Guitar Hero YouTuber Sings Acapella Version To Get Around ContentID Takedowns... Probably Is Still Violating Copyright Law

from the because-copyright-law-is-fucked-up dept

So, Vice's Motherboard has an amusing article about how the misleadingly named GuitarHeroFailure (misleading, because the guy's actually good at the game) tried to get around YouTube ContentID takedowns on one of his Guitar Hero videos (of Ozzy Osbourne's "Bark at the Moon") by singing an acapella version of the song over it. The overall effect is really quite amazing. Watch the video (and don't miss his, um, "variation" at the very end) below: The guy claims, in a separate video that he wasn't really trying to comment on copyright law (he actually says "YouTube's copyright laws," which, you know, aren't actually a thing). But, no matter what it is commenting on it. He notes that he was really proud of how well he did in that particular game, and was disappointed that it got taken down by YouTube.

But, even if he didn't mean for it to be a comment on copyright law, it absolutely is. But here's the craziest part. It's likely that his new video also violates copyright law. Because, remember, when it comes to music licensing in particular, copyright law is insane. There are multiple licenses that you need. There's one for the sound recording -- and in this case, he doesn't have to deal with that one. But, if you're doing a cover song, you need a mechanical license for the composition of the song. And then, the fact that it's been put on a video raises a whole separate issue, which is the need for a totally different license called a synch license, for when you use a composition with a video.

Of course, YouTubers rarely (i.e., basically never) get such licenses at all, and it's mostly ignored by everyone. But that doesn't mean it will always be. And, again, that highlights the absolute insanity of music licensing these days. People are doing stuff that clearly is not taking away anything from the market for the original music, but because of the messy, patchwork setup of copyright laws and music licensing, it's almost impossible to be fully compliant no matter what you do.

And don't even get me started on the copyright questions raised by this other video in which someone took GuitarHeroFailure's acapella and synched it to the original Ozzy song. Because, really, there aren't enough hours in the day to analyze that mess...

Filed Under: acapella, contentid, guitar hero, licenses, mechanical licenses, music, synch licenses, takedowns, youtube
Companies: youtube

Press Speculates Batman Shooter Must Have Played Video Games; They're Right: He Loved Guitar Hero

from the unless-you-want-to-blame-guitar-hero-i-guess dept

I'm going to assume that most of us are by now aware of the tragedy that occurred late last week, when an Aurora, Colorado theatre showing the new Batman movie was allegedly shot up by a James Holmes for whatever reasons people like him have for this kind of depravity. I'll refrain from discussing any details about the shooting, since that's not really apropros for Techdirt. However, I did notice something that seemed worth pointing out.

First, Reason has been keeping a running list of all the things politicians and media pundits are blaming for the shooting (hat-tip to E. Zachary Knight for the link). For those of you keeping score at home, based on the aggregate blame-machine that that article has counted up, the shooting can so far be blamed on: The Tea Party, a lack of Christianity throughout the country, bullying, Star Trek (not kidding), or Occupy Wall Street. And, of course, video games.

The organization responsible for the salvo against gaming is CNN, via Pat Brown, who stated his stance simply:

"Teenage psychopaths get inspired by [video games] and want to make it real"

Interestingly, I was somewhat heartened (as much as one can be in a situation like this) that I had not seen such a rush to judgment against violent video games in this case, particularly considering that this whole tragedy occurred mere miles from Columbine, where violent video games were skewered over a decade ago. But maybe there is a good reason we aren't seeing violent games being blamed in this case: because suspect James Holmes apparently didn't play them. He is apparently known for playing video games, but not of the violent variety (via TMZ):

"one of James Holmes' classmates at the University of California at Riverside played Guitar Hero with the shooter all the time, and "for hours."

The male student is telling friends he is "shocked," never having had a clue that Holmes had a propensity for violence. It's an interesting side note, because people with violent tendencies often act them out in various ways, and video games are definitely an outlet."

The point that needs to be made is that we're likely not going to understand what motivated James Holmes to do what he did for a long time, if at all, and the rush for media members and political forces to judge a tragic situation through their own biased viewpoints rather than to simply wait for the facts to bear themselves out is dangerous.

Filed Under: batman, guitar hero, james holmes, video games, violence

Did The Record Labels Kill The Golden Goose In Music Video Games?

from the of-course-they-did... dept

For the last decade or so, every year the major record labels seem to bet on some single "magic bullet" to fix all that ails them. They go through phases. There was their own crappy DRM'd and locked-down music stores. There were ringtones. And... there were music video games like Guitar Hero and Rockband. And, of course, as soon as those games actually started helping the recording industry, the industry decided to suck them dry. Edgar Bronfman kicked it off by declaring angrily that those games had to pay much more to license the music -- even though the music in those games tended to lead to much greater sales of albums for those artists.

