Gymnasts, Figure Skaters, and Other Artistic Athletes Are Up Against an Unlikely Foe | Golden Skate

Gymnasts, Figure Skaters, and Other Artistic Athletes Are Up Against an Unlikely Foe

"The lawsuit eventually settled for an undisclosed sum suggested to be in the millions."

I wonder who paid the millions. I doubt that Alexa and Brandon have millions.

The ironic thing is that the music in question, "House of the Rising Sun" performed by the Heavy Young Heathens (who?) was itself ripped off from the famous version recorded by the Animals in the 1960s -- which was itself based on a traditional folk song dating back decades.
 
"The lawsuit eventually settled for an undisclosed sum suggested to be in the millions."

I wonder who paid the millions. I doubt that Alexa and Brandon have millions.

The ironic thing is that the music in question, "House of the Rising Sun" performed by the Heavy Young Heathens (who?) was itself ripped off from the famous version recorded by the Animals in the 1960s -- which was itself based on a traditional folk song dating back decades.
Yeah, it’s kind of infuriating. I guess it wouldn’t have been “better” if it had been say, the estate of Marvin Gaye or Paul McCartney suing but it wouldn’t have felt quite as arbitrary as Knierim/Frazier simply having the bad luck of choosing the wrong cover of a song that’s been covered a thousand times triggering all this hoopla.
 
I just thought of this solution. Music is in the public domain if it was written (published as sheet music, for instance) before 1926. The ISU or some consortium of skating interests should jump into the gap by assembling a house band to produce arrangements and recordings for skaters.

Carmen and Swan Lake were both composed in 1875, so figure skating has a clear path.

By the way, can figure skating choreographers copyright the moves that they give to their clients, and then sue rival skaters if they copy those skating moves? Can Ina Bauer sue Shizuka Arakawa and Jun-hwan Cha?
 
Last edited:
I just thought of this solution. Music is in the public domain if it was written (published as sheet music, for instance) before 1926. The ISU or some consortium of skating interests should jump into the gap by assembling a house band to produce arrangements and recordings for skaters.

Carmen and Swan Lake were both composed in 1875, so figure skating has a clear path.

By the way, can figure skating choreographers copyright the moves that they give to their clients, and then sue rival skaters if they copy those skating moves? Can Ina Bauer sue Shizuka Arakawa and Jun-hwan Cha?

I don't want to have everyone skate to boring music. Canada seems to have solved this issue.
Can you not give the choreographers ideas, please?:)
 
If it wasn't that band, it would have been some other band.

I think everyone has been skirting the line on this for decades, and it's only further revealed how complicated it all is.

Yes, from the article it seems to have been festering for years. Like I said, I hadn’t realized the rights weren’t being cleared.
 
By the way, can figure skating choreographers copyright the moves that they give to their clients, and then sue rival skaters if they copy those skating moves? Can Ina Bauer sue Shizuka Arakawa and Jun-hwan Cha?
Is there any sort of precedent for that in other choreographic disciplines? General choreography can be copyrighted - but a single move? I dont think so.
 
"The lawsuit eventually settled for an undisclosed sum suggested to be in the millions."

I wonder who paid the millions. I doubt that Alexa and Brandon have millions.
"Suggested..." may I also suggest this is a way of indicating a large helping of journalistic hyperbole? 🤔

The ironic thing is that the music in question, "House of the Rising Sun" performed by the Heavy Young Heathens (who?) was itself ripped off from the famous version recorded by the Animals in the 1960s...
Though to be fair, there is no indication that the former did not pay all the necessary rights to the Animals/their estate to rerecord the song. (Even as uneducated as I am in matters litigous, were I NBC etc's lawyers I'd have been checking into that well before the first hearing date).
 
Last edited:
I don't think it is simple even to determine who owns the full set of rights and what "licenses" must be paid. If it were, copyright lawyers would be out of business. (instead of making millions). Who owns the rights to the University of Wisconsin fight song (also used, mutatis mutandis, by hundreds of high schools)? Michael Jackson? Paul McCartthy? The University? Nobody?

