Digital Media: Copyright Issues in Remixing and Mash-ups

This presentation delves into the implications of remixing and mash-ups within the music industry, focusing on copyright issues. It begins by outlining the scope of the music industry and the rise of remixes and mash-ups, differentiating between the two and highlighting their popularity. The core of the presentation addresses the conflict in usage, particularly the infringement of copyright when using original music content without permission. It explores the implications of copyright infringement and piracy, which are identified as major threats. The presentation also proposes potential resolutions, such as using royalty-free music and proper attribution, to mitigate these issues. References to relevant academic literature are also included to support the arguments presented.

IMPLICATIONS OF
REMIXING AND MASH-
UPS
COPYRIGHT ISSUES

INTRODUCTION
THE PRESENTATION WILL DISCUSS;
• SCOPE OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY
• RISE OF MASH-UPS AND REMIXES.
• ORIGINALLY CREATED MUSIC
• CONFLICT IN USAGE
• POSSIBLE ISSUES
• COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
• PIRACY
• POSSIBLE RESOLUTION
• SUMMARY

SCOPE OF THE MUSIC
INDUSTRY
• MUSIC DATES BACK TO THE MEDIEVAL TIMES (MARSHALL, 2013).
• MUSIC HAS BEEN TREATED AS RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY
• IT HAS ALSO BEEN TREATED AS A PASSION BY SOME.
• THERE ARE VARIOUS STYLES OF MUSIC THAT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED
• WITH TIME, THE STYLES HAVE BEEN RE-INVENTED. CHANGES ARE TAKING PLACE AT
RAPID RATES.
• NEW GENRES OF MUSIC DISCOVERED RAPIDLY.
• THE INDUSTRY IS GENERATING FAVOURABLE AMOUNT OF RETURNS.

RISE OF MASH-UPS AND
REMIXES
• REMIXES ARE EDITED VERSIONS OF A MUSIC TRACK.
• RISE OF DIFFERENT DJ-REMIXES (ATTIAS, GAVANAS & RIETVELD, 2013)
• HELPS IN CUTTING THE MONOTONY FROM THE ORIGINAL TRACK
• MASH-UPS ARE MUSIC TRACKS THAT ARE MADE FROM ASSEMBLY OF
DIFFERENT TRACKS.
• MASH-UPS AND REMIXES POPULARIZED BY ARTISTS SUCH AS SKRILLEX,
DATSIK, FLUX PAVILION AND OTHERS.

ORIGINALLY CREATED MUSIC
CONTENT
• MUSIC IS CREATED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF MUSIC PRODUCERS, ARTISTS SUCH
AS GUITARISTS, BASSISTS, DRUMMER, VOCALIST AND OTHERS (MOREAU,
2013).
• ORIGINALLY CREATED MUSIC IS PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHTS.
• COPYRIGHTS PROTECT FROM MUSIC PIRACY.
• USE OF ORIGINAL CONTENT WITHOUT CONSENT LEADS TO COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT.

CONFLICT IN USAGE
• POSSIBILITY OF CONFLICT AS A RESULT OF THE PIRACY
• MASH-UPS USING MUSIC THAT US PROTECTED THROUGH COPYRIGHTS.
• LEADING THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ACTUAL MUSIC
PRODUCER AND THE REMIXERS (DOBUSCH & SCHÜẞLER, 2014).
• ORIGINAL CONTENT USAGE HELPS IN AVOIDING CONFLICT.

POSSIBLE IMPLICATION
• USE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (DEPOORTER, 2013).
• VIOLATION OF ETHICS.
• COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
• PROFITABILITY OF AN INDIVIDUAL WITH SOMEONE ELSE’S WORK.
• PIRACY

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
• IT REFERS TO THE USE OF CONTENT PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT WHICH
LEADS TO VIOLATION OF THE COPYRIGHTS (ANGELOPOULOS, 2013).
• IT IS USE OF PROTECTED WITHOUT THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE
DEVELOPER.
• MASH-UPS AND REMIXES OFTEN VIOLATE VARIOUS COPYRIGHTS.
• HAS LEGAL IMPLICATIONS AS A RESULT OF WHICH THE ACTIVITY IS DEEMED
TO BE ILLEGAL.

PIRACY
• IT REFERS TO THE UNAUTHORIZED USE, DISTRIBUTION AND COPYING OF CONTENT
(PERCY & SHORTLAND, 2013).
• IS TREATED AS A SERIOUS LEGAL VIOLATION.
• PROTECTED BY PIRACY PROTECTION LAWS.
• VIOLATION OF THE LAW LEADS TO PROSECUTION (BERNAZ, 2015).
• MASH-UP AND REMIXES INCORPORATES USE OF MUSIC, THE RIGHTS TO WHICH IS
OWNED BY OTHER INDIVIDUALS.
• HENCE, TREATED AS PIRACY.

POSSIBLE RESOLUTION
THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN DETECTED CAN BE SOLVED BY:
• USING SONGS THAT ARE FREE FOR USE.
• BY GIVING PROPER CREDITS TO THE PEOPLE BEHIND CREATION OF THE
CONTENT.
• BY DEVELOPMENT OF GENUINE MUSIC.
• IDENTIFICATION OF CONTENT THAT ARE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHTS.

SUMMARY
• THE MUSIC DATES BACK TO AGES.
• THERE HAS BEEN RISE OF REMIXES AND MASH-UPS.
• ORIGINALLY CREATED MUSIC IS PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHTS
• VARIOUS IMPLICATION HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. PIRACY AND COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT ARE THE MOST THREATENING.
• POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AND CAN HELP IN MITIGATION
OF THE IDENTIFIED ISSUE.

REFERENCES
• ANGELOPOULOS, C. (2013). BEYOND THE SAFE HARBOURS: HARMONISING SUBSTANTIVE INTERMEDIARY LIABILITY FOR COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT IN EUROPE. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY QUARTERLY, 3, 253-274.
• ATTIAS, B., GAVANAS, A., & RIETVELD, H. (EDS.). (2013). DJ CULTURE IN THE MIX: POWER, TECHNOLOGY, AND SOCIAL CHANGE IN
ELECTRONIC DANCE MUSIC. BLOOMSBURY PUBLISHING USA.
• BERNAZ, N. (2015). CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW: THE NEW TV SAL AND AKHBAR BEIRUT SAL CASES AT
THE SPECIAL TRIBUNAL FOR LEBANON. JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 13(2), 313-330.
• DEPOORTER, B. (2013). INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INFRINGEMENTS & 3D PRINTING: DECENTRALIZED PIRACY. HASTINGS LJ, 65, 1483.
• DOBUSCH, L., & SCHÜẞLER, E. (2014). COPYRIGHT REFORM AND BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION: REGULATORY PROPAGANDA AT GERMAN
MUSIC INDUSTRY CONFERENCES. TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 83, 24-39.
• MARSHALL, L. (2013). THE 360 DEAL AND THE ‘NEW’MUSIC INDUSTRY. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CULTURAL STUDIES, 16(1), 77-99.
• MOREAU, F. (2013). THE DISRUPTIVE NATURE OF DIGITIZATION: THE CASE OF THE RECORDED MUSIC INDUSTRY. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
OF ARTS MANAGEMENT, 15(2).
• PERCY, S., & SHORTLAND, A. (2013). THE BUSINESS OF PIRACY IN SOMALIA. JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC STUDIES, 36(4), 541-578.