Category: Copyright Infringement

The Six Rights of Copyright – Part V: The Right to Public Display

The Six Rights of Copyright – Part V: The Right to Public Display

 

Public Display and the Bundle of Rights That Make Up Copyright 

 

This is the fifth part in our series on what makes a Copyright, the right to public display.  The prior four rights reviewed are linked below for you to get up to speed.  To refresh, the six parts of copyright are:

To try to get behind the curtain of copyright, we’re individually exploring each of these six rights.  An understanding of each and how they operate will allow you, the creator, to be in a better position to take advantage of your copyright.

There are a couple words of caution.  First, the practical effect of these exclusive rights will depend on the type of copyrighted work (literary works, musical works, motion pictures, sound recordings, etc.).  Second, these are exclusive rights.  The law allows only the copyright holder to exercise these rights.

V: The Right to Publicly Display the Work

 

Copyright owners have the exclusive right to display or permit others to display the copyrighted work publicly. The public display right is similar to the public performance right, except that it is applicable to public “display” rather than a performance.  This right applies to musical works (the lyrics, composition, and arrangement), but not to sound recordings (a particular version of a musical work).

The Right to Public Display Protects what People can See

 

Right to Public Display
Sheet music on public display

A public display of copyrighted means to show a visual copy of the work to others.  This covers individual images (stills) from a film, reproductions of paintings and drawings, sheet music from a musical works, or photos from other performance pieces.  Public display can occur directly or indirectly through the use of film, slides, or television.  It’s important to bear in mind what is a pubic display vs. a private display.  In general, it’s a private display if you’re showing a work to a small circle of family and friends.  It’s a public display when the showing goes beyond that small circle of family and friends.  See the prior article on the right to public performance for more detail.  A museum exhibit, a television show, or transmission vis the internet are good examples of public displays.

Limitations on the Right to Public Display

 

An important limitation on the right to public display covers the situation when a person buys a lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work. Under this scenario, the owner of the copy can display it directly (e.g. the buyer of a copy of a DaVinci painting can display in their office).  The owner can also display it indirectly, but only one image at a time (e.g. the buyer of a music video cannot display the entire video, only a still).

The ubiquitous Fair Use exception to copyright protection can come into play for the public display right, too.  Other limitations to the right of public display are out there, but are beyond the scope of this article.

            – Ari Good, Esq.

Ari Good, JD LLM, is an experienced Miami entertainment lawyer and aspiring musician himself who represents DJs, live musicians, fashion models, and other entertainers in copyright, licensing, and contract matters.  For a free and confidential consultation to discuss your legal rights, contact Ari of Good Attorneys at Law, P.A., in Miami-Dade County at (239) 216-4106 or toll free at (877) 771-1131 or by email to info@goodattorneysatlaw.com.  Visit goodattorneysatlaw.com  for more information.

Image by Josh Gross

Bieber and Usher Not Feeling the Love over $10 Million Copyright Lawsuit

The Music Pitch

Songwriters Devin Copeland and Mareio Overton have filed a $10 million copyright lawsuit against Justin Bieber and Usher over their hit single, “Somebody to Love.”  This sordid ditty begins back in 2008 when Copeland and Overton claim they first recorded the song for Copeland’s album, “My Story II,” and registered the copyright.  Music scouts Sangreel Media, in a conference call with Copeland, then pitched their copyrighted music to Jonetta Patton, Usher’s mother.  This presentation led to Patton telling Copeland that Usher wanted Copeland to re-record the album and tour with him.  But Copeland never from Patton again and Sangreel Media never returned the copies of his music.

The Copyright Infringement

Bieber copyright infringement
Bieber and the Law

Fast forward to 2010 and when Overton first heard Justin Bieber’s version of the song on the radio.  Overton contacted Copeland believing their song had been “clearly copied.”  Their copyright lawsuit claims that Usher and other songwriters directly copied “Somebody to Love” and tried to pass if off as their own.  This occurred after Patton never followed up on her offer for Copeland to tour with Usher and Sangreel Media never returned copies of his music.  Usher uploaded the demo track to YouTube by February 2010, but did not use it for his album.  He instead offered it Bieber, a YouTube sensation at the time working on his first full-length album.  The lawsuit alleges Bieber agreed to record the infringing version of “Somebody to Love” and Usher provided the background vocals.  The song was an immediate hit and Usher went on to release a remix with him singing lead and Bieber performing backup.

“Somebody to Love,” ultimately, helped propel Bieber up the charts.  He performed it at the 2010 MTV Music Video Awards, the Today Show, and other television appearances.  It also became a backbone for Bieber’s “Believe” tour.

The Lawsuit

Copeland and Overton ‘believe’ many similarities exist between their version and Bieber’s according to the lawsuit.  This includes opening lyrics that are nearly identical and the same beat pattern.  They claim that that Bieber’s copyright infringing song has been exploited through the sale of albums and singles, but also through the sale of sheet music and live concert performances.

Their lawsuit demands $10 million in compensation from Bieber, Usher, Usher’s mother, and others.  They also want punitive damages on top of the $10 million because of the heinous nature of the copyright infringement.  Copeland and Overton have stated that they are not willing to settle the lawsuit unless it’s proven in court that they are owed less, too.

A big payday awaits if Copeland and Overton can prove their copyright infringement claims in court.  The lawsuit also shows the importance of songwriters and composers registering the copyright to your music.

–          Ari Good, Esq.

Ari Good, JD LLM, a tax, aviation and entertainment lawyer, is the Shareholder of Good Attorneys At Law, P.A.  Ari Mr. Good received his BA, With Distinction, from the University of Michigan in 1993.  He graduated from the DePaul University College of Law in 1997 and received his LL.M. in Taxation from the University of Florida.  Ari represents DJs, live musicians, fashion models and other entertainers in copyright, licensing and contract matters.

Image by Mt. T in DC