copyrighting music

[kurth]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

Nobody is forcing a (song)writer to copyright their work. If you don't care if someone else uses your stuff, that's totally fine. Many on this forum wouldn't care, particularly amateur songwriters who may not even post their songs to the public.

However, professionals who ply their trade and make their livelihood writing have a real reason to protect their intellectual property. And even amateurs who put their original stuff out there, where many will hear it, prefer see copyright registration as "insurance" (not a racket), on the chance somebody else tries to make money off of their work. As Kev said, there are also international treaties, so there is some protection if someone in another country steals your work as well.

Chipotle....have you ever contemplated making a claim in Mexico ...over the border? I promise I know a little, apostillas between countries cost small fortunes. I'd imagine everywhere is the same. People want a fortune for having to deal with bureaucracy. So ...it looks like just cutting to the chase...that if someone doesn't live in the US, they would have to acquire legal council in the US..to even advance their claim. Wow...that could be expensive....if you're just going after joe the plumber, and not bruce spingster. Because doing so in any other country would most probably require double the work and cost...first the suit and all the paperwork being officially apostilla'd in their home country, and then the answer to that suit within the usa would then require legal response. I mean on a real scale these laws only affect corporations and their minions. Us tiny beings are only so many ants running away with the crumbs on the table. Honestly Chiptole and Kev ...yes, it's a major paradigm shift. Truth is.... just about the only intellectual property that's safe from duplication is something handmade....like before. Paintings, sculpture, even real film. Even film dubs. But the moment that film is digitized , it's like a wild animal being released into the city. Look what happened to the art of photography. Photographs especially if they were nice, were worth something. Now everyones a photographer...and photographs , all of them on instagram or somewhere else, are virtually worthless. It might seem like you guys got a gorilla guarding the gate for you...but in reality, the rest of the world usually just ignores it. Now I agree we need a way to protect our own creations, but usually the world does it's thing regardless. Now my only experience in all this ...is I am the co author of patent sold as intellectual property , and I did apply for one copyright about 4 years ago, which, because I tried to portray the songs as one 'operatic piece' and then just pay the basic, which was like 35bucks at the time , was rejected. I had to assume the reason because , if you wanted a reason, it cost $250 to be responded to. No big deal. while my first attempt at copyright was a fluke....I retired at 36 from my patent, so I guess it averages out. I did take a peek at Mexico's derechos de autor. Might be a possibility to protect against largescale flagrant violation. It appears quite a bit cheaper....but I don't have enough details as yet.

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by kurth

If no independent songwriter has ever had to avail themselves of the need to sue someone over authorship claims and won their case due to them having registered their music with the UScopyright office...

How can you be so sure this never happens? On the contrary, it does, even if we don't personally know anyone. In fact, here's an article on 35 such cases. Not all are "artist steals and makes it big with unknown songwriter's work" (and some allegations I think are questionable, like with "Blurred Lines"), but if a quick search can turn up that many instances, it's probably fair to say there are lots more out there we haven't heard about.

If you don't want to spend money on copyright registration, fine. But don't cast shade on those who do--there are good reasons why they take that step.

[thestubbyone]

Originally Posted by KevWind

This subject has been discussed at length in multiple threads here so a search can yield some in depth threads. Unfortunately here as elsewhere there are reasonable offerings as well as some myths and misunderstanding, ambiguous use of terminology and a conflation of "how I think it should be" vs. what are the actual legal statutes and presidents

So agin in brief outline this is my understanding

#1 A copyright is technically created (comes into existence) as soon as an original work is "affixed to any tangible medium".. i.e. = written on paper, recorded to tape, CD,,, or a written or sound recording digital file , etc....

#2 It appears that Publishing to a streaming service (i.e SoundCloud or YouTube etc. ) the modern version of the " The poor mans copyright" of mailing a copy to yourself. Only establishes a time stamp/or reference of when you published it or mailed it . It does not establish a legal claim of ownership. and will be of very limited if any,,, use in a legal proceeding for infringement

#3 Registering with the US Copyright Office establishes a legally recognized claim of ownership and a date for such claim ... And such registration has been a fundamental component of , and president for, most successful infringement recovery

That said what I do personally on my YouTube videos for any of my originals,(registered or not) is to have a title at the start, that states the song is "by" (my name) ,, and I type "All rights reserved" followed by (C) as the keyboard representation of the copyright icon

haha. "all rights reserved, "c". That's a good way to scare off the timid thieves.

