3 ms·
Arguably, the only thing derivative about JoCo's cover is the lyrics. Hypothetically, if he had released it first with original lyrics (or as an instrumental),
by re 14y ago
Arguably, the only thing derivative about JoCo's cover is the lyrics. Hypothetically, if he had released it first with original lyrics (or as an instrumental), and then released his Baby Got Back as a mashup, would that afford him copyright protection for the composition? If so, is such a work-around truly legally necessary?
- tunesmith 14y agoYeah, I was wondering the same thing. Some prankster could take Coulton's karaoke, re-create it by plunking in notes, sing different lyrics, and then what? They'd have the copyright on a brand new original song? And then if someone else did the exact same thing, they'd owe royalties to that prankster, even if the lyrics were changed again? I understand the basic principles, but that's where it starts to bend my mind.
- elemeno 14y agoFrom what (little) I understand, they'd not owe royalties to the prankster, just to the original artist.