What happens when a DJ takes LMFAOs new song adds a few new sound effects to it, speeds it up 10% and publishes it on their new album as 'their' new track. Who owns the copyright to that..? Technically its LMFAOs song as they put the hard work into the creation of the track, melodies, words etc but a slight change in the beat and it no longer belongs to them...
I work as a dance teacher and I know that for my current production we actually had to receive permission from the record companies to use their tracks as we would be 'acting dj' and mixing them, speeding them up as well as adding our own sound effects to the tracks to fit our particular theme and this was all necessary in order for us to avoid being penalised for breaching copyright laws.
I understand copyright but just don't see how DJs don't get into trouble for copyright breaching when we had to ask for permission to use the tracks to do the exact same thing that a DJ does... (Anyone that understands this please feel free to explain)
Speaking of copyright associated with music use... A recent copyright case involved the 1980' band Men at Work and Larrikin Music. It look 28 years for the similarities to be noticed between Men at Works hit song "Down under" and Marion Sinclair 1934 girl guides jamboree song "Kookaburra sits in the Old Gum Tree". Men at Work were found guilty of a copyright infringement and were ruled to pay 5% of all profits made from May 2002 to Larrikin Music (Originally Larrikin was asking to 40-60% of profits which was ruled unrealistic). Who would have thought that the sort of 'unofficial' Australian anthem would be in the middle of a copyright infringement case!
What do you think about the Men at Work copyright case.. Have a listen to the tracks! Do you think that Men at Work stole the tune to the song?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-02-04/listen-to-a-mix-of-both-songs-and-compare/321638
