. Copyright law and its statutory termination rules – the point at which the copyright reverts back to the writer – would take precedence over any contracts in the U.K. 
 
 McCartney and John Lennon had assigned the rights to some of the songs, written between 1962 and 1971, to various publishers; by the Eighties, a number of the songs belonged to ATV. "Some time ago, the media came up with the idea that Michael Jackson was going to leave his share in the Beatles songs to me in his will, which was completely made up and something I didn't believe for a second," McCartney said in 2009, upon news of Jackson's death and the revelation that Jackson had not given him his songs back. Last year, Sony/ATV, which was established as a joint venture between Sony and Michael Jackson in 1995, bought late the King of Pop's share of the company for $750 million. The lawsuit claims that McCartney has been serving notices of his intention to reclaim them to the current owners of the copyrights since 2008, and is expecting to have these copyrights returned to him beginning in October 5, 2018.  Paul McCartney I Want to Get Back My Beatles Hits from Sony 
 
 Paul McCartney Sues Sony to Get Back Beatles Songs 
 
 EXCLUSIVE 
 
 Paul McCartney is putting Sony Music on notice ... he's going to reclaim his copyright on a bunch of The Beatles hits in the very near future whether the label likes it or not. The suit -- which asks the court to affirm that these notices are valid and proper under the law -- seems to be an attempt to protect the former Beatle from a legal strategy the publishing company used in U.K. courts in December to hold off an attempt by Duran Duran to reclaim its publishing. “If that goes as defendants hope, defendants evidently intend to challenge Paul McCartney’s exercise of his termination rights on similar contractual grounds.” 
 
 A spokeswoman for Sony/ATV said, in a statement, “Sony/ATV has the highest respect for Sir Paul McCartney with whom we have enjoyed a long and mutually rewarding relationship with respect to the treasured Lennon & McCartney song catalog. "We have collaborated closely with both Sir Paul and the late John Lennon's Estate for decades to protect, preserve and promote the catalog's long-term value. We are disappointed that they have filed this lawsuit which we believe is both unnecessary and premature.” 
 
 Here's the full complaint:
– Sony currently holds the copyright to part of the Beatles catalog, including such hits as "Love Me Do" and "I Want to Hold Your Hand"—but Paul McCartney is suing to get the songs back. Per TMZ, the songs in question are the ones Michael Jackson once held the rights to; his estate sold the rights to Sony last year for $750 million. McCartney has been trying to get Sony to transfer the rights to him by 2018; as ABC News explains, he's been notifying Sony and the prior rights holders of his intention to reclaim the rights since 2008. A McCartney rep explains, per Rolling Stone, that the suit is attempting "to confirm his ownership" of the songs "which are granted to him by US copyright law." As Rolling Stone and Variety explain, the US Copyright Act says that for works in which creators transferred their interests before 1978, rights can be reclaimed by the creators 56 years after the original copyright date as long as termination notices are served to the current rights holder; next year will mark 56 years since McCartney started writing songs with John Lennon, and his suit notes that at the time the songs in question were created, he and Lennon typically transferred their rights to publishers in exchange for royalties. The Hollywood Reporter, which says the case "could become one of the most important legal battles in the music industry this decade," has more detail on the ins and outs of the law.