Slashdot Mirror
Dance Copyright Enforced by DMCA
goombah99 writes "The "creator" of the Dance move known as the electric slide has filed a DMCA based takedown notice for videos he deems to infringe and because they show "bad dancing". He is also seeking compensation from the use of the dance move at a wedding celebration shown on the Ellen Degeneres Show. Next up, the Funky Chicken, the moonwalk, and the Hustle? More seriously, does the DMCA have any limit on its scope?"
Richard Silver is lucky that noone's managed to copyright crap web pages. His page (with animated email gif & quicktime plugin required) does not leave a font, colour, alignment, highlighting, style or indentation untouched.
My eyeballs feel.... violated.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
No more copyrighted music at weddings without a license. I'm sure somebody owns the copyright on "Here comes the Bride". You can license it for your wedding at the low low price of $1995.
1) The DMCA is not an organization, it is a law. Laws get enforced. They don't go around doing the enforcing.
2) The claim has yet to be upheld (enforced) by any court or other governmental body.
3) Even if the letter is acted upon and the video is removed, that still doesn't indicate whether or not the DMCA is being properly applied (if not, then the DMCA can't be demonized in this situation). All it means is that someone decided removing the video was the easiest way to handle a potential problem.
Maybe this guy thought the DMCA was the Dance Millenium Copyright Act and wanted send the dance dance people to sing sing.
the Pogo!
Zoid.com
every day I see something more stupid than the last. It's time people realised you can't 'own' something like this.
I fear that one day, every aspect of life will be owned.
Western culture is decaying to the point of absolute stupidity. It's no wonder some people want to blow it up.
How about stretching and yawning at the same time! I'll make billions!!!
That's just copywrong.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
When YouTube/Google turn on their revenue sharing plan for video makers, this is going to get ugly. One of the tenets for "fair use" is whether or not the use of the copyrighted material was whether the intent was of a commercial nature or not. Once revenue sharing starts, millions of legally "naive" video uploaders are suddenly going to find themselves thrown into the nasty side of the fair use litmus test. Watch how the DMCA takedowns and litigation filings skyrocket once money is involved (as it always does).
Robert Oschler - RobotsRule.com
Should it be patented or copyrighted?
It has to be a joke! ...it is a joke, right?
I guess that mean we must stop moonwalking all over the place or be sued by Michael Jackson.
Seriously, is it that hard to understand that ITS is the possessive, and that IT'S is a contraction for IT IS???
There was a time when US used to invent. The rate at which we are seeing DMCA and patent infringement cases these days, it is a sorry state of affair. What would they copyright next. I think FART should be a good candidate. OK guys I am ready file a copyright for farting. Any one having an urge to fart, better have a good cash reserve.
The more the law is used like this, the more it will be seen as absurd. When the DMCA is used to stomp on uses of technology the wider public can't understand it. When it's used to stop you from being filmed dancing a certain way in public it's understandable by everyone.
In my firm opinion, this guy is just a pompous little prick. Desperately wanting to have a little piece of something all to himself that he can call his own and won't share with anyone else. I mean it's just genius that he's come up with THREE dance moves in thirty years! My heart goes out to this guy, with such intensive research and development that it takes on average ten years to produce a completely original move ;) he definately deserves the full protection of the law no matter how frivilous he is.
Unavailable for comment.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
There are something like 2+ million weddings per year in the US. Imagine if every couple-to-be sent a letter to him, asking for permission to tape people doing the dance. Put in something like, "If you do not respond to this request within 30 days, you hereby grant us a royalty-free license to record and distribute representations of the dance in any form, good or bad, electronic or otherwise."
Let's see him and his lawyers try to answer 6000 letters a day.
-- Fugacity: Confusing chemists since 1908
Great, there goes my night out, the only way I can dance is badly.. now someone has gone and copyrighted that..
What I want to know is, how can you issue a takedown notice for someone "incorrectly" copying your pathetic dance? I mean, I was to post up a video of me badly singing a song (I can't sing any other way), there is no way a take down notice would be put into effect. You could probably use the same law that Weird Al Yankovic used to use his parodies.. It might even be considered a new work.
- paul
http://www.paulpichugin.com.au/
Pmp @ DeviantArt
...but since this is the internet, I'd probably make more money if I copyright the 'Dirty Sanchez', 'Standing up in a shower doing it from behind' and 'Two midgets, a trapeze and the running start'.
The summary for this story is just weird. The DMCA is just the method of enforcement, because the performance is being displayed online.
Choreography is just one of the items that are protected by copyright, which is listed in 17 USC 102:
(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories:
(1) literary works;
(2) musical works, including any accompanying words;
(3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;
(4) pantomimes and choreographic works;
(5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;
(6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
(7) sound recordings; and
(8) architectural works.
This statute was last revised in 1990. The DMCA did not add anything to it. I don't know how long choreography has been protected by copyright, but I would gamble that it's been at least fifty years or so.
therefore you all owe me each a million dollars in damages from stinking up my precious air with their cheeto breath!
- signed dearly "mr. breathless"
He's not trying to stop people from doing the Electric Slide, he's trying to stop people from doing it incorrectly! He's mroe than willing to share the correct steps with everyone!
Of course trying to drill the correct steps into the thick booze-addled skulls of all the way-behind-the-curve morons that show up at people's weddings and make asses of themselves may be just a much a fool's errand as...well...getting Slashdot idiots to read articles!
You're using her as bait, Master!
makes me wish the electric slide was suddenly turned into the electric water slide.
I'm tagging this with "apostrophe." Slashdot editors, gb2hs.
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
its analog!
>>but since this is the internet, I'd probably make more money if I copyright the 'Dirty Sanchez', 'Standing up in a shower doing it from behind' and 'Two midgets, a trapeze and the running start'.
Hey I invented 'Standing up in a shower doing it from behind'! I wish I didn't though. Everytime I do it that way I can't sit down for a week.
Wouldn't that mean that it was public domain for 26 years?
Wouldn't it also mean that all of those people who were "doing it wrong" weren't really doing *his* dance, but another one that's strikingly similiar?
Does he really have a floor to dance on? I can't imagine that he does. If so, then I'm going to copyright the "coreography" of copywriting bad dances 26 years after the fact. Then I can send a C&D to him and tell him he can't copyright his crappy dance.
Note: Terms used, such as "crappy dance" are purely opinion, and cannot be misconstrued as anything but opinion.
Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
Long before the DMCA, copyright subsisted in choreography (and thus dance moves) both at a statutory and common law level. I don't have my IP text with me to give cites, but if someone could help out I'd appreciate it.
The Electric Slide? That's out of this world...
Have you read my journal today?
If they didn't do it correctly, then wouldn't that mean they DID NOT do the electric slide and at worse just made themselves look like an ass by doing it wrong? I don't think this guy has a leg to stand on here.
In case he does, how much does that guy who whacks people in the back of the knees charge anyway? I have some business for him. Break a leg indeed!
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
Hopefully it'll put an end to the Macarena.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
the market will find ways to route around it.
Where police fail, private security will suceed.
He wants people to do The Electric Slide "correctly" aka his way, because if they don't do his copyrighted dance then he can't sue companies like Oprah, Ellen, Movies, local communities doing a dance to pay him royalty fees. This is about money. Make no mistake about it. And he is hard up for it too. He is out to claim that any line dancing done to the song "The Electric Slide" is HIS line dance. I say B.S.
BTW - If "Ice Ice Baby" can be considered to have different music from "Under Pressure" because of 1 minor change to the tempo, then 1 different (or incorrect) step for the "Electric Slide" makes it a completely different dance.
Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
Next up, the Funky Chicken, the moonwalk, and the Hustle?
Michael Jackson has patented the melting nose.
Table-ized A.I.
... can anyone say Hokey-Pokey?
Things fall apart, it's scientific.
Boy, would I like to have a copyright on Karma Sutra moves!
Table-ized A.I.
Has anyone else noticed that he is using that clip of copyrighted characters on his website doing line dancing. How much do you want to bet he doesn't have permission from the copyright holders to show that. Also, the music he has on line, the video he has on-line and THE VIDEO HE IS SELLING all contain the song The Electric Slide which he is NOT the copyright holder for.
One quick call to the RIAA and he is done for. Fight fire with Fire.
The only sad part is that I find myself defending line-dancing of any kind.
Britney Spears sues a group of third-graders playing Christmas carols on their recorders.. it turns out they were playing her copyrighted songs, but they only SOUNDED like Christmas songs, because they were playing them VERY BADLY!
Remember the formula, kids:
current USA copyright law + vegetards = shitcock
What was the original intention of copyright laws? Wasn't it to prevent people from gaining from other people's works?
No on all counts.
.sig withheld by request
The ultimate irony would be if the videographer claimed copyright, the way so many wedding photographers do, and went after him for having a copy of the video. I haven't heard much about it lately, but apparently it is *really* difficult to find a wedding photographer who will simply take his fee and turn over the digital files and/or negatives. I once scanned my parent's wedding photo, and it occured to me that if I were to actually try and legally comply with copyright, I would have to locate the photographer in another state. He took the picture 50 years ago. He's probably dead. I'd have to find his heirs. Needless to say, I "pirated" my parent's wedding picture. Come and get me!
Now, I'm not war3z kiddie. I'm actually in favor of intellectual property as a concept (legal mumbo-jumbo about it not being property? feh!). Howeve, when it fails the "common sense" test in such an obvious way, you have to employ something called "judgement". Hopefully, that's what the judge will do, and pencil whip this silliness right ouf of court.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
If the choreography for the dance is copyrighted and they are doing it "wrong", then they aren't actually copying the copyrighted material, so copyright infringement can't apply.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I wonder if he receive the rights to use Spider Man, what looks to be one of the transformers, aladin or whoever that guy in the back is suppose to be, and one of the girls from the Sims? (granted the only one I can ID for sure is Spider Man... but still...)
Since you have already staked your end around the rear end I will
claim my monopoly on urination and to make sure people don't cheat
with catheters I am going to cover those too. Want to pass water?
Fine. I'll let you for a dollar which is a fair price considering
you are polluting the environment with uric acid, phosphorous
compounds, salts and metals.
On a more serious note, why don't we just short-circuit this entire
preposterous system that special interest built, spare us the slow
but steady slide into an all-out fascist regime and just get on
with it. Bring your swastikas.
As most people are shithouse dancers, especially when they've had a skinful at a wedding, just claim a personal performance/recording thereof as a parody: fair use, right?
"Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
Yup ...you heard it! Some sucka is gonna copyright ole lady thumb and her four daughters. Now all you bathroom sitters are gonna hafta pay up every time ya see the joy man. If ya don't, well then that joker will issue a take down notice to yer pants.
Has he enforced his copyright before? I'm doubting it. Don't people have to show proof that they've done their best making sure noone violates their copyright in order to be able to keep it?
The greatest experience we can have is the mysterious.
- Albert Einstein
God bless you, Mr. Schultz, for your tireless counter-proliferation efforts! I long suspected that you, like Einstein and the atomic bomb, forever regretted the evil you loosed upon an unsuspecting world.
With a little help from the US legal system, we may yet destroy the menace to society that is the Electric Slide.
