Anti-Piracy Group Sued For Using Pirated Theme Song

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Anti-Piracy Group Sued For Using Pirated Theme Song

image

Dutch copyright group BREIN has been sued by a musician who claims that it has been using his music in an anti-piracy campaign without his permission.

The Bescherming Rechten Entertainment Industrie Nederland, or BREIN for the sake of simplicity, is a Dutch trade association functionally similar to the MPAA, and much like the MPAA it has aggressively pursued copyright infringement over the years, including through the use of lawsuits against organizations like The Pirate Bay. But now the tables are turned, as the group is facing a lawsuit filed by a musician claiming that it is using his music in their campaigns without permission.

Back in 2006, BREIN asked Melchior Rietveldt to compose a song for an anti-piracy video for a local film festival. Rietveldt agreed, allegedly under the conditions that the video was only for use at the festival; but in early 2007, he noticed that a Harry Potter DVD he purchased contained the same video, including his music. And presumably because of the ubiquity of the ad, he claims that his work has been used on "tens of millions" of DVDs, which according to his financial adviser means that he's owed at least $1.3 million.

Amazingly, when Rietveldt took his case to Buma/Stemra, a "music royalty collection agency," he was told by board member Jochem Gerrits that before he could get any help in the matter, he'd have to sign the rights to the track in question to Gerrits' own music publishing company, and that he'd have to give Gerrits 33 percent of any money he received. Gerrits told Rietveldt's financial guy that he deserves the money because he's got a lot of pull and later said that getting two-thirds of what he's owed is a lot better than the no-thirds he has now.

What Gerrits didn't realize is that the entire conversation was being recorded by Pownews. When word of his demand got out, he claimed he'd been "misinterpreted" but also temporarily resigned his position on the board until the matter can be resolved. BREIN Director Tim Kuik, meanwhile, says the dispute with Rietveldt is a contractual dispute that doesn't actually have anything to do with his organization because it is neither the distributor nor the client in the case.

Source: TorrentFreak

Permalink

I just love the irony here.

Or hypocrisy, perhaps. Yeah, either way.

Sounds like there was no written contract which probably makes things tricky in a 'he said/he meant' sort of way.

And just when I though Fox taking Pedo-bear seriously was funny.

But if they used it for a copyright campaing they didn't profit from it. where is that 1.3 million coming from?

esperandote:
But if they used it for a copyright campaing they didn't profit from it. where is that 1.3 million coming from?

Just because they didn't ask for any money from the distribution doesn't mean he wasn't paid a royalty for the original performance - multiply that original "one time" royalty over the tens of thousands (if not millions - it's Harry Potter we're talking about) DVD's than that fee would shoot up to an exorbitant amount.

A Satanic Panda:

And just when I though Fox taking Pedo-bear seriously was funny.

Wait, did they? They didn't. Surely they didn't? Tell me they didn't!

The irony always takes it's toll.

esperandote:
But if they used it for a copyright campaing they didn't profit from it. where is that 1.3 million coming from?

They do profit it from it, just not directly. Or at least, they think they do - thats the point of the campaign, they believe that by discouraging piracy they will make more profit on legal sales of their items.

But regardless of profit or not, the content creator is still entitled to be paid for the use of their work. Standard practice is to pay a licensing fee for the content, and that is calculated into the cost of running the campaign, same as you would still have to pay for the cost of editing it and printing the discs, but they denied this guy the appropriate licensing fee.

Without having agreed on licensing before hand, the BREIN group dont get to benefit from for example negotiating a bulk-discount, the guy can just list his standard fee of $X per disc.

No link from a news source in our language?

No details on any contract?

It would be nice to get at least half a story...

EDIT: It's probably some guy who wishes he had made a better deal. Then he was told he'd need to pay a third of his winnings to even proceed legally. Not that crazy of a thing.

That composer had it coming. Deal with crooks, get shafted. Duh!

Sampler:

esperandote:
But if they used it for a copyright campaing they didn't profit from it. where is that 1.3 million coming from?

Just because they didn't ask for any money from the distribution doesn't mean he wasn't paid a royalty for the original performance - multiply that original "one time" royalty over the tens of thousands (if not millions - it's Harry Potter we're talking about) DVD's than that fee would shoot up to an exorbitant amount.

