Intellectual Property and Copyright Laws in Australia Essay

Intellectual Property and Copyright Laws in Australia - Essay Example Through the use of the copyright laws, the artists, songwriters, and music recording companies will be challenged to produce and create their own unique and artistic musical piece (Golvan 7). The copyright laws can be used to protect not only the creators of artistic designs but also those individuals who create their own music, sound recordings, dramatic films, and broadcast signals. Under the Australian copyright law, â€Å"the copyright term in Australia has been increased from 50 to 70 years from the life of the author† (Golvan 7; Remix'd). It means that the writer of songs who was granted a copyright for their masterpiece is protected by the copyright laws for up to 70 years after his or her death. With regards to the essence of intellectual and copyright laws in Australia, this study will focus on discussing why the remix culture can be read as a sustained critique of the intellectual property and copyright laws. To prove that the reproduction of remix songs can indirect ly violate the intellectual and copyright laws in Australia, several real-life examples will be provided in this paper. Literature Review Song remix is all about changing the form of an existing song by either enhancing the tone or the beat as a way of coming up with a more interesting sound and musical structure (James 24). By using the DJs special skills on basic scratches in order to match the beat, James explained that the DJs can easily alter the come up with an entirely new sound creation based on the original songs (25). Even though song remixed could offer an entirely new sound and beat, people who listen to remixed songs will always be able to determine and identify the origin of remixed songs. According to Martin, â€Å"the copyright laws in Australia and overseas – are not keeping up with the digital era and are stifling creativity† (Martin para 5). The problem with the remix culture is that DJs are using some form of digital gadgets (i.e. CD players, pitch control keys, etc.) in order to create an alternative music using songs that are already been protected by the copyright laws (James 24 – 25). For example, Martin mentioned that a couple of DJs based in San Francisco and Perth gathered in one occasion wherein these two DJs performed a remix using famous songs from Eminem and Aerosmith (Martin). Since the public viewers are patronizing remix songs, Martin pointed out that a lawyer in the Queensland University of Technology mentioned that a lot of amateur DJs are now demanding to have the right to produce remix songs whereby they should be given the title and protection for their role as a remix producer. Because of the absence of a more precise and clear legislation with regards to the practice of modifying existing songs through remixes, a lot of amateur DJs are technically guilty of copyright infringement yet these people are insisting that the remix culture is part of innovating new songs Derived from the copyright laws in UK, the Copyright Act 1968 in Australia clearly explained in section 31 that it is illegal to reproduce or disseminate all â€Å"literary, artistic, dramatic, musical work, sound recordings, cinematograph films, television, and sound broadcast† materials that are protected by the copyright laws and that the copyright owners of songs demand acknowledgement of their authorship from their musical masterpiece.