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
If only they did this with the Macarena.
This is awesome, it looks like the 'inventor' of the electric slide is actually serious but no matter ; we need something this ridiculous for the courts to go, "oh wait, maybe that was retarded of us to pass that ridiculous legislation in the first place". My only complaint about the whole thing is that the case itself, as the article points out - is on shaky ground solely because the videos may fall under fair-use rights.
The problem is that you can copyright a dance (any damned dance) in the first place. I'm going to go copyright 20 different punches, kicks and acrobatic moves then get paid by every single kung-fu movie producer in the world. This is totally ridiculous.
The best quote from the article, " I don't want future generations having to learn it wrong and then relearn it as I am being faced with now ". Seriously? This guy's got to be a complete idiot. Like this would ever be a scenario:
"Hi there guy that invented the electric slide. Wow, I'd love to take dance lessons from you"
"Great, let's get started - I'm going to show you the electric slide"
"Ohhh, I don't need to learn that one - I already know how to do it"
"show me"......... "you're doing it wrong"
"Oh MY GOD! WRONG? NOW I HAVE TO LEARN IT ALL OVER AGAIN!"
moron.
---
The Electric Slide Performed Correctly
Ace
Sorry, I meant Mr. Silver. Mr. Schultz was the guy who unleashed the evil that is "Peanuts" on an unsuspecting world.
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
If anybody is wondering, the quote unquote correct way to perform The Electric Slide is available here.
Ace
Someone could copyright jerkin' off and bankrupt the slashdot user base.
today is spelling optional day.
Get a meme going then slap down the people expressing the meme. Eventually you'll piss off enough people to get the DMCA gutted.
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
Wonder if the wow Tauren dance infringes...
In the USA, Stanley Mills, NY. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_Dance
I remember when I was a wee freshman fresh of the boat, they made us go to a baseball game and they had thing thing go, and it scarred me for life. Get your pitchforks ready. These bastards are going down!
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
Something tells me that since this is the Internet, you'd make a lot more money if you could copyright moving one hand up and down vigorously.
So, all dances which are similar to his but not his are his? Was there nothing remotely like "his" dance that he got "wrong" that should have prevented him from owning this dance for the next hundred years?
These are issues anyone can understand. They might agree that people can't rip off broadway shows and movies to make other shows and movies but they will never be so servile as to think they need someone's permission to dance. More, they expect to be able to sing, dance and share the moment with their friends.
As Lessing put it, suddenly with new technology there's a new common sense. The example he used was the vertical ownership of land. Once upon a time, ownership was theorized to cover all of land from the Earth's core to the stars. Shortly after the invention of airplanes, two chicken farmers tried to sue an airport. The case was shot down because it flew in the face of common sense. It will be obnoxious cases like the Electric Slide that will set straight just what is owned with a copyright to a dance, and it's not going to be forcing everyone to ask one person permission to share their home movies.
With that part of a bad law defeated, people will start to want other freedoms.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You forgot 'the cheerleader and the giraffe'. Too late, I already copyrighted it!
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
That's the one I'd go for and then sue those who performed it at a public event, especially a rich bastard who yelled "Developer, developer, developer" while doing it.
Incoming chair, duck!!
It sure looked a lot like the "Silly Walk" that John Cleese does in Monty Python's Ministry of Silly Walks sketch. I think Mr. Cleese should sue him!
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
Maybe we'll just end up with new release groups dedicated to uploading vids on GooTube through anon proxies or some other unexpected circumvention of the rules.
They'll end up playing cat & mouse forever, unless they keep clamping down.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
This is the whole point of revenue sharing in the first place. Remember, you are potentially violating copyright if the intent is to make money. Now, with the new scheme, it can be successfully argued that any upload to Youtube is with the intention of making money.
I would be willing to bet that the revenue sharing is part of the negotiations that Google have been in with the major studios. The agreement being the studios generally allow (for a fee of course) content to be on Youtube, but the revenue sharing gives them a larger stick to go after people who use copyrighted material in a way the studios don't like. Youtube then agrees that they won't get in the way of the studios pulling those things down.
There is no way Youtube is coughing up money for any other reason than they are getting a return on their investment. The above is the only way they are getting RoI on revenue sharing that makes sense.
> No more copyrighted music at weddings without a license. I'm sure somebody owns the copyright on "Here comes the Bride". You can license it for your wedding at the low low price of $1995.
What a ripoff! SCO would license it to me for only $699...
The more rediculous DMCA complaints that happen the better. More people will realize what a mistake this was and will have justification for asking Congress to repeal it.
Now whether common sense will prevail, I don't know. Ideally I would want to see a flood of complaints that take down every single video, picture and sound on the internet. Then the politicians would be affected and businesses would complain and action would be taken. I'll sacrifice short term pain for long term freedom in this instance.
Spelling and grammar mistakes specifically left in to give the grammar and spelling nazis a meaning to their life.
At least here in Australia a single dance move is not copyrightable. A dance school I once went to tested that in court by losing when they tried to stop former students from starting up in competition. A sequence of moves can be copyrighted. I guess it is roughly like trying to copyright a musical interval compared to an entire song.
It seems at bit strange that the choreographer is trying to stop "bad dancing". The essence of his complaint seems to be "I want to use copyright law to stop these people from doing the Electric Slide because they are not doing the Electric Slide". Spot the inconsistency? Who is to say that these people aren't doing the Electric Slide, but their own dance which looks vaguely like it?
doctor: "My move! I'll SUE!"
This space available.
There'll be no dancing around this issue.
