Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The musical performance is itself copyrighted, by definition. Reproducing part of it without permission is an infringement.


No part of the music being performed is reproduced in a photograph.


A music performance in front of an audience is audiovisual. You would be right if we were talking about a photograph of a radio taken while the performance was broadcast, but we're not. Indeed, when people mention they attended a concert, they say things like 'I went to see my favorite band last week,' as opposed to saying they went to listen to them.


HN shoots the messenger again, I see. I don't make the law, I just tell you about it:

http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/summary_rome.html

wikimedia itself observes that shoting without a permit may put you in breach of a contract you signed when you purchased the ticket, as I alluded to above:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by...

...which is why publishers won't buy photographs without a signed release, such as this one:

http://images.tbd.com/entertainment/gaga-release.pdf


[deleted]


For sure, but that by itself doesn't provide a full defense (per http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html). Bear in mind that if the ticket contractually forbids photography and the event is not in a publicly accessible venue, the issue might well be decided under contract rather than copyright law.


I'm not sure of this any more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8131785 (title "Extracting audio from visual information")


Photographs are not video.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: