Ministry of sound trying to copyright song play order - in lawsuit with Spotify
Home :: Free word - say whatever you like which does not fit under the other topics. :: Ministry of sound trying to copyright song play order - in lawsuit with SpotifyReply
Ministry of sound trying to copyright song play order - in lawsuit with Spotify Posted on: 04.09.2013 by Rosina Steinkuehler "The case will hinge on whether compilation albums qualify for copyright protection due to the selection and arrangement involved in putting them together."So this is a bit interesting. Ministry of Sound UK is trying to lay copyright to their 'curated' compilation CDs track ordering. Question - if Ministry of Sound can copyright track ordering then why can a DJ not do the same? Seems like this might open up pandoras box. http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...d-sues-spotify | |
| Nikole Resende 08.09.2013 |
Originally Posted by GeekGod
But there is something that can already be copyrighted for your mixtapes: the mixing itself (as long as it's creative... ) Or should I rather say "could"....? As long as you don't own the rights to all the tracks on your mixtape it would be wiser not to make any claims that would draw attention to your work. Making copyright claims for the track ordering and mixing on your tape without having cleared the copyrights for all the tracks would be about as wise a drug dealer calling the police because someone stole his drugs... |
| Rolanda Clodfelder 06.09.2013 |
Originally Posted by Xonetacular
They are a relatively small label, so someone throws together an Album with exactly the same track listing AND order, puts the Ministry of Sound VolX Name on it and they receive zero $ for tracks being played that they already had to license from labels to put on the said album in the first place. As it mentions this is less of an issue with the likes of the "Now" albums as the compilers already own the rights to the tracks on those albums and get paid accordingly per play. I cant see them winning but could envisage a situation where: Royalties must be issued if Spotify do not cease and Desist playlists when requested by the brand that is being plagiarized e.g. People will not be allowed to create playlists called "Global Underground", Ministry of Sound, "MOS" and the likes. And IF they do, that the brand in question will be able to gain royalties as a result. As an example: If a playlist called "Ministry of Sound Vol IIX" gets 500,000 more hits than the same Track playlist called "Mickey Joe's Club Hits" its obvious that plagiarizing the Ministry of Sounds Brand Name was the reason the playlist was popular. In that case I would say MOS deserve Royalties of SOME sort at the very least for using their Name to promote the product without proper brand licensing. |
| Hellen Mindrup 05.09.2013 |
Originally Posted by jdownesbaird
|
| Rosina Steinkuehler 04.09.2013 | "The case will hinge on whether compilation albums qualify for copyright protection due to the selection and arrangement involved in putting them together." So this is a bit interesting. Ministry of Sound UK is trying to lay copyright to their 'curated' compilation CDs track ordering. Question - if Ministry of Sound can copyright track ordering then why can a DJ not do the same? Seems like this might open up pandoras box. http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...d-sues-spotify |
| Nikole Resende 08.09.2013 |
Originally Posted by GeekGod
But there is something that can already be copyrighted for your mixtapes: the mixing itself (as long as it's creative... ) Or should I rather say "could"....? As long as you don't own the rights to all the tracks on your mixtape it would be wiser not to make any claims that would draw attention to your work. Making copyright claims for the track ordering and mixing on your tape without having cleared the copyrights for all the tracks would be about as wise a drug dealer calling the police because someone stole his drugs... |
| Rolanda Clodfelder 06.09.2013 |
Originally Posted by Xonetacular
They are a relatively small label, so someone throws together an Album with exactly the same track listing AND order, puts the Ministry of Sound VolX Name on it and they receive zero $ for tracks being played that they already had to license from labels to put on the said album in the first place. As it mentions this is less of an issue with the likes of the "Now" albums as the compilers already own the rights to the tracks on those albums and get paid accordingly per play. I cant see them winning but could envisage a situation where: Royalties must be issued if Spotify do not cease and Desist playlists when requested by the brand that is being plagiarized e.g. People will not be allowed to create playlists called "Global Underground", Ministry of Sound, "MOS" and the likes. And IF they do, that the brand in question will be able to gain royalties as a result. As an example: If a playlist called "Ministry of Sound Vol IIX" gets 500,000 more hits than the same Track playlist called "Mickey Joe's Club Hits" its obvious that plagiarizing the Ministry of Sounds Brand Name was the reason the playlist was popular. In that case I would say MOS deserve Royalties of SOME sort at the very least for using their Name to promote the product without proper brand licensing. |
| Romelia Stankard 06.09.2013 | what a joke.. |
| Isa Erik 06.09.2013 | Crazy shit.... |
| Hellen Mindrup 05.09.2013 |
Originally Posted by jdownesbaird
|
| Delena Katherman 05.09.2013 | Good point. And, how long does a tracklist have to be before I can copyright it? Four songs? Ten songs? If someone accidentally plays your sequence of "curated" songs, does he owe you money? |
<< Back to Free word - say whatever you like which does not fit under the other topics.Reply