Patrik Kittel not allowed to use his Stevie Wonder music?

[DownYonder]

Anyone know what this is about? Was it a copyright issue?

Quote from Eurodressage:

Patrik Kittel SWE: “I only heard a couple of days ago that I couldn’t use my Stevie Wonder music. We asked a long time ago about using it for the Olympic Games and we only heard back at the very last minute so this music is an old one and Deja isn’t used to it and I think she felt lost in it, and I did too! I’m happy overall, this is an amazing horse, she needs more experience competing over three days but she’s going to be great!”

[egood]

I thought using music in a freestyle fell under fair use? Maybe not in this case?

[Anonymoose]

Public performance, but this one wasn’t for-profit (well, the spectators had to pay to watch).

Copyright law is a complex specialization because it’s about who owns the rights to a nonphysical, nonmaterial “thing.” But it’s a pity the copyright holder didn’t get back to Patrick Kittel’s people sooner.

[NCRider]

[QUOTE=Anonymoose;8799426]
Public performance, but this one wasn’t for-profit (well, the spectators had to pay to watch).

Copyright law is a complex specialization because it’s about who owns the rights to a nonphysical, nonmaterial “thing.” But it’s a pity the copyright holder didn’t get back to Patrick Kittel’s people sooner.[/QUOTE]

That would explain the crap elevator music we were treated to for many of the performances. Is it just because it’s televised that they have to clear the music?

[Anonymoose]

There is something here about fair use.

https://www.teachingcopyright.org/handout/glossary.html

I’m not a lawyer. Most of what I know, I know about getting permissions for copying printed music and recordings for “performances” in churches and schools.

[egood]

[QUOTE=NCRider;8799461]
That would explain the crap elevator music we were treated to for many of the performances. Is it just because it’s televised that they have to clear the music?[/QUOTE]

Yes, I’d have to guess it was because it was being televised.

[high_hat]

I believe that the copyright issues are handled differently in Europe. From what I understand the music has to be more than 75 years old or an original compilation for the riders to use it at any European Championships. Due to the fact that those rides will be recorded and sold.

They sell DVDs of the championships. Since money is being exchanged then the composers are due a cut.

I’m assuming the Olympics are the same. Obviously they thought they might have a problem and that is why they asked if they could use the music.

[DownYonder]

Which begs the question - does copyright fall under some sort of international law? Or do the laws of the host country apply at the Olympics? Iis there some special legal category for IOC?

Interesting that many other riders used copyrighted music - movie scores, pop music, etc. So if a musician wanted to pursue legal action for “copyright violation”, would they file against the rider in his/her home country? Or in the country where the violation took place?

Guessing it has to do with who holds the copyright. Stevie Wonder apparently doesn’t allow his music to be used (without a hefty fee?), and he has made it clear he will sue in any country anywhere in the world. And if that is the case, wouldn’t Kittel be in jeopardy of being sued for using the music at competitions in Europe (because it certainly isn’t more than 75 years old!).

Interesting situation to think about!

[Where_sMyWhite]

[QUOTE=DownYonder;8799903]
Stevie Wonder apparently doesn’t allow his music to be used (without a hefty fee?), and he has made it clear he will sue in any country anywhere in the world.[/QUOTE]

I believe that one must make an attempt to protect the copyright or it is lost (of if this is only true for trademarks). Kodak went after S&G for “Kodachrome”.

[tm1]

IIRC, the FEI, USEF and most other national federations have music licensing agreements with the various music industry license management organizations such as BMI. The IOC, however, being its own weird universe, may or may not have an agreement with whoever manages a particular music library. I don’t know if that’s the issue, of if Stevie Wonder truly doesn’t allow any use of his music in performance sports such as freestyle or figure skating.

[Anonymoose]

“Intellectual property” was the term I was trying to think of the other day. It’s numinous, so different from right to a material property. People are supposed to get permission to include copyrighted music in sales videos too but who oversees that? ASCAP doesn’t seem concerned.

We need Guilherme, I think. Isn’t he a lawyer?

[Velvet]

[QUOTE=tm;8800326]
IIRC, the FEI, USEF and most other national federations have music licensing agreements with the various music industry license management organizations such as BMI. The IOC, however, being its own weird universe, may or may not have an agreement with whoever manages a particular music library. I don’t know if that’s the issue, of if Stevie Wonder truly doesn’t allow any use of his music in performance sports such as freestyle or figure skating.[/QUOTE]

^This seems to be closer to what might have happened. Because they do have agreements and they do usually have no issues with sales of the music, as long as the record company and artist get their cut. It works internationally as well as nationally, so there had to be some restriction by the artist or record company.

[tm1]

[QUOTE=Anonymoose;8800561]
“Intellectual property” was the term I was trying to think of the other day. It’s numinous, so different from right to a material property. People are supposed to get permission to include copyrighted music in sales videos too but who oversees that? ASCAP doesn’t seem concerned.

