Richest Tik Tok star ever stole all her dance moves

Page 1 of 3 [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,969

28 Jul 2022, 5:14 pm

18 year old Tik Tok star Charlie DAmelio is now the world's richest Tik Tok star earning $151,411 dollars every time she posts a dance and the teen has a net worth of $28m for prancing around.
https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at ... 8d4b8dc211

The problem here is that all her millions of fans seem to be oblivious (or perhaps don't care) is that her signature dance (and many other dances) that made her go viral were stolen from other teenagers in the most famous case of plagiarism in dance in the history of the art form.
https://www.insider.com/tiktok-charli-d ... ces-2021-6

Despite big names including Ellen DeGeneres and Oprah trying to give the original teenage creator some credit for starting the dance it hasn't stopped Charlie from profiting massively from her copying.

That's tik tok for you



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

29 Jul 2022, 1:04 pm

Did any of the original dancers copyright their moves?  If not, then they are "Public Domain" and may be freely used by whomever can copy them.

Sure, it is frustrating to produce something original only to have someone else become famous for it, but one should ask why the original people's products are less popular than the same products put out by someone else.

For instance, "Hound Dog" was recorded originally by Big Mama Thornton on August 13, 1952.  It was Thornton's only hit record, selling just a little over 500,000 copies.  On July 2, 1956, Elvis Presley recorded "Hound Dog" and his version sold over 4,000,000 copies in the United States on its first release alone.  It was his best-selling single and, starting in July 1956, it spent eleven weeks at number one.  Ms. Thorton, by all accounts, was very cross and did not take Mr. Presley's success very well.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,969

29 Jul 2022, 7:59 pm

agree with all of that.

But in some ways it illustrates how entertainment on social media is so much about marketing yourself.

Charlie is essentially a analogue of Elvis. She took an artform that was popular in one community and presented exactly the same artform to a new audience who like her image and erroneously assumed she was being original and authentic. Like Elvis she never gave any credit to where she appropriated the artform or copied the dance.

But I accept social media is about image. Charlie is somebody whom a teenage boy desires and a teenage girl wants to emulate. The same can't be said for the little black girl who actually came up with the dance - no credit for her skills, creativity or originality.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

30 Jul 2022, 1:32 pm

Yep! It is all about marketing and presentation. Charlie makes it look fun and easy.

The rest are kinda . . . meh.



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,056
Location: Over there

01 Aug 2022, 8:55 am

Fnord wrote:
Did any of the original dancers copyright their moves?  If not, then they are "Public Domain" and may be freely used by whomever can copy them.
Really? I thought copyright, as in the owner of a work and rights to it, was conferred automatically through their creation of said work. ie, "not registered as copyrighted" is not the same thing as "public domain".
Of course anyone is free to declare their work as free to use or adapt - the essence of Open Source Software. (often: "copyleft")

Quote:
To bring a copyright infringement lawsuit, a copyright holder must establish ownership of a valid copyright and the copying of constituent elements of the work that are original. The copyright owner must also establish both (a) actual copying and (b) improper appropriation of the work. The copyright owner, as plaintiff, bears the burden of establishing these three elements of the prima facie case for infringement.

A plaintiff establishes ownership by authorship (by the plaintiff itself or by someone who assigned rights to the plaintiff) of (1) an original work of authorship that is (2) fixed in a tangible medium (e.g. a book, musical recording, etc.).

Registration is not required to establish copyright protection, but registration is necessary before bringing a lawsuit. Registration is also useful because it creates a presumption of a valid copyright, it allows the plaintiff to collect enhanced "statutory damages", and to be eligible for an award of attorney fees.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright ... d_defenses


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


MaxE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,488
Location: Mid-Atlantic US

01 Aug 2022, 9:00 am

Cultural appropriation. Something all the anti-woke crybabies refuse to acknowledge.


_________________
My WP story


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

01 Aug 2022, 9:01 am

Cornflake wrote:
Quote:
To bring a copyright infringement lawsuit, a copyright holder must establish ownership of a valid copyright and the copying of constituent elements of the work that are original. The copyright owner must also establish both (a) actual copying and (b) improper appropriation of the work. The copyright owner, as plaintiff, bears the burden of establishing these three elements of the prima facie case for infringement.

A plaintiff establishes ownership by authorship (by the plaintiff itself or by someone who assigned rights to the plaintiff) of (1) an original work of authorship that is (2) fixed in a tangible medium (e.g. a book, musical recording, etc.).

Registration is not required to establish copyright protection, but registration is necessary before bringing a lawsuit. Registration is also useful because it creates a presumption of a valid copyright, it allows the plaintiff to collect enhanced "statutory damages", and to be eligible for an award of attorney fees.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright ... d_defenses
Sure, the original artists can claim copyright infringement all they want, but if they want to involve the courts, they first need to register their copyright with the appropriate authorities.

 PDF: Copyright Law of the United States & Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the U.S. Code, May 2021 



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

01 Aug 2022, 9:08 am

MaxE wrote:
Cultural appropriation. Something all the anti-woke crybabies refuse to acknowledge.
"Cultural Appropriation", while annoying, does not seem to be illegal.  Otherwise, just about every Rock & Roll band would be under legal sanction for ripping off just about every previous Rhythm & Blues artist for style and content.



