Mulheres VS Million Years Ago Plagiarism Saga, BERNE’s Resurrection, IP, Timeline Dilemmas! (Edited)

 

I saw the side-by-side comparison of the song Mulheres VS Million Years Ago. It seems, the latter is replica of the former. Watch the comparison by yourself, the musical notes and the rhythm:  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjszPUsjWbA&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2F

The important question: acquiescence, laches, delay, condonation, waiver!

Albeit, generally, acquiescence period usually for trademark is 5 Years; limitation period 3 years, in general, in case of infringement of Copyrights; thus, can the 1996s composition be covered in 2021 citing the 2015 infringement date? And let me further expand the dilemma by changing the year from 2015 to let's say 2009 whilst taking action in 2021. Should such complaints also be allowed? Look, in my opinion, why not? In case of trademarks, it keeps happening, so in case of patents. And furthermore, for the reason that in the case of copyright, there’s no such thing as the Search Box Engine, Except of the Titles, UNLIKE Patents, Trademarks, Designs, G.I.; and in case the composition is made in, let’s say in a remote town, then it won’t have that reach, due to unaffordability of PR Agencies and Advertisements. Thus, it is also the duty of PR agencies, promoters, broadcasters, publishers, and distributors, to cross verify the infringement prior arts, compositions, because I know, due to the non-presence of such Search tools; with so many minds involved, at least someone should be able to catch the void, to avoid the later infringement issues like this.      

I’ve written myriad blogs about BERNE Convention in my previous blogs. It’s an automatic Copyright, sans following protocol of Formality, anywhere; albeit it is always a better option to Register it at your national copyright office, despite it being prima facie evidence of validity. Because, even something meant for personal use, and in the name of fair dealing; alas, ends up especially in the last 15 years, being distributed for commercial usage!

I’ve always said, it is not about deriving or extracting money, but, to know the original behind the originality.

The question about accidental melodic similarities due to the musical cliches, technically cannot be considered as unwarranted threats, because for the reason, as original person behind this hasn’t been even mentioned. And that’s the problem! This is exactly, the issue with the AI companies too, who’ve deliberately confused others with the words alike, Public Domain Data VS Public Data, on which I’ve written a blog (Link: https://www.jpranavc.in/2024/11/seems-words-public-domain-and-public.html ), wherein these two terms are poles apart from each other, and so as the conditions involved in them.

The decision by the Brazilian Court for the immediate cease including using, producing, distributing, or commercializing, is a welcome step. But I am now a bit worried that this would open the pandora box, because this is true that many in the 90s, 00s, copy pasted lyrics, musical notes, scene by scene themes and scripts etc.   

That’s why, meaningful creativity and originality is important. Merely copy pasting someone else’s aesthetics, vibes, character, composition, lyrics, themes, content, even for training of the AI Modules, isn’t helpful, neither for any individual, nor for the company. 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi