Posted on 07/13/2010 12:57:14 PM PDT by a fool in paradise
The struggling music industry may be aroused at the prospect of winning money from the porn industry.
Warner Bros. and a number of other record labels filed a lawsuit last week alleging copyright infringement on the part of an adult entertainment company whose porn videos allegedly featured such spectacles as actors lip-synching to Justin Timberlake's "Sexyback" while engaging in sexual acts on camera.
The defendant in the legal action is a Florida-based company... Damages claimed on the alleged nasty use of copyrighted music could run in the tens of millions of dollars.
...The defendant specializes in a particular brand of adult entertainment where adult "actors" perform sexual acts at exclusive night clubs and private parties.
The record labels say there's virtually no dialogue in these videos -- who needs plot these days? -- and instead, popular recordings from artists like Timberlake, Michael Jackson and Katy Perry provide the "soundtrack" accompaniment to the lustful on-screen action. Videos are allegedly named after songs, and actors are encouraged to lip-sync to the lyrics...
Marc Randazza, the attorney for RK, says he plans to argue that the defendants' use of music is "fair use" in this context.
"If you're going to film in a live night club, you're going to absorb some of the ambient sounds," he says. "You are going to hear what the DJ is playing, and if someone can tell me how to shoot at a nightclub and police out the music in the background, I'm all ears."
...The plaintiffs contend that the use of music was "deliberate and calculated." They are seeking maximum statutory penalties in the amount of $150,000 per claimed infringement. The complaint lists hundreds of examples of alleged infringements. It's hard to imagine the labels' attorneys will have trouble finding associates to research the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Think it can't happen? Time was no one expected labels to willingly license "hooks" from hits to rappers.
...Brown Chicken, Brown Cow......
Hit me with your best shot...FIRE AWAY!!
We’ll have to see if the evidence will stand up in court.
We’ll have to see if the evidence will stand up in court.
Was the party paid for or sponsored by the filming company? Most of the time, that's the case, which kinda blows the hole in the whole fair use argument. And lastly, were the ‘actors’ paid by the film company or producers?
Usually, I'd just wish a pox upon both parties, and let them sue each other into oblivion. This time, though, I think the music industry has a pretty easy case.
I can see that this subject could have it’s ups and downs and MAYBE it’s ins and outs too. :-)!
They have this case licked.
Relax...Don’t do it!
The question is if the use of the music is incidental. If you’re filming a documentary, interviewing someone on the street, and you can hear a song from some guy in his car at a red light, it’s incidental. Even then the copyright holder may want you to pay, and it all depends on how well funded you are to defend yourself. It really is a racket. One documentary had a second or so flash of the The Simpsons on a TV near someone they were filming, and the owners of the The Simpons wanted money.
But if you’re filming a porno and the background music through the whole thing consists of various copyrighted songs, you need to pay up. That they’re lip-synching especially points to the music being an integral part of the larger work, not incidental. License for public performance through ASCAP/BMI doesn’t translate into a license to redistribute the songs with a video.
In a nutshell, the porn purveyors are screwed.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Chicka Bow Wow
[shrug] Shouldn't be too hard... uh, difficult.
>>The porn industry is really bad about getting those done, or claim that they don’t need a permit for private property. The porn industry is really bad about getting those done, or claim that they don’t need a permit for private property.
What the heck is a “filming permit”? Just another unjustified local gov’t money grab? Why should you need one on private property?
*rimshot*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.