3 ms·

And of course the melody is public domain as well, just to add insult to injury.

dylan604 2y ago
That's not how public domain works though. Just because you perform a song in the public domain does not mean that I can use your recording of the performance without your permission for whatever I want. You own the copyright to that performance (if you recorded it yourself). So if I posted something YT and was monetizing the video, I would be making money off of your work. Maybe you wouldn't care, but others will be in their right to care.
- taeric 2y ago
  And before people simplify this to think it means you own recordings of yourself, contract law is a thing.
  - thfuran 2y ago
    That is less elucidative than I suspect you think it is.
    - taeric 2y ago
      I thought it would get people to imagine ways things could happen. Not that it was an easy answer in itself.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    You totally missed the nuance of the parenthetical part of the comment. "if you recorded it yourself" are the magic weasel words. Left unsaid is that if someone else recorded it where you were asked to perform for the person doing/paying for the recording whether you were paid or not means they own the copyright.
    - taeric 2y ago
      That isn't nuance... Even if you recorded it yourself, you may still not have rights to distribute...
- eurleif 2y ago
  1. It's not that simple. There must be sufficient originality in the performance. If you record your orchestra performing the song, that's probably the case. If you mechanically convert a composition to MIDI and then have standard MIDI instruments automatically perform it, that's probably not the case. 2. The copyright claimant wasn't even Samsung. So either the copyright claimant actually infringed Samsung's copyright on the performance (to the extent that such a copyright exists), or their performance is separate from the performance in the video that was detected as copyright infringement, in which case the only thing the two videos had in common was the public domain composition.

That's not how public domain works though. Just because you perform a song in the public domain does not mean that I can use your recording of the performance without your permission for whatever I want. You own the copyright to that performance (if you recorded it yourself). So if I posted something YT and was monetizing the video, I would be making money off of your work. Maybe you wouldn't care, but others will be in their right to care.

taeric 2y ago
And before people simplify this to think it means you own recordings of yourself, contract law is a thing.
- thfuran 2y ago
  That is less elucidative than I suspect you think it is.
  - taeric 2y ago
    I thought it would get people to imagine ways things could happen. Not that it was an easy answer in itself.
- dylan604 2y ago
  You totally missed the nuance of the parenthetical part of the comment. "if you recorded it yourself" are the magic weasel words. Left unsaid is that if someone else recorded it where you were asked to perform for the person doing/paying for the recording whether you were paid or not means they own the copyright.
  - taeric 2y ago
    That isn't nuance... Even if you recorded it yourself, you may still not have rights to distribute...
eurleif 2y ago
1. It's not that simple. There must be sufficient originality in the performance. If you record your orchestra performing the song, that's probably the case. If you mechanically convert a composition to MIDI and then have standard MIDI instruments automatically perform it, that's probably not the case. 2. The copyright claimant wasn't even Samsung. So either the copyright claimant actually infringed Samsung's copyright on the performance (to the extent that such a copyright exists), or their performance is separate from the performance in the video that was detected as copyright infringement, in which case the only thing the two videos had in common was the public domain composition.