Copyright snippets

Yodelling copyright victory

The IPKat learns from the Daily Telegraph that a Munich court has decided that the heirs of Karl Ganzer, who wrote Kufstien Song, a German yodelling song containing the yodel "Holla-räe-di-ri, di-ri, di-ri" and once voted the best German song of all time, are entitled to the royalties, and not the song's publisher. The publisher argued that he 'jazzed up' the song, and therefore was entitled to a cut. What clinched it was a 1980s document where the publisher admitted that Ganzer was the author of the song.

The IPKat wishes he'd been a fly on the wall at the trial. All that yodelling... He notes though that even though this may be a highly popular song, the royalties only seem to amount to £3,000 per annum.

Author's own music taken down by YouTube

Proof that the silly season is upon us - the Mirror reports that the music producer Calvin Harris is not a happy bunny after the BPI arranged for YouTube to remove his own music from his YouTube account , citing copyright infringement. He has not kept his feelings to himself, but the IPKat won't report precisely what he said.

Oh dear..says the IPKat
Copyright snippets Copyright snippets Reviewed by Anonymous on Monday, July 27, 2009 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. ... the (alleged) joint author of the "Kufsteinlied", a Mr Frauenberger who claimed to have created the yodelling part had received 1/12th of the overall annual royalties, a share that amounted roughly to EUR 3000 ... but no longer, as he had admitted that Mr Ganzer was the sole author of the work in an earlier court case several years ago .. d'oh!


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:

Powered by Blogger.