"Indeed, Richard Silver, who filed the copyright for the Electric Slide in 2004" I find it suspicious that he waited to 2004 to file for a copyright, when I was doing this dance "on the moon" as early as 1990. On his website, this guy also claims to have invented break-dancing. I think he's just a fruit loop or two short of a full bowl.
FAQs are evil.
The irony of course is that copyright, a mechanism intended to create a market for creative and intellectual works, effectively discourages participation in that market. The alternative of noncommercial fair use only underlines that failure. (Eliminating fair use wouldn't help: in that case, most of these works wouldn't be created and/or distributed.)
Not that this is new, it's just really obvious here. In spite of the ideology of copyright fundamentalists who preach "the more the better", economists know that copyright by its nature must introduce inefficiencies into the market.
"Longchamps, owners of Beefsteak Charlie's, opened a disco called Vamps on Broadway between 70th and 71st in the fall of 1975 and had an advertisement running in "BackStage" for bartenders and waiters. I needed a job at the time and applied for a position. When they say my resume and found that I was a professional dancer they asked me to give the opening night party. They hired a professional party giver, who did Neil Sedaka's Birthday, to give the Saturday Night Party and one of the girls from the Longchamps office gave the Sunday Night 'Black' Party with Leontine Price and Wilt Chamberland. My party was the only party that made money for the staff as well as the restaurant and when the clientel started dropping off a few months later they asked me to give another party only they wanted me to create a new dance and premier the dance at this party. I created "The Electric Slide" as the song had just come out and had a great beat and as I had already created "The Electric Weeble", it seemed the obvious next step. After only a few weeks of teaching the dance, I tore the cartilege in my right knee while demonstrating some of the variations of the dance and was operated on through Workmen's Compensation and was laid up for over a year. It wasn't until 6 or 8 years later that I realized how far the dance had gone and that my worst fears had come true. Every night I would tell the patrons - this dance has 3 threes, 2 twos, a One and a Hop, but I'm sure that someone is going to forget a step and try to square this dance off into 4/4 timing - It is not supposed to start on ONE every time. That is what makes this dance unique - but someone did square it off and want it to start on the downbeat and incorrectly told someone who told someone and all of a sudden - everyone is doing the dance, but they are not doing it correctly. I have spent MANY YEARS trying to correct this and until recently had given up on ever getting it right. - BUT then came the internet and now I am working to correct this wrong."
Ric Silver was injured that night, and was put on NY Workers Comp WC Case 0763-6911 6/17/76, and in the documentation listed on his website it clearly says he was an employee of VAMPS, meaning that he created it because he was asked by his boss. Therefore he doesn't own the dance moves http://ric06379.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/site builderpictures/ll.jpg
Also, his webpage (and personal homepage each play a sound recording of a song I believe is called (warning: iTunes link)"Electric Boogie" by Marcia Griffiths. I can't help but wonder if Mr. Silver has a license from ASCAP, BMI, or whichever entity may be responsible for enforcing the copyright for this sound recording.
As long as I am pointing out these types of things, on Mr. Silver's homepage is a graphical representation of a copyright symbol (the "circle-c" symbol) that looks remarkably similar to the one on the webpage of the U.S. Copyright Office.
In a line in the song "Electric Boogie" the singer says, "Oooooh .. shocking!" Are these facts shocking? Not to me. But very interesting. At least in my humble opinion.
Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.
I haven't heard much about it lately, but apparently it is *really* difficult to find a wedding photographer who will simply take his fee and turn over the digital files and/or negatives.
It is not that hard anymore. Lots of people are upset with the outdated model where everything from a studio has to be on paper and don't your dare reproduce it at all. Some photographers understand the need to post online and use digital slideshows and DVD's for distant relatives. Ask at the studio. You might get permission and be provided webshot resolution of photos you paid for to post online. If you want full resolution/negatives, you may have to go another route.
Don't bother going to a studio where the photographers are under contract and the studio owns the copyright (like Olan Studios). Put an ad online that you are needing to hire a photographers services and would like to review applicants works. Pick one you like from the applicants. You can also search some photographers portfolios online. Some do fantastic creative work and are proud to post samples online.
Do a contract for the work including the time, number of shots, number of prints and enlargements, quality standard (35mm/large format, digital SLR, etc) and full rights and posession of the negatives/digital files. There are a few good contract commercial photographers. Don't expect the same prices the studios charge. This will cost more, but it's worth it because you have the full rights to put the photos online for those who could not attend. If you like his work offer to recommend him to your friends. Word of mouth advertising is valuable.
Don't expect to pay $60/hour, get 300 great shots and only pay for a dozen prints and collect all the negatives and rights. Come prepared to pay for results of a once in a lifetime event. A good photographer will cost you. Choose one who has the experiance and can show you a great portfolio with good lighting, great focus, conposition, color balance, and can catch all the inlaws in a shot where nobody blinked. A single shot and moving on is not the photographer you want.
When you buy a package from a studio, you work with their contract. When you hire, they work with your contract.
The truth shall set you free!
But if you insist, fine, I promise I won't... actually. Guys, let's think about this... "Sorry, babe, my attorney has advised me that dancing in an unlicensed forum could put me in an untenable legal position. Let's just pound a few more drinks and head home, eh?"
Slashdot had an interview way back with some lawyers in the US Copyright Office way back when and discussed the DMCA. One of their answers concerning the perjury provision is that it doesn't mean what we'd like it to mean :[
:[
Supposedly, and IANAL so get one if the answer is important, but the perjury part only applies if they lie about representing the copyright holder. So they might lie outright about having a copyright in the first place, but so long as it's sent by someone who really does represent the (alleged) copyright holder, you can't nail them for perjury
That said, if you can convince a judge that their claim was legally frivolous you might still be able to nail the bastards for something anyhow, but it's doubtful you'll get very much. Just look at what all the Cult of Scientology has done using the DMCA and they're still going on. If you can see the 'firehose', you'll see that Slashdot hasn't been publishing much about that one guy who is now in prison for allegedly "threatening" them with a "[Tom] Cruise missile" on Usenet.
