Dance Copyright Enforced by DMCA 402
goombah99 writes "The "creator" of the Dance move known as the electric slide has filed a DMCA based takedown notice for videos he deems to infringe and because they show "bad dancing". He is also seeking compensation from the use of the dance move at a wedding celebration shown on the Ellen Degeneres Show. Next up, the Funky Chicken, the moonwalk, and the Hustle? More seriously, does the DMCA have any limit on its scope?"
This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Funny)
My eyeballs feel.... violated.
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Funny)
I'll just file that under "taking yourself waaaay to seriously."
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Insightful)
So there.
Layne
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Funny)
/For those who don't know, the difference is something like one note in the bassline
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
-nB
IANAL, but as best I understand... (Score:3, Insightful)
OTOH, the damages he might conceivably collect will be less than if he had been actively asserting his rights all this time. "Innocent" infringement incurs only actual damages, while "willful" infringement opens one up to serious punitive damages.
I'd be curious to see where the lines are drawn for derivative works WRT choreography. Typically dance IP issues only
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Funny)
DO DO DO Dah-DAH Do-Do
vs.
DO DO DO DAH Do-Do.
I kid you not.
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Informative)
I need to go to bed now as I've expended my geek quota for the day.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Under Pressure:
|dum dum|dum da-da|dum dum|____||dum dum|dum da-da|dum dum|____||
Ice Ice Baby:
|dum dum|dum da-da|dum dum|__dum||dum dum dum da-da|dum dum|__dum||
That's the best way I can really break it down for non-musical types.
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Funny)
Darl Explained that as part of his 'Image for SCO' policy, instigated in late 2002, he sent all his senior executives on a special course to teach them how to 'enter a room with purpose and drive', and they were taught to modify their walking pattern in a way that exaggerated their 'business swagger' when entering a room.
This so-called 'Darl McStride' was apparently developed by a team of leading psychologists and physiotherapists at a cost of several thousand dollars and, says Mr Mcbride, is the intellectual property of SCO.
"We are not totally insensitive to the accidental use of our intellectual property by those involved in road accidents, recovering from surgery or having naturally-occurring limb deformities that cause them to imitate our Business Swagger, but I take exception to profit-making organisations using it for their own gain when entering a room, and if they wish to do so they should licence the concept on a commercial basis". It has been rumoured that Rowan Atkinson, the comic actor behind such characters as the bumbling "Mr Bean" is already engaged in licensing discussions with SCO. John Cleese was unavailable for comment.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I say we sue him.
--
BMO
Re:This guys is lucky. (Score:5, Insightful)
http://the-electricslidedance.com/sitebuildercont
Layne
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be so critical... it clearly had to do the hustle to get the page up.
DMCA take down notice in 3, 2...
From now on... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:From now on... (Score:5, Informative)
That's supposed to sound funny, by the way...
Re:From now on... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp [snopes.com]
Re:From now on... (Score:5, Interesting)
One of these days, I may very well be able to post on slashdot without citing Futurama. That day is not today.
Probably because.... (Score:5, Funny)
Probably because through a series of Mickey Mouse protection acts, it's *still* copyrighted in year 3000.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"There is a 1935 copyright registration for "Happy Birthday to You", as a work for hire by Preston Ware Orem for the Summy Company (the publisher of "Good Morning to All"). "Good Morning to All", however, was published in 1893 and is public domain by U.S. statute. The current owner of the 1935 copyright believes that one cannot sing "Happy Birthday to You" lyrics for profit without paying royalties. Except for the splitting of the first
Re: (Score:2)
It is funny to see that stepped around on new TV shows.
"Oh for he's a jolly-good fellow, for he's a jolly-good fellow..."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Another Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Insightful)
2) The claim has yet to be upheld (enforced) by any court or other governmental body.
3) Even if the letter is acted upon and the video is removed, that still doesn't indicate whether or not the DMCA is being properly applied (if not, then the DMCA can't be demonized in this situation). All it means is that someone decided removing the video was the easiest way to handle a potential problem.
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Informative)
True, but apparently you can copyright choreography [copyright.gov]:
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually this is a problem with the DMCA qua DMCA. Anyone can *claim* to own a copyright on any crazy thing, and send a DMCA notice, and effectively reverse the burden of proof for the price of 30 seconds typing.
