Member Article

In this article, we’ll discuss three copyright-related stories that have made headlines and contain some interesting lessons.

ED SHEERAN (YES, AGAIN)

We recently discussed the well-publicised case where Ed Sheeran successfully fought off a UK High Court copyright claim relating to his song Shape of You. When the verdict was announced, Sheeran said that he hoped that there would be no more “baseless” copyright claims. He also previously said this: “There’s only so many notes and very few chords used in pop music. Coincidence is bound to happen if 60 000 songs are being released every day on Spotify.”

Thinking out loud

Whether or not it is baseless remains to be seen. A further claim is taking place in the USA and it relates to Sheeran’s song Thinking Out Loud. it is alleged that Sheeran copied aspects of Marvin Gaye’s 1973 hit Let’s Get It On. The plaintiff claims that there are similarities relating to “melody, rhythms, harmonies, drums, bass lines, backing chorus, tempo, syncopation and looping”. Just the song title is missing then!

Sheeran’s response is that the similar elements are not sufficiently unique to enjoy copyright He says that similar elements can be found in songs like Since I lost My Baby by The Temptations.

No bright-line rule

But the judge has rejected Sheeran’s request to throw the case out. According to the judge, “there is no bright-line rule that the combination of two unprotectable elements is insufficiently numerous to constitute an original work. A work may be copyrightable even though it is entirely a compilation of unprotectable elements.” Sheeran will now need to face a jury in New York because the musical experts commissioned by the two sides cannot agree.

A different kind of plaintiff

The plaintiff, in this case, is called Structured Asset Sales (“SAS”). If you’re thinking that this a strange name for a musician or band you’re quite right, it is. SAS is, in fact, the name of a finance company that was started by an investment banker, David Pullman. The company acquired the copyright and, according to a recent FT podcast, this is not uncommon. Apparently, finance companies regard music as an asset class, one that can deliver good returns. An example of a recent transaction is the purchase of the music catalogue of Christine McVie (Fleetwood Mac) by Hypnosis Song Fund.

Damages

SAS is seeking damages of USD100-million. We can’t help thinking that when this case kicked off, Sheeran may have done a rough calculation and thought “Well I’ve made a tidy sum over the years and USD100-million isn’t that much in Sterling”, but later – thanks to the efforts of someone who comes up later in this article – started thinking “This could be a lot of money”.

BOTTICELLI

Here’s an interesting story set in Italy that sounds a bit like copyright, but isn’t quite copyright.

The world-famous Uffizi Gallery is suing Jean Paul Gaultier for the unauthorised use of images from Botticelli’s The Birth Of Venus on clothing. Most of the stuff isn’t even smart, including T-shirts, leggings and bodices, but it can be expensive. One Venus dress apparently sells for EUR590.

Image source: Wikimedia commons

You’re probably thinking that Botticelli sounds old and yes, while copyright terms are long, they’re not that long, surely? However, they’re not. Terms of 50 or 70 years after death are common, but in Italy, there is a specific law that states that any use of publicly owned art requires authorisation and payment, and this right has no time limit. It’s the Italian Cultural Heritage Code that allows museums to take legal action, particularly Articles 107 and 108.

The people at the Uffizi Gallery are no mugs. They have software that monitors whether the museum’s artworks are being used to sell products online. The museum has a strong vested interest as it sells merchandise that bears Italian masterpieces like Botticelli’s Venus and Michelangelo’s The Medusa. You can’t help thinking that the museum’s approach is something like this: “we won’t countenance tackiness, except where we’re benefitting!”

LIZ TRUSS: MOVING ON UP?

It would have been fair to say that former British Prime Minister, Liz Truss, did not exactly have a dream start... nor exit.

Image source: Wikimedia commons

The ruling Conservative Party recently held its annual conference. When Prime Minister (at the time of writing) Truss walked onto the stage to give her address, she did so to the sound of M People’s song Moving on Up. But the band is apparently “left-leaning” and no supporter of the prime minister. And no permission was sought to use the song. The best the former prime minister’s press secretary could come up with when he was asked for comment, was that he did not have “detailed knowledge of how the licensing of this stuff works”.

We previously covered a similar situation where Donald Trump was accused of using Eddy Grant’s Electric Avenue during his election campaign without permission.

Copyright: it’s so important, yet it’s often overlooked. If you need advice on a copyright issue, contact us.

Waldo Steyn

Executive IP

[email protected]

 

Link to article