Games, Copyright, and International Treaties | Copyright Drama! | Copyright and Travelogues | Copyright Basics
Copyright Implications of AI | How Are the Taylor Swift Re-recordings Legal? | The World's First Copyright Act (in the Modern Sense)
Public Domain Day 2024 | So You Want to Create a Cover Song?
Notes about the text:
*Author and Creator are used interchangeably
*Bolded text are defined in the Glossary Tab
The fact that a company that began with the creation of hand-made trading cards in Japan is today an international household name among even the youngest gamers is a testament to its success. This success is built on the legitimization of games into our lives over the past couple of generations, and their intrinsic popularity. With new gaming platforms and delivery methods increasing reach to ever-growing audiences, Nintendo serves as an example among many contemporary contenders in the market for our playtime. It can also teach us about copyright!
Games are a complex conglomeration of a variety of moving parts. The pieces that make up a game, including characters, code, mechanics, story, instructions, graphical (still and animated) and tactile elements, sounds, and music are immediately under copyright protection upon emplacement into a fixed format. This is true whether we’re talking about board games or video games. In particular there are special practices of video game enthusiasts that tend to expand the original purpose and reach of the game’s content and therefore subject the gamer to risk of copyright infringement: live streaming, modding, and creating fan works. Video game companies have understood the sometimes-present value in user generated content (UGC), and have modified their end-user license agreement (EULA) to allow for the companies to reap these benefits while allowing their fans’ creativity to flourish. Minecraft (a Mojang/Microsoft property) states, “We love that our players and fans do cool things and share them with the community. Our goal is to create an environment where you get to do great things for the Minecraft community without others coming along and spoiling it for everyone” (Minecraft, 2025). This is an example of how copyright licenses have the ability to promote creativity in the market.
While gaming and its popularity continues to rise and evolve, they do so alongside new technologies (AI), professional gaming, and e-Sports. E-Sports is so popular that it is now accepted by the International Olympics Committee and has its own World Cup competition (Murko, 2025). But teams must also partner with games publishers who license their games to be played in these competitions. Bellevue University’s own Bruins athletics has e-sports teams who participate in a variety of licensed games. Our NACE Apex Legends team just won the Proton Collegiate Kickoff Championship, displaying “our program’s success against both Division I universities and top-ranked Apex Legends teams…[and] the growing strength of Bellevue University e-Sports” (BUBruins, 2025). The Bruins also play NACE Super Smash Brothers Ultimate, a Nintendo property. Here are team members (left to right in the purple photo) Jason Poe, Colin Shockey, Logan Caldwell, and Josiah Ellwein:
You can learn more about BU’s athletics and incorporation of play in our recent blog: Let’s Play—in the Archives!
Here's the answer to the quick quiz found in the library blog:Nintendo’s video game rebirth in the 1980s involved creating new characters (Mario, Princess Peach, and Donkey Kong) when the original character desired was under copyright (Watts, 2025). Who was the desired character?
The answer is 3. Popeye the Sailor Man
The concept of copyright is built on the idea of respect: respect for the creator or copyright holder’s ownership of their intellectual property (IP) for the designated term. In the US, that term is the life of the author plus 70 years. Copyrights vary across the globe and are determined by the individual country; but treaties have been adopted to standardize the rules across countries and allow authors to be more globally productive and profitable during their lives. Unless the copyright is renewed, the rights fall into the public domain 70 years after the author’s death.
The respect for a creator’s property extends beyond borders. The worldwide World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO, an agency of the United Nations) have worked together for more than a hundred years to convene and adopt basic intellectual property rights globally. The Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement are examples of these cooperative results: they ensure that works that are protected by one government would then also be protected by another.
Why is this collaboration and cooperation so vital? “Protecting your ideas keeps innovation moving forward” (WIPO, 2025, 0:45). It protects the space where new ideas can be incubated, proliferated, and marketed in unique versions for others to share and enjoy; it encourages more creativity based upon those earlier ideas. WIPO’s goal is to facilitate this cooperation, and promote fairness, accessibility, and the transformative nature of new creative outcomes based on ideas.
Underneath the superficially descriptive term “IP” is a powerful, creative, innovative, and transformative idea that was created by a human being, with experience and access to one or more socio-cultural traditions, and that idea is disseminated and shared with a potentially global audience of consumers and beneficiaries (WIPO, 2025). And, according to WIPO Director General Daren Tang, “we need to keep having the human being at the center of the IP system” (WIPO, 2025, 4:43). Human-centeredness allows creativity to flourish over the machines—machines and technology are the tools, while humans remain the real innovative creators.
People, Faces, Diversity Image by Khanh Trinh from Pixabay
Benson, S. R. (2021). Select international copyright library issues. In Compact copyright: Quick answers to common questions. ALA Editions.
BU Bruins. (2025, September 15). E-Sports press release. Bellevue University Athletics.
Dimita, G. (2022, September 2). Copyright infringement in the video game industry. WIPO: Advisory Committee on Enforcement.