It isn't just Harry Potter we are talking about here though. I saw the interview done by Pownews and the guy who composed said song had a little trunk with him, with all the DVDs he could find that included the little 'commercial'.

It showed movies such as: The Dark Knight, Happy Feet, 300, I am Legend, Resident Evil SomethingSomething, and a lot of other, smaller movies. Or rather, lesser known, movies.

NinjaDeathSlap:

A Satanic Panda:

And just when I though Fox taking Pedo-bear seriously was funny.

Wait, did they? They didn't. Surely they didn't? Tell me they didn't!

It wasn't fox, it was KRQE, a news station in new Mexico.

Anyway, I love the irony of this situation.

So anti-piracy groups like to pirate their stuff.

Great publicity guys!

I just had a delicious dinner.

This was the perfect dessert.

Irony just tastes so damn good.

bluegate:

Sampler:

esperandote:
But if they used it for a copyright campaing they didn't profit from it. where is that 1.3 million coming from?

Just because they didn't ask for any money from the distribution doesn't mean he wasn't paid a royalty for the original performance - multiply that original "one time" royalty over the tens of thousands (if not millions - it's Harry Potter we're talking about) DVD's than that fee would shoot up to an exorbitant amount.

It isn't just Harry Potter we are talking about here though. I saw the interview done by Pownews and the guy who composed said song had a little trunk with him, with all the DVDs he could find that included the little 'commercial'.

It showed movies such as: The Dark Knight, Happy Feet, 300, I am Legend, Resident Evil SomethingSomething, and a lot of other, smaller movies. Or rather, lesser known, movies.

I hope this guy rips the anti-piracy group to shreds for this.

Note to people: NEVER ask someone to make a song for you and then lie about the use of the song. ALWAYS give proper credit. Not doing so not only makes you an asshole but makes you liable to get sued big-time.

I want to say this is ironic, but I expected this to happen at some point or another.

Ahahaha fail on the part of these stupid people.

AVAST THERE YOU SCURVY CURS!

DarkRyter:
I want to say this is ironic, but I expected this to happen at some point or another.

It's like all those anti-gay/ pro family politicians getting caught with male interns, or "hiking on the Appalachian trail"

I'm curious what the song was about. Or was it just some instrumental piece? Come to think of it, if BRIEN is like the RIAA, wouldn't they already have free access to a huge library of commercial music they can use however they want?

Isn't that less piracy and more... I dunno, it just doesn't seem like piracy, considering they paid him for it and just used it in the wrong place

Welp, there you have it. Even the people who pretend to help just want some of the goods themselves...

It certainly explains why there are so many ambulance chaser ads these days.

Oh no, no easy getting out of this. After all, if you buy a music CD then burn it and give it to a friend, it's piracy. So, in this instance, BRIEN bought one use of the guy's music, then used it repeatedly. So they owe him about a hojillion dollars. Seems fair enough.

Oh the irony!

I wouldn't consider it piracy because the song was made for them, he didn't deny that fact, they just misused it based on their contractual agreement. But depending on what the contract states someone is out money either him or the group. Only time will tell.

DVS BSTrD:

It's like all those anti-gay/ pro family politicians getting caught with male interns, or "hiking on the Appalachian trail"

I find that more expected than this. Usually slimy corporations cover their asses with contracts and such. Hell, look at Sony's "You can't sue us!" crap.

dogstile:
Isn't that less piracy and more... I dunno, it just doesn't seem like piracy, considering they paid him for it and just used it in the wrong place

It's copyright infringement, albeit in a slightly different form, it's still what they're campaigning against. They didn't download it, but they did use it illegally. Once they stepped outside the initial venue, they were doing the same thing, even if in a different way.

As funny as this would be, the title isn't just misleading for humorous intent so much as it is a flat-out lie.

1: There's no lawsuit, only talk of one.

2: It's not pirated, he wrote it for them then they used it "without his consent", it's copyright infringement but a long stretch to equate it to piracy..

3: It's a contractual issue that may or may not be brought up, nowhere near actual piracy.

I'd be the first to laugh my ass off if this were true, because I have no love for the big anti-piracy firms, but change the damn title.

