*This article was created using voice input with AI (Aqua Voice) for text conversion. Please note there may be some inconsistencies.
Who Owns Performance Rights in VR Theater — A Mind-Bending Question
Hello. How’s everyone doing?
I’m Hiro from Full Body Tracking Lab.
In my previous article about performance rights and full tracking, I wrote that “avatar appearance is copyright, movement is performance rights — separating them makes things clear.”
But the moment I started thinking about VR theater, my brain broke. Here’s that story.
Copyright Law Defines Two Types of “Performance”
Article 2, Paragraph 1, Item 3 of Japan’s Copyright Act defines two types of performance:
First: Performance of a copyrighted work (performing a script or musical score)
Second: Performance that doesn’t perform a copyrighted work but has artistic/entertainment qualities (magic tricks, impressions, etc.)
My previous article assumed the second type. But in VR theater, the boundary between the two becomes unclear.
When Shinano Performs a Traditional Dance
Concrete example: A performer using the “Shinano” avatar performs a traditional dance in VR space. A real geisha wearing full tracking sensors performs through the avatar.
Who owns the performance rights?
Case A: “Shinano” performed theatrically. The avatar character appeared on stage. Copyright (creator) and theatrical performance rights are intertwined.
Case B: The person inside (the geisha) performed artistically. The avatar is like “costume.” Performance rights belong to the geisha.
Honestly, I don’t know which it is.
Probably Both Overlap Simultaneously
My intuition says both apply simultaneously:
- The geisha’s physical movements: artistic performance (belonging to the individual)
- The avatar “Shinano’s” expression: theatrical performance (character copyright belongs to the creator)
These two merge into one performance through full tracking. They can’t be separated. This is a situation current law didn’t anticipate.
Someone might say “just ask a lawyer.” But even lawyers would likely say “there’s no precedent.”
That’s exactly why I want to share that “this question exists” with the community. Even without answers, raising the question itself has value.
Full-body tracking is simultaneously “a device that enables performance” and “a device that creates new legal questions.”
Thank you for reading! Please follow us on X and subscribe to our YouTube channel!