Hu, H. (2024). User-Generated Content and Copyright Liability: Assessing the Role of User in Copyright Infringement Detection. Advances in Economics Management and Political Sciences, 71(1), 48–61. https://doi.org/10.54254/2754-1169/71/20241420
Jin, D. Y. (2021). Global esports :Transformation of cultural perceptions of competitive gaming (1st ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Minecraft. (2025). Minecraft usage guidelines. Mojang Studios/Microsoft.
Murko, D. (2025, January 17). Esports trends for 2025: Expectations and forecasts. ESCharts.com.
Rivera, C. A. (2023, October 26). Nintendo reveals new rules for content creators. GameRant.com
Watts, C. (2025, May 29). Levelling up: The IP journey of Nintendo. UK.gov Intellectual Property Office.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2025, June 20). Inventing the future: How WIPO is supporting innovators and creators around the world (short film). wipo.int.
WIPO. (n.d.). WIPO Lex: Access to legal information on intellectual property from around the world. wipo.int.
WIPO. (n.d.). Who is WIPO? About WIPO. wipo.int.
Celebrate Nintendo’s Birthday: Light green background with 2D pixelated (8-bit) foreground graphic elements such as a tree, clouds, shrubs, and red-topped polka-dot mushrooms that pay tribute to Nintendo’s Super Mario Brothers platform game. Text reads, “Celebrate Nintendo’s Birthday and learn about copyright in games and international treaties” in varied brightly colored, mostly green and red fonts. Image created by Jean Turman using CanvaPro.
Bellevue University SSBU NACE Varsity Team: Collection of images from Nintendo’s Super Smash Brothers Ultimate eSports team, beginning top left, clockwise: front view of teammates Jason and Josiah at a table react to action on their screen in front of them, with Jason player putting both hands on his head and Josiah pointing behind him with excited/surprised expressions; a side view of Josiah controlling his character in SSBU on the screen in front of him, manipulating the controller in his hands; a professional portrait of a purple background with four team members (L to R Jason Poe, Colin Shockey, Logan Caldwell, Josiah Ellwein) with serious expressions and arms folded across their chests wearing purple team shirts, and text that reads, “NACE Varsity Plus SSBU Champions!”; a rear-side view of Logan leaning back in his chair controlling his character in SSBU on the monitor in front of him. There are a few graphics on top of the images, including a red-and-white Nintendo logo, a black-and-white question block, a yellow star with eyes and an open mouth, and a red and white super mushroom with eyes and a green text bubble that says “super,” and a graffiti-style sticker on the purple team photo that says “smash!” Image assembled in CanvaPro by Jean Turman using BU Athletics/eSports photos. Nintendo logo from Wikimedia Commons.
Quiz Time Image: CanvaPro
International Treaties: Dark purple background with horizontal lines to appear like a television screen, with foreground graphics of various colored 2D neon-style game controllers, arrows, and flags to indicate different countries. The center contains a bright neon-styled purple and blue border, with text inside reading “international treaties” in clear, bright font color. Image created by Jean Turman using CanvaPro.
People, Faces, Diversity: Light background with 2D colorful graphic illustrations of diverse human faces, by Arienne Thuringer and obtained via PixaBay.
*If a source is listed, the term was obtained and directly quoted therefrom.
Berne Convention – The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works is an international set of laws that protects copyrighted works from infringement across the member countries (Cornell Law School).
Copyright License – Simply put, a license is permission to use a work of another creator. Because the copyright holder has limited, exclusive rights to make and distribute copies, publicly perform or display the work, and prepare derivative works based on the original, anyone who wants to make use of the copywritten work must ask permission and obtain explicit license (legal documentation) to do so.
End-User License Agreement (EULA) – A legal contract between a software application author or publisher and the user of that application. In the EULA, often referred to as the "software license,” the user agrees to pay for the privilege of using the software, and promises the software author or publisher to comply with all restrictions stated in the EULA. Commonly referred to as “click-through” agreements (Duquesne University, Educause, p. 5).
Fan Works, also Fanwork(s) – A creative work produced by one or more fans, generally intended for other fans (Fanlore).
Human Being – Concepts of humanity are anthropologically universal. There is no human life-form that does not place humans into a general order of things giving them an idea of their relationship to the surrounding world and to the other humans with whom they live together. Within their concepts of humanity, people know who they are, and who the others are—or are not—to whom they belong and from whom they differ (Rüsen, 2012, Encyclopedia of Global Studies). A human is legally distinguished from animals or AI, for example, in the context of copyright. Copyrights are currently not granted to works created by anything other than a human being.
Intellectual Property (IP) – Intangible property that includes patents, trade marks, copyright, and registered and unregistered design rights (OxfordReference.com).
Life of the Author Plus 70 Years – In General.—Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author’s death (Copyright Law of the United States (Title 17), Chapter 3, §302(a))
Live Streaming – The process of broadcasting video content, recorded in real-time, to a target audience over the internet. It’s a highly authentic and reliable way to communicate, as no editing happens before the video content is transmitted (Webopedia).