The Electric Slide is made up of 1 unit of choreagraphy known as a phrase. Mostly these "phrases" are meant to match a specific phrase structure of a particular set of music. In general a phrase is 32 beats of music. The electric slide is a 32 beat phrase with an extra 4 beat rhythm break. Through the process of doing the dance the dancer starts facing one wall. At the end of the phrase the choreagrapher incorporated a 90 degree turn. So that by the time you have completed the phrase 4 times you will end up facing the same wall that you started in. Rinse and Repeat till the song ends. It is the dancing equivalent of a for loop.
Whoever choreagraphed this little peace of nostalgic heaven did a brilliant job. The dance is so easy that any grandma can do it in only a few minutes. She feels as if she is dancing just as well as the rest of the cool and hip people on the dance floor. She is getting exorcise. The younger set gets a lot of chances to be creative within the dances structure, yet still be part of a group.
In the late 70's and mid 80's a concurrence of events in American pop-culture created an environement that made this dance popular. The late 70's marked the end of the "hustle-era" and the mid 80's marked the "urban-cowboy" era. Line dancing was not extremely popular with the hustle dancing set but was just catching on when "Disco" was collectively pronounced dead by the American zeitgest. About the same time John Travolta again made a splash with his movie Urban Cowboy and a new dancing fad was born. Two-stepping and Line-dancing at the local "honky-tonk" was all the rage. The easiest of all the dances to learn was the Electric Slide. Soon after this confluence of events every budding dance teacher across the country rushed to put out content on the new hot medium of the day... Video Tape. I still see the dance prominently displayed on DVD's in the dollar bin at Half Priced Books all the time. The Electric Slide was in the right place at the right time to become the most popular line dance in history.
In my mind there is no question that the choreagraphy is indeed something worthy of being copyrighted. On the other hand it is quite debatable whether or not it has any real value. I don't know copyright law. But I can say that if I was faced with the decision of paying a liscence fee to the choreagrapher, I will just make up my own 32 beat phrase with a 1 quarter turn at the end and call it The Erotic Bump instead. It isn't that hard to do. For an overview of where line dancing is today view this link.... http://www.ucwdc.org/competition/linedances.shtm where you will find that not one of the choreagraphers is paid for their efforts. In the meantime Im going to go out to the salsa club and do the Macarena
"The problem is that you can copyright a dance (any damned dance) in the first place. I'm going to go copyright 20 different punches, kicks and acrobatic moves then get paid by every single kung-fu movie producer in the world."
No. You can't copyright something, magically, that you didn't come up with. You can't copyright a punch or kick that someone else has already used. You could perhaps copyright a sequence of 20 different punches, kicks and acrobatic moves as you seem to suggest, but unless your sequence takes on another layer of signification in the popular consciousness, no kung-fu movie producer will use it. This is perfectly reasonable. The Electric Slide is desirable to people because of the value it as a whole has gained historically, not because it's a fundamentally basic mode of movement.
Yes, you can copyright a dance, as with any other mode of expression.
Seriously: there are problems with this guy's strategy, including uncertainties of the copyright, whether it's applicable at all, whether fair use comes into it, and of course the onerous requirements of the DMCA. But people's ability to claim a copyright on their own creative work is not the problem here. His being a bully is.
This aspect of the DMCA is limited by copyright subject matter. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the dance itself is uncopyrightable due to lack of proper fixation. I may be wrong, but I remember it being very difficult to get a copyright for something like that (or at least, to defend one).
And if this is upheld, I'm going to copyright the "hand-dance" moves that are required to fill out DMCA paperwork.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Just to second PT, I haven't had any trouble at all finding wedding photographers perfectly willing to hand over all rights and full-resolution digital copies of everything shot. Around Milwaukee, most of the independent photographers charge a flat rate for their time and hand you a DVD or two and the end of the event. They recommend print shops or even Wal-mart for your prints as the quality is close enough that civilians can't tell the difference and real development studios can't get anywhere near the price point. From my research, most modern photographers make up the cost in optional digital editing. You want shots cropped, spliced, and centered? (1 min in Photoshop) Sure thing, but it'll cost you $10 a shot. Want a nice pastel effect? (30 seconds in Photoshop) $25. You want a black and white shot with a red rose? (1.5 minutes in Photoshop) $50. I have definitely come to realize how valuable my Mad GIMP Ski11z are, if not to the rest of the world, at least to my wedding budget.
What's he's doing isn't *clearly* right or wrong.
Wrong: He's getting litigious for no good reason.
Right: He's trying to stop people from doing The Electric Slide.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Wow I'm impressed, hes right this dance really isn't for the faint of heart. This is a dance only for true badasses. If you can't moonwalk on one foot yet don't even attempt to perform The Electric Slide. I tried and I think I dislocated my knee. As the website says "for professional dancers only!" Here enjoy this incredible display of precisely dexterous and acrobatic skill. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NZwnm6B90M
I just checked the videos on the website linked from the article, it appears YouTube has blocked the playing of the embedding videos on Mr. Silvers page, at the request of the owner. It tells me I need to go directly to youTube to watch the videos. Oops.
That's why Futurama sang a different variant in the episode with Nibbler's Birthday.
Probably because through a series of Mickey Mouse protection acts, it's *still* copyrighted in year 3000.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The DMCA is finally being used for something constructive!
