• Welcome
    Sponsors
  • Director
    Assistant Director
    Members
    Advisory Board
    International Advisory Council
    Research Affiliates
    IPilogue Editors
  • IPilogue
    Projects
    Publications
  • JD
    Graduate Program
    Clinical
    Prizes & Awards
  • The IPIGRAM Archive
    Events Archive
    IP in the News
    IP Poll of the Week
    IP Pick of the Week
    Gowlings IPilogue Prize
  • Legislation
    Journals
    Government
  • Contact Us
    Subscribe

Is there Copyright in Choreography?

March 8, 2010 by Virgil Cojocaru (IPilogue Editor)

Virgil Cojocaru is a JD candidate at Osgoode Hall Law school.

Choreography is about dance moves. It is the arrangement of dance moves, usually in patterns, accompanied by music. Are these dance moves protected by copyright? The argument out there is that they are, even when placed in games.

In order for choreography to be protected it has to be fixed to another medium, usually a tape, paper, DVD, etc. An alternative to recording the actual dance moves on a tape is to describe these moves precisely and record those descriptions. However, choreography does not have to tell a story, nor does it have to be performed in front of an audience. Even so, it needs an original expression of an idea. For an interesting summary on choreography please click here.

Pastor v. Chen shows the interplay of originality, expression, and fixation. Armando Pastor (claimant) alleged that he choreographed dances in the Cuban genre. Following some classes, the claimant thought that Roger Chen (defendant) had talent so he invited him to some intermediate tutorials. Afterward, he invited Mr. Chen to take part in a performance involving La Reuda dance moves. Based on one of the claimant’s witnesses, La Reuda is a Cuban way to dance salsa, which is difficult to perform because it involves multiple couples. After some performances, the defendant told the claimant he was not interested in dancing. Soon after, he left the claimant’s group.

However, a few months later, Mr. Chen started teaching La Reuda to other instructors and students in Vancouver, even though he had signed a Confidentiality Agreement (agreement) with the claimant. According to the claimant, the agreement applies because there is no other way to learn La Reuda, other than by being taught. For instance, one cannot pick it up by simply watching a video. The claimant was the only one in Vancouver who knew how to perform it. Over time, the defendant’s conduct allegedly led to a loss of business, as other instructors became proficient in this dance. Eventually, the claimant could no longer attract any students to take his dance classes in La Reuda. It is important to note that his financial decline began around the time the defendant started teaching this dance style to other instructors—the claimant’s competitors.

The claimant stated that he had made his own style of La Reuda, as any expert in this field does. Hence, Mr. Chen was not just teaching the general theories or moves of La Reuda that are in the public domain, but rather the specific choreographed moves developed by the claimant over his career. Mr. Chen admitted that he had taught some of the claimant’s moves to others, but he never performed them in public. He stated that most of the moves he taught he learned from one of the claimant’s videos and his travels to Montreal and Toronto.

Granted, the agreement could apply to the situation, given it is unlikely Mr. Chen learned those moves on his own. However, before the claimant can make use of it, several things need to be established. First, is the agreement a barrier to trade? The restrictions imposed by the claimant turn out to be reasonable for the protection of his business (the restriction extended to teaching and performing La Reuda). Mr. Chen could have sought the claimant’s permission, however he did not. The next issue is whether the claimant’s moves were in the public domain. Based on the evidence of the claimant, defendant, and other witnesses the Court concluded that the choreographic moves (the expression) are original and fall within copyright.  Even so, it is worth pointing out that the Court does not address the dichotomy of idea and expression. How close is the expression to the idea? If the idea is too close to the expression, the protection of the latter will stifle the use of the idea, reducing innovation.

Posted in Contracts, Copyright, IP, Infringement, Originality

One Response to “Is there Copyright in Choreography?”

  1. Jan Rak, on March 30, 2010 at 7:49 pm Said:

    If Mr. Chen had acknowledged the work of Mr. Pastor while using this material, would there still have been a case? (for example a written reference in a course outline)

    If the material used in the case above had been altered by creative design and referenced would it still be a case?

    If the choreographic material (steps) are common to many movement forms, is it still a case?

Leave a Reply

All replies and responses are moderated and will not appear on the site immediately. Please see our response policy.

« South Australian Web Anonymity Law Backfires | “Purposive Construction”: Has certainty been compromised? »

Career Opportunities
Osgoode IP Club
Events Calendar
Writing Competitions
IP Research Guide

 

RSS Follow Comments via RSS
  • bob on Bill C-32: Copyright and Education in the Digital Age
  • Stuart Freen on Sizing Privacy Harm
  • Steven Bercu on First sale and digital content
  • Anonymous on Federal Court of Appeal rules that ISPs are not "broadcasters"
  • Stuart Freen on Federal Court of Appeal rules that ISPs are not "broadcasters"
  • Anonymous on Federal Court of Appeal rules that ISPs are not "broadcasters"
  • Christian Rock on ‘Operation In Our Sites’
  • Anonymous on Does Fashion Need Copyright Protection?
  • Fly Intheointment on ‘Operation In Our Sites’
  • Bart on Copyright Termination: How Authors can Reclaim their Copyrights
RSS Follow Posts via RSS
  • CRTC Seizes Internet Regulation Mantle
  • Brand Expectations in the Restroom: 4th Circuit Applies Contributory Trademark Infringement Doctrine to Post-Purchase Confusion Case
  • Yes, Patents Do Have Gender
  • Fashion IP Revisited: The Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act
  • RIM’s Battle for Information Privacy, Market Share, and its Reputation
  • Transnational Regulation: Rough Consensus and Running Code
  • IP Osgoode: Call for Editors (2010-2011)
  • Sizing Privacy Harm
  • The Internet Age: The Culprit for a Rise in Plagiarism?
  • USPTO Issues Post-Bilski Guidelines for Patent Examiners
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • June 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • Commercialization (46)
  • Contracts (36)
  • copyright reform (65)
  • defamation (6)
  • events (36)
  • General (120)
  • Innovation (79)
  • Internet (122)
  • IP (650)
    • Copyright (308)
      • CD Levy (6)
      • Digital Downloads (39)
      • Digital Locks (12)
      • Fair Dealing (25)
      • Infringement (60)
      • Internet Sharing (50)
      • Literary Works (24)
      • Movies (24)
      • Music Industry (42)
      • Originality (17)
      • Ownership (45)
        • Licensees (12)
      • Subsidiary Rights (4)
    • Patents (198)
      • Cross Border Issues (34)
      • Electronic Processes (7)
      • Infringement (37)
      • Patent Trolls (10)
      • Patentability (59)
      • Pharmaceutical Drugs (46)
    • Trademarks (130)
      • Domain Names (26)
      • Famous Marks (9)
      • Official Marks (8)
      • Parallel Importation (3)
      • Personality Rights (8)
  • IP Course Topic (11)
  • Links (3)
  • Music Industry (39)
  • Open-Source (14)
  • Osgoode Alumnus (3)
  • Privacy (111)
    • Electronic Databases (23)
    • Human Rights Issues (19)
    • Identity Theft (6)
  • Regulatory Policy (2)
  • Tech Transfer (12)
  • Technology (119)
  • Telecommunications (30)
  • Uncategorized (70)
  • Log in

Home   |   Contact Us  

© 2008 Osgoode Hall Law School York University
4700 Keele Street Toronto, Canada M3J 1P3
T:416.736.5030   F:416.736.5736