Modding – The modification of existing computer games, programs, or systems by users or third parties, typically to enhance their functionality or appearance. It involves making changes to the game’s code, graphics, sounds, or other aspects, resulting in customized and often improved user experiences (Amazing Algorithms).
NACE – National Association of Collegiate Esports. (NaceSports.org)
Public Domain – No copyright or patent is eternal. Those intellectual property rights expire. Once the protection period has terminated, that idea or work can’t be re-protected. It then becomes free to all. This status is known as the “public domain.” Without any copyright protection, a book can be reprinted or copied by anyone. Similarly, when a patent expires, any business can use that invention without paying the inventor (Public Domain Guide at DailyWireless.org)
Technology – The application of scientific knowledge to the practical aims of human life—or, as it is sometimes phrased, to the change and manipulation of the human environment (Britannica Academic).
Transformative – The two most important factors of the fair use doctrine are the purpose and character of use, and the effect of the use upon the potential market. Under the first factor, precedent has directed that courts look to the "transformative" value of the derivative work. Works were transformative when they underwent a (1) physical transformation or (2) a change in use, purpose, or meaning. What qualifies as transformative, and whether it sufficiently necessitates fair use, depends on the specific court (Palmer, 2024, the “Orange Prince” of copyright, ¶2).
TRIPS Agreement – Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is the most comprehensive multilateral agreement on intellectual property (IP). It plays a central role in facilitating trade in knowledge and creativity, in resolving trade disputes over IP, and in assuring WTO members the latitude to achieve their domestic policy objectives. It frames the IP system in terms of innovation, technology transfer and public welfare. The Agreement is a legal recognition of the significance of links between IP and trade and the need for a balanced IP system (World Trade Organization).
User Generated Content (UGC) – Any content, such as images, videos, reviews, blog posts, and social media posts, that is created voluntarily by individuals rather than brands. Simply put, UGC content originates directly from customers or users, rather than being produced by professional marketers or paid influencers. any content, such as images, videos, reviews, blog posts, and social media posts, that is created voluntarily by individuals rather than brands. Simply put, UGC content originates directly from customers or users, rather than being produced by professional marketers or paid influencers (Intellifluence)
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) – The United Nations agency that serves the world’s innovators and creators, ensuring that their ideas travel safely to the market and improve lives everywhere. We do so by providing services that enable creators, innovators and entrepreneurs to protect and promote their intellectual property (IP) across borders and acting as a forum for addressing cutting-edge IP issues. Our IP data and information guide decisionmakers the world over. And our impact-driven projects and technical assistance ensure IP benefits everyone, everywhere (WIPO).
World Trade Organization (WTO) – The only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations. At its heart are the WTO agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world’s trading nations and ratified in their parliaments. The goal is to ensure that trade flows as smoothly, predictably and freely as possible (World Trade Organization)
Ah, Wretched Plight!
Photo by engin akyurt on Unsplash, modified in Photoshop and Canva by Jean Turman, Shakespearean text generated with the help of ChatGPT free version
Drama—we all have it in our lives, even when we’re not paid actors! Twentieth century Irish dramatist Sean O’Casey even opined, “all the world’s a stage and most of us are desperately unrehearsed.” Despite our own woes, film and theatre are massively consumed by the general population. We take supreme delight in others’ joys, sorrows, love, and misery. Dramatic works, on film and on stage, offer us a compact, digestible view of lives and stories. And these works are copyrightable.
Nigh 170 years ago during the month of August 1856, “copyright protection was extended to dramatic compositions, including, for the first time, the right of public performance” (Copyright.gov, n.d., “Dramatic Works Are Protected”). And about half of a century later, “the amendment of the 1909 act” extended “copyright protection to motion pictures on August 24, 1912. Prior to that date, motion pictures had to register their works as a series of still photographs” (Copyright.gov, n.d., “Highlight”).
Dramatic works, including films, actually involve many moving parts that would be copyrightable on their own, such as a musical number, an artistic set, or a performance of oratory. Under copyright law and with the ability to register an entire theatrical composition or motion picture, all pieces are housed within the main work, uniting all of those disparate yet essential elements and allowing for a single registration of copyright. Still, various individual elements of a film or drama such as the music, lyrics, script, or dance choreography, may be separately copywritten.
When navigating copyright issues, as we’re available and the Copyright Center is here to help you do so, there are these basics to keep in mind regarding copyrights and dramatic works:
Students – The BU Library allows students to access myriad media! Films and other audio-visual recordings are a great resource for learning and research. Using these materials and citing them in your research is considered to be a fair use of copywritten material. Remember, to avoid plagiarism you need to cite whenever you quote, paraphrase, or refer to any of these sources. If you find yourself flummoxed when it comes to citations, you can use our Plagiarism Tutorial or reach out to our friendly reference librarians who are on call to help! And I highly recommend taking advantage of the support our Writing Center can provide.
Faculty – Since films and other media make such great tools for teaching and learning, it is quite common to include access to these kinds of sources via your learning management software. But due to the copyrights involved, you need to request permission for use, display, and presentation of the media. BU Library has numerous databases of media for which we’ve already obtained license. If you don’t find what you’re looking for, contact me or complete our Copyright Permission Request and I’ll help you.
