Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums :: For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights

I am interested in knowing if karaoke companies have a copyright of their own on the karaoke tracks they produce?

More specifically, does Sound Choice have a copyright on any/part/all of the tracks they have produced. If yes, would you mind calling out the appropriate copyright code information? I am interested in reading up on how the copyrighting of a derivative works is done.

-Chris

A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.

(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.

(a) Initial Ownership.— Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work. The authors of a joint work are coowners of copyright in the work.

(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.

(c) In any judicial proceedings the certificate of a registration made before or within five years after first publication of the work shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the certificate. The evidentiary weight to be accorded the certificate of a registration made thereafter shall be within the discretion of the court.

I think it is about time copyright and trademark laws change. They should favor the consumer not the publishers. With something we bought and paid for, we should be able to do whatever we want. Karaoke mfrs should get their piece from the PRO fees just like the regular music producers do, and then we should be able to shift away all the Karaoke we buy.

Smoothedge69 wrote:

Sure, except...

The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries ... .

-- U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, cl. 8.

Author:	chrisavis [ Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:18 pm ]
Post subject:	For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights
I am interested in knowing if karaoke companies have a copyright of their own on the karaoke tracks they produce? More specifically, does Sound Choice have a copyright on any/part/all of the tracks they have produced. If yes, would you mind calling out the appropriate copyright code information? I am interested in reading up on how the copyrighting of a derivative works is done. -Chris

Author:	mrmarog [ Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:12 am ]
Post subject:	Re: For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights
Some one earlier stated that what you are describing might fall into a category of a "new work" or "derivative work", but in order for that to come into play it would have to be substantially different, and of course that is counter to the way karaoke works. People what it as close to the original as possible.

Author:	JimHarrington [ Fri Nov 15, 2013 11:50 am ]
Post subject:	Re: For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights
chrisavis wrote: I am interested in knowing if karaoke companies have a copyright of their own on the karaoke tracks they produce? More specifically, does Sound Choice have a copyright on any/part/all of the tracks they have produced. If yes, would you mind calling out the appropriate copyright code information? I am interested in reading up on how the copyrighting of a derivative works is done. -Chris The short answer to your question is, of course, "yes." To take you through the steps is a bit more complicated. To start, you'll find a lot of important definitions in 17 U.S.C. § 101. A karaoke track--consisting of an audiovisual work (akin to a movie) comprising visual images synchronized to a sound recording--is a derivative work of the underlying musical composition. The term "derivative work" is defined in § 101 as follows: Quote: A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”. One of the exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a musical composition is the right to prepare derivative works. (17 U.S.C. § 106(2).) As a result of that "exclusive right," if the original work is still the subject of a valid copyright, the owner's permission is required in order to make a karaoke track. Note that because it is up to the owner to enforce his own copyright, that permission can be obtained at any point, before or after the making of the track. Derivative works are separately copyrightable from the original work (17 U.S.C. § 103(b)): Quote: (b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material. The copyright in a derivative work is vested in the author of the derivative work, not in the author of the original material (17 U.S.C. § 201(a)): Quote: (a) Initial Ownership.— Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work. The authors of a joint work are coowners of copyright in the work. However, note the words "in a work protected under this title." It may not be immediately obvious how those words apply to derivative works, but it relates to permission. If permission to make the derivative work was needed and not obtained, there is no copyright protection, and the karaoke producer does not have an enforceable copyright (17 U.S.C. §103(a)): Quote: (a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully. However, there is some question as to whether a defendant in a copyright suit, such as someone who's being sued by a karaoke producer for piracy, could raise § 103(a) as a defense, because the term "used unlawfully" implicates rights that the defendant does not own (those rights are owned, of course, by the music publisher). Where I come down on that is that I believe a defendant in a copyright action by a karaoke producer could only raise that defense by affirmatively showing that the karaoke producer had been adjudged liable for infringement and not subsequently licensed by the music publisher. This is particularly true in view of the (rebuttable) presumption of validity afforded to registered works, as long as they were registered within five years after first publication (17 U.S.C. § 410): Quote: (c) In any judicial proceedings the certificate of a registration made before or within five years after first publication of the work shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the certificate. The evidentiary weight to be accorded the certificate of a registration made thereafter shall be within the discretion of the court. Hope this helps.

Author:	Smoothedge69 [ Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights
I think it is about time copyright and trademark laws change. They should favor the consumer not the publishers. With something we bought and paid for, we should be able to do whatever we want. Karaoke mfrs should get their piece from the PRO fees just like the regular music producers do, and then we should be able to shift away all the Karaoke we buy.

Author:	JimHarrington [ Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights
Smoothedge69 wrote: I think it is about time copyright and trademark laws change. They should favor the consumer not the publishers. With something we bought and paid for, we should be able to do whatever we want. Karaoke mfrs should get their piece from the PRO fees just like the regular music producers do, and then we should be able to shift away all the Karaoke we buy. Sure, except... The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries ... . -- U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, cl. 8.

Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums https://mail.karaokescene.net/forums/

For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights https://mail.karaokescene.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=28997	Page 1 of 1

Author:	doowhatchulike [ Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: For Harrington: Karaoke and Compyrights
HarringtonLaw wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: I think it is about time copyright and trademark laws change. They should favor the consumer not the publishers. With something we bought and paid for, we should be able to do whatever we want. Karaoke mfrs should get their piece from the PRO fees just like the regular music producers do, and then we should be able to shift away all the Karaoke we buy. Sure, except... The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries ... . -- U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, cl. 8. Sorry, you all...looks like you have to get in line for a constitutional amendment to get with the times, behind gun control and same sex marriage...

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/