Copywrite Question

[JohnN]

I am new to the home recording business, and I have a very basic question. If I have a singer who wants to sell a CD of him/her singing popular songs using Karaoke background, does that violate copywrite laws? I thought that since these are designed for anyone to sing Karaoke publicly, that simply recording it and then selling them doing karaoke would be fine. But I thought I better ask the question... Don't need a lawsuit or anything!

 

[Red Dog Studios]

have you searched about this over the internet? like at some government law sites. And it would prolly not be allright to record the karaoke because the company that put out the karaoke cd, got the rights to do that, but you do not have the rights to copy their cd and sell it. Just look up some of the laws before your friend trys to sell the cd.

 

[bennychico11]

no, it is not alright to do that
even though it is a Karoke track, those tracks only have performance rights for them. the song itself is still copyrighted, PLUS the person who transcribed it, played on it or published it owns the copyright to that arrangement of the tune.

 

[ssscientist]

PLUS the person who transcribed it, played on it or published it owns the copyright to that arrangement of the tune.

What?!? This is just wrong information!

U.S. copyright law doesn't work that way.

The composers of the song are entitled to a payment under U.S. copyright law, as is the entity that copyrighted the sound recording of the specific performance. But not the 'person who transcribed it' nor anyone who 'played on it'.

If the players were entitled to a piece of the copyright action I would be a rich man.

 

[The Green Hornet]

Yo Dr. Sylvania: SSS

"If I were a rich man...."

Hmmm. That sounds like a good title for a song, doesn't it?

Green Hornet

 

[bennychico11]

What?!? This is just wrong information!

U.S. copyright law doesn't work that way.

The composers of the song are entitled to a payment under U.S. copyright law, as is the entity that copyrighted the sound recording of the specific performance. But not the 'person who transcribed it' nor anyone who 'played on it'.

If the players were entitled to a piece of the copyright action I would be a rich man.

this is why i said OR in the middle of all those. it all depends on how the terms were agreed upon when creating the recording. who know what they did...maybe they Sting agreed to record his version for a Karoke song 'cause he grew up singing Karoke himself and loves it.....OR was the key word there. And in this example, the OR had to do with the publishing company who has rights to that performance. Who knows what agreement was settled upon before the actual recording. Saying that the musicians don't have rights to it though is stupid...just look at any band out there who makes CDs of their stuff...they still have rights to their music. If you made a CD and someone else was selling millions of copies of it, you can bet your ass you should get some of that dough.

When you simply just BUY a CD you don't have to worry about what goes on behind the copyright of it all...ie. where is your money going towards, and who gets it. BUT as soon as you start trying to do things with that CD the rules change completely and you have to find out where all the money goes towards and who you have to pay more to.