And just like that, no more copyright drama, thanks to your library and the Copyright Center.
Super Copybara!
ai-generated image created in Adobe Photoshop by Jean Turman
References:
Ash, E., & Seven Dimensions Films of Australia, production company. (2015). Insights and strategies. Copyright warning (E. Ash) [Video recording]. Seven Dimensions. https://bellevue.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01BUN_INST/1jbe57m/alma991004239681307376
Copyright.gov. (n.d.). “Dramatic Works Are Protected.” Timeline: the 19th century. Retrieved from https://www.copyright.gov/timeline/timeline_19th_century.html
Copyright.gov. (n.d.). “Highlight: Congress passes first comprehensive copyright law of the twentieth century.” Timeline: 1900–1950. Retrieved from https://www.copyright.gov/timeline/timeline_1900-1950.html
Images:
Ah, Wretched Plight! A photograph of a theater actor in all black on a black background, with only arms and head visible, hands on either side of the head as if in turmoil, wearing a white mask with cutouts for the eyes. A speech bubble shows the text, “Ah, wretched plight! Copyright law doth confound mine art!” Original photo by engin akyurt on Unsplash, modified in Photoshop and Canva by Jean Turman, with Shakespearean-style text generated with the help of ChatGPT free version.
Super Copybara! A capybara sits facing front, with a red superhero cape and mask, a blue collar on a blue sky background with clouds, and a sun only revealed by half light, sun rays, and gold-tinged clouds. This is an obviously ai-generated image created in Adobe Photoshop by Jean Turman.
Bon voyage !
Photo by Christine Roy on Unsplash
Travelogues are as old as humanity, really. We’ve been documenting and sharing our journeys ever since the earliest days of using “rock markings to map sacred sites, leave warnings, note plants or animals, and document messages or prophesies. The markings may have told a story, marked a trail, or commemorated an event” (NPS, 2025). Some of the most instantly recognized stories in our culture involve travel, from Homer’s Odyssey, to Don Quixote or Robinson Crusoe, to (real-life Corps of Discovery) Lewis and Clark, to Bilbo, Frodo, and friends in Lord of the Rings. We humans don’t stay put. And we are inherent, prolific communicators. Every experience is unique—but travelogues are a new treatment on a common, relatable human theme: sharing our adventures.
While travelogues are not unique in concept, it is worth emphasizing that the individual expression is. This is where copyright comes in. Copyright protections come into play—not to protect a list of facts, such as a packing list, an itinerary, or a concept such as the travelogue itself; but to allow for a fully vibrant and active marketplace of unique, protected expressions. If each one of us wrote, filmed, photographed, painted, or in myriad other ways put down a tangible, original creation documenting our vacation adventures, they would each be copywritten—publication and © not necessary! (See our previous feature about Copyright basics to learn more, or contact us at copyright@bellevue.edu.)
Coincidentally in July of 1870, the first work ever registered for copyright in the Library of Congress was in fact a travelogue! Copyright had already been around in the U.S. law for about eighty years, but prior to this date there was no “centralized place to administer copyright claims. Instead, [the law] directed authors and proprietors to register works at the U.S. district court where they resided” (Copyright.gov, n.d., ¶2). The travelogue first registered in the Library was entitled San Domingo by De Benneville Randolph Keim, which you are still able to access! And today, it is in the public domain.
San Domingo, a travelogue by De Benneville Randolph Keim
(image courtesy of LOC.gov)
The public domain is a treasure trove of content that you are free to use! Once copyright terms and limitations have terminated, the previously protected items fall into the glut of materials that no longer require permissions. In addition to copyright-expired items, the public domain also contains U.S. government works, and works whose author originally meant to release to the public without restriction.
Anyone willing to compose their summer explorations into a copywritten work can do so easily (find out HOW). But for my fellow desk-chair, web-savvy travelers, we can find ourselves as Keim wrote, “amazed and perplexed at the marvelous discoveries constantly unfolding before” our eyes and within our minds as we take in the adventures that others have taken the time to embellish and expound upon (1870, p. 13). We can do this in the blink of an eye, the click of a mouse, and the doff of your summer sunhat.
Copybara Tourists a-Trekkin’
Image ai-generated and edited using Adobe Creative Suite by Jean Turman
Do you have questions about copyright? Contact the Copyright Center by email at copyright@bellevue.edu.
You can read more of our Copyright Feature articles here.