And now it looks like the labels may have succeeded in bleeding those types of games dry. With Activision announcing that it was dumping Guitar Hero, one of the major reasons given is the high cost of licensing music. Yup, the labels priced things so high that they made it impractical to actually offer any more. Yet another case of the labels overvaluing their own content. Now, it's also true that these games haven't evolved that much, and people haven't seen the point of buying new versions, but part of that lack of evolving is because so much of the budget had to go towards overpaying for music, rather than innovating.

Filed Under: guitar hero, music, video games
Companies: activision

Axl Rose Sues Activision For $20M Because Guitar Hero Shows Former GNR Guitarist Slash

from the that's-some-mighty-impressive-hatred dept

How much does Guns 'N Roses singer Axl Rose hate former guitarist Slash? So much that he's suing Activision for $20 million because Activision included a virtual version of Slash in the latest version of Guitar Hero, despite claimed promises not to do so. While the likelihood of success may depend on contract specifics, it does seem rather silly to care about this. The claim that "This lawsuit is about protecting Guns N’ Roses," is obviously bogus. There is nothing about "protecting" involved here.

Filed Under: axl rose, guitar hero, lawsuits, slash
Companies: activision

Gibson 'Settles' Patent Lawsuit Over Guitar Hero

from the rock-on dept

You may recall that famed guitar maker Gibson started claiming that its patent (5,990,405) on a "simulated musical concert" system was being infringed upon by various musical video games. Gibson went nuclear, suing everyone it could possibly think of, including companies who were just retailers of the game for patent infringement. Pretty quickly a court told Gibson that the lawsuit "bordered on the frivolous" which didn't bode well for Gibson. However, THREsq points us to the news that Gibson has "settled" the lawsuit and will be dropping the case. Given the way the courts reacted early on to the lawsuit, you have to imagine that "settlement" wasn't for very much money. My guess is that Viacom offered Gibson something less than it would have cost to continue defending these lawsuits to make the company go back to focusing on making guitars.

Filed Under: guitar hero, patent, settlement
Companies: activision, gibson, viacom

ASCAP Now Demanding License From Venues That Let People Play Guitar Hero

from the can't-listen-without-paying-up dept

We've been detailing how the various collection societies around the globe have been trotting out all sorts of dubious reasoning to try to get more people to pay up for a license. In the US, ASCAP has been particularly ridiculous, seeking public performance licenses for (legally licensed) ringtones as well as the 30-second previews you find on music download stores like iTunes. ASCAP has already succeeded in forcing YouTube to pay up as well. Of course, the end result has actually been harming many up and coming songwriters and musicians, as more and more venues are choosing to forego music entirely, because it's just not worth having to pay up the fees that ASCAP charges.

In the latest overreach, sent in by reader faceless, ASCAP is demanding a licensing fee from a venue that has the video game Guitar Hero for people to play. While the venue does sometimes have live musicians, it has purposely chosen to only allow original music (no covers) from artists and songwriters not covered by ASCAP, to avoid having to pay the fee. As the venue owner notes, it's ridiculous to think that the venue should have to pay for a license just to let people play Guitar Hero, saying, "patrons are paying for the entertainment of the game not for the listening value of the music." But, of course, that's not how ASCAP views any of these things, insisting that the value itself comes from the music, and thus the songwriters must absolutely be paid. Of course, this isn't the first time ASCAP has come down hard on music video games. Earlier this year, it insisted that the video game companies themselves should pay performance licensing fees as well -- so in this case it looks like they're trying to double or triple dip.

Of course, the most likely end result? The venue will drop the game, and fewer people will hear the music. This harms everyone -- the songwriters, the musicians, ASCAP and the venue. But ASCAP seems to think it's the right move. This is why more and more musicians are recognizing that what's good for ASCAP is not good for songwriters.

Filed Under: guitar hero, licensing, venues, video games
Companies: ascap

Publicity Rights Of Dead People: Courtney Love Threatens Activision Over Kurt Cobain In Guitar Hero

from the welcome-to-the-digital-world dept

While we often talk about copyright, patents and trademarks as "intellectual property" (a misnomer, of course) there are some other related areas as well. One that has been growing in importance is the idea of "publicity rights" as a separate "right." The issue, of course, is usually about whether a company can use the likeness of someone for commercial purposes without their permission. But that issue is getting more and more complicated as technology gets better and better. In the last few decades, for example, there's been a growing trend to use famous dead people, such as John Wayne, Lucille Ball and Fred Astaire in commercials. But those mostly involved taking clips of those actors from existing films/TV and splicing them into a commercial (with permission from their estates). However, as some lawyers have been noting, with better and better digital technologies, this issue is becoming more important as it's now possible to digitally recreate someone for the purpose of film. Or, say, a video game. Apparently in Guitar Hero 5, singer Kurt Cobain has been... well... reanimated, and some find it rather distasteful (especially since he sings a bunch of songs you wouldn't expect him to sing).