Now if I can only finagle patent law to somehow get me out of going to weddings in the first place...
Around Milwaukee, most of the independent photographers charge a flat rate for their time and hand you a DVD or two and the end of the event.
I found most of these offerings are one guy with one digital SLR, no studio work, limited creativity (Burger King assemply of the required traditional shots) & one or two umbrella lights. If you have large extended family present, you may want to look for someone who takes the time to do good lighting with background shadow elimination flash, key and several fill flash, & hair light. Some people just want snapshots, some want studio quality family photos. Hire what you need.
Review their work. I found the quality all over the map from 35mm shots with on camera flash, to full studio set-up. A photographer with a great personality can work wonders with crowd orginization for great shots with everyone happy. Don't go by price alone. It isn't worth it. Find a pro.
The truth shall set you free!
courts don't pass legislation.
Not that I doubt your experience, but from mine, most of the "brand name" outfits were much more prone to the line-up-and-smile type of work as that's what sells prints to the extended family. My fiancee and I aren't interested in wasting time with photos that will live their entire existence in a box. Basically, we're looking more for "slices of life". The independents have at least claimed to be more creative and interested in putting an artistic slant on things instead of looking out solely for their bottom dollar.
Just for the record, I have also found that many of the independents are just as if not more expensive than the brand name outfits. The main difference being that the independents offer a little more sway to their contract, somewhat because of the more personal relationship, but mostly because of their lack of legal division.
I do have to agree with the advanced lighting on some of the "important" shots. We're doing the bridal shots in-studio well before the wedding to make sure that they come out perfectly.
I also have to second the "personality" comment. These people are going to be wandering around at your wedding and your main piece of history is going to be from their point of view. Make sure you like their outlook on life.
Attention planet earth...
I created this new move... it involve expanding then contracting your chest... and makes this cool sound, as air passes in and out through your nose and mouth. I created this move. It's mine. Anyone who performs it anywhere, anytime, without my permission, owes me a ton of money, and I can ask you to stop doing my move (especially if your lame ass is doing it wrong) whenever I feel like it. under draconian penalty of law... Because the DMCA says so.
Genda
"We have no more right to consume happiness without producing it than to consume wealth without producing it." - George Bernard Shaw
This is just another story - among dozens - of people taking copyrights too far. When you copyright something, and it becomes ingrained into social culture, the courts should rule that it has been assimilated to the extent that it is now social property. I do believe that copyrights should be enforced, but when people are simply having fun, the last thing that they should be worrying about is wheather they are violating a copyright held by some obscure selfish 'artist'. I think that copyright law should be that unless there is a clear motive to generate massive amounts of revenue, then the case should be dropped. There shuild be criteria in determining copyright infringement:
1: Social Assimilation. - Has the song/dance/slogan/look become ubiquitous in today's society? Doest the recognition of the "creator"/"artist" critical to society?
2: Financial Motives. - Is the "offending" individual solely attempting to generate revenue? Is the "offender" simply re"creating" th work in question for the benefit of society and/or interested individuals, or are they simply doing it for financial gain?
3: Factual Engineering. - Is there clear evidence that the work in question was solely and explicitly designed with the clear intentions of discrediting the other "artist"?
Soon, everything in today's society will be copyrighted. Someday, we'll have to pay royalties to whoever owns the rights to the Kama Sutra just so we can have sex.
Voice from under the bed: Sir.....?
Me: What?
Voice from under the bed: Sir, I am required by law to serve you with this Cease And Desist Order.
Me: What the hell did I do?
Voice from under the bed: Sir, you are using a copyrighted sexual position without citing proper credit to the original creators and/or paying the appropriate copyright fees to the creator.
Me: What?! What the hell am I supposed to do then?
Voice from under the bed: Try the "Sixty-Nine Position", it's only in the Patent-Pending stage.....for now.
Me: Then who do I pay royalties to?
Voice from under the bed: The Gods demand payment in the form of a virgin sacrifice.
Girlfriend: Do you represent the Gods?
Voice from under the bed: Yes Ma'am, as a matter of fact, I do.
Girlfriend: Tell them we're broke.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
It has come to our attention that the administrators and contributors of slashdot.org (henceforth known as "you terrorists") are infringing on a copyright held by republicans (henceforth known as "us"). You terrorists are imitating the concept of "stupidity", albeit badly, and labelling it as "Funny", or worse, as "Insightful". Please cease and desist, or pay us royalties of $0.001 per "stupid" comment posted and $0.10 per "stupid" article retroactively. Based on early estimations, you terrorists owe us in excess of $67 billion.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Submit this to your state legislatures and save a baby seal!
A BILL to deny any legal effect to any marriage ceremony which is preceded or followed by any event that involves the Electric Slide, either the song or its accompanying dance, in any form.
More seriously, does the DMCA have any limit on it's scope?
It dosn't appear that usable by small corps/individuals against large corps. Even in situations which involve actual copyright infringement, such as SCO claiming that can do what they like with GPL code.
So are they then liable for "attempted infringement" (tried to do it right but failed) or is the incorrect version a derivative work (tried to do it right - didn't remember how - made up some of my own)?
Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.
MAKE SURE you get it in WRITING that the photos are works made for hire or if not works made for hire the photographer assigns the copyright to you.
Make sure you have an honest photographer. Honesty is worth MUCH more than the best contract. Trust me - it totally SUCKS to have your photographer screw you on your wedding photos. Having to sue him/her just adds to the injury.
Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.
What would make you think that?
What?