We need Guilherme, I think. Isn’t he a lawyer?[/QUOTE]

Just because one hasn’t been caught using rights managed assets doesn’t mean that it’s the right thing to do. Or that it wouldn’t be an expensive problem if one WAS caught.

[SnicklefritzG]

Shame on Stevie Wonder or his record company (or whoever was in charge) for not providing feedback in a timely manner. If they don’t want the music to be used, that’s their right but they should make this clear and respond promptly to people who have inquired about use, especially when the Olympics are involved!

[Lord_Helpus]

[QUOTE=Where’sMyWhite;8800268]
I believe that one must make an attempt to protect the copyright or it is lost (of if this is only true for trademarks). Kodak went after S&G for “Kodachrome”.[/QUOTE]

And yet there is a TB racing with the name Koda Chrome

[Xanthoria]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8800633]
Shame on Stevie Wonder or his record company (or whoever was in charge) for not providing feedback in a timely manner. If they don’t want the music to be used, that’s their right but they should make this clear and respond promptly to people who have inquired about use, especially when the Olympics are involved![/QUOTE]

Well we also don’t know when they asked to use the music, how and who they asked and so on, so fault can’t be laid at anyone’s feet really. Stevie Wonder is a really nice guy - I’d be surprised he said no without considering it carefully. His label may have direct control over the use of that track though: Universal Music Enterprises who licenses Motown tracks are a big enough group that this comes up often for them, so I doubt they ignored the request.

As for should he allow people to profit from his work without a charge, well that’s for him to determine obviously. His profession is a musician and he obviously deserves to be paid for his work. If he chooses to donate for sporting events, his choice.

Here’s some more info on how it works from ASCAP: http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.aspx#general

Fair use is the use of a copyrighted work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.” so this would not fall under that umbrella.

[wireweiners]

[QUOTE=Anonymoose;8800561]
“Intellectual property” was the term I was trying to think of the other day. It’s numinous, so different from right to a material property. People are supposed to get permission to include copyrighted music in sales videos too but who oversees that? ASCAP doesn’t seem concerned.

We need Guilherme, I think. Isn’t he a lawyer?[/QUOTE]

Generally the owner of the intellectual property enforces the right through lawsuits. Companies with a lot to lose through copyright or patent infringement have cadres of lawyers to go after violators. In addition I believe the FBI and Interpol have departments that investigate intellectual property crimes.

[SnicklefritzG]

See original post. If what Patrick is saying is true, then yes, I would fault the artist, the music label, or whoever was in charge.

Patrik Kittel SWE: “I only heard a couple of days ago that I couldn’t use my Stevie Wonder music. We asked a long time ago about using it for the Olympic Games and we only heard back at the very last minute so this music is an old one and Deja isn’t used to it and I think she felt lost in it, and I did too! I’m happy overall, this is an amazing horse, she needs more experience competing over three days but she’s going to be great!”

No one is arguing you about the artist’s right to choose what happens with their music. However, when Kittel asked a “long time ago” and only heard “at the very last minute”, that is not right. People who follow the proper channels deserve a response that allows them enough time to find an alternate path if the answer is “no”.

[QUOTE=Xanthoria;8800943]
Well we also don’t know when they asked to use the music, how and who they asked and so on, so fault can’t be laid at anyone’s feet really. Stevie Wonder is a really nice guy - I’d be surprised he said no without considering it carefully. His label may have direct control over the use of that track though: Universal Music Enterprises who licenses Motown tracks are a big enough group that this comes up often for them, so I doubt they ignored the request.

As for should he allow people to profit from his work without a charge, well that’s for him to determine obviously. His profession is a musician and he obviously deserves to be paid for his work. If he chooses to donate for sporting events, his choice.

Here’s some more info on how it works from ASCAP: http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.aspx#general

Fair use is the use of a copyrighted work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.” so this would not fall under that umbrella.[/QUOTE]

[BLBGP]

Yikes, don’t get mad at Stevie Wonder. He has no say in the matter and probably knows nothing about it. It’s not like an artist gets a call every time someone wants to use their music. It gets negotiated through a publishing company. It doesn’t usually take that long, but perhaps they started with the wrong place (like Stevie’s people) and it took awhile to get to the right place. It can also cost a hell of a lot of money. It likely had to do with the song being played on international tv.

[danceronice]

Televised clearance is different than just playing it at a competition.

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.aspx#general

The Stevie Wonder cut is likely under ASCAP rules and that means NBC in particular would be in a lot of trouble if they broadcast it without proper clearance. And yes, you do have to protect your copyright-naming a horse “Koda Chrome” is not infringing on the copyright, playing the song in public every time he raced without paying for it would be (copyright does not protect names, that’s trademark and a very separate thing, but it protects entire works and if not defended vigorously can result in it being lost and work becoming public domain. That is why, no matter what people think about it seeming mean, Disney will go after illegal use of its characters by daycare, UFS will pursue unauthorized use of Snoopy, a lot of Youtube videos talking about Star Wars will use ersatz music that isn’t Williams. Failure to stop infringement can mean you lose the rights to your own creation.)