'Death Of ACTA' Song Taken Down In Copyright Claim
from the irony-much? dept
You may recall last fall we wrote about one of Dan Bull's excellent tracks commenting on copyright issues, called Death Of ACTA. You can see the video for the song here:Dan was kind enough to forward on the takedown message... and it's a total mess. There's simply no useful info in it other than that a French company called TF1 wants the file (and a bunch of others) off of Mediafire as quickly as possible. Now, it's not clear what the issue is here, but it's not difficult to take a guess. "Death of ACTA" is obviously a play on Jay-Z's "Death of Autotune" Jay-Z's song features prominently a sample of the song "In the Space" by French film composers Janko Nilovic and Dave Sarkys. It's quite likely that Jay-Z licensed the sample. Not surprisingly, Dan Bull did not, but that's the nature of creating a parody song.
Also, since all of this is happening in Europe, there aren't fair use laws. Dan would probably have a stronger argument in the US. In Europe, it's a bit more of a crap shoot. Of course, the whole thing is pretty silly if you think about it. Is there any less demand for "In the Space," due to Dan's song? Anyone who suggests that's the case is not in touch with reality.
In the end, though, how ridiculous is it that a song that's all about the excessive nature of copyright law ends up being subject to a takedown notice itself? It seems to encapsulate everything that the song is talking about as being ridiculous concerning copyright law. The song is, of course, still available in lots of other places, though it will be interesting to see if TF1 starts going after it elsewhere as well. I'm guessing that each takedown will only draw that much more attention to Dan's song and the ridiculousness of copyright law today, if it creates a situation where a clear commentary about copyright law gets taken down... by copyright law.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: acta, commentary, copyright, dan bull, death of acta, jay-z, parody, takedown
Companies: tf1
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Not really parody
To be sure, many disagree with the distinction, but it is nonetheless a fairly well established doctrine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
So under your definition of parody almost all of Weird Als music is not protected by fair use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
In fact, it's pretty much free advertising that might get people to buy the actual thing in question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
From his website:
Does Al get permission to do his parodies?
Al does get permission from the original writers of the songs that he parodies. While the law supports his ability to parody without permission, he feels it's important to maintain the relationships that he's built with artists and writers over the years. Plus, Al wants to make sure that he gets his songwriter credit (as writer of new lyrics) as well as his rightful share of the royalties.
http://www.weirdal.com/faq.htm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
I remember there was some miscommunication between him and Coolio over the song Gangsters Paradise and Weird Al's Amish Paradise parody, Al thought it was OK with Coolio if he made the parody (he asked) but Coolio was later somewhat offended after Amish Paradise was released, supposedly he didn't really give permission and Al misunderstood him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
Not entirely accurate. He pays the statutory fee to make a cover/derivative work and proceeds from there. There have been many cases where the original artist didnt approve or give permission but he did it anyway due to this method. See Coolio's grammy award backstage rant about how he didnt want Weird Al to parody Gangstas Paradise. (wow, "gangstas" doesnt get flagged in firefox as needing spelling correction....)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
Since Amish Paradise ended up selling more copies than Gangsta's Paradise, I think Coolio changed his mind...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
But it is important to credit the original composer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
Just sayin'...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not really parody
While I cannot divine the intended meaning by US lawmakers, outside of that law the meaning can be much broader than what you suggest. In fact, it has been explicitly stated by at least one scholar that a parody does not always target the subject of imitation.
Even allowing your narrow definition, others have already pointed out how you're wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pimping piracy for attention he could never receive elsewhere (The Nina Paley Effect)? Check.
Too stupid to realize he'll probably get busted for breaking the law? Check.
Masnick defending him as if he is actually a useful and contributing member of society? Check.
You pick some bonehead battles, Mike.
Really firing up the piracy articles today. Page views were down a bit these past few days, eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm beginning to think that you are the epitome of a troll and really hope that someone bans you from posting very soon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
ad hominem attacks? double check.
Actually addressing any arguments.. Sorry, no.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Basically, the measure of art isnt whether or not YOU think its art, but whether or not SOMEONE thinks its art....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That makes him quite an enemy to those that are looking for exemplary art and those that wish to create it and devote their livelihood to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Huh?!? I have never made any argument along those lines at all. How is suggesting that *market-based* solutions are available for artists and helping them find and embrace those solutions, rather than a gov't-backed one "Marxist"?