For printed material, for instance, there is the "fair use" doctrine. You can't steal someone else's words except for "fair use" (such as quotations in a book review or a legal brief,) Hoo boy.
 
I don't think it is simple even to determine who owns the full set of rights and what "licenses" must be paid. If it were, copyright lawyers would be out of business. (instead of making millions). Who owns the rights to the University of Wisconsin fight song (also used, mutatis mutandis, by hundreds of high schools)? Michael Jackson? Paul McCartthy? The University? Nobody?

For printed material, for instance, there is the "fair use" doctrine. You can't steal someone else's words except for "fair use" (such as quotations in a book review or a legal brief,) Hoo boy.
Simpler than you may think if there is good will and professionalism.
If you are using something, you make sure you can use it...it's that simple.
 
...were I NBC etc's lawyers I'd have been checking into that well before the first hearing date).
That's another funny thing. "NBC etc." do have millions (unlike figure skaters), yet they do not seem sufficiently exercised over the issue to take any action, either prophylactic or defense-wise, to protect themselves.

Unlike Disney. If you draw a picture of Mickey Mouse, you will be in debt the rest of your life trying to fight off the Disney lawyers. (Unless your picture is of the original "Steamboat Willie" version, which has just recently entered the public domain . But this is trade mark laws, not copyright laws.)
 
I have another legal question. In determining the amount of the settlement, don't the plaintiffs have to show that they suffered a million dollars worth of financial loss in order to collect a million dollars. Did the Young Heathens (not to be confused with rapper Young Thug) suffer any financial loss by someone skating to their cover of this much-recorded song?
 
Ah. That's the part I didn't understand. All the good will that informs the litigants in these disputes.
Really ? For instance, I am making a commercial recording : I want to make sure that everything is done properly because I respect the creators of the works I am performing. I make sure that every single piece of music I am using is fine to be used,if not, I obtain permission by paying what's necessary to pay. Usually, it's a very reasonable fee. Sometimes it's ridiculously low. If it's too much for me, I select other music. Sometimes, the composer is "public domain" but not the poet for instance in art song... Professionalism and good will is to make sure that everything is done properly for your own sake, your colleagues, and of course, the creators. When everyone acts with this good will and respect, there is no problem.

Figure skating is not a new sport. Copyright law is not new. Usually, there is no problem. So why this time? Because someone screwed up, wasn't professional and didn't respect the work of others (lack of good will) . Maybe I am not using the term good will the way you thought i was...

I am sorry but I don't feel very sorry for skaters who mess things up. To me, it's as simple as doping rules.
 
So why this time? Because someone screwed up, wasn't professional and didn't respect the work of others (lack of good will) .
I had the same question, why this time? I am willing to bet that what these skarers did (whatever we think of their good will and professionalism) was no different than what thousands upon thousands of figure skater do and have always done.

Anyway, I cannot agree that copyright laws are "just as simple at that." When applied to print media, for instance, you can only copyright words, not ideas. There used to be lawsuits all the time where an unknown author would send in a screenplay to a big production company, the company (lacking good will) would rewrite the script and produce it, leaving the author to stew in his own juices.

Walt Disney's great nature classic the Living Desert was a famous example. The courts usually decide in favor of who can field the most powerful legal team. It is not a simple matter at all.
 
I had the same question, why this time? I am willing to bet that what these skarers did (whatever we think of their good will and professionalism) was no different than what thousands upon thousands of figure skater do and have always done.
Two things :
1) utilization of music for figure skating has nothing to do with print material copyright. No need to even mention it and compare it.
2) it's not because it seems complicated for outsiders that it's terribly complicated for people who have dealt with it for decades, for instance, the Skating Federations, the coaches etc.

Someone here didn't check all the boxes, didn't do their job properly and a band decided they would not let it go. :) Simple as that.
 
Back
Top