Making YouTube
videos for a living or as a hobby is a growing phenomenon. You can delve into
the lives of “beauty gurus” or watch tutorials on just about everything from
cooking help to how to make rainbow loom bracelets. While creating new content does not
raise problems, using songs protected by copyright can land you into trouble as
Michelle Phan has just discovered. Ms Phan, a YouTube entrepreneur earns money through the platform by making make-up
and lifestyle videos. As background music for her videos, she has used songs
from various artists. Ultra Records, which is in charge of some of the artists’
works featured in Ms Phan’s videos, brought an action for copyright
infringement against her.
Artists usually
assign their rights to a music society in exchange for royalty payments. The
society then takes care of granting licences to other parties who wish to use
the artists’ works. Artists therefore no longer have the right to decide
whether to allow someone else to use their work, nor can they sue people for
unauthorised use, as it is the music society which becomes responsible for
this.
Among the songs
featured by Michelle Phan in her videos is Kaskade, and although his songs are
some of the most used ones in her videos, he does not agree with his record
label’s decision to sue her. Despite having no control over the claim, he is
siding with her on this matter. In her support, he has said: “Copyright law is a dinosaur, ill-suited for the landscape of
today's media.” True, copyright laws were designed around a time when the
YouTube phenomenon could not be anticipated. Today, content is created
constantly on YouTube and songs are often added to videos. “Free music” can be
found online, but it is unlikely to include any “trendy” songs.
The label’s
complaint contains 50 alleged instances of copyright infringement, and they are
asking for £88,000 for each proven breach. They fear that unless ordered to
stop by the court, Michelle Phan will continue to use materials without their permission.
However, a spokesperson for Ms Phan said that the claims lacked merit and
emphasised that Ultra had agreed to let her use the music previously: “Michelle's intention has always been to promote other
artists, creating a platform for their work to be showcased to an international
audience.” Fans on twitter have attested becoming aware of Kaskade’s songs
through her videos.
Whether the works were used with or without
permission remains to be seen. The usual policy when copyright
infringement is alleged on YouTube is the take down the videos, but given the
extensive use of copyrighted music here, we shall have to see what happens
next. Ms Phan has more than 6 million subscribers to her YouTube
channel and it is perhaps the potential loss of revenue from broadcasting to a
public of this size that is the driving force for Ultra Records’ claims. They
maintain that she used the songs in her videos without their permission and
that despite not requesting a licence to use the musical works, she “…continues to wilfully infringe in blatant disregard of plaintiffs'
rights of ownership”.
When the Writ Hits the Phan
Reviewed by Unknown
on
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Rating:
Reviewed by Unknown
on
Thursday, July 24, 2014
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
Indeed, the BBC story goes on to say "He expressed his disbelief on Twitter that his own record label was suing Ms Phan for copyright infringement. "And the kicker... they're citing her using my songs for the suit. Come. On," he wrote on the site."
ReplyDeleteIt does rather suggest that record companies' insistence on copyright protection being essential to the livelihoods of artists as being a little bit exaggerated.
[By the way, often when I lauch IPKAT it complains that it "cannot be shown in a frame"; and often recently if I click on the "xx comments" to put up a new window with the comments in, it says I have "unsaved changes" when I try to close the window. Could these be fixed, please?]
Thanks, Anonymous: I think the problem lies with either your choice of browser or your browser setting -- I've not experienced this problem on the various computers I've used and no-one else has reported it (yet).
ReplyDeleteDo the copyright assignments not contain provisions requiring the assignor to give such assistance as may be required to support infringement lawsuits, and to refrain from impeding the same? Cannot Ultra compel Mr Kaskade to refrain from disparaging the merits of the lawsuit in a public forum? If not, tighter drafting is clearly required.
ReplyDeleteanonymous at 12:51,
ReplyDeleteCheck into concepts such as contracts of adhesion and public policy making certain contract provisions de facto unenforceable.
"Tighter drafting" may not be the workable answer you think it to be.
I have the same problem as Anonymous at 22:15, in that if I click on the "xx comments" to put up a new window with the comments in, it says I have "unsaved changes" when I try to close the window. I haven't experienced the problem with frames though.
ReplyDelete>>Do the copyright assignments not contain provisions requiring the assignor to give such assistance as may be required to support infringement lawsuits, and to refrain from impeding the same? Cannot Ultra compel Mr Kaskade to refrain from disparaging the merits of the lawsuit in a public forum? If not, tighter drafting is clearly required<<
ReplyDeleteKaskade is not under contract with Ultra Records; he was released by the label on or before March 20, 2014 and he is currently not signed to any label/publisher/distributor.
>>It does rather suggest that record companies' insistence on copyright protection being essential to the livelihoods of artists as being a little bit exaggerated.<<
Fledgling artists tend to rely on record label advances and other support; established artists like Kaskade develop revenue streams independent of their record label such as tours and live performances.