Slashdot Mirror
Download Only Song to Crack the Top 40
nagora writes "The BBC is reporting that next week's UK music chart may have the first sign of the end of the recording industry as we know it. From this week (7th Jan, 2006), all downloaded music sales are counted in the official UK chart, not just tracks which have had a physical media release. Now, an unsigned band called Koopa is poised to enter the top 40 without any old-world recording, distribution, or production deals. Band member Joe Murphy says "If someone comes along and gives us an offer, we'll talk to them." before continuing on to add the words the recording industry has been having nightmares about since the introduction of the mp3 format: "If we can get enough exposure and get in the top 40 by the end of the week, do we necessarily need a large label? Probably nowadays, no you don't." Is this finally the crack in the dam we've all been waiting for to wash away the entrenched monopolies of 20th century music production? Or just a sell-out waiting to happen?"
The song is Blag, Steal, and Borrow and they have a Video, if you wish to hear the song.
Zing!
Copyrights protect creative works once they are released into the public
No, they protect works upon creation. Further, there is some desirability in them doing so, or else we might have people stealing manuscripts in order to get around copyright. This has happened in the past, more or less, and should be dealt with.
I can put a circle-C (©) on a piece of original work and it is protected by law from that point forward.
Actually it's protected once you fix the work in a tangible medium of expression. But I would agree that strict notice formalities are a good thing and should be brought back.
Now, copyrights can be contested if prior art existed before you released your work and made your claim to copyright on it.
I think that you're confusing copyrights and patents. Copyrightable works have to be original, but they don't have to be novel (i.e. never done before). Patents have to be novel. It's entirely possible for Alice to create a copyrightable work, and for Bob to independently create and identical work and for Bob's work to also be copyrightable. So long as Bob doesn't copy from Alice, it's fine. That the works are identical doesn't matter.
free speech as they are not restricting original oration or free thinking
Free speech has nothing to do with originality. If I recite Hamlet, I use my right of free speech just as much as if I recite something I wrote myself. Both original and unoriginal speech are the same for first amendment purposes.
then an NDA is a good way to protect the rights of ownership
No, not really.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Despite what the story says, it is NOT all downloads which count. If you look at the chart rules (http://www.theofficialcharts.com/docs/NEW_Single_ Chart_Rules_2007.pdf, there are very stringent conditions on a downloaded track being counted for the chart. Amongst these are the minimum dealer price of £0.40 per track. This will immediately preclude any tracks released under Creative Commons etc. It also only seems to apply to track downloaded from 'official' online retailers.