Copyrite

  • Thread starter Thread starter barrt
  • Start date Start date
Actually, SR is for sound recording and should be used when an album is released as it covers the whole package, not individual songs. SR listings can not, and will not indicate each song's writer and publishing. You will find that most artists will do the SR filing when it is a commercial release, but you will also see a PA filing for each individual song (Or maybe one PA covering all songs if the writer(s) and publisher(s) do not change from song to song).

BUT what Zoetrope said is correct - if you make those stipulations and notes on the form, an SR form will work and can do that - but that is not it's original purpose. I would say go the SR route if you intend to protect the whole enchilada (making those above notes that Zoetrope suggested) and go the PA collection route if you are just trying to protect the songs.
 
Last edited:
Okay, here is an example. First listing is for Madonna's album Like a Prayer


SR-106-xxx
TITL: Like a prayer / [performed by] aMadonna.
IMPR: Sire 9 25844-2, c1989.
PHYS: 1 sound disc: 33 1/3 RPM; 12
NOTE: Photography: Herb Ritts.
CLNA: (c) (p) acSire Records Company
DCRE: 1989 DPUB: 21Mar89 DREG: 27Sep89
APAU: sound recording, photos.: Sire Records Company, employer for hire.
PREV: Track 1 prev. reg. 1989, SRu 148-149.
LINM: NM: tracks 2 thru 11 sound recording & photos.
COTI: Like a prayer.
Express yourself.
Love song.
Till death do us part.
Promise to try.
Cherish.
Dear Jessie.
Oh, Father.
Keep it together.
Spanish eyes.
Act of contrition


Now look at the CLNA line, that is the copyright claimant. Here it is listed as the record label. Do they hold copyright on the songs? Heck no. They hold copyright on the ALBUM in it's released form, the presentation of the album, if you will.

Now look below at the first two songs on the album. These are the individual PA listings. On these, the Claimant line entry is now the publishers. Notice how the writing and publishing credits change?


PA-415-xxx
TITL: Like a prayer / [by Madonna and Patrick Leonard]
NOTE: Performed by aMadonna.
INAN: Like a prayer. mSire 1-25844, c1989. 1 sound disc : 33 1/3 rpm ; 12
in. side 1, band 1
CLNA: Johnny Yuma Music, Webo Girl Publishing, Inc.
DCRE: 1989 DPUB: 21Mar89 DREG: 17Mar89
INND: notice on lyrics: 1988
APAU: words & music: aPatrick Leonard & aMadonna Ciccone




PA-429-xxx
TITL: Express yourself / by Madonna & Stephen Bray.
NOTE: Performed by Madonna.
INAN: Like a prayer. mSire 1-25844, c1989. 1 sound disc : 33 1/3 rpm ;
12 in. side 1, band 2
CLNA: W B Music Corporation, Bleu Disque Music Company, Inc., Webo Girl
Publishing, Inc., & Black Lion Music
DCRE: 1989 DPUB: 21Mar89 DREG: 29Jun89
APAU: words & music: Madonna Ciccone & Stephen Bray.


So if all the songs on the album were written by the same people, with the same publishing, it could've been done as a collection very easily (There are some cases where the writing and publishing does change on a collection PA, but it is chock full of notes like: Words & music on songs 1,2, & 15... etc. and other comments like the ones Zoetrope mentioned and a lot of other wording has to be thrown in - too much trouble for the big whigs who don't care that it costs $30 a pop) but even if all writing and publishing were the same, I am sure Madonna's people would still do each song individually - more concise and clear documentation if it is done this way.

So you can see why LOC has the two forms. They weren't really made with you & me in mind - they were for artists doing this for a living. Of course, we can protect our work just like the big boys and girls - and that is why all these options are available - collections, making notes indicating which songs are written by whom and so on. They are a kind of loophole.
 
Last edited:
Here is the quote from the Circular 50 of the Copyright office:
"When a group of unpublished works is registered as a collection, only the collection title will appear in the catalogs and indexes of the Copyright Office. Individual titles will appear in Copyright Office records only if each work is registered separately or if an application for supplementary registration is submitted to specify the individual titles in a collection. An application for supplementary registration may not be submitted until a certificate of registration has been issued for the collection. "

Here is my first question: unlike database index, will the printed
certificate list all titles of the collection?

Unfortunately Circular 8 "Supplementary Copyright Registration" does clearly say how to use this form for having all titles in the collection indexed. One thing is clear - supplementary registration costs $65.

And secondly, imagine that only the title of collection is indexed and findable in the Copyright office database, like Buffalo Bob said. Is it really that bad? Why can't you market individual titles of the collection like "Spank Your Monkey, part of Who's Your Monkey collection"?

