Do you post covers legally?

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

You are correct... there are actually TWO forms of protection.

A copyright is protection against the first thing you mention: stealing all or part of a work and passing it off as your own.

Performing rights (often included in copyright law, but distinct) are what we are talking about in this thread. Such laws and PROs, Performing Rights Organizations, formed to help protect artists in this area, have been around for over 100 years--long before mass recording and reproduction even existed.

Performing rights laws do specify artists should be compensated for performances of their works in public. All well and good when public spaces and performances were pretty clearly delineated. But things have gotten messy since the rise of the internet and public can be anything on line.

Let's throw up a straw man. You compose and record an amazing original song, and post it to YouTube. Someone sees it, and covers it, and posts their version to YouTube. It starts to go viral, and suddenly there are 6 different cover versions of your song getting posted, and getting thousands more views than your original version. The covers make it clear they are covers, and aren't even necessarily making the cover-ers much, if any money, but they are getting all the exposure and your original seems to be forgotten.

You could say, well, I wouldn't have gotten money anyway, so who cares? Or (especially if you are trying to make a living off your music) you could say, hey, that is my intellectual property these people are spreading, and I should be compensated for my work.

IMO, "compensated" is the wrong word. It suggests I am losing out.
In fact, I am gaining - exposure, kudos, etc. If anyone asks, it's easy enough to prove my priority, by the date of my initial youtube.

If, OTOH, those other people end up making money out of my song - not quite sure how that would work, but I'm sure advertising would be involved - then I might feel aggrieved. I might feel that some of that money ought to be coming my way. "Compensation" would then reflect potential earnings.

But I'll stick with my principle here. They are welcome to make any money they can out of my song - assuming they either credit me by name or at least don't claim it's their own song. (The latter is easily dealt with by proving my priority.)
If they make more money from their youtube than I do from mine, it will be because their performance of my song is better than my performance. My video is out there too, of course, and anyone curious enough would find it. Maybe they are more charismatic or skilled performers, the kind advertisers love because they naturally attract more views.
Meanwhile, the more people like the song itself (aside from the way it's being covered), and still assuming I'm credited on at least some of those performances, the more people may seek me out in order to get me to write more songs. That's where I might start charging money up front. You want my songs? We'll do a deal.

IOW, you could say that first song is a "loss leader". Common commercial practice! That wouldn't be why I put it out there, of course, because I wouldn't anticipate making any money at all. I might put it out there simply because I want the appreciation; in which case people covering it and it going viral would be immensely satisfying. But naturally, if that appreciation was to turn into a demand for further "product", to be paid for, I'm not going to say no!

Still, I'm lucky in that I don't need to make a living from songwriting - or not from songwriting alone anyway. I'm not rich, far from it, but I'm OK, I survive (so far). I appreciate it might be different for some young person who is a talented composer but has no other way of making an income.

I might also say that I have yet to post any song of mine online - mainly because I can't sing well enough to deliver them with confidence. I do have one original instrumental composition on youtube. I'm not aware of anyone stealing it yet - 132 views after being up for over a year - but there's still time. Here you go, pirates, do your worst!

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by JonPR

But I'll stick with my principle here. They are welcome to make any money they can out of my song - assuming they either credit me by name or at least don't claim it's their own song.

That's all well and good for you. But many, many artists, and record companies, and publishing companies, and PROs, and copyright lawyers, and legislators who helped pass the copyright laws, feel differently.

[Pitar]

Originally Posted by romancandle

I noticed that Band Camp, Sound Cloud, and You Tube prohibit covers unless you have permission by the label. I know that there are sites to get your music on Spotify and iTunes but I'm talking about the free services. So you see covers on these sites but are people doing this legally? I would love to get my covers out there but I just don't feel comfortable getting a copyright claim.

I'm not a member of ASCAP or BMI so I suppose playing/posting published music covers under their labels is a bozo no-no. Sometimes it confuses me to the end in which their protection extends. If no monies exchange hands over the music played, then basically it's free marketing for them and artist promos. If monies do exchange hands then royalties should be assessed and tendered. If the covers are played here, I suppose the host site and contributors are gaining by some non-monetary measure but how can that be assessed?

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

That's all well and good for you. But many, many artists, and record companies, and publishing companies, and PROs, and copyright lawyers, and legislators who helped pass the copyright laws, feel differently.

Sure, because they know money is to be made and they all want a slice. I don't blame them. If the little guys don't protect their product the big guys will steal it.
The big guys steal it anyway, one way or another. Those who know how to exploit will do so. Naturally the lawyers win in the end.

I recommend this book, for a great survey of the wild west of 20thC popular song and music copyright:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Its-One-Mon.../dp/1472111907

[TBman]

My naive point of view is as long as I'm not making money from an online cover I'm fine. Every cover done by a player like me is free advertising for the original artist.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by TBman

My naive point of view is as long as I'm not making money from an online cover I'm fine. Every cover done by a player like me is free advertising for the original artist.

Yep, that's also my view. Not so much naive, maybe, as just not wanting to think about all the other stuff.

If I did find a cover of mine got some kind of warning, I'd just take it down. No big deal.

[Golffishny]

Parallel thought? Nobody remembers who invented the telephone, but Bell made the money by putting it into distribution. Does the original owner have a claim for damages? I'm sure the laws protecting original ideas have changed since then. I've enjoyed reading this thread.

[Winfred]

Originally Posted by Gordon Currie

The whole YouTube thing is really a minefield these days. As someone posted, if you are a musical act that does covers, or you include a few, you still need these days to have some performance video clips for bookers - thus opening yourself up to (inadvertent) copyright infringement.

