The Challenges Of Music Plagiarism In The Music Industry

Copyright law, which manages much of the music business industry, tries to maintain a balance concerning the rights of the creator, and the common good in an attempt to drive society forward. In essence, the

Is important for anyone who has created any intellectual property to protect it. In the music industry, in order for someone to protect their work, they must obtain a copyright. Music has been around before anyone could obtain a copyright and when the invention of the computer came along it made it easier for someone to steal another artist's intellectual property with the help of the internet. This paper will cover what events have taken a big role in copyright protection for artist, the consequences if someone was to break the rules of a copyright which is called copyright infringement, and how will a copyright hold in the future. Were copyrights enacted without the thought of life changing technology, and how can some music companies

In this essay, you will read about an artist in the name of Robert Matthew Van Winkle, known professionally as Vanilla Ice who became famous for a while, not because of his talent, but because of the copyright of someone else baseline. He thought changing the rhythm of David Bowie’s “Under Pressure” baseline and not giving him credit would avoid him from any questions. In this essay I will provide you my opinion of Vanilla Ice’s song “Ice, Ice, Baby”as an example of plagiarism, with evidence provided of what he did wrong, and what he could have caused.

Throughout our Communication Studies, we have examined the capitalist economy through a critical lens and as a result, corporations always appear at the forefront of debate, blame, and power. From a neo-liberalist economic standpoint, the typical “prosumer” is encouraged to create consumer-generated content, but what happens when you put your creative labour to the test? York University consistently advocates, “this is your time”; in other words, students are responsible for their own success and are held liable for any failures or mishaps they may endure. While contemporary technologies have multiplied and democratized opportunities for musical creativity, intellectual property law has been used to repress our right to free speech, which is guaranteed under the first amendment (Demers 2006). Therefore, the industry’s effort at convincing people that file-sharing is equivalent to thievery have turned an increasing number of artists into intellectual property activists.

One of the most common, yet controversial, issues of First Amendment law is the subject of copyright and infringement. Although the subject may not seem major at first, many different issues and controversies have risen and become more common than ever over the years. The issues that have become pertinent to this subject are endless, including trademark infringement, piracy, theft, fraud, plagiarism, and many more. With the coming of age and advancement of technology, these cases have become more common and appear more often than ever before. Government officials have always been strict about copyright rulings, and have tried to deliver fair and just rulings for both parties involved under First Amendment rules. Because the owner’s work and material is protected under the First Amendment, it gets tricky when involving another party that can claim the same work of art. In short, the definition of copyright has always been cut and dry: allowing owners of creative works the right to control and profit from their creations. It is basically recognized as a form of property ownership.

This paper discusses the copyright law in Canada connected with an ethical line in music sharing. Before embarking on the discussion, it is imperative to understand what copyright entails under the umbrella of intellectual property; the latter refers to intangible property, which is entirely a creation of the mind (Alexander & Penalver, 2012, p. 188). Copyright is the exclusive right granted to the original author of literary work. In this effect, it prevents other people from using an authorship without authorization by the original author. The latter grants license for the reproduction of copies of the work, its usage, as well as distribution in lieu of some fee, i.e. royalty. Merges (2011) explains that literary work encompasses a wide

Over the past fifty years, the British Music Publishing industry has undergone dramatic changes. It has evolved as an entity with innovations in technology, changes and creations of laws and new mediums to promote and exploit songs to a wider audience. Therefore, the way in which the music publishing industry operates and exploits its assets has completely transformed, and continues to do so at a rapid pace. This paper will attempt to explore the ways in which publishers exploit song copyrights and the way in which this has changed over the past 60 years. It is important to define what is meant by copyright and its role within the industry. The Performing Right Society website states: “Copyright

Music amid World War II unprecedentedly affected America, both on the home front and on troops serving abroad. Dissimilar to World War I, which happened in the pre-radio period, by December 1941, for all intents and purposes each American family unit, 96.2 percent, possessed radios. At no other time had recordings of tunes and live musical exhibitions been show to such a large number of a great many Americans, both to those supporting the war at home and to troops serving all through the world. For some Americans, this mass appropriation of music had a binding together, devoted impact by raising the assurance of the troops abroad and rousing and motivating the Americans at home to completely bolster all parts of the war exertion. Some African

Copyright is the legal right, to an inventor to perform, print, publish, film, or record artistic, literary, or musical material, and to allow others to do the same. Copyright law was developed to provide the creators and inventors of any works with powerful and effective rights of exclusivity over their creations (Patterson & Lindberg, 1991). Over the past, these rights were almost unlimited. People would use existing developments as if they were their own without any regard of the creator’s exclusive rights. The need to balance and limit such rights arose, and governments established these limits for the general good of the public.

Music Copyright is a very important aspect of the music industry. The Copyright law was established to preserve the creativity and rights of authors, composers, performers of expression. Copyright is the law that protects the property rights of the creator of an original work in a fixed tangible medium. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copyright) A fixed tangible medium is something substantial like copying lyrics on paper or putting a song on tape or CD. Copyright can be seen every where in the music industry. Many music artist of our culture today have been involved in copyright issues. Recently, on MTV news it was stated that, "As the music industry becomes increasingly concerned about protecting the

Along with the development of a file format (MP3) to store digital audio recordings, came one of the new millennium’s most continuous debates – peer-to-peer piracy – file sharing. Internet companies such as Napster and Grokster became involved in notable legal cases in regards to copyright laws in cyberspace. These two cases are similar in nature, yet decidedly different. In order to understand the differences and similarities, one should have an understanding of each case as well as the court’s ruling.

MP3 is an audio format that allows users to compress and send music files easily over the Internet. The major problem with this music sharing is that most of the files are pirated, which has caused a stir in the music industry. Music companies and music artists have been complaining about how their music is being stolen and therefore lowering their album sales. The major blame has been put on Napster and other file sharing software available on the Internet.

A&M Records v. Napster is a landmark case in which the application of intellectual property laws has forever impacted contemporary culture with regards to digital works. The legal issues and applicable laws presented in the instant case resulted in a holding, which set forth a precedent that has influence the mode and means of digital works distribution. The outcome of Napster affects both businesses and individuals.

Producers of musical content cannot undo the adverse effects that piracy has had on the industry. Because of the internet and the way individuals have manipulated it to obtain music, many people are unwilling to change their habits. Here lies the issue between the producer and the consumer. Acts like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) work against the incentive of many consumers by telling them that they cannot do what maximizes their utility. Producers are thus working against the likings of the consumer. This is wrong.

Music licensing is certainly not the ideal solution to maintain the integrity of the art. Music licensing has created situation in which people actually have to pay to use folk songs such as "Happy Birthday" in certain circumstances. The company that owns the license to the song actually receives millions of dollars every year for a song that nobody knows who originally wrote. However, compensating artists for their works is a complicated endeavor and does not receive much public funding in a capitalist system. Therefore, even though the licensing practice may be counter-productive the art form and overly commercialized, it is a necessary evil that must be tolerated in modern society.