Demers-Steal This Music-How Intellectual Property Law Affects Musical Creativity

194 Pages·2010·3.39 MB·English

this page intentionally left blank
StealThis Music

Steal This Music
HOW INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
AFFECTS MUSICAL CREATIVITY
JoannaDemers
THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA PRESS
ATHENSANDLONDON
©2006bytheUniversityofGeorgiaPress
Athens,Georgia30602
Allrightsreserved
DesignedbyKathiDaileyMorgan&AnneRichmondBoston
SetinElectrabyBookcomp
PrintedandboundbyMaple-Vail
Thepaperinthisbookmeetstheguidelinesforpermanence
anddurabilityoftheCommitteeonProductionGuidelines
forBookLongevityoftheCouncilonLibraryResources.
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
06 07 08 09 10 C 5 4 3 2 1
06 07 08 09 10 P 5 4 3 2 1
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Demers,JoannaTeresa,1975–
Stealthismusic:howintellectualproperty
lawaffectsmusicalcreativity/JoannaDemers.
p.cm.
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN-13:978-0-8203-2710-5(hardcover:alk.paper)
ISBN-10:0-8203-2710-7(hardcover:alk.paper)
ISBN-13:978-0-8203-2777-8(pbk.:alk.paper)
ISBN-10:0-8203-2777-8(pbk.:alk.paper)
1.Copyright—Music—UnitedStates. 2.Composition
(Music) 3.Intellectualproperty—UnitedStates. I.Title.
KF3035.D462006 346.7304'82—dc22 2005021226
BritishLibraryCataloging-in-PublicationDataavailable
CONTENTS
MakingMusicintheSoundscapesoftheLaw,
byRosemaryCoombe vii
Acknowledgments xiii
Introduction 1
ChapterOne MusicasIntellectualProperty 11
ChapterTwo ArrangementsandMusicalAllusion 31
ChapterThree Duplication 71
ChapterFour TheShadowoftheLaw 111
Notes 147
Bibliography 159
Index 171

MAKING MUSIC IN THE
SOUNDSCAPES OF THE LAW
Althoughcopyrightappliestomanyculturalexpressions,itsexten-
sion into the field of musical creativity manifests most clearly the
complexitiesofthelawandtherangeofitsculturalinfluence.From
itsoriginsasarighttoprohibittheunauthorizedcopyingofsheet
music,musicalcopyrighthasdramaticallyexpanded.Withrespect
to musical compositions, the law now enables copyright holders
toenjoinpublicperformances,broadcasting,themakingofsound
recordingsinanymedium,and,inmanyjurisdictions,thesharing
ofmusicwiththeaidofdigitaltechnology.Eachoftheseexclusive
rightscanbeseparatelyassignedormultiplylicensedfordistinctpur-
poses,potentiallycreatingtangledwebsofprohibitionthatfreight
theuseofmusicwithdangersoflitigation.Moreandmoreperfor-
mancesarenowconsideredpublic(forexample,songssungatfamily
mealsinrestaurants,atchildren’sdaycarecenters,andatsummer
camps), and the reproduction of even short samples of a song is
potentiallyaninfringementiftheoriginalworkisrecognizable.
Thereachofcopyrightlawhasextendedfarbeyondcompositions
toencompasssoundrecordingsandperformancesasunique“works”
ofcreativitydeservingprotection.Rightsoverrecordingsandperfor-
mances,knownasneighboringrights,inmanyjurisdictionsaresim-
ply incorporated into existing copyright statutes. They exacerbate
vii
viii ROSEMARY COOMBE
the already complicated webs of protection woven around musi-
calworks.Termsofcopyrightprotectionhavebecomeprogressively
longer, ensuring that fewer and fewer works of musical creativity
enterthepublicdomain.Therealmofactsexemptfrominfringe-
mentliability—includingcertainreproductions,performances,and
communicationsofmusicalworks—hasnotexpandedasrapidlyas
thebodyoflimitationsthatincreasinglyencroachupontherangeof
socialactivitiesinwhichmusicmaybeenjoyed.Eventhephysical
mediaforfixingmusichavebeentaxed,andlegislatorshavepassed
laws against circumventing technological “locks” used to prevent
copyingofelectronicmediaevenwheresomeofthecopyingthenew
laws prevent might actually be permitted under traditional copy-
rightlaws.Althoughthereisarichbodyofcaselawelaboratingthe
public’srighttofairdealingandfairuseofworks,copyrightowners
seektocircumventit.Inanycase,howeverpotentiallygenerous,fair
use is valuable only to those who can afford the fees necessary for
aggressivelitigation.Mostfansandcreatorswhosharemusicwillbe
sufficientlyintimidatedbyacorporate“cease-and-desistletter”on
legalletterheadtostoptheiroffendingactivity—regardlessofhow
creative,transformative,noncommercial,ornoncompetitiveitmay
be—go underground, or pay a licensing fee set by corporate fiat.
Meanwhile,therecordingindustrythattendstocontrolthegreat-
est concentration of copyrights in musical works has also learned
todeploycontractlaw,trademarklaw,commonlawunfaircompeti-
tionsuits,andevenpublicityrightstolimitlisteningpracticesand
creativeuseofmusicwithoutauthorizationandpayment.
This legal situation leaves us with a musical culture structured
primarily in favor of the financial interests of corporate intellec-
tualpropertyholdersandshapedbythecontractualconditionsthey
establish.Anypresumptionthatmusicservespublicpurposesand
helps support social objectives seems to have vanished just as any
notionthatthestateshouldacttoprotectthepublicinterestand