evenflow1969
Gold Member
Not bullshit retard. Intellectual property is protected. Ya got to pay to use it unless donated to public domain.Bullshit.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not bullshit retard. Intellectual property is protected. Ya got to pay to use it unless donated to public domain.Bullshit.
And arists sue all the time.
People use my song “Aldo is gay” all the time, and I sue,
Well, his estate then asshole....I am so sick and tired of musicians wanting to throw hissy fits because someone uses their song to enter an event or something....Lighten up people....He’s dead, moron.
It's stealing. The music that musicians make is their income. You have no right to use it without permission any more then I have the right to come to your house and take your car without permission. Remember Napster?Well, his estate then asshole....I am so sick and tired of musicians wanting to throw hissy fits because someone uses their song to enter an event or something....Lighten up people....
LOL....Petty is dead remember? This is his liberal estate getting their panties in a bunch over nothing...It's stealing. The music that musicians make is their income. You have no right to use it without permission any more then I have the right to come to your house and take your car without permission. Remember Napster?
If these politicians want to use a song, GET PERMISSION.Napster - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
It's stealing. It's a crime punishable by a fine of anywhere from $200 to $150,000.LOL....Petty is dead remember? This is his liberal estate getting their panties in a bunch over nothing...
You do know that songs are copywritten, right?I guess one of the hate sites is programming the drones.![]()
This is not how it is done.They lost.
As long as royalties are paid, anyone can use any PUBLISHED work.
Don't want people to play your song? Don't publish it. Publishing is a license to the public to use the published material.
No, not necessarily....It is covered under the "fair use" doctrine....It's stealing. It's a crime punishable by a fine of anywhere from $200 to $150,000.
The Fair Use doctrine is not what you think. It's quite complicated. If it doesn't meet the criteria, you would still need approval of the copyright holder.No, not necessarily....It is covered under the "fair use" doctrine....
106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works.
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;
(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and
(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.
She is not using the song to make money.It's stealing. The music that musicians make is their income. You have no right to use it without permission any more then I have the right to come to your house and take your car without permission. Remember Napster?
If these politicians want to use a song, GET PERMISSION.Napster - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. For works first published prior to 1978, the term will vary depending on several factors. To determine the length of copyright protection for a particular work, consult chapter 3 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the United States Code). More information on the term of copyright can be found in Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright, and Circular 1, Copyright Basics.She is not using the song to make money.
She is using the song to energize people to get out and vote.
That makes it public domain.
The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. For works first published prior to 1978, the term will vary depending on several factors. To determine the length of copyright protection for a particular work, consult chapter 3 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the United States Code). More information on the term of copyright can be found in Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright, and Circular 1, Copyright Basics.
How Long Does Copyright Protection Last? (FAQ) | U.S. Copyright Office
Brief answers to questions about duration of copyright, and renewal of copyright.www.copyright.gov
Clearly you have no clue about copyright law.Copyright laws are to prevent somebody else from profiting monetarily from your work.
If i charged you to come to a venue where I used one of Petty's song to entertain you and made money then it would be a clear violation of the copyright laws. Like a movie using his song during the opening credits and not paying him for it.
An exception is made for music and other entertainment material for use in the public domain.
She did not use the music to make money. She used it to for entertainment in a public setting. The intention was to get people out to vote.
This would be a good one for the courts to decide.
They could rule that this Libtard jackass Petty has the right to prevent her from using his music because he is a Moon Bat shithead or they could decide it met the definition of public domain.
Clearly you have no clue about copyright law.
They did the same to war monger and globalist John McCain.Tom Petty’s estate is looking into suing MAGA anti-democracy grifter Kari Lake for hijacking his music “to promote her failed campaign”
![]()
Tom Petty Estate Blasts Trump-Endorsed Candidate For Illegal Use of ‘I Won’t Back Down’
A better option might have been Don't Come Around Here No More.loudwire.com
![]()
I've studied copyright law for many years. You are way out of your league.The problem you are having understanding the issue is that you are a stupid confused uneducated Moon Bat that hates Keri Lake that clearly has moral clarity and has been exposing the stupidity and dishonesty of the goddamn Democrats and you don't like it.
You have a distorted view of reality because you have a mental illness, probably caused by TDS, TDS is a serious mental illness that has affected you Moon Bat's capacity to understand basic reality.