so now dances being copyrighted
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Someone tried something similar to this before with their likeness and lost, I even remember one of her complaints is the character did her dance move:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/deee-lite-singer-loses-sega-lawsuit/1100-6158913/
The article mentioned says "Whether a dance move can be copyrighted is largely a settled matter; they cannot, as doing so would largely inhibit the creative expression of dancers. "
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/5/18128115/epic-games-fortnite-sued-lawsuit-rapper-2-milly-dance-move-emote
The issue seems to be more with using the music video for 1-to-1 copying, rather than recreating the steps themselves, if I gathered this correctly.
“Exactly duplicating source imagery probably isn’t legit. (For example, making a photorealistic drawing of a photograph without making any changes.),” writes Kiff Stahle,"
A few years ago, I can remember hearing something about a footballer wanting to copyright his celebration, which he did when he scored a goal. It couldn't have happened, as a lot of other players from other teams have adopted that celebration since.
I don't play Fortnite, and I never will. But I have been playing a game called Saints Row The Third, and no one has sued Volition games for using dance moves and celebrations in that game. And believe me, there are LOADS.
Plus, the dance move is only available after purchasing the DLC with real money. No one wants other people making money with their content without their permission, or without profit for themselves.
(I hope this makes sense, my Dad is ranting again and I just can't seem to concentrate).
we proudly teach our offspring to build on the "shoulders of giants", then sue for our current art like it's something completely unique, distinct, and original.
clearly, it's not that simple, as the lens that defines 'unique' has many facets. Simply looking in the daz3d.com gallery, one can see how many versions of 'unique' can be produced from a limited set of characters, surfaces, lights, and viewpoints. Truly impressive, yet most are arguably "a picture of a beautiful woman in a beautiful and interesting setting", which could probably be dignified in todays legal environment as being copyrightable concept. Follow the money, and you'll find that such silliness occurs when money and power choose to either stomp on, or protect, some form of IP that suites their bottom line. 'RRRRready to RRRRrrrrrumble', etc.
Is the onus properly on the the person claiming 'unique' to prove that it is, or the so-called plagerist to prove that it isn't? I'd assert that in a world of 7 billion people, that most of us would prefer that before we get in trouble for 'doing a move', that the accuser be compelled to prove that none of the 7 billion alive, or their ancestors, have never done said 'move'. right. problem solved.
Heck just look at our species: we 'feel' as if we're all special and unique (snowflakes), but an alien flying over a full stadium would see us much like we see a bucket of earthworms... - not so unique in the big scheme.
That our legal profession even dignifies this case is a true sign that our society is seriously going out of kilter and in need of adjustment and some healthy perspective. Sad that we all have to spend our time fighting those who get paid to toss such silly noodles on the wall, hoping nobody is paying attention and that one sticks. Worse yet, it has become less expensive to settle with a bad law, than to fight it and scrub it from the books. In a precident-based law system that builds upon a foundation of such silliness, this is the real danger that haunts us into the future.
Even if 'tracing' or some other direct copying was involved, that some form of damage or reputational impact is occurring is a pretty weak argument. I might eat my words and think differently if I saw a direct knock off of a book cover I'd done on a Pixar movie poster.
Yet, the idea that there's no prior art in the field of silly dance moves is patently absurd unless there is more to the lawsuit than meets the sensational eye (look at most of us with a good song and a bit too much wine... now *there* are some moves... lol). In fact, the moves in some of Wendy's videos are as unique as any I've ever seen. She might actually be able to make such a copyright claim, if anyone could!
So here we are. I say 'damn the torpedos, dance away my friends, dance away!'
cheers,
--ms
(eta, typos, thoughts)
Its far more profitable as a whole to allow others to perform your dances and even get paid to do it. The Kpop industry is proof of that.
Mattymanx, you're right about that. If you asked the guys that sang that Macarena song if they had objected to the dance moves going viral I'm sure they'd look at you like you were insane. That made them famous (briefly) and brought in a lot of cash to boot.
Closed as it's clear the subject cannot be discussed without getting into forbidden areas.