When Creative Programs Meet Copyright Law
Performing artistic athletes today work in a fast-moving creative environment where inspiration spreads rapidly and infringement accusations can arise just as quickly, creating ongoing tension. Art often depends on reference, remix, and transformation, coming into conflict with copyrights built around exclusive rights and permissions.
In figure skating, programs once relied heavily on public domain music such as Tchaikovsky and Chopin. Modern music introduces significantly more complexity. A single song can involve multiple rights, including composition rights, sound recording rights, public performance rights, synchronization rights, and, in some jurisdictions, moral rights. International competitions and broadcasts add additional layers, often requiring coordination across publishers, record labels, and societies.
The figure skating competitions at the Milan Cortina Olympics have already generated multiple copyright disputes. Spanish skater Tomas-Llorenc Guarino Sabate was able at the last minute to obtain permission for the music for his Minions-based performance. Hectic as that was, it was a better outcome than that of Russian skater Petr Gumennik, who had to switch his music only days before his performance, because of copyright issues. And American Amber Glenn apparently failed in advance to obtain copyright permission for the music for her free skate program (one that helped the U.S. win a gold medal), and had to resolve problems after the fact.
A frequent misconception is that material is free to use if it is old, widely shared, or easily accessible online. In reality, even if an underlying work is in the public domain, a particular recording, arrangement, or modern interpretation may still be protected. Likewise, posting a photograph or artwork online does not remove copyright protection.
Most infringement disputes come down to a few central questions, including whether the work is protected by copyright and whether the alleged copying involved protected expression rather than an unprotectable idea. Ideas are generally free to use. Specific expression is not.
Artists often rely on fair use or fair dealing as a safeguard, but these doctrines can be narrowly interpreted. In the United States, courts evaluate purpose and character, the nature of the original work, the amount used, and market effect.
For creators, the practical lesson is not to avoid inspiration but to manage their infringement risk. If there might be ambiguity, seeking legal assistance on which rights apply, securing permissions when needed, and documenting licenses can help reduce confusion and risk.
Copyright is not inherently opposed to creativity. It is a system designed to support creators through enforceable rights. The challenge is that modern art often depends on the very practices copyright regulates. The most sustainable creative work increasingly requires both artistic innovation and legal support.
The experienced trademark, copyright, and litigation attorneys at Renner Otto are happy to address any questions or concerns you may have about protecting your valuable copyright assets. Contact us to schedule a consultation.
The attorneys at Renner Otto strive to be authorities in all matters concerning the ever-evolving landscape of Intellectual Property; however, the information provided on our website is not intended to be legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship.