Music Business

Village People Could Be Banned From Singing ‘YMCA’


Village-peopleBy Mike Masnick and republished from Techdirt.

We've written many times about the issue of termination rights in copyright. Under the Copyright Act that went into effect in 1978, artists have a "termination right" to basically take back their copyright from whomever they assigned it to, 35 years after the works were created. Artists cannot contract that right away. It's inalienable. Of course, it's 2013, and as you may have noticed, that's 35 years after 1978. There are a variety of legal fights going on, as copyright holders (generally large gatekeeper companies) are fighting to stop the termination rights. One of the first key cases on this involved The Village People's Victor Willis, who scored an initial victory last year.

Of course, the legal fight went on. The NY Times, however, is reporting that Willis himself is now claiming victory, but the details are lacking, and the lawyer for the record labels denies Willis' claim, noting that there's still an appeal to be heard.

That said, what struck me as more interesting — but no less troubling — is the gleeful manner in which it appears Willis is preparing to use his new copyright powers (if he actually gets them) to make the current version of The Village People stop performing the band's classic songs:

In a telephone interview from his home in Southern California, Mr. Willis said he has not yet decided how best to exploit the song catalog. “I’ve had lots of offers, from record and publishing companies, a lot of stuff, but I haven’t made up my mind how it’s going to be handled.”

He added, however, that he is thinking of prohibiting the Village People — the band still exists and is touring this month and next, though with largely different members — from singing any of his songs, at least in the United States.

Willis seems positively gleeful about his believed power to stop the song from being played:

“I learned over the years that there are some awesome powers associated with copyright ownership,” Mr. Willis said. “You can stop somebody from performing your music if you want to, and I might object to some usages.”

The NY Times claims that this right could allow Willis to prevent venues from even playing recordings of classic songs like YMCA. This seems somewhat unlikely. While it's true that a copyright holder can prevent a public performance (though not a recording of a cover), most songs are licensed for public performance via one of the major performance rights organizations like ASCAP, BMI or SESAC. In theory, there could be a situation in which Willis would pull the songs from those guys, but that would likely lead to a major loss of income. But if it's licensed to those guys, then, generally speaking venues pay a blanket license and can play any and all songs in that venue. I can't see how Willis would possibly stop that without pulling his songs out of the PROs and that just seems silly.

Still, even assuming there is a way to do this, why would he? It just seems petty and stupid and vindictive, with little upside, other than annoying a lot of people. But, all too often, it seems like that's what copyright is for.

 

Share on:

1 Comment

  1. Yes, it is annoying that he might not allow the group performing as the Village People to perform YMCA. And yes, it is stupid to do this because he could gain income from it. And yes, (to quote you) it is vindictive too.
    But for you to follow all of that with the statement that: “…But, all too often, it seems like that’s what copyright is for”; Is equally stupid, petty, and vindictive!
    Copyright is there so that musicians, songwriters and artists can have a fighting chance at earning a living
    If you think that being petty and vindictive is primarily what copyright is for: Then you are alarmingly ignorant to it’s true pour pose and should not be writing about it (And I am surprised that Hypebot allowed this article).
    .

Comments are closed.