header-logo header-logo

08 March 2018 / Guy Osborn
Issue: 7784 / Categories: Features , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail

Copyright: stop me if you think that you’ve heard this one before

Music, law & plagiarism. Simon Anderson & Guy Osborn explain why copyright compromises could promote harmony in the music industry

The issue of copying within the music industry is a longstanding one. ‘Home taping is killing music’ was a well-known refrain in the 1980s as part of a campaign to stop consumers using cassette recorders to make copies of albums. The issue became more pronounced with the rise of digitisation, and particularly the inception of file sharing and the use of torrents, culminating in a series of high profile legal challenges against Napster and Pirate Bay among others.

From a creative perspective copying has long been contentious, again exacerbated by the advent of digitisation, facilitating as it has, practices such as sound sampling, which have thrown issues of originality and creation into sharp relief. Yet there is a clear, and usually obvious distinction to be made between copying an entire musical work for personal consumption and copying part of a work for commercial gain. This piece focuses on the latter

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll