The covers were made to sound nearly identical to the real bands, so some of the real bands began to complain that even though their song content wasn't being stolen, other rights were being infringed upon. There was an article about it in the USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/2007-11-22-romanticssue_N.htm While there is some merit to the Romantics' case, it does raise the usual question of where should the line be drawn between what is a copy and what isn't a copy. Should a band be allowed to copy the look and sound of another band? Should a band be able to license its look and sound?
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Infriging?
Guitar Hero, its sequels, and its clones represent an interesting aspect of the copyright issue. While all of the Guitar Hero type games have attempted to obtain at least partial licensing for their content, there have been some interesting issues. The Guitar Hero games began using songs that were played by cover bands rather than the real bands to reduce licensing fees. They obtained the license for the lyrics and melodies, just not the recordings done by the bands.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jordan, a few years ago, there was an interesting dialogue between Chuck D and the lead singer of Metallica. The latter made the case for strict enforcement of copyright while the former made the case for music to be more free. You might check to see if you can find it online. In the matter of Guitar Hero, I would think the band would like to have their music copied in that people who may have not been acquainted with their music might look around for it and download it or even go to a store and buy it. Iappreciate the legal issues involved but I'm always amazed about people getting made at what looks to me like free publicity!
ReplyDeleteDr. Bob