Among those most upset? Cobain's widow, Courtney Love, who is threatening to sue Activision for breach of contract. Since she's claiming it's a breach of contract issue, there are (obviously) plenty of questions over what's in the actual contract. Still, like with patents and copyright, there is plenty of concern about how far publicity rights extend. In the Law.com article above, it notes that publicity rights didn't used to apply to the deceased, but that's changed. More troubling?

Initially, the right covered only a person's name and likeness. But courts expanded the protected "persona" to cover a variety of elements. Bette Midler and Tom Waits were allowed to pursue claims against advertisers featuring singers using similar vocal styles. Vanna White and George Wendt were allowed to sue companies using robots evoking their roles as the letter-turner and barfly in "Wheel of Fortune" and "Cheers" respectively. Lothar Motschenbacher was allowed to claim damages based on an advertiser's use of a distinctively ornamented racing car.

That certainly reflects the expansion of copyright and patents -- beginning narrowly focused and then expanding over time. I can certainly understand the desire for a "publicity right," but I wonder if it's not better handled through other laws -- such as trademark, fraud and contract law, rather than creating separate boundaries for "publicity rights." I can understand why Love is upset about the use of Cobain's image, but at some point you have to wonder whether it really makes sense to limit such uses. As the technology gets better and better, the legal questions are only going to get more complicated -- and, once again, we're likely to see the reach of such rights extended, perhaps in ways that make little sense.

Filed Under: courtney love, guitar hero, kurt cobain, publicity rights
Companies: activision

Is One Unauthorized Copy Of Guitar Hero Worth $7 Million?

from the copyright-law-insanity dept

JJ points us to a look at some of the sillier outcomes from the $1.92 million verdict against Jammie Thomas. Based on that, for example, sharing a single unauthorized copy of Guitar Hero 4 might put you at risk for nearly $7 million. The argument is that the game comes with 86 musical tracks, and thus a single unauthorized copy could put you at risk of infringing on the copyrights of each and every one of those songs. It's difficult to see how anyone could think this is a reasonable outcome (except for the paid mouthpieces, of course). It's yet another example of just how incredibly out of touch copyright law is these days with the way content is actually used. Copyright law was designed for situations involving commercial copying, not some kid sharing a video game with a friend. The fact that the results are so out of whack with any sort of sensible response to the actions of users should be a sign that it's time to scale back the law, not to make it even more strict as the entertainment industry insists.

Filed Under: copyright, guitar hero, infringement

No, Guitar Hero Doesn't Infringe On Gibson's Patent

from the good-news dept

Last year, we wrote about yet another highly questionable patent lawsuit, involving famed guitar-maker, Gibson, claiming that Activision and pretty much every retailer who sold Guitar Hero violated its patent on "generating and controlling a simulated musical concert." The whole thing seemed pretty ridiculous (the patent itself seemed to describe something entirely different from what happens in Guitar Hero.

It took almost a year, but Colin Ross points out that, earlier this year, a California court didn't just toss out the lawsuit against Activision, but told Gibson that the lawsuit "bordered on the frivolous." This was especially true of Gibson's claim (I kid you not) that "the '405 Patent covers any system where a user controls something 'musical' with any device." Yes, really. The court wasted little time smacking down that idea:

By arguing that any sound made by any controller can potentially be musical, Gibson would have everything in the world -- from the buttons of a DVD remote, to a pencil tapping a table -- be an 'actual musical instrument' within the '405 Patent....

No reasonable person of ordinary skill in the relevant arts would interpret the '405 Patent as covering interactive video games.

The lawsuits against the retailers and other companies associated with the game are still ongoing, but hopefully will be tossed out on similar grounds shortly.

Filed Under: guitar hero, patents
Companies: activision, gibson

MTV Supposedly Boycotting Warner Music Artists In Rock Band

from the nice-work,-Warner! dept

A bunch of folks have sent in an article from the latest issue of Wired Magazine about Warner Music's fight with the publishers of music video games, Rock Band and Guitar Hero. To be honest, the article doesn't cover much more ground than stories from last year, when Warner Music's Edgar Bronfman Jr. first demanded more money from the game publishers. But, it does include one juicy tidbit. After reposting Bronfman's silly quote demanding more money:

"In response, Rock Band publisher MTV Games is now boycotting Warner artists, according to a source close to the negotiations."

This is yet another example (in an increasingly long line) of how Warner Music's recent actions have done plenty to harm its artists. You may recall that a similarly ridiculous whine from Warner Music execs that YouTube wasn't paying enough money resulted in YouTube pulling all Warner Music videos from the site, pissing off many Warner Music artists. Other reports have noted that if musicians were blocked from getting their music in these video games, they might look to move to other labels as well.

And, of course, Warner Music's fight with the video game publishers is doubly stupid. Reports have shown that having your music in one of those games greatly increases sales of the music itself. So... the end result? Pissed off musicians who get less people hearing and interacting with and buying the music. It's amazing that Warner stays in business at all, with management foresight like that.

Filed Under: boycott, guitar hero, music, rock band, video games
Companies: warner music