Music Copyright

Bog
  • Format
  • Bog, paperback
  • Engelsk
  • 532 sider

Beskrivelse

THIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that analyze and discuss issues surrounding copyright in musical works. * * * In order to prove copyright infringement, a plaintiff must show "(1) that he owns a valid copyright in his work], and (2) that the defendants] copied protected aspects of the work's] expression." See Rentmeester v. Nike, Inc., 883 F.3d 1111, 1116-17 (9th Cir. 2018) (citing Feist Publ'ns, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 345, 111 S.Ct. 1282, 113 L.Ed.2d 358 (1991)). * * * Whether a d]efendant ] copied protected expression contains two separate and distinct components: "copying" and "unlawful appropriation." Rentmeester, 883 F.3d at 1117. A plaintiff must be able to demonstrate that a defendant copied his work, as independent creation is a complete defense to copyright infringement. See Feist Publ'ns, 499 U.S. at 345-46, 111 S.Ct. 1282; see also Rentmeester, 883 F.3d at 1117. In cases ] where there is no direct evidence of copying, the plaintiff "can attempt to prove it circumstantially by showing that the defendant had access to the plaintiff's work and that the two works share similarities probative of copying." Rentmeester, 883 F.3d at 1117. "When a high degree of access is shown," a lower amount of similarity is needed to prove copying. Rice v. Fox Broadcasting Co., 330 F.3d 1170, 1178 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted). "To prove copying, the similarities between the two works need not be extensive, and they need not involve protected elements of the plaintiff's work. They just need to be similarities one would not expect to arise if the two works had been created independently." Rentmeester, 883 F.3d at 1117. * * * To prove "unlawful appropriation" a higher showing of substantial similarity is needed. Id. The works must share substantial similarities and those similarities must involve parts of the plaintiff's work that are original and therefore protected by copyright. Id. To determine whether an allegedly infringing work is substantially similar to the original work, we employ the extrinsic and intrinsic tests. The extrinsic test is an objective comparison of protected areas of a work. This is accomplished by "breaking the works down into their constituent elements, and comparing those elements" to determine whether they are substantially similar. Swirsky v. Carey, 376 F.3d 841, 845 (9th Cir. 2004). Only elements that are protected by copyright are compared under the extrinsic test. Id. The intrinsic test is concerned with a subjective comparison of the works, as it asks "whether the ordinary, reasonable person would find the total concept and feel of the works to be substantially similar." Three Boys Music Corp. v. Bolton, 212 F.3d 477, 485 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). Skidmore v. Zeppelin, 905 F. 3d 1116 (9th Cir. 2018)

Læs hele beskrivelsen
Detaljer
  • SprogEngelsk
  • Sidetal532
  • Udgivelsesdato13-05-2019
  • ISBN139781097613588
  • Forlag Independently Published
  • FormatPaperback
  • Udgave0
Størrelse og vægt
  • Vægt702 g
  • Dybde2,7 cm
  • coffee cup img
    10 cm
    book img
    15,2 cm
    22,8 cm

    Findes i disse kategorier...

    Se andre, der handler om...

    Velkommen til Saxo – din danske boghandel

    Hos os kan du handle som gæst, Saxo-bruger eller Saxo-medlem – du bestemmer selv. Skulle du få brug for hjælp, sidder vores kundeservice-team klar ved både telefonerne og tasterne.

    Om medlemspriser hos Saxo

    For at købe bøger til medlemspris skal du være medlem af Saxo Premium, Saxo Shopping eller Saxo Ung. De første 7 dage er gratis for nye medlemmer. Medlemskabet fornyes automatisk og kan altid opsiges. Læs mere om fordelene ved vores forskellige medlemskaber her.

    Machine Name: SAXO080