Old songs obscure copyrights

Northward · #1 01-29-2017, 07:11 PM

I wonder how things stand legally if I decide to record a new interpretation of an old song and lyrics. More precise: if that songs copyright is so obscure, that it's hard to really confirm if there really is a valid one at play.

Can e.g. a random firm buy an old out of business record company's whole catalog, and now own songs they never had anything to do with?

Yesteryears copyright laws was so horrible in many cases to songwriters and artists. I wonder how long money men can own/claim ownership to songs by long gone artists. Isn't there some form of 'song emancipation' after a certain time?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jseth · #2 01-29-2017, 08:07 PM

If you record a song written by someone else and do not get permission from the holder of the copyright, you probably won't ever hear a thing about it UNLESS you are selling a huge number of recordings with that song... and then you will. I do not think that Bob Dylan is going to roust you for doing one of his songs and selling a couple hundred copies of it.

Is the above the "legal" way to go? No. Get in touch with whomever holds that copyright and pay them whatever fee they want to license the tune...

Yes, a new company can buy an entire catalogue of songs from an existing firm and subsequently own the lot. I think that, at one time, Michael Jackson purchased the balance of The Beatle's compositions... and then was nice enough to sell them to Paul (for a LOT of money, no doubt!).

As far as older copyrights being a "bad deal" for composers? I think that some new laws were recently passed that absolutely SCREW composers and songwriters here in America, so "No" would be the answer to the "have things gotten better" question...

DupleMeter · #3 01-29-2017, 09:50 PM

what jseth said...

You technically need to pay the copyright owner, unless the song was written before 1923, in which case it is in the public domain.

I believe the current copyright law extends copyright for 75 years after the writer's death. That may have changed. It's been a while since I've looked at copyright laws.

Everton FC · #4 01-29-2017, 10:00 PM

Not exactly "on topic"... But how many of us have picked up old records at the thrift store and discovered "gems" from artists/bands no one's heard of?! Researching Public Domain laws might be worth it, in order to resurrect some of these old gems.

Northward · #5 01-30-2017, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jseth

If you record a song written by someone else and do not get permission from the holder of the copyright, you probably won't ever hear a thing about it UNLESS you are selling a huge number of recordings with that song... and then you will. I do not think that Bob Dylan is going to roust you for doing one of his songs and selling a couple hundred copies of it.

Is the above the "legal" way to go? No. Get in touch with whomever holds that copyright and pay them whatever fee they want to license the tune...

Yes, a new company can buy an entire catalogue of songs from an existing firm and subsequently own the lot. I think that, at one time, Michael Jackson purchased the balance of The Beatle's compositions... and then was nice enough to sell them to Paul (for a LOT of money, no doubt!).

As far as older copyrights being a "bad deal" for composers? I think that some new laws were recently passed that absolutely SCREW composers and songwriters here in America, so "No" would be the answer to the "have things gotten better" question...

Thanks for a good answer. Sounds like you know what you're talking about.

The part about getting in touch with the current copyright owner may prove difficult, due to time and several resales of song catalogues. And there simply isn't any one clear search engine for older stuff, I have found. But many tend to have been swallowed by some Sony publishing company, just sitting there doin nothin, like some old patent for water fuelled engine in an Exxon wault..

Someone here mentioned, rare gems do exist, -that may not have been a commercial success in its day.

New laws that screw composers..even more you say!? It's sad really to see artist sometimes getting very little after creating something that touch people profoundly.

With today's "record sales" and streaming revenue, copyright laws must also have gotten pressure from new agents in an changing industry.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JonPR · #6 01-30-2017, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jseth

Yes, a new company can buy an entire catalogue of songs from an existing firm and subsequently own the lot. I think that, at one time, Michael Jackson purchased the balance of The Beatle's compositions... and then was nice enough to sell them to Paul (for a LOT of money, no doubt!).

But he didn't. He died, and they passed to Sony. Paul is currently trying to get them back http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38675147
I suspect it's so he can assign them how he likes - in his will if not before. He's an old man, and I'm guessing he's not prepared to wait until the rights naturally revert.

Don't you just love Sony/ATV's comment that it's "disappointed" by the lawsuit, calling it "both unnecessary and premature"?

JonPR · #7 01-30-2017, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jseth

As far as older copyrights being a "bad deal" for composers? I think that some new laws were recently passed that absolutely SCREW composers and songwriters here in America, so "No" would be the answer to the "have things gotten better" question...

That's not the half of it. The internet has pretty much trashed the whole notion of "intellectual property", with music fans expecting to get music for free.

Pretty soon, the whole idea of a "composer" might disappear - at least the notion that one might make money from writing music (what a quaint notion). Musicians will have to fall back on live performance - the only skill they have that can't be stolen. (although it can, of course, be emulated better and better....)

Bob Womack · #8 01-30-2017, 08:59 AM

Your first step is to try out a search at the HARRY FOX AGENCY. That's their job and they are the main source for current copyright status of a song. Not infallible, but they are the min source for licensing.

Bob

Northward · #9 01-30-2017, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonPR

Don't you just love Sony/ATV's comment that it's "disappointed" by the lawsuit, calling it "both unnecessary and premature"?

What's wrong with these people... What did they ever create themselves anyway...... Such ignorance is mind-boggling! How about a little respect for a very talented man's lifework.

Northward · #10 01-30-2017, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Your first step is to try out a search at the HARRY FOX AGENCY. That's their job and they are the main source for current copyright status of a song. Not infallible, but they are the min source for licensing.

Bob

Thanks! Looks like a solid site. If a song ain't there, what are the chances it's not under copyright in the US..?

Bob Womack · #11 01-30-2017, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northward

Thanks! Looks like a solid site. If a song ain't there, what are the chances it's not under copyright in the US..?

The HF Agency handles licensing for just about all active copyrights, so there's a pretty strong chance if they can't find it it isn't active. The main gripe with them is that they have been known to arrange license payments for material with expired copyrights on occasion.

I work for a broadcast company. We do all our licensing through them.

Bob

Northward · #12 01-30-2017, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

The HF Agency handles licensing for just about all active copyrights, so there's a pretty strong chance if they can't find it it isn't active. The main gripe with them is that they have been known to arrange license payments for material with expired copyrights on occasion.

I work for a broadcast company. We do all our licensing through them.

Bob

Good stuff