The BBC reports that EMI, the record label responsible for the Beatles’ music, has successfully threatened legal action against the DJ, DJ Dangermouse, who has mixed together the music from the Beatles’ White Album with the words of rapper Jay-Z, taken from his Black Album. In response to EMI’s assertion of its copyright, Mr Dangermouse has agreed not to produce, sell or distribute any more copies of the work. However, he is encouraging his fans to do what he can’t and a spokesman has said that he is “just happy for people to burn it, bootleg it and post it on the internet”. This is possible because a number of promotional copies were realsed and are now circulating in the hip-hop community. Their scarcity makes them all the more sought after.
The IPKat is mildly amused by the ironic fact that EMI’s assertion of its copyright has made the potentially infringing materials into valuable commodities. Moreover, there’s not a lot EMI can do to stop the private reproduction of the work, short of tracking down and bringing action against the actual copiers. Additionally, there’s nothing that EMI can do against DJ Dangermouse because there’s no offence of incitement to infringe copyright.
Dangermouse here
Dangerous mice here
Have a grey day here
Everything’s all white here, here and here
The IPKat is mildly amused by the ironic fact that EMI’s assertion of its copyright has made the potentially infringing materials into valuable commodities. Moreover, there’s not a lot EMI can do to stop the private reproduction of the work, short of tracking down and bringing action against the actual copiers. Additionally, there’s nothing that EMI can do against DJ Dangermouse because there’s no offence of incitement to infringe copyright.
Dangermouse here
Dangerous mice here
Have a grey day here
Everything’s all white here, here and here
SHADES OF GREY FOR DJ DANGERMOUSE
![SHADES OF GREY FOR DJ DANGERMOUSE]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html