Copyright.gov. (n.d.). “U.S. Copyright Beginnings.” Retrieved from https://www.copyright.gov/history/copyright-exhibit/beginnings/
Copyright.gov. (n.d.). “First work registered for copyright in the Library of Congress.” Retrieved from https://www.copyright.gov/timeline/timeline_19th_century.html
Keim, De Benneville Randolph. (1870). San Domingo: Pen pictures and leaves of travel, romance and history, from the portfolio of a correspondent in the American tropics. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/item/02012389/
National Park Service (NPS). (2025, May 5). Why were petroglyphs, pictographs, and inscriptions made? Retrieved from https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/why-were-petroglyphs-pictographs-and-inscriptions-made.htm?utm_source=article&utm_medium=website&utm_campaign=experience_more&utm_content=small
Bon voyage ! – a photograph of a colorful world map with push pins inserted into many continents and a border of international paper monies. Photo by Christine Roy on Unsplash
San Domingo, a travelogue by De Benneville Randolph Keim – image of a title page of a work published in 1870 with “San Domingo” visible among other blurred text and a stamped marking. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/item/02012389/
Copybara Tourists a-Trekkin’ – AI-generated image by Jean Turman of a family of three capybaras standing on a dirt trail on a hill surrounded by nature on a sunny day; one capybara holds a camera by a strap around the neck, and two capybaras are donning summer hats.
What pops into your head when I say “copyright”? What feeling is evoked? For many, the feeling is confusion. On social media, when people are looking for an easy, quick answer to life’s complicated problems, the trend is that copyright elicits a muddle of puzzling ideas, and dismay that the answer is not simply presented. Posted questions (these are from Reddit) to the Internet include:
photo by He Junhui on Unsplash; modified by Jean Turman
We know that looking to social media for expertise is ill-advised (but we do it anyway). In the case of copyright, it confirms our fears that we’re stepping into a muddy morass. So to help us navigate the questions that surround copyright and put us on track to gain confident answers, The Copyright Center is here to help! The Bellevue University Library Copyright Center is in the process of breathing some fresh features to life, and we’re starting off with an overview of copyright basics here, where we’ll briefly discuss the Who–What–When–Where–How—and Why.
Up next >> WHO?
Here is actually a simple answer: EVERYONE owns copyright! Specifically, if you’ve created a tangible, creative work of writing, music, art, or other unique creation, the copyright is yours. Today, just the fact that your expression is your own and you’ve fixed it in some tangible form that can be shared, you are in possession of the copyright, worldwide, immediately!
Of course, the terrain is not super smooth. There are details to discuss, like what does it mean to be a unique expression, and what is a tangible form. But basically, the ownership of your work is yours, and you’re immediately granted the copy rights of a copyright holder.
Up next >> WHAT?
There are some things that are not copyrightable. You can’t copyright an idea, or a list of ingredients. It does not apply to a(n):
| idea | system | method of operation |
| procedure | concept | discovery (Copyright.gov, §102b) |
| process | principle |
But if you write down or record your idea for a story, a play, or a song (literary, dramatic, or musical works); or if you create an expression in a form like a sculpture or painting; or if you write computer code into a program, that creative work you’ve made is copywritten—as long as it’s an “original work of authorship” (Copyright.gov, §102) with a spark of creativity, or originality.
The basic list of rights held by an author upon creation of their work are as follows:
These are exclusive rights held by the author of the work. The author has the right to use their own work commercially or to distribute it for free or for lease. No one else is granted these exclusive rights outside of the author(s). However, the author can decide to enter into agreements with a publisher or distributor in order to expand the reach of their own work, and may thus decide to transfer all or some of their exclusive rights to that agent.
up next >> WHEN?
We discussed previously that copyright is granted to the author immediately upon fixing the work in a tangible form. It doesn’t require publication. As I’m typing this article and saving it to my hard drive, I would be immediately designated as the copyright owner. (There are exceptions: I am writing this article as part of my regular job. In this case, my employer, the Bellevue University Library, is the copyright holder.)
Copyright is long lasting so as to allow great commercial potential to the copyright holder. If I wanted to publish my articles in a book or on a website, I would be able to earn money from that endeavor for the entirety of my life and for 70 years beyond. Renewal is also possible. At the end of the copyright or renewal term, the work goes into the public domain and can be used freely by everyone: the author’s exclusive rights have terminated.
The takeaway for copyright term is: The author’s life + 70 years
up next >> WHERE?
There are global treaties in place to honor your copyright around the world. And, author works from around the world equally are copywritten and those author’s rights are protected in the U.S. and other territories (laws can vary from region to region, so always check). Copyright and intellectual property concerns are ongoing, nuanced, and ever-evolving. Court cases occur regularly, so keep this in mind and keep up to date on your rights. The U.S. Copyright Office publishes numerous documents and reports to ensure you can stay informed.
up next >> HOW?
Yes, your copyrights are granted immediately and with no need to register. But copyright registration does set you up with particular enhancements and substantiated legal protections, and it’s easy and affordable! The USCO Registration Portal will ask you to complete a form, upload a tangible copy, and submit a small fee. You’ll be given a case number and can track your work’s status. You’ll even receive documentation showing your work registered in the name you entered.
You are not required to show proof of copyright with a symbol or registration, but you may. It can be helpful for the world audience-at-large to see that a work is copywritten and who holds the copyright. When various consumers want to seek permission to use your work, that will make it easier to find you!
up next >> WHY?
Copyright seems so complicated, can it really be worth my time? The answer here is also easy: YES!!