[thestubbyone]

Originally Posted by kurth

well Kev, if I'm reading you right...you don't copyright your cover stuff. Perhaps you have original songs but most of your cover stuff wouldn't need copyrighting. I guess someone could copy your copy to use in another form, but wouldn't that be a case of ' stealing is the most flattering compliment' kinda of deal. and the real copyright violation would be for using the authors music, not your cover. . A one off kinda of thing. What I'd like to know is.....

If you write a song, and you choose to not give the govt your money because for a number of reasons of which could include you don't live there and most likely could never mount a litigation even if there was the case....you post it online, and someone blatantly steals your song and says they wrote it, even if they copyrighted it themselves fraudulently, couldn't the true author be victorious in litigation for damages if it was fraud, if they had all the proof necessary to show the song was pilfered by nefarious methods? I mean to write a song actually leaves alot of documented evidence behind. It's not like it just appears on a piece of paper. So the question would be encompassing to include something like....has an independent songwriter ever had their music stolen because their song wasn't registered in the US copyright office? I mean I don't want to be the one who dreams up the idea that the govt would do something like scam a million songwriters when they really didn't need to pay, but.....I also realize a sizable portion of the population are into nefarious activity as well. But to me...that would be less probable than the govt just wanting my money for nothing. I realize this is difficult to discuss...but questioning the unquestionable is a thing with me. Also it all needs to be weighed against the small probability that Dua Lipa would want to try to copy someone elses ideas w/o compensation. I mean ...if a songwriter gets that far along, where bigbuck popstars are pilfering their music off the internet, wouldn't the negative press dissuade them of doing such. So ...it would really be about an individual copying your songs like identity theft. Has that ever happened in the history of the world , ever ? So...its really about 'the small time song swindler' stealing his credits.....oops ...think I got an idea for a new title jajaja

The "theft" of songs is replete in the history of music. Way back when, it was considered not only acceptable but flattery to the song writer. zoom ahead to today and every note is owned by somebody. They even tried to enforce the eternal copyright for the Happy Birthday song years ago!!! remember that?

[thestubbyone]

Originally Posted by kurth

well Kev, if I'm reading you right...you don't copyright your cover stuff. Perhaps you have original songs but most of your cover stuff wouldn't need copyrighting. I guess someone could copy your copy to use in another form, but wouldn't that be a case of ' stealing is the most flattering compliment' kinda of deal. and the real copyright violation would be for using the authors music, not your cover. . A one off kinda of thing. What I'd like to know is.....

If you write a song, and you choose to not give the govt your money because for a number of reasons of which could include you don't live there and most likely could never mount a litigation even if there was the case....you post it online, and someone blatantly steals your song and says they wrote it, even if they copyrighted it themselves fraudulently, couldn't the true author be victorious in litigation for damages if it was fraud, if they had all the proof necessary to show the song was pilfered by nefarious methods? I mean to write a song actually leaves alot of documented evidence behind. It's not like it just appears on a piece of paper. So the question would be encompassing to include something like....has an independent songwriter ever had their music stolen because their song wasn't registered in the US copyright office? I mean I don't want to be the one who dreams up the idea that the govt would do something like scam a million songwriters when they really didn't need to pay, but.....I also realize a sizable portion of the population are into nefarious activity as well. But to me...that would be less probable than the govt just wanting my money for nothing. I realize this is difficult to discuss...but questioning the unquestionable is a thing with me. Also it all needs to be weighed against the small probability that Dua Lipa would want to try to copy someone elses ideas w/o compensation. I mean ...if a songwriter gets that far along, where bigbuck popstars are pilfering their music off the internet, wouldn't the negative press dissuade them of doing such. So ...it would really be about an individual copying your songs like identity theft. Has that ever happened in the history of the world , ever ? So...its really about 'the small time song swindler' stealing his credits.....oops ...think I got an idea for a new title jajaja

The "theft" of songs is replete in the history of music. Way back when, it was considered not only acceptable but flattery to the song writer. zoom ahead to today and every note is owned by somebody. They even tried to enforce the eternal copyright for the Happy Birthday song years ago!!! remember that?

[thestubbyone]

Originally Posted by KevWind

This subject has been discussed at length in multiple threads here so a search can yield some in depth threads. Unfortunately here as elsewhere there are reasonable offerings as well as some myths and misunderstanding, ambiguous use of terminology and a conflation of "how I think it should be" vs. what are the actual legal statutes and presidents

So agin in brief outline this is my understanding

#1 A copyright is technically created (comes into existence) as soon as an original work is "affixed to any tangible medium".. i.e. = written on paper, recorded to tape, CD,,, or a written or sound recording digital file , etc....

#2 It appears that Publishing to a streaming service (i.e SoundCloud or YouTube etc. ) the modern version of the " The poor mans copyright" of mailing a copy to yourself. Only establishes a time stamp/or reference of when you published it or mailed it . It does not establish a legal claim of ownership. and will be of very limited if any,,, use in a legal proceeding for infringement

#3 Registering with the US Copyright Office establishes a legally recognized claim of ownership and a date for such claim ... And such registration has been a fundamental component of , and president for, most successful infringement recovery

That said what I do personally on my YouTube videos for any of my originals,(registered or not) is to have a title at the start, that states the song is "by" (my name) ,, and I type "All rights reserved" followed by (C) as the keyboard representation of the copyright icon

True and false.

When you do the following you have established the groundwork in a court of law to successfully prevail on an infringement provided you have the legal muscle to engage:


the plaintiff must:
Establish the ownership of legitimate copyright. (your date stamped proof such as recording on an iPhone)
That the infringing party had access to the copyrighted work.(publish on You tube, this is what gets many, you have to put it out in the public domain somewhere, mailing a letter to yourself aint going to work)
That the infringing party had the opportunity to steal that work.
Prove that protected elements of the original work have been copied. (That is a hard one and it don't mean **** if you registered it with the patent office)

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by kurth

Kev....actually I believe the advice was to pay the 85 twice....and going thru the motion, I just rounded it off at 200 for 20 , which is 10bucks a song. So if one had 50 songs to copyright, that's a grand.
...and
"IMO If an independent songwriter has availed themself of recouping infringement damages has no relationship to the advisability of registering your claim, so that if the situation ever arrises you have the highest level of legal precedent going for you."
I'd say just the opposite. If no independent songwriter has ever had to avail themselves of the need to sue someone over authorship claims and won their case due to them having registered their music with the UScopyright office...then what's the point of taking the medicine? If no one got cured taking a med, few would continue using it. I agree it's kinda of like insurance, 'cept insurance is better.

No there was no "advice"-- SWF was saying because he had also produced a commercially available CD he (personally) also registered the sound recordings ( the second $85) as well as the underlying work (which is what most songwriters do ) .

Your personal reasoning of the criteria for not registering based on mere unsubstantiated speculation of "IF no songwriter has availed themselves+--- is just that mere speculation and you personal view. Why should that be a factor for anyone else ?

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by thestubbyone

True and false.

what specifically do you think is false in my post ? As I understand it the only thing that actually "Establishes ownership of a copyright " is a ruling in a court of law. That either a time stamp recording or Registration "Establishes" only a date for claim of ownership, not the "Establishment of ownership" .....

I am also confused what does any of this discussion , have to do with your original OP question ?

haha. "all rights reserved, "c". That's a good way to scare off the timid thieves.

Your OP asked what we do, not why .. Do you have some unstated agenda here ?
Are you an intellectual property lawyer with experience in songwriting copyright law who is sarcastically advising that doing so does not establish much in the way protection ?? OR are just guessing and being plain old sarcastic and disrespectful "inquiring minds want to know "

[kurth]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

How can you be so sure this never happens? On the contrary, it does, even if we don't personally know anyone. In fact, here's an article on 35 such cases. Not all are "artist steals and makes it big with unknown songwriter's work" (and some allegations I think are questionable, like with "Blurred Lines"), but if a quick search can turn up that many instances, it's probably fair to say there are lots more out there we haven't heard about.

If you don't want to spend money on copyright registration, fine. But don't cast shade on those who do--there are good reasons why they take that step.

Chipotle....I had a good laugh. It was strange coming from you cause you're one of the most knowledgeable people here, but that article actually proves my point that it's all corporations and their minions doing all the towel throwing...not poor little guys with too many guitars. I wonder how much the copyright office actually racks in from those scare tactics. Sorry, but yes they do....intentionally scare people into doing things they wouldn't normally do under other more sane circumstances.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by thestubbyone

The "theft" of songs is replete in the history of music. Way back when, it was considered not only acceptable but flattery to the song writer. zoom ahead to today and every note is owned by somebody. They even tried to enforce the eternal copyright for the Happy Birthday song years ago!!! remember that?