One other thing is not clear: how copyright database is related to BMI or ASCAP databases? Do all these databases chare the same index, or are they done totally separate?
 
Just to answer that last question webstop, the ASCAP, BMI & LOC databases are completely separate. So is the Harry Fox database. Unfortunately, they sometimes have conflicting information - that probably has more to do with when & why each database updates info.

The only info you see on the internet that might come from the same database regarding music, is album info (Label, track listing, etc.) from sites like tower.com, cdnow.com, allmusic.com, etc.
 
I have been randomly browsing through the copyright database and came across the following entry:

Number: TXu-520-406
Title: The synthesized gospel of Jesus Christ : Son of God, Savior-Healer-Baptizer, King of Kings, Lord of Lords / aMatthew, aMark, aLuke and aJohn.
Note: Text.
Claimant: John V. Bellamy, Jr. and Candace Rohde Bellamy
Created: 1992
Registered: 11May92
Author on ¿ Application: acJohn Vaughn Bellamy , , 1941-; editor: acCandace Ruth Rohde Bellamy , 1952-.
Previous Related Version: Prev. reg. 1991, TXu 464-929.
Claim Limit: NEW MATTER: additions and revisions.

You would note how the title lists the name of compilation AND individual titles.

Another one:
Number: SR-16-272
Title: Y'all come] : Bluegrass humor with Jim & Jesse & The Virginia Boys / [performed by] aJim & Jesse & The aVirginia Boys.
Imprint: C S P P 15401, c1980.
Description: 1 sound disc : 33 1/3 rpm, stereo. ; 12 in.
Claimant: (c) (p) acC B S, Inc.
Created: 1980
Published: 1Mar80
Registered: 26Mar80
Author on ¿ Application: sounds, compilation, pictorial & textual matter : C B S, Inc., employer for hire.
Previous Related Version: Preexisting material: various recordings by Jim & Jesse & The Virginia Boys.
Claim Limit: NEW MATTER: "compilation, pictorial & textual matter."
Contents: One slew foot. Stay a little longer (The Hoe down fiddle song) Better times a-coming. Sleepy-eyes John. Salty dog blues. Blue grass banjo. Company's coming. Rabbit in the log. Alabam'. Good bunch of biscuits. Tell her lies and feed her candy. Y'all come.
Special Codes: 7/U

This one lists separate titles on the Content line.

How did the do that? Is it done by filling the application in certain way, or is it through supplementary registration (see my post above)?

LI Slim, where are you? Can we get another $500 advise for free, please?
 
The first example is a TX register - That is for text. Same rules may not apply, I don't know.
Since we are mainly concerned with PA & SR, we shouldn't look at TX listings as an example. As for the SR example, look at the claim limit. That exludes the songs themselves. CBS has copyrighted the album, in it's fixed form, nothing else. The fact that the titles are listed does not mean each song is covered by that SR copyright. It is explained that way in the Madonna example given above as well.
 
all this jargen is making me dizzy.... but i have a question none the less... an old band of mine recorded a cd ourselves. the band was called lift, the album was called neurotic and tortured, this was 3 years ago.... we copyrighted it as a collection under each members name... however in all reality i wrote 7 of the 10 songs myself... now that the band has been broken up for over a year...im curious if i were wanting to use one or several of those songs that i had written in the future would i have to get permission from the rest of the band?....
 
head spinning

I think some clarification is in order (not that I'm capable of providing it). We need to distinguish two concepts here:
1. Protecting your songs with a copyright, either individually or as a collection
2. Having the names of individual songs part of a searchable database at the copyright office, or at ASCAP/BMI, or at Harry Fox, or somewhere else.

Let's focus on number 1. It has been implied above that if you use form SR to register a collection of songs that this somehow fails to protect the individual songs with copyright protection. I believe this to be totally false. If you protect the collection of songs you are protecting each and every song, just as if you had registered each song by itself. A song is either copyrighted or not, there's no middle ground here. As soon as the song is fixed in a tangible medium of expression, say a CD or MP3 or CD-rom, it is copyrighted. As soon as it is registered using either PA or SR, either alone or as part of a collection, you the copyright holder are entitled to additional statutory protections under the copyright act.

Now, if you want each song name to be searchable or part of the copyright office database, that's a whole nother ball of wax, but does not have any bearing on the protections available to you for that song.

I'm 95% certain that the above is accurate. If anyone sees errors, please point them out.
 
