[LAU] A weak link in the license chain: Releasing on false assumptions?

Hello list, any opinion or experience for this case? The main question is: Who is responsible? A free, copylefted work is taken to build a derived work. This is realistic for GPL but much more realistic for a Creative Commons work, maybe a music piece. The derived work is released properly and 100% according to the original license, so there is no problem in that. (Imagine here a phase in which the derived works becomes popular, but that is not strictly necessarry) Later it turns out that the original work itself was a copyright break because music was stolen or the code was taken from a closed program where the initial releaser had access to (@ work or however). Now what happens? Of course the intial release was wrong and there will be legal consequences, no question. But what about the derived works and their derived works? Greetings, Nils