My duo does mostly originals, but we have distinctive arrangements of three copyrighted songs. We decided to upload performance videos to YouTube, but keep the account Private. We then embed the video in our site. We do NOT send anyone to YouTube. Essentially we are using YouTube as a storage site.

If there is ever a time we want to promote our own YouTube channel (for the monetization opportunities), we will do it on another account and tightly control the content to avoid infringement. It could be disastrous to find oneself locked out of YouTube AND all promotional videos blocked.

Also, Vimeo is an alternative for streaming videos - they are FAR less interested in policing casual non-revenue generating infringement than YouTube (the revenue models are different).

Hi Gordon!

All with a grain of salt from me as I'm only an amateur wannabe. I wanted to acknowledge the original artist and do things legally on YouTube. I wanted to post a cover song, "Both Sides Now" by Joni Mitchell. I went to her official website to ask for permission as I couldn't afford paying a lot for a license. At the time, about a month ago, her website noted no gratuities and to go to Alfred Music for a license. I was apprehensive approaching a big publisher and was prepared for rejection or a big fee maybe months later. They were very nice and answered right away and said YouTube means you need a "synchronization license" and for that I had to go to Sony Music. I went to the website but was even more nervous about it, saying the right thing etc.

I found a licensing service thinking they know how to approach them as I'm an unknown with no agent etc. They said publishers can take like 45 days and say no, or never answer, or charge even thousands of dollars to get a license, or not even communicate with non-agented musicians. They quoted their high end price for their service to submit to Sony at $1,500!! I then gave up, but regrouped and thought something is better than nothing even though I don't have an agent... and wrote to Sony. I was shocked as the next day they said I could do it! I'm not "monetizing" it, but if it gets popular they said they, Sony, monetize it so they make money from advertising.

I was very grateful as they could have said no, where now if YouTube locks me out I can copy-paste the letter a Sony staff person wrote to me. Another musician who plays paid gigs (not now with the CoVid19) said that was amazing that happened. Some post covers without permission and get by, but I don't believe in that, plus I read that YouTube will buy rights to some songs so they can let musicians do covers and monetize them for YouTube and make money that way. All I care is if people find my cover, hear my version of it and my abilities (non-abilities ha!), and learn about my original music I'm going to post.

There's only 5 listeners after about 15 hours since I posted it, so really I need to figure out how to attract others to it. Let me know if you or anyone here has any ideas. I hope I helped you too, or anyone else here. This is it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2wXWBqJv2I

Carpe Diem!
Winfred

[KevWind]

A fair amount naiveté and questionable notions being expressed
And the subject is fairly complex BUT

In brief summary.

#1 In the US a song (original work) copyright gives the holder of those rights "EXCLUSIVE" rights over the work.

#2 Any reproduction of said work without permission is technically illegal. (Except when that reproduction falls under one of the statutory compensation methods, like performance licensing fees , mechanical licensing fees, or things like YT monetization format. Outside of those exceptions or direct permission , publishing a copyrighted song is in fact a copyright infringement.

#3 And legally those "exclusive" rights do not change whether or not any money is made from said infringement and money not being made is irrelevant . Whether or not a non monetary infringement is actually promoting that work is not only highly debatable but is also completely irrelevant.

That said in the case of covers posted on YT I would think given the number of covers than the vast majority fall under options #1 and #2
The copyright holders options ,
#1 They can agree to allow them and get add monetization money.
#2 They can simply ignore it knowing there is little money to be collected and may indeed personally feel that it is a form of free promotion. Which is not a legal conclusion but simply a personal decision
#3 They can ask the cover be taken down,

[Brent Hahn]

I don't think legal opinions from non-lawyers belong here.

[Huskyman]

The country you reside in must have something to do with it. I learn a lot of songs and one person I learn from will only do his finished cover on youtube. Then you go to his website and you can buy the lesson. He has 4000 covers. There are also people doing this in the US though. Some of these guys do well by doing this. One of them has 5000 patreon subscribers and the minium is $2.

[Doug Young]

This topic always turns into a quagmire, but really, there are answers and it's not as complicated as it seems. Unless you wrote the song, someone else owns the rights. Depending on the situation, you may have to ask permission to use it, or you or someone else (club owner, for example, in the case of live performance) may have to pay to use it legally. There are different cases for live performance, recording, streaming, video, publishing written music, etc. You may think you're doing <insert famous artist> a favor by giving them exposure when you play a cover, and they may or may not agree, but the law's fairly clear. But it's up to the rights holder to enforce it (which is how You Tube can provide their alternative system).

Here are some decent, fairly easy to understand articles that should cover most of it, in the US at least.

https://diymusician.cdbaby.com/music...for-musicians/

https://diymusician.cdbaby.com/music...organizations/

https://diymusician.cdbaby.com/music...nical-royalty/

https://diymusician.cdbaby.com/youtu...law-explained/

https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/r...or-cover-songs

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

I don't think legal opinions from non-lawyers belong here.

Not sure if you're referring to my post directly above yours ? If so .
The good news is I actually attended several classes at the "Durango Songwriting Festival" hosted by two Intellectual Property Rights lawyers, on the subject.

And given the statues are relatively straight forward language , one does not need a law degree to read and get a (basic general ) understanding of the US statues on copyright. Lengthy and detailed and applies to all copyright not just music but still fairly straight forward in language https://www.copyright.gov/title17/
Even so my post was purposely stated as basic summary not legal opinion, and did not address specifics.

If your post was more general ? I would agree how the interpretation of the statutes may apply to any given "specific situation", is no doubt best left to a lawyer.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Not sure if you're referring to my post directly above yours ? If so .
The good news is I actually attended several classes at the "Durango Songwriting Festival" hosted by two Intellectual Property Rights lawyers, on the subject.

I won't say any more about it. It's a policy issue with the folks who run the forum, and they're apparently okay with it.