Zoetrope,

I am having trouble finding examples that have the notes that you and I mentioned above. It is clear that the indended use of the SR form is for record companies to protect the finished product, artwork, the fact that songs appear in a certain order, etc. The troubling thing, and the reason I would urge people to just go ahead and use the PA form for collections, is this: Claimants on SR's are usually record companies. Now, do you think that these record companies own the songs? Only if the artist is supremely naive and gave them away (in which case the record company would promptly file PA forms with their name on it!)

Let's look at one more example:

SR-35-xxx
TITL: Diver down / [performed by] aVanHalen.
IMPR: W B Records BSK 3677, c1982.
PHYS: 1 sound disc : 33 1/3 rpm ; 12 in.
CLNA: acWarner Brothers Records, Inc.
DCRE: 1982 DPUB: 19Apr82 DREG: 18May82
APAU: sound recording: Warner Brothers Records, Inc., employer for hire.
PREV: Preexisting material: side 1, band 6; side 2, band 6.
LINM: NM: side 1, bands 1-5; side 2, bands 1-5.
COTI: Where have all the good times gone]
Hang 'em high.
Cathedral.
Secrets.
Intruder.
(Oh) pretty woman.Pretty woman
Dancing in the streets.
Little guitars (intro)
Little guitars.
Big Bad Bill (is Sweet William now)
The Full bug.
Happy trails.


My question is this: Does Van Halen have any ownership of (Oh) Pretty Woman or Happy Trails or Dancing in the Streets ? Does this SR form say anything as to who the copyright owner is for those songs?
This is simply the record company saying "We put this album out, with these songs on it, in this order, with this artwork, by this band, on this date. Don't try and claim you did it first!"

I don't honestly know how the courts would take into condideration an SR listing in an infringement case. I can tell you that from personal experience, working with a copyright attorney in the field of research and clearance, SR listings don't mean much. They don't contain the pertinent information. There are exceptions, but not many.

My own view is this: You can't go wrong using form PA to copyright single songs or collections of songs. You can go wrong, if proper notes are not made with legalese, using a form SR to actually copyright the songs. So why not just use what works?
 
Instead of looking at registered works and going backwards from there, why not begin at the source. The copyright office. Look at this --> http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ56.html#when where we learn the following:
--------------------------
When to Use Form SR
Use Form SR for registration of published or unpublished sound recordings, that is, for registration of the particular sounds or recorded performance.

Form SR must also be used if you wish to make one registration for both the sound recording and the underlying work (the musical composition, dramatic, or literary work). You may make a single registration only if the copyright claimant is the same for both the sound recording and the underlying work. In this case, the authorship statement in Space 2 should specify that the claim covers both works.

Form SR is also the appropriate form for registration of a multimedia kit that combines two or more kinds of authorship including a sound recording (such as a kit containing a book and an audiocassette).

When to Use Form PA
For registration purposes, musical compositions and dramatic works that are recorded on disks or cassettes are works of the performing arts and should be registered on Form PA or Short Form PA. Therefore, if you wish to register only the underlying work that is a musical composition or dramatic work, use Form PA even though you may send a disk or cassette. For information on Short Form PA, request SL-7, "New Short Forms Now Available."
------------------------------
In other words, if you performed it and wrote it, SR will cover both the underlying song (writing) and the performance of the song (playing). Also read the examples at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ56.html#unpublished

My confidence has now risen to 98% and there is no stopping me.
:D
 
I agree with zoetrope here. The registration is designed to cover both, recording and music, as long as proper language is included in the "Nature of Ownership" box.
The reason why you, Brad, may have trouble finding an example of such registration is probably because it is not often that the same person composes AND records. Besides, with established division of roles in the industry it probably never happens that way in middle and high ranks.
Although I don't consider my recordings to be of great potential commercial value I still plan to file PA for a simple reason: if I can cover more for the same money, why not do that?
 
Right, like I have said several times, go ahead and use the SR form if you make proper notes in the proper places. I never disputed that. The examples I gave are the most common uses of the SR form, not the exception to the rule. I still contend that the original use of the SR form is for record companies laying claim to the sound recording, not the ownership of the actual songs, and the implementation of options re: ownership of songs on an SR came about because a lot of people were using the wrong form. I have no facts to back myself up on this, but I ask the question why two different forms in the first place?

So I say, go crazy, use all the SR forms you want (with the right notation) or just use a PA form. Just trying to save some confusion rather than add to it (as I apparently have :rolleyes: )
 
Did I write "PA" in my previous post?
I can't edit it anymore, so this is the correction: of course I will use SR form!
There is also an interesting difference I noticed between PA and SR forms.
On the PA form there is the line, that says "Previous or alternative titles".
On the SR form similar line says: "Previous, alternative or content titles (circe one)". I like that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top