And I have NEVER argued that "all art should be considered the same in regard to quality." In fact, I've argued exactly the opposite, that quality art is really important if you want these new business models to work. None of them work if your art sucks.
Finally, I've never argued that anything *should* be free. I've just explained the nature of economics and the economics forces that *drive* price towards free, and then explained how that can be used to make artists more money.
In other words, everything you stated here is a blatant and ridiculous lie.
That makes him quite an enemy to those that are looking for exemplary art and those that wish to create it and devote their livelihood to it.
Considering that I stand for basically the exact opposite of everything you said in the first sentence, it only stands to reason that I am not "an enemy," but a wonderful friend towards those looking for exemplary art and those who wish to create and devote their livelihoods to it. That's why I HELP THOSE ARTISTS by helping them find sustainable business models.
You? You admitted that you're a failed musician who keeps waiting for the government to give you money. And *I'm* the Marxist? Yikes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Appropriate Action: Hit "Report" and read something penned by someone literate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
one artist deserves more protection than another? what are you trying to say?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And no one gives a shit about the above buffoon's "art" except freetards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Huh? Then why is it that most of the music I like the most is not at all popular. I've spent a lot of time this week listening to an *amazing* jazz/reggae band out of Berlin that you've never heard of.
And no one gives a shit about the above buffoon's "art" except freetards.
The way you write off anyone who might actually understand this stuff is really quite amazing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Mind telling us who they are so we can check them out ourselves?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not at all. The band is Jazzbo, and they're actually signed to a Spanish label (remember how the Spanish recording industry was destroyed? yeah...).
http://www.jazzbo.de/
http://www.myspace.com/jazzboberlin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Although, I'm sure our favourite AC will find a way to suggest I'm pirating because I'm not buying a full price album from an RIAA member, or something...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well your totally correct!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[sarcasm abounds]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
And art is in the eye of the beholder, like the shadows on Plato's cave it is all virtual and relative to the observer.
And Marxist? when you have actually studied political theory and ethics and realise what marxism (like most 'ism's) is actually about, then you can talk. Until then you are just showing your ignorance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Can someone in the web department remove this automatic ability to "close" threads flagged by those who are too thin-skinned?
Seriously. Techdirt prides itself on its comments, and I find it distracting I have to take an additional step just because a few panties were bunched up. It seems rather counter-intuitive to see Mike boast about his unfiltered comments, yet turns and delivers an option to hide them.
How about a compromise: make it an opt-out option, like the CB?
Half the reason I read the comments is to lap up the asinine statements made by people who think they know what they're talking about.
Please don't take this away.
I realize it's as simple as a mouse click, but it's a burden when I have to put down my 7 layer burrito to do so, or any other "non-free hand" moment (which I'll leave to your imagination... sorry, trying to make this light and not so serious).
Thanks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Also you won't see ads and buttons, those will become unicorns to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Apparently enough for suckers like you to still care and post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
About TF1
I’m not really surprised to see that TF1 is involved here. You might be interested by their page on the English-speaking Wikipedia, especially the “Criticism” section… I can assure you that all the facts related there are, sadly, true. Even the part about “selling available human brain time” and the role TF1 played in the HADOPI story.
I can add that Martin Bouygues, CEO of the Bouygues group (owner of TF1) is a close friend of Sarkozy and is always ready to help him when he needs to “inform” the population…
Oh, by the way, have you seen that the Vivendi group now owns 100% of SFR, one of the biggest French Internet access providers? Yes, that’s right, Big Content has bought some Internet pipes. As you can imagine, this is very very dangerous for Net neutrality…
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: About TF1
That being said I think the bigger issues here is if ya cant beet them buy the hardware and "attempt" to do it ourselves since our money in people cant. The other I hesitate one because it usually turns it to a crap suit for a anti-trust violation. Fun word that, violation. Wonder if he French will fight this time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.aqualab.cs.northwestern.edu/blog/sendai-earthquake-japan-peers.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For it to take down truly original content (be it fair use or not, as I do not think the concept actually exists over here) reaches Monthy Phython levels of absurd.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Ni!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
;)
Sometimes lately I think the The Crimson Permanent Assurance Accountants had it correct...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and.. it's fun to charter an accountant, and sail the wide accountant sea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't know about France, but there ARE fair use laws in Europe. At least in Poland.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(c) BS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Un-Knit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]