We know that copyrights are granted freely and immediately. So when we create a copyrightable work, it is in our own best interests (personally, professionally, academically, financially) to understand our rights and their limitations. The copyright ecosystem grants each of us a fixed, short-term monopoly for our works, encouraging us to create and fully realize our talents how we deem fit. We have our entire lives and then some to make full use—how we desire—of our creative works! Once beyond the life+70 basic copyright term, we are all contributing to a great wealth of shared content that comprises the public domain—it is a vast pool of public expression and inspiration just waiting for you to dip your toes!
One, two, three…!
photo by Rob Hayman on Unsplash
As you can see, there is a lot to know about copyright and how to use it. My name is Jean, and I’m the Scholarly Communications and Archives Librarian at Freeman/Lozier Library and I’m here to assist with your copyright questions. Take a look around our Copyright Center, and even peruse the U.S. Copyright and the Library of Congress sites. Contact me at jturman@bellevue.edu if you have any questions.
up next >> Resources
Reference
Copyright.gov. (December, 2024). U.S. Copyright Law, Title 17 of the United States Code. Retrieved from Copyright Law of the United States | U.S. Copyright Office
Photos
Capybara: looking down on a sleepy capybara with closed eyes standing on a wood floor, with a thought bubble that asks, “Copybara?” by He Junhui on Unsplash; modified by Jean Turman
Child: a child in a diaper holding arms high above the head, standing in a shallow river in a natural area, by Rob Hayman on Unsplash
Copyright Implications of AI
by Sierra Whitfield
While it might sound like a concept straight out of science fiction—think robots and androids—artificial intelligence (AI) is very much a reality that has taken the world by storm. But there's no need to fear a robot apocalypse anytime soon!
Though the technology is still in its early stages, it's advancing rapidly. The recent surge in AI coverage is largely due to startups releasing innovative tools, such as ChatGPT. This AI model responds to prompts with coherent, contextually relevant content and can even recall earlier conversations in the same thread.
To understand how AI generates content, we must delve into a process known as machine learning. AI systems are trained to recognize patterns and skills by analyzing vast databases of publicly available images and text from the internet. This training process involves creating digital copies of existing works. For example, OpenAI states that its programs are trained on "large, publicly available datasets that include copyrighted works," and this involves making copies of data for analysis. As a result, much of this data originates from human-created content, raising various copyright implications.
Creating these copies without explicit permission could infringe upon the copyright holder’s exclusive rights to reproduce or create derivative works. Nevertheless, many AI companies argue that their training methods fall under the copyright doctrine of fair use.
If you’re unfamiliar with fair use, it’s a provision in the U.S. Copyright Statute that allows limited use of copyrighted material without obtaining permission from the copyright owner. The determination of fair use hinges on four statutory factors outlined in 17 U.S.C. § 107:
Many AI companies, including OpenAI, argue that their use is "transformative" rather than merely "expressive," as the training process aims to create a "useful generative AI system." They also maintain that the third factor supports fair use, as the copies are not made public but are solely for training purposes.
However, the most significant contention arises around the fourth factor—impact on market profitability. Critics express concerns that AI can generate works similar to those in the copyrighted datasets it has been trained on. This can lead to competition with original works, potentially undermining their market value. A notable example is the AI-generated song “Heart on My Sleeve,” which mimics the styles of artists Drake and The Weeknd. It garnered millions of streams before Universal Music Group, representing both artists, claimed that AI companies were infringing copyright by using their songs in training data.
For more insights into the potential effects of artificial intelligence on copyright, libraries, and academic publishing, be sure to check out Episode 52 of our podcast, More Than Books, where we discuss AI and AI art.
How are the Taylor Swift Re-recordings Legal?
by Sierra Whitfield
Source: iHeartRadioCA
This file licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.
Prior to 2019 American Music Awards (AMA, for short), Taylor Swift claimed that her former label, Big Machine records, has blocked her from performing any of the songs on her old catalogue (prior to the release of the 2017 album, Reputation).
Do they have a right to do this?
Absolutely!
As the company owns the exclusive rights to her music, they are able to “reproduce, prepare, distribute, and publically perform” in any way they see fit (Exclusive rights in copyrighted works).
Music copyright is typically comprised of two different licenses – a composition license and a master license. The master license or master recording license is the right held by the person or entity who owns the recording of the song. The master license gives the user permission to use the original recording of the song for an audiovisual project, but does not allow the user to use a re-recorded version of the song (i.e. a cover). The composition license or prints rights license refers to the musical composition that the artist has written.
As Swift is the primary songwriter listed on all of her songs, she retains the copyright for the composition. And so, she is able to create a new recording, of whose master copyright she fully owns. The advantage of this is that Swift can now retain a good chunk of the income by making sure that her fans, companies, and other vendors, purchase rights to her new improved recordings – which she has called “Taylor’s Version” – rather than the rights to the original versions, that are still owned by Big Machine Records.
So, the biggest question that many are asking is: why is she doing this?
Besides the financial benefits, many have speculated that the true motivations behind Taylor’s decision lay in her contentious relationship with music manager, Scooter Braun.
