“It is quite ingenious to have put it to music, but my personal opinion is that Mr. Titus Silva he is losing a lot of money, because if he had created the music for these lyrics by Mrs. Zully Pinchi and made that parody of her writing, he would have monetized being the author of a melody. By using a melody that belongs to other authors, obviously the rights do not go to him, regardless of whether or not he may be in a situation of copyright violation”, tells us Rubén Ugarteche, general director of Apdayc.
MIRA: Tito Silva: “In a country like Peru, I will never be short of work” | Interview
As we know, Silva took the words written by Pinchi in alleged dialogues with the former president Martin Vizcarra -revealed by a political program-, added music and the success was almost immediate. Soon, phrases like “My little baby Fiu Fiu” that gives title to the song hit the collective unconscious and were a trend in social networks. Despite the fact that this has happened on other occasions in topics related to politicians, such as the phrase “Estar Chihuán”, being short on budget, or the “Nano Challenge”, with the photo of people enjoying themselves on the beach, none of them It had had the worldwide reach that Tito Silva achieved with his version of the song that has Eminem, Dido and Paul Philip Herman as authors.
For Ugarteche, who drafted the text of the copyright law when he worked at Indecopi, an institution of which he is one of its founders, “Under article 49 of the Peruvian copyright law, it is not required to request permission from the author of the work to be parodied, because if it were required, many would not give it to you, since you are going to make fun of the lyrics that have been parodied. writing or the person who has done it. To transform or adapt it to other genres, permission is required”. As for copyright, there is a difference if we speak of a parody of a work.
However, for the theme to be a parody that does not require authorization, it must meet certain conditions, according to the specialist: that does not imply a risk of confusion with the work itself or that no damage is inferred to the original work. This can also be done without prejudice to paying for the subject being parodied. “In a nutshell, it’s like I don’t have to ask your permission to use your car, but any profit generated from it should benefit you.”.
“It is quite ingenious to have put it to music, but my personal opinion is that Mr. Tito Silva is losing a lot of money.”
For his part, the lawyer Óscar Montezuma published a thread on Twitter explaining details of the case. “Why can’t I find #BebitoFiuFiu on some digital platforms anymore? The short answer is because of copyright laws (Anglo-Saxon countries) and/or copyright laws (Europe and the vast majority of Latin America)”, he commented. And he added later:Why does that happen? Because there are other laws in the USA, such as the Digital Millennium Act of 1999, which establishes that when there is digital content that infringes copyright, the platforms can be exonerated from liability if they act quickly and withdraw”. Finally, he assured that “the underlying legal issue of copyright is very complex and all the edges must be mapped (…) The opportunity for Tito Silva is great, but the legal details are also great to guarantee the complete success of Peruvian creativity”.
This newspaper tried to communicate with Silva on several occasions, without receiving a response. However, spokespersons for Sinergia, the agency that represents him, told us, verbatim, “Tito is not giving interviews of any kind to any media due to the policies of our representation”.
It seems that, following the noise in the media and on social networks, whoever generated it has preferred silence.
