Home of Rhett & Link fans - the Mythical Beasts!
How to monetize a parody?
Rhett, Link, you guys are awesome! I recently became a Mythical Beast! By far my favorite videos you've created have been the Taylor Swift and One Direction Caption Fail vids (I bought the songs even)!
I have a question for you: How does one go about monetizing a parody of an existing song that they've created? For example, did you have to get permission from Taylor Swift/One Direction or share any of the profits with them? Or were the songs different enough from the originals that it didn't matter? Those details may be too private to share, but I'm really interested in how to find out, because I've been working on a parody that I'm actually quite happy with, and if it does well I'd like to try and monetize it somehow. But I want to do it the right way, without infringing on anyone's intellectual property.
Can you or any of my fellow Mythical Beasts help me out by pointing me in the right direction?
Thanks!
-Josh
Replies to This Discussion
-
K-ModPermalink Reply by Kevin (UniSeal) on -
I am sure that they did not have any contact with Taylor Swift's management about using "her" songs. Parody, insofar that it is a criticism of the original work, can be monetized under fair use. However, parody is not the absolute qualifier that commercial profit is fair. If you want some more information on the case that brought about this decision, you can see this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell_v._Acuff-Rose_Music_Inc
So in other words, Rhett and Link's parodies you mentioned are legal under that precedent. It's confusing stuff!
-
Permalink Reply by Joshua Whiting on
-
That's really useful, thanks!
So, I'd pretty much just use my best judgement and if I go for it, cross my fingers and hope nobody tries to take me to court over it...?
Looking closely at the four main points, I think I'd be okay. I'd go so far as to say what I'm trying to do is similar to, for example, a song by Weird Al Yankovik:
1. My purpose is to make a parody. My intent isn't necessarily to "criticize" the original, though I suppose it could be viewed as such, because it's meant to be humorous. Although I have no idea how successful it will be, if enough people like it, I'd definitely look into selling it.
2. The copyrighted work is a song by a popular artist, so like the wiki article says, this point probably doesn't sway the matter much one way or the other.
3. The lyrics I wrote are significantly different from the original. There are just enough similarities here and there to make reference to the original, usually for comedic effect. I don't have the music for it yet; my guess is I'd better find a way to record my own. The tune will probably be very similar, if not identical to the original (again, think Weird Al: same tune, different lyrics).
4. Effect on the original's market value? I doubt it will influence it negatively. Even if it somehow became really popular, it's not meant for the same audience as the original, and it could even boost sales of the original by giving it more exposure. (Presumptuous, I know, but it could happen, right?)
-
K-ModPermalink Reply by Kevin (UniSeal) on -
That sounds like you shouldn't have a problem. Even if it became "popular" by our standards, it's highly unlikely a huge music company would care about that, given the scale of other comparative matters/profits they are busy with.
If you REALLY want to be safe, here's another article to skim: http://diymusician.cdbaby.com/2011/01/how-to-legally-sell-downloads... (The actual procedure starts a few paragraphs down).
Basically, it's entirely legal to commercialize a blatant cover of a song as long as you pay royalties to the original distributor. So if you wanted to fully protect yourself, you could do the same for a parody, which is far less intrusive than a cover, as far as the market value is concerned.
With what you've described, though, that shouldn't be necessary.
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Lepel / GryffenDan on
-
Not to usurp any response from our Mythical Overlords Friendly Hosts....but parodies have been deemed as fair-use by the Supreme Court. You can thank Weird Al Yankovich and others for blazing that trail.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569 (1994)[1] was a United States Supreme Court copyright law case that established that a commercial parody can qualify as fair use. That money is made does not make it impossible for a use to be fair; it is merely one of the components of a fair-use analysis.
I should note that I (nor my Mythical Beast are lawyers, but just similarly interested in such matters. :-)
I'm also a fan of Wow Machinima and related parodies.....otherwise Disney would have come down like a hammer on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Dro2cljnY.
-
K-ModPermalink Reply by Gumbo123 on -
". . . but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night . . . "
-
-
Non Sequitur
© 2024 Created by Link.
Powered by