Yes I know the history of early rock'nroll, and the absurd state we find ourselves in today, but my question is ...has it ever happened since copyright law was rewritten and redefined that an independent songwriter has successfully sued someone for stealing their music online and won because they registered their songs with the copyright office. You see alot of what Chipotle's article demonstrates that corporations and 'famous' people throw their dirty laundry around looking for more hiddencoins in their dopplegangers pockets. But show me someone who isn't controlled by corporation interests ever benefiting. Seems a bit taboo to even contemplate.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by KevWind

No there was no "advice"-- SWF was saying because he had also produced a commercially available CD he (personally) also registered the sound recordings ( the second $85) as well as the underlying work (which is what most songwriters do ) .

Your personal reasoning of the criteria for not registering based on mere unsubstantiated speculation of "IF no songwriter has availed themselves+--- is just that mere speculation and you personal view. Why should that be a factor for anyone else ?

ok....so the second $85 is optional...he didn't return to clarify. And Kev...it's all personal opinion isn't it? What this discussion has clarified is registering a copyright in the USoffice makes any case a creator is able to legally finance 'possibly', only possibly easier to win in a US court of law, if the defendant has the resources to pursue said claim till the end of legal process, and the thief has resources to attach...which would be a whole other ball of wax. You could win a copyright suit, and spend years pursuing compensation. And since in a US court of law , a copyright lawsuit wouldn't be decided by a jury of our peers, but by a single judge( that's another blackhole), it's just another opinion. All these opinions. Maybe people shouldn't have them? Me thinks this makes my question even more pertinent....just one songwriter on the planet who's benefited from registering? Just one example. Ya'll say it's like insurance. Well I can provide billions of insurance cases where people paid their premiums and collected when there was fault. Just sayin'...just one little guy who won his case??

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by kurth

Why do you need to register the performance ....if the music is registered?

This is the way I think of it:

If an artist records of a version of a song written by somebody else (a very common occurrence), he can't claim copyright to the lyrics/composition (since he doesn't own those rights).

But he CAN claim a copyright to HIS recorded version of the song. Why is that necessary? Because what happens if (for example) some studio uses that recording in a movie, and hasn't paid for its used? Money is owed not only to the songwriter(s), but also to the person whose recording was used without compensation.

So, in a case like mine (I own the songwriting, the publishing, and the performance rights), I am entitled for payment for BOTH things: the songwriting, and also the performance. A copyright for the former doesn't apply to the latter.

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by kurth

Chipotle....I had a good laugh. It was strange coming from you cause you're one of the most knowledgeable people here, but that article actually proves my point that it's all corporations and their minions doing all the towel throwing...

I realize that the article mostly has "corporations and minions" but that's because those are the ones that make the news. But in even in some of those, look who is doing the suing... in the first 5 examples in the article, it is a little-known Brooklyn band, singer-songwriter Josh Stone (ever heard of him before?), "songwriting brothers", "two Georgia producers", and an "unknown singer-songwriter". These artists are probablyl more like us here on AGF: small time, local musicians who put up some stuff on YouTube or Soundcloud. You want to post a song and then discover it's making millions of dollars for Lady Gaga instead of you?

My point is that it *does* happen, and there are probably far more smaller-potatoes cases that we don't see... the article is like the tip of the iceberg, the rest is underneath. Oh, and how many aspiring songwriters *didn't* copyright their stuff and had it "stolen" with no recourse? We have no way of knowing.

Do you have home or auto insurance? Most people never have their house burn down, or have a car totaled. I've paid far, far more in insurance premiums in my life than I've ever made claims. But I sure want that insurance policy should it ever happen.

As I said, if you feel it's a racket, don't pay. Many, many songwriters feel differently.

[The Bard Rocks]

I broke down this summer and copyrighted my original songs and tunes. For one price. What I did was send them a paper copy of my original songbook, it's the book which is copyrighted and, by extension, all the songs in it.. If you do this, you should use use musical notation.

But arrangements of someone else's tune can be copyrighted. You could not enforce against someone else making that song "their own" because then that would be their arrangement. But copyrighting the way you perform a song (the tune and words of which may be copyrighted by another person) is enforceable against someone trying to duplicate the way you did it. And both of you still owe the Harry Fox Agency or whoever for the right to perform someone else's song, which is related somewhat but not the same thing.

And mailing an unopened copy of something, so I have been told multiple times, while a neat idea - cuts no mustard in court.