Jump to content

Mandolin Picker

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mandolin Picker

  1. "Lady in a Blue Mercedes" - Johnny Duncan and Janie Fricke
  2. "Champagne Ladies And Blue Ribbon Babies" - Ferlin Husky
  3. "Lefty's Old Guitar" - J.D. Crow and the New South https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-xKFh4iCGg How do we add videos now??
  4. As a follow-on to the post on the recent decision against Katy Perry concerning copyright infringement, here are two additional articles that provide food for thought. Does the Music Business Have a Copyright Trolling Problem? Full article at https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2019/07/30/music-copyright-troll-katy-perry/ What exactly constitutes copyright infringement of a musical work these days? You’ll have to ask a jury. In other words: nobody can safely answer the question of what constitutes musical copyright infringement unless the infringement is absolutely clear-cut and blatant. Otherwise, it’s fair game, with anything even remotely resembling something else vulnerable to litigatory attack. .... But what’s the difference between ‘blatantly infringing’ and ‘possibly infringing’? Unfortunately, neither the music industry, U.S. Copyright Law, nor the court systems have an answer to that question. Which means anything is fair game for infringement, with everything incentivizing trolls to pursue multi-million dollar lawsuits. .... And in the absence of a clear-cut standard of exactly what constitutes infringement of a musical work, cases like “Dark Horse” won’t be the exception in the coming years. They’ll be the rule. Kraftwerk Wins Its 20-Year Copyright Infringement Battle — Over a 2-Second Sample Full article at https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2019/07/30/kraftwerk-copyright-lawsuit/ Kraftwerk, the legendary electronic-pop band based out of Germany, has just won a 20-year-long lawsuit over the unauthorized use of a two-second sample of one of their songs. .... The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled, in short, that unauthorized sampling constitutes copyright infringement if the sampled sound is recognizable. In this instance, the sampled sound, though very short, was recognizable. .... The condensed explanation of these implications is that while the unauthorized use of two-second portions of songs can be classified as copyright infringement (or a lesser charge pertaining to the utilization of another’s intellectual property), sampling that includes ample changes does not qualify as unauthorized use or copyright infringement. ..... It’s probable that the near future will bring with it additional rulings based upon this precedent, and there’s no telling how artists, sound mixers, editors, and other music professionals will change their work habits as a result. The EU courts indicate a 2-second sample is enough to infringe copyright. The US courts have said small riffs, basic building blocks of music and unintentional copying can result in huge monetary outcomes. One thing is for sure, the current state of copyright in the US and around the world is in a huge mess, and it doesn't look like it is going to get any better any time soon.
  5. "It Wasn't His Child" - Skip Ewing [video=youtube;jwxRCEhPwsY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwxRCEhPwsY[/video]
  6. Actually, as soon as you commit it to paper (or electrons as the case my be), it is copyrighted under current US copyright law. Copyright is now assumed. There is no requirement to register a copyright (although it is still recommended to enhance your prospects of a favorable ruling in a copyright dispute).
  7. This is going to continue to happen and its going to get worse. The current state of copyright law has not seen any works enter public domain in over 20 years until this year. The works that entered this year are from 1923 - 95 years ago. Works being created today will not enter the public domain until 2114, possibly as late as 2139. So a child born today could live their entire life and never be able to use, modify or make use of anything created in their lifetime. Everything would have to be new and unique. Do you begin to see the problem? As a matter of perspective,(from Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyri..._United_States) The original copyright law was for 14 years, enacted in 1790. You could renew your copyright once. In 1840, copyright was changed to 28 years Copyright Act of 1976 changed it to "Either 75 years or the life of the author plus 50 years" The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 (also called the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act", because it prevented the copyright from expiring on the first commercial success of the cartoon character Mickey Mouse), increased it to 120 years, or the life of the author plus 70 years Also, intent has no bearing on the matter. Even if you never heard it, you still "copied" it. Duke Law University has a website dedicated to Public Domain. It contains some additional perspectives. It can be found at https://law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2019/. Makes for interesting reading. So good luck in not copying anything for 120 years!
  • Create New...