Mumbai - November 17, 2000.

Television
Cover Story
News Articles
News Bite
Split Screen
Telly Watch

Prime Time
Preview
Close Up
Tv Today

Films
Cover Story
Focus
Featured Articles
Newsmaker

Short Takes
On the Sets
Ali's Notes

Preview
Review
Talking Business
Spotlight
News Flash

Ask Anupam
Snapshots

Box Office
Letters
Editorial

Music
Cover Story
Reviews
News Articles
Ratings
Features

Regional
Cover Story
Focus
Interview
News Briefs
Happenings
On the Sets
Marathi Diary
Event Scan
Reviews
Features

Technology
Articles

Internationall
Vignettes


WriteIn

 

 

 


 

 

Television - Telly Watch

Screen - The Business of entertainment
 

Musicians irked by Universal’s “works-for-hire” classification

Musicians have weighed in on the Universal Music Group’s decision to classify all their copyrighted songs as works-for-hire — and they aren’t happy. “What this Court cannot and should not do is to allow Plaintiffs to use as prima facie evidence copyright registrations that contain materially erroneous authorship claims,” the lawyers argue in the brief. “These authorship claims by Plaintiffs on the copyright registration forms are not innocent mistakes or minor variances. Plaintiffs fully understood the significance of claiming sound recordings as works-for-hire on the copyright registration forms. Whether in good faith or bad faith, Plaintiffs claimed more rights than they actually owned.”
As MP3.com continues to challenge a multimillion-dollar verdict against it for wilfully infringing copyrights with the creation of its my.mp3.com streaming service, the Recording Artists Coalition is preparing to submit an amicus brief that disputes Universal’s claims to those copyrights.

At issue is whether a recording artist is an employee of a label. If the answer is yes, musicians lose all rights to their copyrights. If the answer is no, then musicians retain the rights to their work 35 years after it was created. It might seem like an insignificant point, but for musicians, their back catalog is their retirement fund. Long after they’ve stopped rocking, they can still expect to garner some income from album sales - unless the labels never relinquish ownership of their music.

In the brief, the lawyers argue that since musicians don’t receive benefits or salaries and are required to reimburse the labels for marketing, art, and recording costs, they can’t be considered employees of the company.

 More News>>>>
Guidelines on DTH to be issued within a few days
ABCL offers to pay Rs. 9 crore to Prasar Bharati to clear dues
Cable operators welcome Andhra Pradesh HC ruling on pay channels
Prasar Bharati, Ford Foundation to build corpus of PSBT
Beating KBC — SET’s programme rescheduling works

UTV may rope in ESPN, Disney for Vijaya TV slots
Sony Music India’s site launch in December
Have FM licence, can join club
MTV plans to go local
Creative Eye’s bookbuilding offer oversubscribed 3.4 times
CNN to launch two made in India programmes

TOP

 


Expressindia.com  | Indian Express | Financial Express 
Loksatta | Newslines  | Latest News  | Corporate results Hindumythology
Mumbai Sportsline  |  Headstart | Lifemate  | Rebelle
Tasveerein  | Cerfkids  | Livestylz Indianvacation | Zevraat
Astrology  | Expresscomputers  | Ebate  | Chat