Are you kidding?! Not so much against the DMCA but more to the fact of the guy who "created" it. He is going around telling people their doing it "wrong" and taking down wrong videos of it. How stupid. He needs to grow up and get a life and not cherish the slide like he cured cancer and let people have fun with it. You don't see people suing over the macreana. Plus, if you technically change a step, are you then not doing the slide and are not violating his copyright?
Bryan
Where was the DMCA when the plans for the cotton gin were leaked?
Oh, and also the head bop, whereby the head rocks back and forward or up and down, also to some pre-defined rhythm.
Karem
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
This is so simple.
The guy's lawyers want to earn some more money, so they persuaded him into meaningless legal battles.
Sounds to me like this guy is a line dancer, line dancers in my experience are all pompous little pricks.
I was at a free music festival once near Wolverhampton. It was a Country Music festival but that year a huge crowd of line dancers had turned up and took up the entire area in the front of the stage.
To start with they offered to teach people line dancing so we did that for a while but it was deadly dull so we just started hanging out in front of the stage drinking and performing our own dances instead to the increasing annoyance of the line dancers who eventually made a big fuss and asked us to leave because we were spoiling their dancing.
You're spoiling our music festival we said, why can't you go and dance somewhere else ? The band who were playing at that point stopped the music and said there was no way we should go anywhere because we looked like we listening to the music and clapping and cheering and such whereas in his opinion the line dancers were a bunch a miserable tossers and hadn't clapped a single band all day. That shut them up and they went off somewhere else but I think this is indicative of the general attitude of the line dancers.
Actually I took my pictures with Olan Mills (just before they went bankrupt) specifically because they would hand over the copyright (it was a special deal that you got all the pictures on a DVD - the copyright thing was a side effect).
Seriously
I think I'm going to apply for a copyright for my new dance entitled "Fuck you silver." It's like the electric slide, only with a lot of gesturing and screaming "Fuck you Richard Silver, you fucking fuck-for-brains." Yeah, I think it's gonna be huge at weddings.
I call copyrights on walking.
I take Paypal, Credit card and cash.....
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
....+5 just isn't enough. :)
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Not that I doubt your experience, but from mine, most of the "brand name" outfits were much more prone to the line-up-and-smile type of work as that's what sells prints to the extended family.
I was born in the 1950's so I have experianced the studios running photography like the diamond industry as a cartel. Even then, it paid to talk to individula photographers and review their portfolios, learn the personality, style of photography, and find out what equipment he uses.
It's like getting a custom pizza at Pizza Hut. Talk to the right guy and you may get a pizza art piece instead of just half peperoni, half Hawaiian. Ever get a smiley face pizza for a kids party?
The truth shall set you free!
I'd like to see him dance the grim fandango
You'd think with all the articles here on /. people would know the difference between patents, copyrights and trademarks by now :(
I'm sorry... maybe I missed something here... isn't this the DIGITAL Millenium Copyright Act?
Is he claiming a patent on this dance step? I don't know how he can. I'm sure there is prior art for bad dancing. Or should I say prior artlessness? ;)
Time for a Dance Dance Revolution!
No smoking sigs indoors.
I'm a child of the 80's, and obviously don't have as much experience to work with. I vaguely remember my parents being forced into package deals on family portraits and such. I also remember being put in a lot of lines at weddings for pictures I would never want.
My first real experience with a professional photographer was when I was 16 just getting started in freelance web design. He wanted a website that would rival Pepsi World (back when they were first experimenting with web-based chat) and he wanted to pay $200. We (I was working with a friend) tried to explain the impossibility of his request, but he wouldn't have any of it. We told him we would put together what we could in 15 hours and we would go from there. Well, upon receipt, he said that it was great, handed us $100, and said that he would get back with us about changes. He drafted up a simple contract for monthly maintenance and such which we all signed. After that, he never called back. When we called him, both he and his office secretary denied ever knowing of our existence, let alone a contract. We were kids, so of course we didn't fight it.
But I digress. I think it's sad that they days of personal service (in any industry) are all but gone. I think it's high-time people start asking businesses for what they want instead of just taking what they can get off the prefabricated value menu.
After years of following these cases, and wathing the rights of every citizen be stripped away, one copyright at a time, I'm left with one obvious conclusion: THERE'S NO HOPE FOR OUR SOCIETY. Give us another 30 years of the DMCA, and we'll slide back to the 7th century.
I don't see a difference between Osama's bombers and these RIAA / BSAA / MPAA guys.
Unfortunately, our misguided presidente (Bush) is sending marines against the wrong side.
Andy Out!
OTOH, the damages he might conceivably collect will be less than if he had been actively asserting his rights all this time. "Innocent" infringement incurs only actual damages, while "willful" infringement opens one up to serious punitive damages.
I'd be curious to see where the lines are drawn for derivative works WRT choreography. Typically dance IP issues only arise with more "serious" forms like ballet, musicals, dance companies, and the like (to the point where some instructors insist on controlling taping of student recitals so that students & family can get copies, but rivals cannot). I don't know how derivation would apply in a "popular" or "modern-folk" dance idiom which, almost by definition, will gradually change over time.
Any choreographers (or their lawyers) want to chime in on this one?
C'mon - you all know it's true. Get any group of average white people together and try to get them to do the Electric Slide and it truly is a parody of the original.
(FWIW - I once worked as a bartender for a Shriner's convention in Washington D.C. To see 400+ people out on the floor doing the Electric Slide properly, with style, is truly a sight to behold.)
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
This could get really interesting if it applies to virtual reality. I think my favorite tauren female dance could be in trouble if this guy ever decided to go after Blizzard Entertainment.
~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
What about that dance where you jerk your thumbs about like in Seinfeld?
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
Radio stations and bars that have cover-bands make similar accommodations.
