Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Plagiarised D&D art
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 9233707" data-attributes="member: 7035894"><p>No, she didn’t own the recording masters for those albums. She still owned the compositions, but not the recordings that were used to make those albums. By re-recording them, she did not regain the rights to the original masters and can’t stop them from being sold by their current owner. She has effectively supplanted them with new versions that she owns and markets as superior versions.</p><p></p><p>Edit: I love that she did this, but note that only Taylor Swift and maybe a few other artists have the fan muscle and financial resources to pull something like this off at an appreciable scale. But yeah, she didn't violate earlier copyright agreements regarding her masters (not the rights to the compositions themselves), she just did an incredible end run around a crappy contract.</p><p></p><p>So you can still go on, say, iTunes and buy "Shake It Off" (the original version which is not owned by Swift but for which she presumably receives a royalty), OR you can buy "Shake It Off (Taylor's Version)", which she/her business owns, and is the one that she wants you to buy. The point is that she still can't stop the original from being sold; she has not recovered those rights.</p><p></p><p>Edit 2: But her move <em>did</em> effectively recover her right to perform her music publicly, since now she can say that she is performing the versions that she owns, and not ones that Big Machine Records owns. Kudos!</p><p></p><p>Edit 3: now I am wondering if she has to do some sort of disclaimer before her live shows, to the effect that everything she performs from those first albums is based on the "Taylor's Versions" re-recordings.</p><p></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.flblaw.com/taylors-version-explaining-taylor-swifts-re-recordings-under-the-copyright-law/#:~:text=With%20regards%20to%20Taylor%20Swift,case%2C%20is%20Big%20Machine%20Records.[/URL]</p><p></p><p>Plagiarizing yourself and committing copyright infringement against work that you sold are different things. It definitely would not, and should not, be legally acceptable for you to turn around and sell the exact same poem, or substantial pieces of it, to another publisher if you signed an exclusive deal with the first or sold it to them outright.</p><p></p><p>If you wrote another poem that was similar because that’s the way you write poems, you’re probably fine, as the Fogerty case illustrates.</p><p></p><p>For example, as a grad student, I was hired to design an educational board game. I signed a contract essentially ceding all my rights to it to the publisher. I cannot now republish it or substantial parts of it for profit, or I would be infringing their copyright. But I can design and publish other games that reuse or expand my ideas, as long as I’m not crossing that line.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Edit: Plagiarizing yourself and committing copyright infringement <em>can</em> be connected, however, which is why students are warned that copyright infringement is one potential consequence of self-plagiarism (if you are doing it with published work). But mostly self-plagiarism is wrong because it is seen as dishonest, not legally actionable. Almost 100% of the time it consists of students reusing work that has already been used for another assessment, without acknowledging it as such (trying to hand in the same term paper twice, for example).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Clint_L, post: 9233707, member: 7035894"] No, she didn’t own the recording masters for those albums. She still owned the compositions, but not the recordings that were used to make those albums. By re-recording them, she did not regain the rights to the original masters and can’t stop them from being sold by their current owner. She has effectively supplanted them with new versions that she owns and markets as superior versions. Edit: I love that she did this, but note that only Taylor Swift and maybe a few other artists have the fan muscle and financial resources to pull something like this off at an appreciable scale. But yeah, she didn't violate earlier copyright agreements regarding her masters (not the rights to the compositions themselves), she just did an incredible end run around a crappy contract. So you can still go on, say, iTunes and buy "Shake It Off" (the original version which is not owned by Swift but for which she presumably receives a royalty), OR you can buy "Shake It Off (Taylor's Version)", which she/her business owns, and is the one that she wants you to buy. The point is that she still can't stop the original from being sold; she has not recovered those rights. Edit 2: But her move [I]did[/I] effectively recover her right to perform her music publicly, since now she can say that she is performing the versions that she owns, and not ones that Big Machine Records owns. Kudos! Edit 3: now I am wondering if she has to do some sort of disclaimer before her live shows, to the effect that everything she performs from those first albums is based on the "Taylor's Versions" re-recordings. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.flblaw.com/taylors-version-explaining-taylor-swifts-re-recordings-under-the-copyright-law/#:~:text=With%20regards%20to%20Taylor%20Swift,case%2C%20is%20Big%20Machine%20Records.[/URL] Plagiarizing yourself and committing copyright infringement against work that you sold are different things. It definitely would not, and should not, be legally acceptable for you to turn around and sell the exact same poem, or substantial pieces of it, to another publisher if you signed an exclusive deal with the first or sold it to them outright. If you wrote another poem that was similar because that’s the way you write poems, you’re probably fine, as the Fogerty case illustrates. For example, as a grad student, I was hired to design an educational board game. I signed a contract essentially ceding all my rights to it to the publisher. I cannot now republish it or substantial parts of it for profit, or I would be infringing their copyright. But I can design and publish other games that reuse or expand my ideas, as long as I’m not crossing that line. Edit: Plagiarizing yourself and committing copyright infringement [I]can[/I] be connected, however, which is why students are warned that copyright infringement is one potential consequence of self-plagiarism (if you are doing it with published work). But mostly self-plagiarism is wrong because it is seen as dishonest, not legally actionable. Almost 100% of the time it consists of students reusing work that has already been used for another assessment, without acknowledging it as such (trying to hand in the same term paper twice, for example). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Plagiarised D&D art
Top