4 ms·
"...releasing a cover without permission...is not ok." I have to disagree with this. And it's already allowed with Compulsory Licensing. The writer of the song
by delinka 9y ago
"...releasing a cover without permission...is not ok."
I have to disagree with this. And it's already allowed with Compulsory Licensing. The writer of the song gets their cut as specified in the law.
As to the rest of your comment, I don't think you mean "broad protection." Broad protection is exactly what allows 'silly' lawsuits. Something that's "too similar" gets into trouble because the protection for the original is too broad.
Now, making a transformative work based on others is where I feel things get interesting and there should be lots of flexibility and leeway for the transforming artist. But how that could possibly be codified into law I have no idea...
- cJ0th 9y agoSorry, I was a bit unclear as English is not my mother tongue. I thus expressed my thoughts not correctly/clumsy. "cover without permission": I meant to say stealing everything from a song (text+music) 100% while claiming it is your own. "broad protection": apparently not the correct word. I meant to say, the law should be less strict. > Now, making a transformative work based on others is where I feel things get interesting and there should be lots of flexibility and leeway for the transforming artist. yeah, I agree.
- jboxee 9y agoI think this is why remixes exist. For me, I often find the interpretations of others' works sometimes more interesting than the original - this is within music as well as other fields like art in the form of painting/drawing.