The DMCA doesn't shift any burdens of proof. If a DMCA notice takes a piece of content down, the person who posted the content can counter-notify and the ISP, to retain their safe harbor, must reinstate access to the content. The entity making the DMCA notification in the first place must then
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Bring it on! [imdb.com]
-
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:4, Funny)
Then, when the case finally makes it to the Supreme Court, one party can say to the other: Bring It On: All or Nothing [imdb.com]
I'm not sure what they're going to call the next sequel, maybe "Bring It On - Cheerleaders Lobbying Congress"
Maybe that would work better as a Girls Gone Wild video...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Even under the 1976 act, it has problems. For example, the fixation requ
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Screw that. I'm going to copyright "bring woman to orgasm".
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:4, Funny)
As a work of fiction?
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I have never seen anything that would make me believe that creating a dance move gives you some kind of copyright over that dance move.
My understanding is that your DMCA takedown notice requires that you swear under penalties of purjury that you won the copyright in question.
So what's the penalty for purjury?
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:4, Informative)
So what's the penalty for purjury?
It's not really purjury. Since you're not required to register a work (in the US) in order to have a copyright over it, there is room for some gray area. While it's probably not going to be upheld in court, it would be difficult to prove that he's actually lying when he says he has a copyright on the dance move...he could very well believe that he does. Unless you can show that not only did somebody else do it first, but that he had some prior knowledge that it was done before him...
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Funny)
Old Man, there's no need to feel down
I said Old Man, pick your feet off the ground
I said Old Man, there's a new law in town
Lawsuits can make you feel happy
Old Man, here's what you must do
I said Old Man, do what your lawyer says to
You can sue them, and I'm sure that you'll find
They won't violate your copyright!
It's fun to sue with the D-M-C-A!
It's fun to sue with the D-M-C-A!
It has everything you need to sue
You can even screw YouTube!
It's fun to sue with the D-M-C-A!
It's fun to sue with the D-M-C-A!
You can take down the vids,
You can enforce your rights
It's all within your sights!
Re:Another Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Interesting)
Oddly enough, this is a problem best solved by another law/tort: frivolous prosecution. You can sue for not only the actual damages (that is, your court costs) but punative damages (money on top to get the other guy to never do it again.)
(Unless, of course, you really MEANT your grammatical mess-up, and intended to say that going along with legal thuggery is less expensive than standing up for your rights -- in which case, WTF?)
D in DMCA (Score:5, Funny)
Dibs on .. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm going to copyright other motions! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm going to copyright other motions! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Brilliant! (Score:2)
Somebody had to say it... (Score:4, Funny)
YouTube Revenue Share Will Really Make This Bad! (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright inhibits the market it tries to create (Score:3, Insightful)
The irony of course is that copyright, a mechanism intended to create a market for creative and intellectual works, effectively discourages participation in that market. The alternative of noncomm
The Robot (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What ought to torpedo this copyright troll is this: independent invention is a complete defense in copyright law. If the alleged infringers can make a plausible argument that they're not doing this guy's dance, but some other dance that happens to resemble it but comes from another source (the dancers' own invention; tradition; or anyone oth
Thriller... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Thriller... (Score:5, Funny)
This is awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Minister of Funny Walks (Score:5, Funny)
Just pester him for permission (Score:2)
Let's see him and his lawyers try to answer 6000 letters a day.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This trick wouldn't work. He has no obligation or need to respond. If he owns the copyright, unless and until he issues you a license, you're out of luck.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I can copyright the missionary position..... (Score:4, Funny)
Nothing to see here... (Score:5, Informative)
Choreography is just one of the items that are protected by copyright, which is listed in 17 USC 102:
(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories:
(1) literary works;
(2) musical works, including any accompanying words;
(3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;
(4) pantomimes and choreographic works;
(5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;
(6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
(7) sound recordings; and
(8) architectural works.
This statute was last revised in 1990. The DMCA did not add anything to it. I don't know how long choreography has been protected by copyright, but I would gamble that it's been at least fifty years or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ummmm... perform it with an erection? ;)
Read the bloody article FFS! (Score:4, Funny)
Of course trying to drill the correct steps into the thick booze-addled skulls of all the way-behind-the-curve morons that show up at people's weddings and make asses of themselves may be just a much a fool's errand as...well...getting Slashdot idiots to read articles!
Re:Read the bloody article FFS! (Score:5, Insightful)
If people are not doing the correct steps, they are not violating his copyright. He may have a trademark case, since the owner of a trademark can compel people not to use his trademark incorrectly, but if his complaint is inaccuracy he has no copyright case.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
he just show himself in the foot.
A quick youtube search (Score:3, Funny)
It's? (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif [angryflower.com]
Poster:
http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html [angryflower.com]
--
BMO
Odd that it took him 26 years to file copyright? (Score:2)
Wouldn't it also mean that all of those people who were "doing it wrong" weren't really doing *his* dance, but another one that's strikingly similiar?
Does he really have a floor to dance on? I can't imagine that he does. If so, then I'm going to copyright the "coreography" of copywriting bad dances 26 years after the fact. Then I can send a C&D to him and tell him he can't copyright his crappy dance.
Note: Terms used, such as "crappy dance" a
Re: (Score:2)
Misinformed (Score:2, Interesting)
Hey now... (Score:2)
In case he does, how much does that guy who whacks people in the back of the knees charge anyway? I have some business for him. Break a leg indeed!
It's not all bad. (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Moonwalk, eh? (Score:2, Funny)
Michael Jackson has patented the melting nose.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually he was denied on the basis of prior art. The Phantom of the Opera predates his claim and Lon Chaney never copyrighted it so his new style of nose falls under public domain. Same holds true if he decides to add a hump.
And another thing... (Score:5, Interesting)
One quick call to the RIAA and he is done for. Fight fire with Fire.
The only sad part is that I find myself defending line-dancing of any kind.
The intention of copyright laws? (Score:2)
Ultimate Irony (Score:3, Insightful)
The ultimate irony would be if the videographer claimed copyright, the way so many wedding photographers do, and went after him for having a copy of the video. I haven't heard much about it lately, but apparently it is *really* difficult to find a wedding photographer who will simply take his fee and turn over the digital files and/or negatives. I once scanned my parent's wedding photo, and it occured to me that if I were to actually try and legally comply with copyright, I would have to locate the photographer in another state. He took the picture 50 years ago. He's probably dead. I'd have to find his heirs. Needless to say, I "pirated" my parent's wedding picture. Come and get me!
Now, I'm not war3z kiddie. I'm actually in favor of intellectual property as a concept (legal mumbo-jumbo about it not being property? feh!). Howeve, when it fails the "common sense" test in such an obvious way, you have to employ something called "judgement". Hopefully, that's what the judge will do, and pencil whip this silliness right ouf of court.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't that qualify as a "work for hire?
Works Made for Hire. -- (1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or (2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by the
Bad dancing??? Not possibly infringing. (Score:2)
Claim as parody (Score:2)
Prior Enforcement (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I wish Mr. Schultz all the success in the world... (Score:2)
With a little help from the US legal system, we may yet destroy the menace to society that is the Electric Slide.
-Isaac
Re:I wish Mr. Schultz all the success in the world (Score:2)
-Isaac
If only (Score:2, Funny)
Finally a reason to revisit the question of DMCA (Score:3)
The problem is that you can copyright a dance (any damned dance) in the first place. I'm going to go copyright 20 different punches, kicks and acrobatic moves then get paid by every single kung-fu movie producer in the world. This is totally ridiculous.
The best quote from the article, " I don't want future generations having to learn it wrong and then relearn it as I am being faced with now ". Seriously? This guy's got to be a complete idiot. Like this would ever be a scenario:
"Hi there guy that invented the electric slide. Wow, I'd love to take dance lessons from you"
"Great, let's get started - I'm going to show you the electric slide"
"Ohhh, I don't need to learn that one - I already know how to do it"
"show me"......... "you're doing it wrong"
"Oh MY GOD! WRONG? NOW I HAVE TO LEARN IT ALL OVER AGAIN!"
moron.