Taylor has been signed under Big Machine Records since starting her career at the age of 15, and finally left a little more than ten years later, in 2018. Whilst she was there, she was barred from making any re-records of her previous albums.
When Taylor Swift switched record companies, one of her required stipulations was that she would own her own masters. This, however, only applied to her new material.
The masters for all of her old music now belonged to Scooter Braun.
Scooter Braun’s company, Ithaca Holdings, LLC., acquired Big Machine, and all of its “recorded music assets,” in a deal made with Scott Borchetta. Scott and Taylor had a friendly, though professional, relationship as Big Machine Records was a small, independent recording label at its start. Swift’s father, Scott Swift, was also a major shareholder for the company. Though the final vote on the pending deal was passed with 3 out of 5 of the major shareholders voting in favor, Swift claims that that deal was done without her knowing, and that the company never gave her a chance to buy back her own masters.
She further portrayed Borchetta has a “traitor” for selling her master rights to Braun, and called the manager a “bully.” However, Borchetta, in a written response posted on the label’s website, contends this accusation by explaining that her management team and attorney went over the deal in detail and reported the terms back to her.
Whether that is true or not remains to be seen.
But what is not up for speculation is that 17 months after the deal, Scooter Braun sold the rights to Taylor’s masters to an investment fund. The deal reported closed north of $300 million, though some speculate it could be as high as $450 million (some have reported $480 million).
Swift’s main issue with Scooter Braun is not personal, but rather due to his professional ties to Kanye West. Their rivalry is a well-known one, dating all the way back to 2009, when Kanye West infamously interrupted Taylor’s Swift acceptance speech for Music Video of the Year. He snatched the mike away from her, and publically announced that Beyoncé, who had also been nominated for the category, had “one of the best videos of all time.” Then, later in 2016, Swift entered into a big fight with Kanye over his song, Famous. At the time, Braun was West’s manager, and he was working with the artist when the song was released. Taylor Swift kicked up a storm over the lyrics of the song: “I feel like me and Taylor might have s**. Why? I made that b**** famous.” The conflict was further amplified when the music video for the song was released, and at one point in the video model figures that were made in the likeness of several celebrities, which included Swift, appeared in the nude.
Regardless of the celebrity drama that permeated the situation, Taylor Swift has – unintentionally – given us a unique look into the world of music copyright. Armed with her own creativity, and immense social sway, Taylor Swift has managed to outsmart and wrestle control of her intellectual property away from the record labels and industry leaders, and has returned the power of the copyright holder back into the hands of the artist and creative. Don’t believe me? Case in point: when asked which version of Swift’s music they listen to, any die-hard Swiftie will say with a loyal assuredness: “Taylor’s Version!”
Sources:
https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-taylor-swift-changed-the-copyright-game-by-remaking-her-own-music/
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=98b85aef-2092-4098-a36d-98302218271f
https://variety.com/2020/music/news/scooter-braun-sells-taylor-swift-big-machine-masters-1234832080/
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67237220
https://www.bigmachinelabelgroup.com/so-its-time-some-truth/
https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/7/1/20677241/taylor-swift-scooter-braun-controversy-explained
by Sierra Whitfield
The original purpose of copyright in Victorian England was not to protect authors’ (or even publishers’) rights, but to raise revenue for the government, as well as giving them the primary power over the ability to censor literary works. Many of these restrictions were authorized by the Licensing of the Press Act in 1662, and were enforced by the Stationers’ Company, a guild of printers that was regulated by the Court of Star Chamber, that held the exclusive power to print. These stifling modes of censorship (and press restrictions) did not sit well with authors and the public alike. As such, these regulations led to widespread protests that eventually ended the reign of the censors.
The Statue of Anne, named for the reigning Queen Anne, which was passed on April 5, 1710, was a milestone in copyright law. The bill was the first of its kind, as it advocated for the protection of an author’s intellectual property by emphasizing that the author – or creator – should be the primary beneficiary of copyright law, rather than the publishers. The new bill granted a prescribed copyright term of 14 years from the inception of the law, and 21 year to any published work, that was already in print. A provision for renewal was included in its terms, during which only the author and the printer, to whom their work was licensed, held exclusive rights to publication. Should the copyright be left to expire, the work in question would then fall into the public domain.
Though the Statue of Anne would later be replaced by the Copyright Act of 1842, the law would forever more be considered a “watershed event in Anglo-American copyright history.” Within the written provisions of this statue, included a myriad of first such as copyright protections that favored authors over publishers or guilds and the legal deposit schema (and precursor, one could say, to the modern day institutional repository). This statue, also, had an influence on copyright laws that were enacted in other countries – Denmark in 1741, the United States in 1790 (and later the Chase Act nearly a hundred years later in 1891), and France in 1793 (a tous la liberté!).
References: Nineteenth-Century British and American Copyright Law by Philip V. Allingham
Public Domain Day 2024
By Jennifer Jenkins
Director, Duke Center for the Study of the Public Domain
CC BY 4.0
Note: Please note that this site is only about US law; the copyright terms in other countries may be different.
