Necessary to copyright?

[TonyFlyingSquirrel]

Considering the countless expense that musicians go to to enjoy our craft, the cost of copywriting our material seems inconsequential in comparison. We spend tens of thousands of dollars on gear and maintenance, and are having a hard time parting with a few filing fees? Really?

 

[ArtDecade]

Considering the countless expense that musicians go to to enjoy our craft, the cost of copywriting our material seems inconsequential in comparison. We spend tens of thousands of dollars on gear and maintenance, and are having a hard time parting with a few filing fees? Really?

You own the copyright when you put it down. If you are going to litigate, you need to file as that is part of the process. You don't need to register unless you are going to take someone to court. Copyright registration is not copyright proof. That is only determined in court.

 

[bostjan]

Has anyone here had to defend a copyright? Most people on here aren't making enough money from their music to even bother with the lawyer fees - and that includes the guys in pro bands that make music their main source of income. The thing about copyright is that you own it the second you put it down. If you are releasing an album or something, it doesn't hurt to register it because its not terribly expensive if you the registering in groups - although you will be spending a small fortune doing it a little at a time. That said, this all comes down to the more powerful lawyer. They always win the case. If Slayer steals your riffs, you aren't going to win in court. Hell, Katy Perry lost of a copyright lawsuit because they brought it in front a jury that was bamboozled by the "expert" witness. On top of that, Katy should have won. Copyright is a mess. It is probably easier to just roll with the punches and worry about it more when you are a superstar.

Yes. There is a lot of music out there and there are a lot of ways it can go from one person to another to a format, such as a television programme theme song or whatever. If, say, your favourite network airs a show that has a theme song that sounds a ridiculous amount like something you made, what do you do? Well, maybe you'd think "lawyer up," but haha good luck finding a lawyer that would even touch that case with a twenty foot pole. So you write your own letter to *insert huge network conglomerate here* or whatever and then you never hear anything, because they know that no lawyer will touch you with a thirty foot pole, and not responding to you costs them nothing.

Another scenario is that you are approached by an indie movie producer. He wants to use a song of yours for a movie. As an added bonus, let's say this movie producer also wants you to write music specifically for the movie. It sounds like a fun gig, so you agree to terms over a handshake and even put it in writing via email and get email confirmation on terms. You write and record original music for the films, the producer says he wants something totally different, gives you extremely vague information to go on, you try your best to make him happy and redo everything, send him more music... but he changes his mind and wants something else instead, so you do your best and send him a third set of music, and then you hear nothing back. You ask him again a couple weeks later and hear nothing. You figure the guy ran out of money or whatever, forget about it, and then, one day, you are scrolling through indie titles on your favourite streaming service and there's the movie. You open it up and see that a fairly major movie publisher now owns the rights, and as soon as their logo is off the screen, you hear your own music in the opening scene ... and then throughout the entire movie, including the song you copyrighted during the end credits. You pull up your old emails and believe you are entitled to some credit or money or something. Now you have a super-clear case, right. I mean, you have, in writing, the agreement. You have the one song copyrighted. You have the name of the producer, who was the person with whom all contact was made and recorded via email. It should be a slam dunk for whichever lawyer. Furthermore, you find out that the film actually did extremely well for a zero-budget indie film. You know a friend who has a friend who's a lawyer who specializes in copyright. You don't think it could be any more cut and dried, do you? - But your friend-of-a-friend won't touch the case with a forty foot pole because *insert big movie publisher here* owns the rights to the film, not little piddly producer man. You are currently a college student with a few thousand in savings, and, well, you just wasted your time getting all excited thinking that your work would ever make you a penny, because the people like you who play by the rules never win.

So yeah, I still copyright stuff because it's pretty cheap and pretty much hassle-free. But I also think it's a waste of money. If anyone ever steals something from you, all they have to do is hide behind a lawyer who is bigger than your lawyer and you're fucked. At least in the USA. Because, in the above scenarios, what do you hope to gain? Say a movie made millions, but you openly agreed to do all of the work for a few hundred bucks. Best case, someone throws you half of what was originally promised and then you have to pay a lawyer a couple grand for his time. In the other case, all you have is that your song sounds incredibly similar to the other song. If they had stole it outright, and used it for a show that lasted two years, you should get money, but you won't. Again, best case, the network thinks you might have something, but they know they are cancelling the show soon anyway, so you pay your lawyer a bunch of fees and the network says that they lost money on the show and they can't pay anything. Maybe the court sees through their bullshit, but you aren't going to get enough to cover your attorney.

 

[cip 123]

If you hold an original time stamped recording you are the copyright holder.

So say I record my bands song at rehearsal on my iphone, that is now technically my copyright as I can prove it was written at that time by my group.

Once it's in a format that proves it's a thing it's yours.

Now using services like distrokid is a great way to protect yourself, it gives you official spotify pages and pages on apple music etc. Making it harder for someone to steal your music as their own. You will never be 100% protected unless you're a massive artist though.

... so one can assume that once a song is posted on youtube it becomes automatically copyrighted?

