Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Amse

Regulars
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
    Not Specified
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

Amse's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/7)

0

Reputation

  1. Thank you DavidOdden for your posts.
  2. What protection does your compilation receive? We have established that it is not copyright infringement if you have gained permission from the owners of the copyrights of the songs. (To reproduce a song without permission is violating the rights of the owners of the copyright). Additionally, what specifically are the rights given to copyright owners concerning their products?
  3. Interesting point. So, according to this principle, the only way video (2) would be legal is if the makers of the video received explicit authorization from the owners of the copyright to the song (presumably the record company)? How does this principle apply to cars? For example, Henry Ford created the Model T, and then after, different kinds of cars began to appear. So, the difference is that a different car model isn't making a "copy" of the Model T, in the strictest sense, even if it had to have borrowed certain design features, or production features (to make their version marketable). How then can one distinguish between a "copy" of a good, and an "imitation"?
  4. Is a Youtube video which features a song (not on an artist's official Youtube channel) an infraction of copyright laws? Firstly, what is the principle involved? Intellectual property - If a person creates a value, he is entitled to the rights to it. These rights are defined and are protected by copyright law. What's its application to this issue? A song is a value a person creates. A record company owns the copyright to these songs, so is entitled to protection under the law. The problem: A Youtube video may or may not be a value a person creates: (1) A video which simply plays a song without anything additional is not creating new value, he is using the value of someone else (and in turn violating the rights of a record company). (2) A person who takes a song, and adds a video which adds something new may be considered a value, which in turn may be considered for copyright protection. To concretize (1), here is an example: http://youtube.com/watch?v=j8ErMe1AiyU Additionally, to concretize (2), here is an example : http://youtube.com/watch?v=yO_71ON_IFY&feature=user (I apologize in advance to those who dislike rap - and the (2) video is garbage.) Question : In this context, what is to be considered "additional value"? What is the principle involved?
×
×
  • Create New...