On January 1, 2024, thousands of copyrighted works from 1928 will enter the US public domain, along with sound recordings from 1923. They will be free for all to copy, share, and build upon. This year’s highlights include Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D. H. Lawrence and The Threepenny Opera by Bertolt Brecht, Buster Keaton’s The Cameraman and Cole Porter’s Let’s Do It, and a trove of sound recordings from 1923. And, of course, 2024 marks the long-awaited arrival of Steamboat Willie – featuring Mickey and Minnie Mouse – into the public domain.
Here is just a handful of the works that will be in the US public domain in 2024. They were first set to go into the public domain after a 56-year term in 1984, but a term extension pushed that date to 2004. They were then supposed to go into the public domain in 2004, after being copyrighted for 75 years. But before this could happen, Congress hit another 20-year pause button and extended their copyright term to 95 years. Now the wait is over. (To find more material from 1928, you can visit the Catalogue of Copyright Entries.)
Click the PDF Link below for full article.
Written by Jennifer Jenkins.
Public Domain Day 2024 by Jennifer Jenkins, Director of Duke Law School’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain, is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Note on Changes: Excerpt taken from Public Domain Day 2014 by Jennifer Jenkins, Director of Duke Law School’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain. Certain segments, in particular “Why Celebrate the Public Domain?” have been reordered. Original footnotes have been removed.
This website is not official legal advice. Instead, it is a summary of United States law relevant to the public domain and a guide to some of the works entering the public domain in 2024.
So You Want to Create a Cover Song?
By Sierra Whitfield
So, you want to create a cover song?
Or, you already have created it, and are looking to release your newest creation out into the world?
Either way, there are some things that you’ll have to take into consideration, and that “thing” is copyright. I know, copyright may seem like it has little to do with music, or the arts in general, but these protections are far more relevant than you might think. It is important to adhere to copyright laws, for not only the artist’s benefit, but also your own. Copyright is all about protecting the value of a creator’s work, by giving the originator of the work the ability to protect it from unlicensed or uncredited usage. This leads to the prevention of their work being copied to the degree where they cannot sell it effectively or receive credit for it. In this way, copyright fosters intellectual creativity as it provides an incentive for a creator to work freely, allowing them to gain recognition for their work as well as protecting their livelihood.
So, an artist holds the rights to his work, to print, publish, reproduce, film etc. this material over a period of years, though they may give this right to others at their discretion or by allowing others to reuse it when other people ask for the owner’s permission. This process of getting consent from a copyright holder to use their creative work is called obtaining copyright permissions. Obtaining permission is often called “licensing”; when you have permission, you have a license to use the work.
And this is how, legally, music covers can exist!
The thought of licensing music may seem like a doozy, especially to someone who’s not used to the copyright permissions process, but once you understand the in’s-and-out’s of the different types of music licenses, you’ll be able to navigate licensing with little challenge.
Types of Music Licenses
Public Performance License: this license is self-explanatory. As one of the most common types of music license issues, the public performance license covers any broadcast of any artist’s work; scenarios include radio broadcasts, background music in public spaces (malls, restaurants, waiting rooms), or live covers in front of an audience.
Print Rights License: this license refers to the musical composition that the artist has written.
Master Recording License: the master right is held by the person or entity who owns the recording of the song. The master license gives the user permission to use the original recording of the song for an audiovisual project, but does not allow the user to use a re-recorded version of the song (i.e. a cover).
Mechanical License: this license covers any physical or digital reproduction of an artist’s work. Though original catered toward physical reproductions such as CD’s, cassettes, and vinyl’s, the existence of the internet and download focus stores like iTunes and Amazon Music has broadened this umbrella to include digital reproductions as well.
Synchronization (Sync) License: this license is necessary when you want “synchronize” music with an audiovisual project such as a YouTube video, music video, commercial, film, and television shows.
So, how do you go about getting licensing for releasing a cover song?
The first question you need to ask yourself is: where do you plan to post it?
Physical/Digital Downloads
If you plan on releasing a cover song on either a physical and/or digital records, then you will need to obtain a mechanical license. This ensures that both the copyright holder is paid and you aren’t sued!
Streaming Platforms
You can upload your cover song directly to streaming platforms utilizing the exact copyright information provided by the original songwriters and publishers. Services like Spotify, Apple Music, and YouTube Music license songs and pay royalties to copyright holders through THE MLC (Mechanical Licensing Collective). Cover artists releasing songs through these platforms do not need to worry about royalty payments.
Playing a Cover on YouTube
You may get away with not acquiring a license to a song posted on YouTube, but if you want to make money off your video, then you need to acquire a sync license. Elsewise, you will put yourself, and your video, at risk of getting a copyright strike. In addition, if you plan to release the song on digital, then the above rules and licenses will also apply.
Now, you are equipped with everything you need to know about cover music licensing. Go forth and release your song onto the platform of your choice!
References
Institute of Art, Design + Technology Dun Laoghaire, Copyright: Why copyright matters and important concepts related to copyright; Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-BY_NC 4.0)
