Et Tu Brute? EMI to Sue AOL Over Musical Infringement
QGambit writes "Salon.com is running an AP story about EMI Music suing AOL Time Warner for using songs from its music catalog on TBS and the AOL service without paying for them."EMI's publishing unit contends that AOL Time Warner is illegally using songs for promotional purposes from "The Wizard of Oz," "Singin' in the Rain," and other classic Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer movies."
Good. Now that they are turning on themselves, they will leave us alone for awhile."
The meat of the story is at the bottom of the article. Apparently TBS owns the rights to the movies that contain these songs. TBS is in turned owned by AOL/TW. But EMI claims that TBS cannot transfer the rights to its own parent company! The exact quote is:
This just seems like an argument between lawyers about the fine print in an old contract. Not really relevant to the whole IP debate. (I'm sure that won't stop the /. hordes from descending, though.<g>)
-- Brian
The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
two different things - the movie clips in radio shows can be seen as either excerpted for parody, or for discussion/example (or a loose interpretation of 'educational') - IANAL, but this probably falls under 'fair use' in most cases.
as for in movies and tv, that's a different (and lengthy) story. The songs used in movies (or anywhere else, for that matter) have to get permission from the publishers of the works (think of 'publisher' in this case as 'stock holder' - you can trade and sell publishing rights, as opposed to copyright, which always stays with the creator). You have both copyright and publishing rights to a song as soon as you create it, but you can sell a portion of the publishing or 'controlling' rights to someone else, so they can give permission for use in media. they can in turn sell those or a portion, etc.
This happens in all instances of the broadcast of the song (in canada, the rights are handled by SOCAN, in the states, it's ASCAP or ... damn, i forget the other one), and usage permission from a publisher is required. I recently had two of my songs used in a movie, and although I share writing credits with other people, I was able to give rights for their use. But had they just used it, I would have had proper recourse.
A lot of songs reside on databases that the tv/movie industry searches when they need a certain 'feel' or type of song - they then find on e of the publishers (people/companies with the right to give permission) and work out terms of agreement.
A lot of times, low-budget movies don't bother because they don't expect to make money. you can't get money from someone who doesn't have any, in other words. In most cases in TV, they probably do have permission, and have worked out a percentage deal or one-time fee, depending on the popularity of both the show and music.
You don't need Geeksintraining if you're on Slashdot.
Radio stations pay blanket licensing agreements to ASCAP and BMI (or another society in other countries)that allow them to broadcast music in the performance rights organisations' catalogs. They are regularly audited and billed based on various formulas. This system has been in place since the late 1930s, and works quite well. Radio stations, publishing companies, and sometimes artists can actually make a profit.