NinjaDeathSlap:

A Satanic Panda:

And just when I though Fox taking Pedo-bear seriously was funny.

Wait, did they? They didn't. Surely they didn't? Tell me they didn't!

No they didn't. As was pointed out it was KRQE in Arizona.

For completeness:

Back to the topic at hand:

Amazingly, when Rietveldt took his case to Buma/Stemra, a "music royalty collection agency," he was told by board member Jochem Gerrits that before he could get any help in the matter, he'd have to sign the rights to the track in question to Gerrits' own music publishing company, and that he'd have to give Gerrits 33 percent of any money he received. Gerrits told Rietveldt's financial guy that he deserves the money because he's got a lot of pull and later said that getting two-thirds of what he's owed is a lot better than the no-thirds he has now.

So if I read this correctly, Gerrits (who is a board member of this Anti-piracy outfit) is looking to profit personally from the lawsuit against the company which he is on the board of?

Oh and I thought they were truly incorruptible...

This looks more like miscommunication and misunderstanding more than, "Anti-piracy group deliberately pirates music" that the article title seems to want to lead people to believe.

Ah, reminds me of the time the major labels were sued for copyright violations.

I also like how when he went for help from the guys who "support the artists", they wanted to fuck him out of 33% of the profits and ownership of the song. The only ones in the music industry not stealing from the artists are the artists themselves.

so nobody on BREIN figured out the song he used was copyrighted?

esperandote:
But if they used it for a copyright campaing they didn't profit from it. where is that 1.3 million coming from?

^Good question, I'm sure someone here can answer it for you better than me, but my swing at it is that BREIN might not be selling a candy bar or a car, but they do have income (adverts are publicity, they help them get money) and they're just as responsible for paying dues as anyone, or else they shouldn't be using the music at all.

That's the funny thing, they've done what they stand against, and it makes them look totally lame.

Basically, there is ALOT of money in standing up for the rights of others if you stand on the side of rich people, you just have to keep your nose clean.

Andy Chalk:
Anti-Piracy Group Sued For Using Pirated Theme Song

image

Dutch copyright group BREIN has been sued by a musician who claims that it has been using his music in an anti-piracy campaign without his permission.

The Bescherming Rechten Entertainment Industrie Nederland, or BREIN for the sake of simplicity, is a Dutch trade association functionally similar to the MPAA, and much like the MPAA it has aggressively pursued copyright infringement over the years, including through the use of lawsuits against organizations like The Pirate Bay. But now the tables are turned, as the group is facing a lawsuit filed by a musician claiming that it is using his music in their campaigns without permission.

Back in 2006, BREIN asked Melchior Rietveldt to compose a song for an anti-piracy video for a local film festival. Rietveldt agreed, allegedly under the conditions that the video was only for use at the festival; but in early 2007, he noticed that a Harry Potter DVD he purchased contained the same video, including his music. And presumably because of the ubiquity of the ad, he claims that his work has been used on "tens of millions" of DVDs, which according to his financial adviser means that he's owned at least $1.3 million.

Amazingly, when Rietveldt took his case to Buma/Stemra, a "music royalty collection agency," he was told by board member Jochem Gerrits that before he could get any help in the matter, he'd have to sign the rights to the track in question to Gerrits' own music publishing company, and that he'd have to give Gerrits 33 percent of any money he received. Gerrits told Rietveldt's financial guy that he deserves the money because he's got a lot of pull and later said that getting two-thirds of what he's owed is a lot better than the no-thirds he has now.

What Gerrits didn't realize is that the entire conversation was being recorded by Pownews. When word of his demand got out, he claimed he'd been "misinterpreted" but also temporarily resigned his position on the board until the matter can be resolved. BREIN Director Tim Kuik, meanwhile, says the dispute with Rietveldt is a contractual dispute that doesn't actually have anything to do with his organization because it is neither the distributor nor the client in the case.

Source: TorrentFreak

Permalink

Yo dawg, I herd j00 lyke hypocrites.

i have more issues with that guy from the "music royalty collection agency" then with brein. being dutch i know the company and the add, but the adds alwaus shows before the movie or the dvd menu, so they are not really around. they are not one of those companies that always has to something about it. this was just a stupid mistake, hoping that is it was indeed a mistake.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here