One of Moses Pelham (45) produced song by rapper Sabrina Setlur (42) employed for years the German justice. Now the Constitutional Court a constitutional complaint of Pelham upheld. The use of samples in the artistic field – in this case, a short sequence of a plant-piece – can justify an interference with copyright and neighboring rights
This has the court a ruling by the Federal tilted for sampling. Now the Supreme Court has to assess the case again, the judge ruled on Tuesday in Karlsruhe.
Vice-president of the court Ferdinand Kirchhof basing its decision on the fact that the vorinstanzliche judgment of artistic freedom not sufficiently carry bill. Because of the short sequence is created a new, independent work of art, without power station thereby have economic damage. It continues: “A ban would exclude the creation of music of a certain style in practice.” That was the central argument of the music producer from Frankfurt
stumbling block
.
in the conflict is about two seconds off the track “metal on metal” 
“Then hip-hop is no longer possible”
Small parts from other songs use without consent allowed to, Pelham had held “for common and lawful”, citing among other things “Spiegel online” from a previous hearing. If you no longer should the, “then hip-hop is no longer possible”. For Pelham it belongs therefore to the “art” that one “deals with other art” itself. In this case, he did not even know how the original is. Looking for a contrast to Setlurs song he had found it in his sound archive and “pinned, which is part because out”.
Kraftwerk founding member Ralf Hütter described other hand, how difficult it was in the 1970s, this creating sound composition: audio tapes without digital technology, experimentally. When he had twenty years later hear that then in another title, it would have “done it affected”: “. There is the seventh commandment – Thou shalt not steal”
Copyright against creative freedom, it is so: the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Setlur songs that use to a foreign sound recordings recorded sounds or sounds for their own purposes, is inadmissible “if there is an average music producers possible to produce an equivalent sound itself.” But this is the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court of today’s Tuesday now first lapses.
What happens now?
Now the case is to re-evaluate again the Bundesgerichtshof. As “sueddeutsche.de” However, after the Supreme Court ruling of 2012 suspected even the European Court could eventually deal with the issue …
No comments:
Post a Comment