cathyweeksAug-23-2011 4:52pm
Copyright is valuable – ‘The Birthday Song’ earns $2 Million a year in royalties
Blog post submitted by : Vanessa Kaster, Esq
http://iplegalfreebies.wordpress.com/
Would you have guessed that the song, ‘Happy Birthday to You’ generates an estimated $2 million dollars a year in royalties? (and has earned this much annually since 1996.) It’s only eight measures long, spans an octave and was written for children …but it’s a BIG money maker.
The song has appeared in over 140 movies, in countless advertisements for products ranging from cars to cereals to insurance to paper products and pet stores… and was featured in the world’s first singing telegram in 1933. Royalties are earned for public performances of the song as well as its use in movies, television shows, advertisements, music boxes, theatrical productions and the like. (Just an fyi… singing it around the dinner table or serenading your friend is a royalty-free private performance.)
‘Happy Birthday to You’ was written by two sisters… one was an educator and the other a composer. They were knowledgeable about copyright law and took steps to register their work for copyright protection. They may not have guessed that their song would become one of the most popular songs in the 20th Century…. earning over an estimated $45 million dollars to date. (Spending $35 to register your music for copyright protection pays off –> http://t.co/ynaHCbX )
(Since my blog http://iplegalfreebies.wordpress.com/ just celebrated its first birthday… this is a timely topic.)
BY: Vanessa Kaster, Esq
Copyright Law: Using quotes from someone else in your book, blog or website
Blog Post submitted by Vanessa Kaster:
Dr. Martin Luther King Junior’s speech ‘I Have a Dream’ is one of the most recognizable speeches in US history and it is covered by copyright protection. Dr. King registered the speech for copyright protection in 1963. This leads to the question, when can quotes from his famous speech or other copyright protected works be used in other books, blogs or websites without permission?
The answer to this question is vague, ambiguous and needs to be analyzed on a case by case basis. Generally speaking, it is possible to use limited portions of a copyright protected work for news reporting, commentary, criticism and scholarly reports under the fair use doctrine of the US copyright law. However, there are no legal rules permitting ‘free use’ of a certain number of words or percentage of a copyrighted work. Additionally, there are several factors that weigh heavily into the analysis: 1) the purpose and character of the use, 2) how much money will be made from the use, 3) the nature of the work, 4) the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and 5) the effect of the use on the potential market and value of the copyrighted work.
Unfortunately there is not a clear rule regarding when and how much of a copyright protected work can be used without permission. Dr. King’s heirs have the legal right under copyright law to monetize the ‘I Have a Dream’ speech that they inherited and to treat it as commercial property. (The safest bet when quoting from copyright protected work is to seek, pay for, and get permission to use the material.)
Note, that crediting the source does not substitute getting permission to use or quote from the material.
Note 2, any work published in the US before 1923 is in the public domain and is FREE to use and quote from. (copyright protection has expired on these works)
(For more information on this topic –> http://t.co/rLurDnX )
recently launched —-> http://www.kasterlegal.com/
Tattoo Copyright FACE-off
Blog post submitted by Vanessa Kaster:
The hoopla surfacing over the unauthorized use of a copyrighted tattoo that is prominently featured in the Hangover II movie sets the stage for examining the elements of a strong copyright claim. Elements of a strong copyright infringement claim are: 1) is the work original and vested with copyright protection; 2) was the work copied; and 3) was the work copied without authorization.
- Is the tattoo an original work vested with copyright protection? Copyright protection is automatically vested in an original work that has been fixed in a tangible form. A tattoo is ‘fixed’ and if the design is original, then there isn’t any reason why it wouldn’t be covered by copyright protection. In this instance, the tattoo artist claims that he created the design. Hopefully he did. However, one way that the movie studio may try to overcome this claim of originality is by researching ancient or historical tattoo patterns. If for example, this tattoo was common among Maori-warriors, Samurai or some other ancient sect, tribe or culture… then the artist’s claim of originality could be trumped depending on how unique and original his version is.
- Was the tattoo copied? You bet. Rather blatantly… and from what I’ve read the exact copying of Mike Tyson’s tattoo is an element of the movie plot. I just took a look at online photos of the movie character and Mike Tyson for comparison… and the tattoos are virtually identical. (looks better on Tyson, though).
- Was the tattoo copied without authorization? The artist claims that he didn’t authorize the use.
As unexpected as it might seem, this has the makings of a strong copyright infringement claim. I’m rooting for the tattoo artist… and I hope he negotiates a solid settlement.
[the lawsuit is: Whitmill v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.]
recently launched —-> http://www.kasterlegal.com/
Copyright Protection Starts Automatically
Blog Post submitted by Vanessa Kaster:
When does copyright protection start? It starts automatically, as soon as you create an original work. It’s like having a baby (ie your creative, brain child)… as soon as it’s in this world it’s yours and it’s covered by copyright protection. You don’t have to DO anything… other than create it and put it in a fixed and tangible form.
What does this mean? As soon as you have written a song down; made a recording; typed out a manuscript; applied pen or paint to paper… copyright protection starts automatically.
Using the copyright symbol © and registering your copyright with the US Copyright Office are two extra steps that give you more rights in your copyrighted work if and when you want to sell it, transfer it or protect it from being abused, misused or copied by other folks.
There is 99.999% chance that you have created original works that are already covered by copyright protection… even if you didn’t know it.
For more info SEE:
–> How and why to use the © copyright symbol?: http://t.co/iBjePPU
–> Copyright registration only costs $35: http://t.co/ykPmZ3T
Vanessa’s blog is: http://iplegalfreebies.wordpress.com
Amazon Announces Cloud Player/Cloud Drive
Amazon announced a new product/service offering recently in an apparent bid to advance the digital music purchase and consumption paradigm.
Cloud Player and Cloud Drive will allow users both to purchase music which they can then stream remotely from any web-enabled device and also to upload files from their current digital libraries (including photos and videos) for additional streaming capability. This model is not unlike the Lala Music Mover cloud-syncing service released a few years ago which failed to gain any significant degree of traction.
An aspect of note with regard to the current offering is the apparent lack of need for large blanket licenses from major record labels which has proven to be the bane of a number of aspiring music streaming services including the US version of Spotify. Amazon claims that Cloud Drive functions along the same lines as Google Docs and other user-directed cloud storage services and thus does not require any licenses from labels.
Amazon does contend that the ability for labels to participate in the process would exist for some model in which a single label-licensed file of a commonly uploaded song could be substituted for a user’s copy sparing the user the hassle of uploading it themselves.
It is unclear at this point exactly to what extent this model will prove to have an impact on the industry at large but this does appear to continue along recent trends for such services although Amazon’s ubiquitous nature may prove to be the piece of the puzzle which has been missing up to this point in terms of success.
For more on the Cloud Player and Cloud Drive, visit HERE.
-Patrick Reagin (RabbitHole Consulting/Center for Music and Arts Entrepreneurship)
THREE MYTHS ABOUT MUSIC SAMPLING
Submitted by Vanessa Kaster
MYTH: sampling less than 6 seconds of someone else’s music is okay
MYTH: sampling less than 5 words of someone else’s lyrics is okay
MYTH: sampling from a church group is okay
ALL THREE OF THESE STATEMENTS ARE MYTHS. None of these instances are an automatic green light when it comes to sampling someone else’s music without permission.
[For more on Music Sampling see —-> http://iplegalfreebies.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/music-sampling-a-few-do’s-and-don’ts/]
Home | RSS Feed | Archive
Artists House Music is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Feel free to reproduce our content. Just provide a link back to our website, and please don't use it for any commercial purpose.