---
The Electric Slide Performed Correctly [douginadress.com]
Electric Slide Video as posted by inventor (Score:4, Informative)
It works for me (Score:2)
He Doesn't Own It! (Score:3, Interesting)
"Longchamps, owners of Beefsteak Charlie's, opened a disco called Vamps on Broadway between 70th and 71st in the fall of 1975 and had an advertisement running in "BackStage" for bartenders and waiters. I needed a job at the time and applied for a position. When they say my resume and found that I was a professional dancer they asked me to give the opening night party. They hired a professional party giver, who did Neil Sedaka's Birthday, to give the Saturday Night Party and one of the girls from the Longchamps office gave the Sunday Night 'Black' Party with Leontine Price and Wilt Chamberland. My party was the only party that made money for the staff as well as the restaurant and when the clientel started dropping off a few months later they asked me to give another party only they wanted me to create a new dance and premier the dance at this party. I created "The Electric Slide" as the song had just come out and had a great beat and as I had already created "The Electric Weeble", it seemed the obvious next step. After only a few weeks of teaching the dance, I tore the cartilege in my right knee while demonstrating some of the variations of the dance and was operated on through Workmen's Compensation and was laid up for over a year. It wasn't until 6 or 8 years later that I realized how far the dance had gone and that my worst fears had come true. Every night I would tell the patrons - this dance has 3 threes, 2 twos, a One and a Hop, but I'm sure that someone is going to forget a step and try to square this dance off into 4/4 timing - It is not supposed to start on ONE every time. That is what makes this dance unique - but someone did square it off and want it to start on the downbeat and incorrectly told someone who told someone and all of a sudden - everyone is doing the dance, but they are not doing it correctly. I have spent MANY YEARS trying to correct this and until recently had given up on ever getting it right. - BUT then came the internet and now I am working to correct this wrong."
Ric Silver was injured that night, and was put on NY Workers Comp WC Case 0763-6911 6/17/76, and in the documentation listed on his website it clearly says he was an employee of VAMPS, meaning that he created it because he was asked by his boss. Therefore he doesn't own the dance moves http://ric06379.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/site builderpictures/ll.jpg [tripod.com]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Interesting ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, his webpage (and personal homepage [tripod.com] each play a sound recording of a song I believe is called (warning: iTunes link)"Electric Boogie" by Marcia Griffiths [apple.com]. I can't help but wonder if Mr. Silver has a license from ASCAP, BMI, or whichever entity may be responsible for enforcing the copyright for this sound recording.
As long as I am pointing out these types of things, on Mr. Silver's homepage [tripod.com] is a graphical representation of a copyright symbol (the "circle-c" symbol) that looks remarkably similar to the one on the webpage of the U.S. Copyright Office.
In a line in the song "Electric Boogie" the singer says, "Oooooh .. shocking!" Are these facts shocking? Not to me. But very interesting. At least in my humble opinion.
It is most definately a copyrightable work (Score:4, Informative)
Whoever choreagraphed this little peace of nostalgic heaven did a brilliant job. The dance is so easy that any grandma can do it in only a few minutes. She feels as if she is dancing just as well as the rest of the cool and hip people on the dance floor. She is getting exorcise. The younger set gets a lot of chances to be creative within the dances structure, yet still be part of a group.
In the late 70's and mid 80's a concurrence of events in American pop-culture created an environement that made this dance popular. The late 70's marked the end of the "hustle-era" and the mid 80's marked the "urban-cowboy" era. Line dancing was not extremely popular with the hustle dancing set but was just catching on when "Disco" was collectively pronounced dead by the American zeitgest. About the same time John Travolta again made a splash with his movie Urban Cowboy and a new dancing fad was born. Two-stepping and Line-dancing at the local "honky-tonk" was all the rage. The easiest of all the dances to learn was the Electric Slide. Soon after this confluence of events every budding dance teacher across the country rushed to put out content on the new hot medium of the day... Video Tape. I still see the dance prominently displayed on DVD's in the dollar bin at Half Priced Books all the time. The Electric Slide was in the right place at the right time to become the most popular line dance in history.
In my mind there is no question that the choreagraphy is indeed something worthy of being copyrighted. On the other hand it is quite debatable whether or not it has any real value. I don't know copyright law. But I can say that if I was faced with the decision of paying a liscence fee to the choreagrapher, I will just make up my own 32 beat phrase with a 1 quarter turn at the end and call it The Erotic Bump instead. It isn't that hard to do. For an overview of where line dancing is today view this link.... http://www.ucwdc.org/competition/linedances.shtm [ucwdc.org] where you will find that not one of the choreagraphers is paid for their efforts. In the meantime Im going to go out to the salsa club and do the Macarena
I'm torn. (Score:4, Funny)
Wrong: He's getting litigious for no good reason.
Right: He's trying to stop people from doing The Electric Slide.
Re: (Score:2)