{"id":1983,"date":"2017-11-01T05:18:00","date_gmt":"2017-11-01T05:18:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sanickilawyers.com.au\/?p=1983"},"modified":"2017-11-01T05:18:00","modified_gmt":"2017-11-01T05:18:00","slug":"lose-yourself-new-zealand-national-party-loses-copyright-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sanickilawyers.com.au\/lose-yourself-new-zealand-national-party-loses-copyright-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Lose Yourself: New Zealand National Party Loses Copyright Case"},"content":{"rendered":"
The success of the New Zealand National Party\u2019s 2014 election campaign may have been in part due to their music choice for a series of nationally-broadcasted advertisements.<\/p>\n
However, similarities between the National Party\u2019s ad track and US rapper Eminem\u2019s 2002 smash Lose Yourself<\/em> did not go unnoticed by New Zealand\u2019s High Court, it seems.<\/p>\n On 25 October 2017, New Zealand\u2019s High Court held that the Nationals\u2019 song \u2018substantially copied\u2019 Lose Yourself<\/em>.<\/p>\n The decision may not come as a shock to the NZ public, given that the copying was thinly veiled to begin with \u2013 the ad track\u2019s title being Eminem Esque<\/em>, but the decision was not made lightly, with the Court considering evidence from two musicologists\/doctors (Dr Dre not included).<\/p>\n The Court found the Nationals infringed the copyright in Lose Yourself <\/em>in not one, but three different ways: communicating the copy to the public, authorising the copying of Lose Yourself<\/em> in the National Party\u2019s ads, and authorising the \u2018use and\/or deployment\u2019 of the ads.<\/p>\n The case reiterates the importance of the principle that, for copyright infringement to occur, it is not necessary that the whole song be copied, nor that the copying be \u2018exact\u2019. Infringement can occur if a substantial part of the song is copied, or even if \u2018what has been copied contains the essence of the copyright work\u2019.<\/p>\n The decision also highlights the sensitive nature of copyright generally. Here, the National Party sought out advice from advertising and music licensing industry \u2018experienced professionals\u2019 regarding use of Eminem Esque<\/em>, which was sourced from a production music company to begin with. The Court found these steps to be \u2018appropriate\u2019 and rejected Eminem\u2019s legal team\u2019s submission that the Nationals should have also sought legal<\/em> advice regarding the potential risk of copyright infringement. Consequently, no additional <\/em>damages for \u2018flagrant\u2019 infringement were awarded to Eminem\u2019s side.<\/p>\n Still, the damages awarded in respect of the copyright infringements outlined above totalled NZ$600,000. The political ads in question were played 186 times on New Zealand television, among many other instances of exposure.<\/p>\n It has been reported<\/a> that Eminem himself was not in fact consulted in relation to the case, but of the damages he personally receives, all will be donated to hurricane relief efforts.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n By Adil Dart<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The success of the New Zealand National Party\u2019s 2014 election campaign may have been in part due to their music choice for a series of nationally-broadcasted advertisements. However, similarities between the National Party\u2019s ad track and US rapper Eminem\u2019s 2002 smash Lose Yourself did not go unnoticed by New Zealand\u2019s High Court, it seems. On … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[106],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-1983","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-trademarks-copyright","7":"entry"},"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n