3 ms·
I completely disagree, as long as you aren't selling the original content people are free to make their own versions. This happens constantly with music and oth
by A2017U1 8y ago
I completely disagree, as long as you aren't selling the original content people are free to make their own versions. This happens constantly with music and other media. Some of the most popular songs are covers of others work and not a cent of royalties is paid.
For example the Simpsons has copied scene by scene dozens of famous movies and made billions doing so.
Backpack kid didn't even "create" the dance, it's just a cheap litigious money grab.
- elliekelly 8y agoThe Simpsons are a parody, that falls under the fair use doctrine.
- astine 8y agoThis is not how copyright law works. You cannot reuse other people's copyrighted performance unless your work counts as a parody and the standards for parody are well documented. For example, Weird Al Yankovich needs to get permission for most of his parody songs because most of them don't actually qualify as parody under the law. Some do, but not all. Musical covers are generally done with permission from the rights holder. https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/posting-cover-songs-on-youtube-what-you-need-to-know https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/posting-cover-songs-on-yo... Also, the question as to whether any of the songs in question meets with the minimal creativity threshold to qualify for a copyright is a different question as to whether choreography can be copyrighted. The later is definitely the case, but the former is an open question that will answered in these court cases.