Necessary to copyright?

[shpence]

Didn't find a clear thread on this so I decided to make one. Is it necessary to copyright nowadays? I don't really know what is even involved in truly owning the masters when not on a label. I'm curious what bands that self-publish their music do.

I know it's less difficult to prove (in a dispute) that you indeed were the creator of something and by using publishing services like distrokid, cdbaby, etc. that it is "technically" published but...I'm also not sure.

Anyone taken steps to copyright and regretted it? Anyone wish they would have?

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ50.pdf

 

[odibrom]

In my point of view, anything that gets to be seen or heard in the web is already published in that media platform like Youtube, Vimeo, facebook, Instagram, etc. Date of publishing should prevail as a form of proof of authorship/ownership, but I'm not inside the details of this question. As said, it's ONLY my OPINION.

 

[ArtDecade]

When you set it to fixed form, it is copywritten. If you expect to enforce it in court, you need it registered by the US Copyright Office.
https://www.copyright.gov/registration/

 

[IrvOnly]

big YES on needing to copyright. Its basically your only defense against someone stealing your song

 

[ArtDecade]

big YES on needing to copyright. Its basically your only defense against someone stealing your song

Not exactly true, but it can help.

 

[TonyFlyingSquirrel]

Always copywrite published content. At a minimum, even undeveloped riffs go into our Pro Tools sessions into the riff library so that they are datestamped at every version of development up to and including final publishing.

 

[shpence]

Not exactly true, but it can help.

Yup so this is why I wanted to start this thread.

 

[ArtDecade]

Yup so this is why I wanted to start this thread.

So I will repeat:

When you set it to fixed form, it is copywritten. If you expect to enforce it in court, you need it registered by the US Copyright Office.
https://www.copyright.gov/registration/

That's it. You write it down, you record it, you do whatever, it is copywritten automatically. If you plan on taking someone to court, you need to file it. If someone attempts to take you to court, you just need proof that you go there first. Simply having it filed does not mean that you were there first.

 

[shpence]

If you plan on taking someone to court, you need to file it. If someone attempts to take you to court, you just need proof that you go there first. Simply having it filed does not mean that you were there first.

Was hoping there was more to it than just being insurance but that makes sense. The scenario that concerns me is that if someone that didn't create it learns it is not copyrighted and then submits it themselves.

 

[ArtDecade]

Was hoping there was more to it than just being insurance but that makes sense. The scenario that concerns me is that if someone that didn't create it learns it is not copyrighted and then submits it themselves.

Just submitting it and getting it registered does not actually mean you own the copyright. If I took your demo, made an album, and registered it today BUT you can prove that you created the music three years ago (sheet music, recordings, time stamps, etc), you will win your claim over mine. Well, most likely. Savvy lawyers are still savvy lawyers. But there is no money in metal, so most of us can't afford savvy lawyers. If you make an album, register it. Otherwise, make sure you have proof of when you created things, but it is not necessary to register everything.

 

[odibrom]

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

 

[TonyFlyingSquirrel]

Do it right, don't shortcut yourself.

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-register.html

https://www.copyright.gov/forms/formsr.pdf

 

[DrakkarTyrannis]

Always do it. Worst case scenario you pay for it and never end up having to enforce it. It's worth it. ALWAYS protect your product.

 

[mongey]

So if you think someone rips you off are you going to sue them ?you gonna get. A lawyer and start the process to actually to take them to court ?

If you are a big artist then yeah maybe. But if you are recoding songs at home for a bit of fun I doubt it.

 

[DrakkarTyrannis]

I suppose it all depends on your situation. Normally a cease and desist letter is enough for them to knock it off. However if they are causing you problems and making you lose money, threaten them with a final letter, and then take it to court if you have to.

If you're not doing this as a business then you don't have to...but it all depends on how hard you want to defend your work

 

[mongey]

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

No. It iis captured in a format that it could
Be copyrighted. Same as any recording.

 

[mongey]

Copyright law is a total shit fight. And when you factor international interests into it .it’s worse.

mega corporations struggle to enforce it with a team of highly paid lawyers. And when they win it’s tied up In endless appeals.

it’s a waste of time. Which sucks to say as a musician. But t is.

 

[TonyFlyingSquirrel]

I would never say that copywriting material that I wrote, arranged, produced, recorded and published is a wast of time and money. It is my creation and therefore my own intellectual property, and deserves to be protected and defended. It may come down to being expensive to do so in a worst case scenario, but those are rare exceptions. I would say that it would be more costly to defend it if you did not do your due diligence as a proper musician/businessperson. Today’s musician has to be a good person of business, unlike the 70’s where others people handled all the business side. That’s how many musicians got screwed.

 

[mongey]

I would never say that copywriting material that I wrote, arranged, produced, recorded and published is a wast of time and money. It is my creation and therefore my own intellectual property, and deserves to be protected and defended. It may come down to being expensive to do so in a worst case scenario, but those are rare exceptions. I would say that it would be more costly to defend it if you did not do your due diligence as a proper musician/businessperson. Today’s musician has to be a good person of business, unlike the 70’s where others people handled all the business side. That’s how many musicians got screwed.

I don’t disagree with anything you wrote. But today’s world it is extremely difficult to enforce.

it ie even more perilous of you give your music away for free. If you have it on free streaming platforms what exactly are you suing for ? You already give it away.

if you are selling and making income from your music then you have a stronger starting point.

 

[ArtDecade]

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.