No that would be published, in a self publishing form no less. The actual copyright is simply the date stamped file you have (the one you would then publish to youtube). Even at this point nothing stops someone stealing your song from youtube, but if you did somehow find out you could then enforce your copyright if you desired.

 

[Dayn]

It's not the 'stealing' you should worry about. It's the people you work with in the industry. Copyright can apply in so many different forms in relation to music, and you can retain, licence, and assign those rights individually.

I know the US has the whole registration thing, but copyright applies to an original work as soon as it's reduced to a material form. Record a song: copyright in that recording. Reduce it to tablature: copyright in that tablature. What rights do you monetise, and how will they do that? Will you retain your rights and only licence them, or did you sell those rights and oops you don't own your music anymore?

Someone copying you is the least of your worries - it's the people at your front door that want to work with you where you need to give serious thought as to how you will monetise your intellectual property and how you will let others utilise it. Without ownership of your intellectual property, you're just a performer playing someone else's music and they hold your strings.

 

[odibrom]

Well, I do have my files backed up...

 

[ArtDecade]

Copyright made sense until Disney got involved. Now, it only serves the wealthy - for the most part. Such is life...

 

[SamSam]

This is a all a very basic way of looking at the way copywriters work.

If a single person writes all the music and lyrics it might work that way.

But if the singer wrote the lyrics for you music and his written notes are the "original reproduction" then your circumstances are already a lot more complicated.

A guitar pro file or sheet music would also be considered original material for copywrite ownership.

 

[Jeries]

I was trying to find the right answer to this and this happened to be right there. I did not see anyone mention the poor man’s copyright? Is that an actual technique you can use as the basis for a copyright

I was told you can mail yourself either the notation, tabs, or a CD/USB with the audio recorded on it, certified and registered mail - as long as it remains unopened, the USPS time stamp receipt can serve as proof of the original work.

Now, these days, maybe it wont hold up, if the law changed from digital media making everything so different, but as far as that goes, wouldn’t the original file show the creation date?

I don’t mean to derail at all, but does a WAV or MP3 always show the original creation date on every/any computer?

 

[ArtDecade]

I was trying to find the right answer to this and this happened to be right there. I did not see anyone mention the poor man’s copyright? Is that an actual technique you can use as the basis for a copyright

I was told you can mail yourself either the notation, tabs, or a CD/USB with the audio recorded on it, certified and registered mail - as long as it remains unopened, the USPS time stamp receipt can serve as proof of the original work.

Now, these days, maybe it wont hold up, if the law changed from digital media making everything so different, but as far as that goes, wouldn’t the original file show the creation date?

I don’t mean to derail at all, but does a WAV or MP3 always show the original creation date on every/any computer?

There is no (and never has been) a provision for the Poor Man's Copyright in living Copyright Law.

 

[SamSam]

Why anyone would mail something to themselves when they could just sign the tablature and have a witness counter sign it (if you even want to be that pedantic)

 

[bostjan]

Why anyone would mail something to themselves when they could just sign the tablature and have a witness counter sign it (if you even want to be that pedantic)

Because the postmark on the stamp is more difficult to fake than a buddy's signature, unless you have a notary present, then it's expensive.

 

[Jeries]

Actually, combine them - great idea = Notarize the work and then sent it registered and certified to both yourself and the notary witness.....that can most certainly hold up on some level.

I had to fight for my band’s own name because someone else used it a decade after I did, but my trademark wasn’t kept up...so I hope my “original” forms and work will hold up

I think copyrights and patents are a bit different than trademarks though...? IDK why I mentioned it, but it seemed almost relevant as far as proving/being able to prove originality and dates...

But thanks for the tip

 

[ArtDecade]

I had to fight for my band’s own name because someone else used it a decade after I did, but my trademark wasn’t kept up...so I hope my “original” forms and work will hold up

Trademarks and copyrights are not the same thing. If you never registered a trademark, you have no claim on it.

 

[dspellman]

No matter what you do involving copyright, the ultimate last resort is litigation.
In order for you to *keep* a copyright, you must defend it, whether that means filing cease and desist letters or taking a suit all the way to court. Unfortunately, Deep Pockets is usually the winner here, though having all of your ducks in a row gives you a good chance of getting a lawyer to take on your case on contingency.

 

[ZXIIIT]

Varg (Burzum) uploaded some unreleased material on YouTube, someone downloaded it and claimed it as their own, giving Varg a copyright claim on his own music.

 

[bostjan]

Varg (Burzum) uploaded some unreleased material on YouTube, someone downloaded it and claimed it as their own, giving Varg a copyright claim on his own music.

Legally, you can never copyright someone else's work, even if they didn't claim it, but we all know how this works with youtube.

I don't know if I'd want to cross Varg, though, myself.

 

[op1e]

If I may tag on, in the same vein... What's the deal with releasing reamps with stems from KSE and the like? I was gonna share one here, I put it up for minute on Youtube before I deleted it cause the images weren't in the video and I saw "Copyright claim".