BIG PIMPING: COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT: MORAL RIGHTS









Image result for copyright infringement
Photo credit: searchenginejournal.com

·        Moral rights are rights of creators of copyrighted works generally recognized in civil law jurisdictions and, to a lesser extent, in some common law jurisdictions. They include the right of attribution, the right to have a work published anonymously or pseudonymously, and the right to the integrity of the work. 
      The preserving of the integrity of the work allows the author to object to alteration, distortion, or mutilation of the work that is "prejudicial to the author's honor or reputation", Anything else that may detract from the artist's relationship with the work even after it leaves the artist's possession or ownership may bring these moral rights into play.
      Moral rights are distinct from any economic rights tied to copyrights. Even if an artist has assigned his or her copyright rights to a work to a third party, he or she still maintains the moral rights to the work- Wikipedia

Last week Friday, the Ninth Court heard arguments in a copyright infringement case against the rapper’s hit “Big Pimpin'”. The case was initiated in 2015 and the judge held that Fahmy lacked legal standing to sue for copyright infringement because he had transferred economic rights under Egyptian copyright law to Egyptian music executive Mohsen Mohammed Jaber. The case was therefore thrown out.

Image result for jay z
Photo credit: okayplayer.com
Plaintiff’s claims


·        That Jay-Z and producer Timbaland had looped four measures of an Arabic flute for “Big Pimpin’” 17 years ago without his permission.

·        The hook – arguably the key to the song’s success – was sampled from “Khosara Khosara” (“What a Loss, What a Loss”), composed by Fahmy’s uncle.

·        Egyptian law allows authors to assert moral rights to their works in Egypt and contest alterations to their songs. Jay-Z attacked the integrity of his uncle’s work by glorifying drug trafficking and misogyny in the song’s lyrics. The Hamdi family retained the right to prevent any fundamental modification to the work ‘Khosara Khosara.’

·        In the United States, courts have protected the right to make derivative works and in Egypt, there is a right to prevent a “distortion or mutilation” of a work, they merely go under different names or “labels.”

·        The reading of the case would set up a “catch-22” for foreign authors because they would be litigating claims in their home court when the infringement was in another country. A failure to read in favour of the plaintiff on this issue would mean that the courts are saying “Go to your home country and enforce your rights under your own law but if there’s no infringement there, then you’re out of luck,” “That can’t be the message that this court is sending to foreign authors”

·        The chain of ownership began in Egypt, but the infringement occurred in the United States. “We are enforcing a right under the United States law, we’re suing for infringement in this country. The only reason why Egyptian law matters is it dictates the scope of rights that we own”

The question is whether Egyptian law holds any sway in a U.S. courtroom. The Ninth Circuit grappled with that during the hearing and the circuit judge had this to say
“Why can’t the United States Court say you might have a right in Egypt and if it’s infringed in Egypt your moral right is infringed, sue there?” “Are you saying Egypt law becomes the law of the Ninth Circuit?”

Image result for baligh hamdi
Photo credit: en.wikipedia.org

Defendant’s claims…


·        Fahmy and his attorney are trying to “import” moral-rights law that is not enforceable in the United States.

·        You can’t transfer the personal right of integrity under Egyptian law, and the remedies are under Egyptian law, not U.S. law. The United States doesn’t recognize it for any purpose.

·        Even if Fahmy could assert his rights he would not be entitled to money damages, only an injunction in an Egyptian court, she said.


The panel took the case under submission and did not indicate when they will rule.


News Credit: Courthouse News





Comments

Popular Posts