copywrite and liscensing

[mikegee]

Originally Posted by Whoopysnorp

Something else I read in Confessions of a Record Producer is that no matter what you do to copyright your stuff, there's not a whole lot you can do about it if you get infringed upon by some big-name artist. Since they can afford a bunch of high-priced lawyers and you're some schlub living in a studio apartment, they can either buy you off with a pittance or lawyer you into the ground. Historically, juries tend to decide in favor of the big star even in cases where it's pretty clear they are in the wrong.

interesting points... yet, big stars have lost infringement cases ie George Harrison but; even if that is the case, and you lose the suit, it is great publicity. publicity is sooo important, so even if you pursue it, and lose the case, you will get your band's name mentioned in the press, and perhaps, even some interest from labels. win or lose, it's worth the effort.

[smopo24]

yea, it's costly for both parties though; the lawyer fees (i imagine) are recoupable losses that the artists will owe. this is why some artists will not accept unsolicited songs; the whole "listen to this, and tell me what you think," can turn into "that song has 2 chords that sound similar to the ones in the song i gave them a few years back....i can make some money!"

[warmowski]

Copyright fights, as with most conflicts in the mainstream music industry, are almost universally won by the party with the deeper pockets.

That said, there are things anybody can and probably should do to protect rights in one's own music no matter who you are.

Rich Stim, guitarist of MX-80 and California attorney wrote a book for Nolo Press a few years ago called Music Law. I highly reccomend it.

It explains the various rights that are protected and how copyright law works. There are several surprising parts in it. For example, copyright protection under the law doesn't begin with the filling out of a paper form or other bureacratic instrument; the law says it exists the moment a completed work is put into a fixed form. From that very second.

Its an interesting story how you get from that legal reality to Jon Fogerty being sued for stealing riffs from...John Fogerty.

Stim's style is great, and is clearly written from the persepctive of an original band musician.

-r

[Whoopysnorp]

Originally Posted by warmowski

It explains the various rights that are protected and how copyright law works. There are several surprising parts in it. For example, copyright protection under the law doesn't begin with the filling out of a paper form or other bureacratic instrument; the law says it exists the moment a completed work is put into a fixed form. From that very second.

I remember when I was making my first homebrew album in high school and I found that out. I thought it was pretty cool to be able to write 'copyright 1999' on it and have it actually mean something legitimate. What advantages are there in actually filling out the forms and paying the Library of Congress fee and all that so as to have an official record of the date of creation? Thinking practically, there is pretty much no way anybody's ever going to infringe on the copyright of my weird and unpleasant music. On the other hand, I like the idea of some advanced civilization someday discovering the ruins of the Library of Congress and listening to the song I wrote about a booger.

[warmowski]

Originally Posted by Whoopysnorp

What advantages are there in actually filling out the forms and paying the Library of Congress fee and all that so as to have an official record of the date of creation?

I am not a lawyer, and I don't even play one on TV.

In an important sense, your copyright of your booger opus is not actually affected by the filling out of the Library of Congress forms. US law says your song is protected the second you put it into a fixed form, such as a sheet of manuscript or a sound recording.

Now the Library of Congress and their forms PA and SR are used not to create or protect your copyright but to document it. Ths difference is subtle but important. NOT filling out the forms still means that you still do have copyright interest in anything you write or record.

BUT if/when you or a partner/publisher claim someone has infringed on that copyright, your position in that conflict is improved if you have filled out and filed the PA or SR form. Why? More or less because the forms are Official Gubmint Documents that say yep, Booger Etude in D Minor, written by Whoopysnorp, this day of our lord 1999 etc.

In my opinion, you had better hope you are never in a position where you care about those forms, because if you do, it almost certainly means you are in some kind of fight over money, and that is a terrible place to be. If you are in that fight, though, having the forms is usually better than not having them because...

Claims of infringement that are decided in favor of the original writer can come with damage judgements - this is when a judge says "hey, infringer - pay this writer becuse you stole their song". If you, as writer, have gotten that far, then you really want the forms to have been filled out, because damage judgements are usually much stiffer / higher when the works PA or SR forms have been filed.

So that's why, under the "anything can happen" philosophy, as well as the "god, I am such a creative genius" philosophy I fill out my SR and PA forms. and pay the fee. It is the longest of longshots that it will ever matter, but I do it.

I am not a lawyer. Did I mention I'm not a lawyer?

I am not a lawyer.

-r

[GearJunkie]

wait, i'm confused. are you a lawyer?

[mikegee]

"i am not a lawyer" is the name of my band. please desist from using "i am not a lawyer" ps i am not a lawyer either, but my lawyer is a lawyer! (just kidding, of course!)

[mikegee]

all kidding aside, here is the link to the library of congress, copyright FAQ page:

http://www.copyright.gov/

ouch, the price went up to $45, but i am pretty sure you can still submit an entire album or collection of material for that one fee. maybe, um, hmmm, not so sure. im glad i could clarify that for you... hehe

[mikegee]

...and here's the answer regarding a collection of music (ie; album, cd etc):

Unpublished Collections

Under the following conditions, a work may be registered in unpublished form as a “collection,” with one application form and one fee:

* The elements of the collection are assembled in an orderly form;
* The combined elements bear a single title identifying the collection as a whole;
* The copyright claimant in all the elements and in the collection as a whole is the same; and
* All the elements are by the same author, or, if they are by different authors, at least one of the authors has contributed copyrightable authorship to each element.


So, i guess, you can take your entire collection/archive of songs you wrote and copyright them all at once, paying just the one time fee of $45, not bad...

[Whoopysnorp]

Originally Posted by mikegee

So, i guess, you can take your entire collection/archive of songs you wrote and copyright them all at once, paying just the one time fee of $45, not bad...

Going by those rules, though, wouldn't you have to give one unifying name to your whole collection of stuff?

I guess you could just call it "The Collected Works of Mikegee, Vol. 1" and be done with it.