Among the More Amusing Experiences I've Had Recently:
Watching a song in a Russian-language children's cartoon that was set to the tune of "Mack the Knife." (The cartoon was from the Soviet era, when Western copyrights — and perhaps all copyrights — weren't recognized, either de jure or de facto.)
UPDATE: Thanks to commenter Burt Likko for a pointer to the cartoon itself.
And you call yourself a blogger. Sheesh. (c:
That is an amazing hilarious classic. Children putting different words to the unmistakable tune.
What questions do you think it raises? I'm not particularly informed on the details, but something I read (perhaps AllOfMP3's own explanation, take it for what it's worth) made it sound like Russian copyright law is like our compulsory licensing regimen, except that by law everything is covered that way, instead of it being a voluntary thing that copyright holders can opt into. Does that bear any relation to what Russian law actually says? Somebody help us here...
I caught a bit of one of the "Coffin Joe" Brazilian horror movies on late night cable a few weeks ago, and was astonished to recognize what was unmistakably chunks of Edgar Varese's "Arcana" in the background music.
I suspect this was lifted without rights clearance (it sure wasn't credited) on the theory that nobody would recognize it (I'm guessing Jose Mojica Marins never crossed paths with Frank Zappa)and that nobody who did would care enough to do anything about it. From the vintage of the film, I'm guessing that a little detective work would have even narrowed the source down to one of only two or three extant commericially available recordings at the time...
r gould-saltman
Only in the sense that "a little" is infinitely more than "nothing", I guess! :-)
I would agree that the situation, as you describe it, doesn't seem just. However, I think the alternative--that a website operator is subject, simultaneously, to the law of every jurisdiction from which someone accesses that site, is much worse.
Anyone told the Ceasar and Youmans estates?