| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:34 am Post subject: The Eagles Sue a Korean Insurance Company |
 |
|
| I was reading the Korean Herald and I saw in one of the last pages of the newspaper that the Eagles were suing a Korean insurance company for 537,000 dollars for using part of the song "Desperado" without permission. The Korean company claimed that the Eagles' agent gave them permission. I didn't notice the insurance company saying that they had permission in writing. A company has to get permission in writing, and why would the Eagles let a company use their song for free? Essentially, the company was lying and its advertising firm doesn't respect copyright laws. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Peeping Tom
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:54 am Post subject: Re: The Eagles Sue a Korean Insurance Company |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| I was reading the Korean Herald and I saw in one of the last pages of the newspaper that the Eagles were suing a Korean insurance company for 537,000 dollars for using part of the song "Desperado" without permission. The Korean company claimed that the Eagles' agent gave them permission. I didn't notice the insurance company saying that they had permission in writing. A company has to get permission in writing, and why would the Eagles let a company use their song for free? Essentially, the company was lying and its advertising firm doesn't respect copyright laws. |
I often wonder how many of the commercials using foreign songs have bothered to get permission. If one has the knowhow, one could probably make a business alerting foreign companies of copyright infringement in Korea and do quite well...although I doubt foreign companies would ever win a battle in Korean courts (i.e. Starbucks). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roch
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:25 am Post subject: Re: The Eagles Sue a Korean Insurance Company |
|
|
| Peeping Tom wrote: |
| Adventurer wrote: |
| I was reading the Korean Herald and I saw in one of the last pages of the newspaper that the Eagles were suing a Korean insurance company for 537,000 dollars for using part of the song "Desperado" without permission. The Korean company claimed that the Eagles' agent gave them permission. I didn't notice the insurance company saying that they had permission in writing. A company has to get permission in writing, and why would the Eagles let a company use their song for free? Essentially, the company was lying and its advertising firm doesn't respect copyright laws. |
I often wonder how many of the commercials using foreign songs have bothered to get permission. If one has the knowhow, one could probably make a business alerting foreign companies of copyright infringement in Korea and do quite well...although I doubt foreign companies would ever win a battle in Korean courts (i.e. Starbucks). |
Word |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: Re: The Eagles Sue a Korean Insurance Company |
|
|
| Peeping Tom wrote: |
| Adventurer wrote: |
| I was reading the Korean Herald and I saw in one of the last pages of the newspaper that the Eagles were suing a Korean insurance company for 537,000 dollars for using part of the song "Desperado" without permission. The Korean company claimed that the Eagles' agent gave them permission. I didn't notice the insurance company saying that they had permission in writing. A company has to get permission in writing, and why would the Eagles let a company use their song for free? Essentially, the company was lying and its advertising firm doesn't respect copyright laws. |
I often wonder how many of the commercials using foreign songs have bothered to get permission. If one has the knowhow, one could probably make a business alerting foreign companies of copyright infringement in Korea and do quite well...although I doubt foreign companies would ever win a battle in Korean courts (i.e. Starbucks). |
Then again, they might be pretty busy in US courts following up youtube, myspace, and various torrent sites... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If Korean advertising companies were actually paying when they should then The Beatles people must be getting very rich from Korea alone. The Beatles music is all over Korean TV. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Young FRANKenstein
Joined: 02 Oct 2006
Location: Castle Frankenstein (that's FRONKensteen)
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| eamo wrote: |
| If Korean advertising companies were actually paying when they should then The Beatles people must be getting very rich from Korea alone. The Beatles music is all over Korean TV. |
The Beatles don't own most of their music anymore. Unless McCartney bought everything back from Jackson. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Young FRANKenstein wrote: |
| eamo wrote: |
| If Korean advertising companies were actually paying when they should then The Beatles people must be getting very rich from Korea alone. The Beatles music is all over Korean TV. |
The Beatles don't own most of their music anymore. Unless McCartney bought everything back from Jackson. |
He'll own it again soon. I read somewhere that some new British copyright laws will make it so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Young FRANKenstein wrote: |
| eamo wrote: |
| If Korean advertising companies were actually paying when they should then The Beatles people must be getting very rich from Korea alone. The Beatles music is all over Korean TV. |
The Beatles don't own most of their music anymore. Unless McCartney bought everything back from Jackson. |
Michael Jackson was famous for owning the rights. I think he slowly sold off shares in the catalog as he needed money but retains (or until recently) retained a 51% control or something. He kind of was able to borrow a lot of money using the catalog as collateral.
When you say catalog, what you're talking about, I believe, is the words and the musical notes. The Beatles retain their performance rights. So you can't really have John Lennon singing revolution in a Nike ad. However, one can sell Nike the rights to cover the song for their commercial.
http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/jackson.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J.B. Clamence
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I would bet that the vast majority of foreign music used in Korean advertising (even the ads for big companies like Samsung) is stolen illegally. I just don't see how they would bother to get permission for all of it, especially that one ad where the guy keeps changing channels on his MP3 player and encounters a different person on the street dancing to each track. I mean, there's no way they went and got permission for all of those songs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Young FRANKenstein
Joined: 02 Oct 2006
Location: Castle Frankenstein (that's FRONKensteen)
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| J.B. Clamence wrote: |
| I would bet that the vast majority of foreign music used in Korean advertising (even the ads for big companies like Samsung) is stolen illegally. |
Why stop at foreign music. I bet the same is true of Korean music. I remember back during one of the presidential elections (I think it was Kim Dae-jung's), Korean singer Lee Jung-hyun came out and announced that she does not give ANYONE permission to use her song 바꿔 in ANY election campains. She said she would prosecute anyone who did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