Only the media cartels cocktail of fear&greed where new distribution channels are concerned have kept something this reasonable this from happening already. Rather than making the little$ that comes in in a public performance, they want the bigger$ (and typically less % to the actual creators) that they would get in a disc-sale.
But as we all know, they cant hold back the tide.
:|Dm,C,A|:
send + more == money?
Back in the day, I used to hang out at a place in Maplewood, MN called The Hideaway (also known as M.T. Pockets); it was a sort of funk/rock honky-tonk; good sized, lots of fun, but pretty much a dump. Anyway, one particular night, early in the festivities they played the Electric Slide, and the floor was filled with larger-type women. I made a reference that the promotion for the evening must have been "Jenny Craig Night"... as the music started, one of my friends asked if that was that new song, the Electric Slide, and I replied, totally deadpan, no, with all that weight on the floor, it would have to be The Hydraulic Slide.
Good times, good times...
Uhhh....since I'm really old, I know that the "Electric Slide" is actually "The Hustle" that was all the rage during the Dark Ages when Disco ruled the dance floor.
I would claim "ownership" of "The Hustle", but it's about the LAST thing in the Universe I want to be known for.
This guy is a liar. Although, I agree than someone should stop Ellen Degeneres from dancing...ever.
I am my own gestalt.
We had a clause in our contract with our wedding DJ that if he played any songs in our "No Play List" he would forfit the remainder of his pay.
The no play list was pretty much *all* the bad wedding songs:
Chicken Dance
Electric Slide
Hokey Pokey
We Are Family
and a bunch of others I can't remember off the top of my head...
Quite funny seeing a bunch of drunk college friends trying to get the poor guy to play chicken dance, with him knowing that playing that one song would cost him about $750.
www.christopherlewis.com
Consider the other side. For decades the general public has been completely unaware of the legislative distortions purchased by content providers and how many rights previously taken for granted weve lost in the name of so-called protection. What you describe, coupled with the loss of ability to copy DVDs, lawsuits for downloading, soon to be lost ability to record TV programs, etc., will bring to suburban living rooms in a very unambiguous manner the true motives and consequences of oligarchy protection organizations like the RIAA and MPAA. Once YouTube/Google suits start flying thick and fast maybe well finally come back around to an understanding of the original intent of copyright and the cost of expanding a utilitarian accommodation made to enhance the Arts and Sciences into an absolutist right over the control of common culture.
Female taurens do the electric slide as their dance emote. I guess my 60 shaman is going to be sued.
I'm off to copyright that Pepto-Bismal dance.
Get the runs and I'll sue you!
She is getting exorcise
You're right. Anyone doing the Electric Slide is definitely in need of an exorcism.
Dude, that made my day. :)
Someone go copyright walking! No one will be able to walk in a movie ever again! Everyone in a picture will have to either crawl or run (until someone copyrights that as well)! Make old people run or sue them for copyright infringment! We can take over the world!!!
please... let me sleep... a little more... yay, no longer annonmyous coward.
Man, if we could ONLY get rid of drunken Electric Slide dancing, due to the grave peril that someone might accidentally record it. Please tell me this guy invented the Macarena, too.
a summons
not very friendly...
http://books.dreambook.com/nycsdancer/
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
He's "Listed in Who's Who in Dance".
You don't wanna just awaken a sleeping giant and stuff...
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Except the courts didn't pass it. Stop before you start Shrug in on a rant about "activist judges."
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
Fight fire with Fire.
Capital idea! *ducks*
Just wanted to point out that that question is a little (though not totally) misleading; it should probably read, "does copyright have any limit on its scope?" The problem is that copyright covers too many things, and that he can (he claims) copyright these dances in the first place. If anything, the DMCA is a limited positive here, because it provides a safe harbor to sites like YouTube who comply with the takedown notices; without the DMCA, this guy could just sue them and, if the copyrights are valid, win. The DMCA did not provide any new rights or abilities to sue beyond "old" copyright in this particular instance.
The downside of the DMCA here is that it provides an incentive for sites like YouTube to take the videos down without really knowing they are infringing at all, and due to the volume of such requests, they almost have no choice. But that's still not really a "scope of the DMCA" problem, but a "scope of copyright" and "DMCA incentives" problem.
-puk
So, anyone over 70 around here able to tell us what you all sang at birthday parties before 1935?
It's times like these that I feel sorry for Billy Ocean. If he had the foresight to copyright his moonwalk dance, he could have stopped Michael Jackson from ripping it off.
... and then they built the supercollider.
done. It actually ended up being very pretty. Thanks for the idea. :-)
What's next? The Bunny Hop?, the chicken dance?
What's a wedding without a bunch of female relatives and drunk Uncle Benny monopolizing the dance floor?
Maybe Jimmy Buffett is right. The hokey pokey may be what it's all about.
Actually I took my pictures with Olan Mills (just before they went bankrupt) specifically because they would hand over the copyright (it was a special deal that you got all the pictures on a DVD - the copyright thing was a side effect).
The last time I dealt with Olan Mills, DVD's didn't exist yet. They did not have anything except photo packages, they kept the negatives and copyright. They insisted on putting their logo on the front of their photos even if you didn't want it. I guess its a sort of watermark before digital watermarking.
The truth shall set you free!
Well, now that Olan Mills has gone bankrupt, all those negatives are probably lost forever!
Yay.
Well, now that Olan Mills has gone bankrupt, all those negatives are probably lost forever!
True! One more reason to not do obsolete studios.
Yay.
At least now I can decide when to toss the negatives instead of it being decided for me. I would like to get some reprints of my growing up years as they are faded. My kids won't have that problem.
The truth shall set you free!