Remix Copyright Infringement?

[mexicanjunior]

From : AnimeMusicVideos.org <amvorg@gmail.com>
Reply-To : admin@animemusicvideos.org
Sent : Sunday, June 11, 2006 4:37 PM
To : mystic4art@hotmail.com, nhmk@nhmk.com, mexicanjunior@hotmail.com
Subject : Fwd: Illegal use of music without permission


The creator of the remixes which were used in your videos, JD Harding,
has contacted us about their unauthorized use and wishes that the
videos that contain them be removed from the local server (see
forwarded message below). You may wish to contact him privately to
see if you can come to an agreement. If I hear no word from any
involved party, the following videos will be removed for download from
the local server in 3-4 days:

RVG Project Track 32
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/mem...nfo.php?v=50043

NES Project 2003
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/mem...nfo.php?v=68139

RVG Project 2004
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/mem...nfo.php?v=68359

A Sonic Tribute - Dancemix 2006
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/mem...nfo.php?v=93292

Thank you for your time,
paizuri
a-m-v.org Admin

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: JD Harding <jdharding1@comcast.net>
Date: Jun 6, 2006 10:07 PM
Subject: Illegal use of music without permission
To: admin@animemusicvideos.org


Hi,

There are a couple of videos on this site that have illegally used
music created by me. No one has asked me for permission to use this music in
their videos, and I haven't given permission to ever use this music in any
videos, so I'm asking that any videos that have music by "JD Harding" or
"JDHarding" be removed immedietly. If the creators of these videos say that
I did give them permission, then they are lying. And I'm pretty sure using
something without permission is against the site's policies.

Thank you.

--
++ | AMV | ++
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/

Ummm...does this guy have the rights to this music? How can a remix be a copyright infringement? I suppose we could remove his videos from the projects and reupload a new version but I don't see how he has a legal leg to stand on considering he doesn't own the rights to the original game music compositions...

[Castor Troy]

It's like asking if we even have the rights to the footage in our videos.

We've been pissing off alot of music people this amv season.

[Shinodude]

It's like asking if we even have the rights to the footage in our videos.

We've been pissing off alot of music people this amv season.

place seems to be going down hill ever sence the creed and other bands deal

[Keeper of Hellfire]

How can a remix be a copyright infringement?

By law? Every unauthorized change of a copyrighted work is a copyright infringement. But probably you wanna know something different. How can a remix be copyright protected so that a use of it is a copyright infringement? By law too. If you change an existing work in a way that it can be counted as creative act, it becomes copyright protected too, no matter if the used work was copyright protected (of course with permission) or not. The one who made the changes becomes the copyright holder for the changed work. So JD Harding becomes the copyright holder of the remix, even if he doesn't own the copyrights of the original work.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Did the guy even offer any proof of who he was? Anyone could easily claim to be whomever and start throwing emails around you know...

[Psygnius]

However, I would like to add that JD Harding uploaded a number of his remixes for public download and distribution to sites such as OCRemix, a site to share self remixed music for free.

According to this, he had an argument with the site and decided to request that all his remixes be removed. So I guess he is trying to elminate all distributed copies of his remixes, which is almost impossible.

And actually he really does not have the original rights to the song, so techincally he cannot force a hand on AMVs.org. Because he does not own the original rights, he can still be sued by the original creators for copyright infringment for usage and distribution of works originally created by others. He may be just trying to cover his own ass by eliminating all remixes of his.

[Ingow]

Did the guy even offer any proof of who he was? Anyone could easily claim to be whomever and start throwing emails around you know...

"Hi my name is Chester from Linkin Park and I'd like everyone to stop using our music."

Psh, THAT WOULD BE AWESOME

But seriously though that "I make video game remixes and I'm pissed of by a non-profit internet community" is just pretty lame.

[Psygnius]

By law? Every unauthorized change of a copyrighted work is a copyright infringement. But probably you wanna know something different. How can a remix be copyright protected so that a use of it is a copyright infringement? By law too. If you change an existing work in a way that it can be counted as creative act, it becomes copyright protected too, no matter if the used work was copyright protected (of course with permission) or not. The one who made the changes becomes the copyright holder for the changed work. So JD Harding becomes the copyright holder of the remix, even if he doesn't own the copyrights of the original work.

Actually, JD Harding can be accredited to the remix. He still cannot attain copyrights for works that he does not originally create without permission. Copyright and ownership are two different things. A copyright is only granted by the government for the purpose of regulating the information (or in this case, music). I am 99.999999% sure that this kid did not go through with the process to protect someone else's work under his own name. Furthermore, since he freely distributed the remixes, he cannot solely regulate how his music is to be used.

[Keeper of Hellfire]

He still cannot attain copyrights for works that he does not originally create without permission.

He has created that remix, so he holds the copyrights of the remix. If he hasn't the license to do that remix, he can be sued by the copyright holder of the original music and he can be forbidden to use it in any way. But the copyrightholder of the original music can't use that remix in any way without the permission of the remixer.

Furthermore, since he freely distributed the remixes, he cannot solely regulate how his music is to be used.

That's wrong. The free distribution doesn't remove any of the rights which are connected with the copyright.

[Psygnius]

He has created that remix, so he holds the copyrights of the remix. If he hasn't the license to do that remix, he can be sued by the copyright holder of the original music and he can be forbidden to use it in any way. But the copyrightholder of the original music can't use that remix in any way without the permission of the remixer.

Yes, the copyright holder of the original music CAN sue JD Harding whenever they want for usage of the original melody. And you are also right that the copyright holder CAN NOT use the remix without the remixer's permission. But I do not see why the original copyright holder would WANT to use someone else's remix. As I stated earlier, JD Harding is the originator of the music, so no one else in the world is allowed to say they wrote it instead of JD Harding, but he cannot re-copyright someone else's work.

Here is a link to a good description of the meaning of "Copyright"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

Copyright is a set of exclusive rights granted by governments to regulate the use of a particular expression of an idea or information.

Furthermore, since he freely distributed the remixes, he cannot solely regulate how his music is to be used.

That's wrong. The free distribution doesn't remove any of the rights which are connected with the copyright.

Again, JD Harding does not have a copyright that uses a melody that is originally copyrighted from someone else. I will use Nintendo as the assumed owner. If Nintendo wrote the Mario Bros. Theme Song and copyrighted it, then they hold the rights to all remixes for that song. So JD Harding is not allowed to remix the song without permission from Nintendo.

Several exclusive rights typically attach to the holder of a copyright:

* to produce copies or reproductions of the work and to sell those copies (including, typically, electronic copies)
* to import or export the work
* to create derivative works (works that adapt the original work)
* to perform or display the work publicly
* to sell or assign these rights to others

Back on to the point, you are right, since JD Harding freely distributed his remix, it does not change any of the rights that Nintendo carries. But because JD Harding distributed his remix freely, JD Harding can claim ownership to writing the remix, as long as his remix does not defame Nintendo in any way. JD Harding's rights to litigation are based only on infringement of ownership, NOT distribution.

In simple terms, he can sue if someone else says they wrote his music. He cannot sue if someone else uses his music for any reason as long as they credit JD Harding for creating the remix. And Nintendo can sue JD Harding at any time if they please.