|
|
Joined:
December 2003
Posts: 1889
Location: Central Massachusetts | Now setting aside all politics, religion, and Yoko Ono hatred aspects of this that may be tempting.. this seems like a huge misinterpretation of the Fair Use Doctrine of copyright law.
Yoko Ono Loses Bid to Bar Use Of "Imagine" In Film
I've always understood that the Fair Use Doctrine allowed me to use portions of a work in the process of criticism or commentary of THAT WORK ITSELF, not just any old thing.
So as long as I use it in the context of criticism or commentary of ANYTHING I CAN DREAM OF, I can use a copyrighted work??
Seems like this completely takes away somebody's power as a copyright holder to restrict how their work is used. "Oh, you think I used your music in the background of my Ford commercial unfairly? No, it was a commentary on how Chevy sucks."
Am I in left field here? This just seems very odd. Wondering how those of you out there with "published works" see this?
DISCLAIMER: I haven't seen the movie, but I like the song! ;)
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2006
Posts: 6268
Location: Florida Central Gulf Coast | I'm soooo tired of our litigious society...
Whoops, did that statement belong to anyone here? If not, then it's mine, all MINE!!! 
 |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2005
Posts: 4833
Location: Campbell River, British Columbia | I dunno about any 'fair use' concept but once a song is recorded and released it is my understanding it can be covered by anyone willing to pay a license fee. The only control the writer has is first release rights. As far as I know. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 2491
Location: Copenhagen Denmark | REVOLUTION !! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 10777
Location: Keepin' It Weird in Portland, OR | I always thought that once a song was 25 years old it entered the Public Domain...
But I ain't no Lawyer... If I was, I recently burnt my lip on a McDonald's Hot Apple Pie!
Left a blister for days too... :( |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2007
Posts: 494
Location: Location Location Location | I believe Public Domain is the lifetime of the writer plus 50 yrs. They mave changed that to +75 yrs. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2007
Posts: 494
Location: Location Location Location | It's different from country to country. I just checked and had to correct myself. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2005
Posts: 4081
Location: Utah | As I understand it, copyright gives the owner first performance rights only, plus specified royalties. So, Lennon/McCartney had the right to record the song first, or not to allow it to be recorded at all. But once they recorded it, anybody else can record it. But, other artists must pay royalties as specified by statute. So, I could record Imagine for a movie soundtrack as long as I pay royalties.
The article didn't say if it was a new recording of the song. In fact, it sort of implied that it was the original recording. If it is the original recording, the court decision seems surprising. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2003
Posts: 1889
Location: Central Massachusetts | FlySig, that's how I read it as well. Yoko references "the clip" and complained that the way it was presented in the closing credits implied she endorsed the use. In reading a little more, here's what the producer's claimed at the time the suit was filed..
"Unbiased viewers of the film will see that the Imagine clip was used as part of a social commentary in the exercise of free speech and freedom of inquiry."
But now on their website they say: "We are disappointed therefore that Yoko Ono and others have decided to challenge our free speech right to comment on the song Imagine in our documentary film."
Interesting. I guess without seeing the clip in context I'll have to reserve judgement. But it sure seems to set a bad precedent. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | How did the Beatles keep their songs out of commercials for so many years? I thought they basically refused use of them (until MJ bought the publishing rights).
Maybe they just set the license fees so high no one would touch them. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2002
Posts: 8307
Location: Tennessee | Commercial use is a whole different kettle of fish. This ruling applies to "social commentary". I think the lines of distinction are blurry, however ... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2003
Posts: 1792
Location: Rego Park, NY, | Originally posted by Old Man Arthur:
I always thought that once a song was 25 years old it entered the Public Domain...
But I ain't no Lawyer... If I was, I recently burnt my lip on a McDonald's Hot Apple Pie!
Left a blister for days too... :( You would probably have a lawsuit if you kept the apple pie between your legs while you were driving. |
|
| |
OT: "Imagine" / Copyright / Fair Use Doctrine...