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,056
Location: Over there

01 Aug 2022, 9:25 am

Fnord wrote:
Sure, the original artists can claim copyright infringement all they want, but if they want to involve the courts, they first need to register their copyright with the appropriate authorities.
Nevertheless, it's incorrect to say that a work not registered as copyrighted is therefore public domain.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


MaxE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,488
Location: Mid-Atlantic US

01 Aug 2022, 9:31 am

Fnord wrote:
MaxE wrote:
Cultural appropriation. Something all the anti-woke crybabies refuse to acknowledge.
"Cultural Appropriation", while annoying, does not seem to be illegal.  Otherwise, just about every Rock & Roll band would be under legal sanction for ripping off just about every previous Rhythm & Blues artist for style and content.

It's not a crime but if we can't bring ourselves to acknowledge cultural appropriation we might as well pack it in.


_________________
My WP story


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

01 Aug 2022, 9:43 am

Cornflake wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Sure, the original artists can claim copyright infringement all they want, but if they want to involve the courts, they first need to register their copyright with the appropriate authorities.
Nevertheless, it's incorrect to say that a work not registered as copyrighted is therefore public domain.
Maybe it is better to say that an "unregistered copyright" leaves the originator of the work in a vulnerable state in which they can claim copyright infringement all they want, but they are unlikely to receive just compensation through the courts.

However, as rights vary by country and jurisdiction, a work may be subject to rights in one country and be in the public domain in another.  Some rights depend on registrations on a country-by-country basis, and the absence of registration in a particular country, if required, gives rise to public-domain status for a work in that country.

Copyright law seems straightforward at first, but is is like diving into deep water -- the deeper you go, the darker and murkier it becomes.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

01 Aug 2022, 9:45 am

MaxE wrote:
Fnord wrote:
MaxE wrote:
Cultural appropriation. Something all the anti-woke crybabies refuse to acknowledge.
"Cultural Appropriation", while annoying, does not seem to be illegal.  Otherwise, just about every Rock & Roll band would be under legal sanction for ripping off just about every previous Rhythm & Blues artist for style and content.
It's not a crime but if we can't bring ourselves to acknowledge cultural appropriation we might as well pack it in.
Oh, I acknowledge the situation; I just do not see it as serious enough to require involvement of the courts.  Besides, the fact that this incident does not seem to have been covered by mainstream news sources should indicate just how "serious" it actually is.



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,056
Location: Over there

01 Aug 2022, 10:25 am

Fnord wrote:
However, as rights vary by country and jurisdiction, a work may be subject to rights in one country and be in the public domain in another.  Some rights depend on registrations on a country-by-country basis, and the absence of registration in a particular country, if required, gives rise to public-domain status for a work in that country.
If... :wink:

Sure, enforcing a copyright is a nightmare minefield and even more so when the dispute is between different countries.
But in which countries does a work automatically become public domain because the copyright may have not been formally registered?


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

01 Aug 2022, 10:42 am

Cornflake wrote:
Fnord wrote:
However, as rights vary by country and jurisdiction, a work may be subject to rights in one country and be in the public domain in another.  Some rights depend on registrations on a country-by-country basis, and the absence of registration in a particular country, if required, gives rise to public-domain status for a work in that country.
If... :wink:

Sure, enforcing a copyright is a nightmare minefield and even more so when the dispute is between different countries.  But in which countries does a work automatically become public domain because the copyright may have not been formally registered?
Yes, IF required...

Which countries?  That is a whole 'nuther container of annelids.

Most of the stuff I write (e.g., owner and service manuals) is covered under my employer's copyright -- however they file and enforce it is a mystery to me.

I did run across this Brittanica definition of "Cultural Appropriation", however:
Quote:
A member of a majority group profiting financially or socially from the culture of a minority group is cultural appropriation.

Ms. D'Amilio seems to be a member of a majority group, and the people who claim to have originated the dance moves seem to be members of a minority group.  If all the forgoing is true, then she still might not be guilty of cultural appropriation unless those dance moves are indigenous to the entire minority group, and not just a handful of its members -- if she was to incorporate elements of a Bantu victory dance, for example, it could reasonably be called "Cultural Appropriation".

As for the copyright infringement . . . I would not hold my breath until a legal settlement is issued.



MaxE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,488
Location: Mid-Atlantic US

01 Aug 2022, 11:57 am

Fnord wrote:
As for the copyright infringement . . . I would not hold my breath until a legal settlement is issued.[/color]

My earlier comment regarding cultural appropriation wasn't about any legal remedy, just the importance of recognizing it when it happens. While implying, without offering proof, that anti-CRT warriors want to discourage such recognition out of fear the appropriators might get canceled. And yes I could see somebody trying to cancel Ms. d'Amelio although I really doubt she'd suffer much.


_________________
My WP story


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 57,012
Location: Stendec

01 Aug 2022, 12:09 pm

MaxE wrote:
Fnord wrote:
As for the copyright infringement . . . I would not hold my breath until a legal settlement is issued.[/color]
My earlier comment regarding cultural appropriation wasn't about any legal remedy, just the importance of recognizing it when it happens. While implying, without offering proof, that anti-CRT warriors want to discourage such recognition out of fear the appropriators might get canceled. And yes I could see somebody trying to cancel Ms. d'Amelio although I really doubt she'd suffer much.
CRT . . . cancel culture . . . whatever.

This case seems more like copying dance moves from only a few unknown dancers than appropriating the same moves from an entire culture -- so "Cultural Appropriation" it ain't.