This HTML5 document contains 62 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n16https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
n18http://www.slate.com/id/2153961/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n11http://fsnews.findlaw.com/cases/6th/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Bridgeport_Music,_Inc._v._Dimension_Films
rdf:type
yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:Happening107283608 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378
rdfs:label
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films
rdfs:comment
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005), is a court case that has proved important in defining American copyright law for recorded music. The case centered on N.W.A.’s song "100 Miles and Runnin'" and Funkadelic's "Get Off Your Ass and Jam". Essentially, N.W.A. sampled a two-second guitar chord from Funkadelic's tune, lowered the pitch and looped it five times in their song. This was all done without Funkadelic's permission and with no compensation paid to Bridgeport Music, which claims to own the rights to Funkadelic's music.
dbp:name
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit_cases dbc:2005_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_copyright_case_law dbc:Fair_use_case_law
dbo:wikiPageID
9460482
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1079370004
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:By_designation dbr:Get_Off_Your_Ass_and_Jam dbr:U.S._Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit dbc:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit_cases dbr:Copyright dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit dbr:Madonna_(entertainer) dbr:Federal_Court_of_Justice_of_Germany dbr:Judith_Barzilay dbr:VMG_Salsoul_v_Ciccone dbr:Ralph_B._Guy,_Jr. dbr:Ronald_Lee_Gilman dbr:De_minimis dbc:2005_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Federal_Reporter dbr:100_Miles_and_Runnin'_(song) dbr:Funkadelic dbr:Copyright_infringement dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Middle_District_of_Tennessee dbr:Bridgeport_Music dbc:Fair_use_case_law dbc:United_States_copyright_case_law dbr:Dimension_Films dbr:N.W.A. dbr:Fair_use dbr:Kraftwerk dbr:United_States_copyright_law
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n11:04a0297p.html n18:
owl:sameAs
freebase:m.0289rk1 n16:4bx7e wikidata:Q4966602
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Reflist dbt:Wikisource-inline dbt:Short_description dbt:Infobox_court_case
dbp:citations
25920.0
dbp:court
dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit
dbp:fullName
Bridgeport Music, Inc., et al. v. Dimension Films, et al.
dbp:judges
Ralph B. Guy, Jr., Ronald Lee Gilman, and Judith Barzilay
dbo:abstract
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005), is a court case that has proved important in defining American copyright law for recorded music. The case centered on N.W.A.’s song "100 Miles and Runnin'" and Funkadelic's "Get Off Your Ass and Jam". Essentially, N.W.A. sampled a two-second guitar chord from Funkadelic's tune, lowered the pitch and looped it five times in their song. This was all done without Funkadelic's permission and with no compensation paid to Bridgeport Music, which claims to own the rights to Funkadelic's music. Bridgeport brought the issue before a federal judge, who ruled that the incident was not in violation of copyright law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed the decision and ruled that the sampling was in violation of copyright law. Their argument was that with a sound recording, an owner of the copyright on a work had exclusive right to duplicate the work. Under this interpretation of the copyright law, usage of any section of a work, regardless of length, would be in violation of copyright unless the copyright owner gave permission. In its decision, the court wrote: "Get a license or do not sample. We do not see this as stifling creativity in any significant way." This decision effectively eliminates the de minimis doctrine for digitally sampling recorded music in the Sixth Circuit, and has affected industry practice. However, the court expressly noted that the decision did not preclude the availability of other defenses, such as fair use, even in the context of "sampling." Thus, in the Sixth Circuit, defendants who digitally sampled may not rely on the de minimis doctrine to say that they copied such a small amount that they are not liable for copyright infringement. However, they may still argue that their use of the sample is a fair use—that is, that the use is transformative, for noncommercial purpose, copied only a small amount, the original had a thin copyright, or the copying did not harm the market for the original work or its derivatives.
dbp:dateDecided
2005-06-03
dbp:opinions
District court erroneously granted summary judgment for defendant on claim for copyright infringement based on fact that defendant's copying of plaintiff's copyrighted sound recording was merely de minimis. Court of Appeals rejects de minimis defense to claim for copyright infringement of a sound recording.
dbp:priorActions
25920.0
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Bridgeport_Music,_Inc._v._Dimension_Films?oldid=1079370004&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
8108
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Bridgeport_Music,_Inc._v._Dimension_Films