I've just done this song where the hook borrows from the melody of the verse on someone's song. The words are entirely different, so is the melody of my song's verses. The similarity is that I have used the melody from that artiste's verse as my hook. Do I need copyright clearance for this, if so, anyone know how I go about it please?
Do I need copyrights for this
- Thread starter Shack
- Start date
distortedrumble
all up in yo grill!
was the hook a prominent focus of the song you took it from? is it the same chords?....the pattern is the same but are the chords the same...what about the beat? and the tempo? if yes to all of those....yeah get clearance from the owner of the other song first.... now you can go up or down a chord set and it changes. also make sure you dont have the same beat/tempo and you should be ok.....just make sure you change a note or something in the hook so it doesnt copy the other song note for note. and even then you could be sued if its still too close.
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
You have just asked a big question with a big answer. If you have any plans to sell a recording of this, yes, you need permission. First, you need to find out if the song is registered for mechanical royalties, usually with BMI or ASCAP.
Then you have 3 ways you can go-
1. Ignore it all, and hope you don't make any real money. The potential liability would be $500,000 for each album it's on (not each copy). Most likely, if you don't have deep pockets, nobody will ever come after you. You'll just be a petty, song stealing, bottom feeding thief.
2. Contact the suits (legal staff or executive producer) at whatever label (most likely) who have the copyrights and beg them to let you do an adaptation of the song for free or cheap. Explain that you are nobody, and are just trying to do the right thing. They might be kind, but whatever deal you work out, if any, it doesn't count for diddly unless you have it in writing. If they are in a good mood, they might just let you do it. Or- they can try to shake you down for any amount of money they think they can wring out of you, and can prevent you from doing the song. or actually go after you for that $500,000 or a portion of it,if you release it, if they are bored, and their lawyers have nothing better to do.
Please note- your problem is this- You aren't recording their song, that would be much easier. You are trying to publish a derivative work, that is, an adaptation of their artistic property. If you were just covering the song, you would contact the Harry Fox Agency, the lawyers who process mechanical royalties for ASCAP and BMI. They are called mechanical royalties, because you don't need their permission, you just have to pay. It changes from year to year, but last I knew it was $.08 per copy, with a minimum license for 500 copies. That's $40.00 and all the paperwork pain in the ass you can stand, if the arrogant suits will even talk to you. They will if you are persistent. In the rare case that the song is not registered to ASCAP or BMI, you can just pay the mechanicals to whoever owns the copyright.
The problem is that derivative works or adaptations are not subject to mechanical license. You *have* to have the written permission of the copyright holder to do a derivative work.
3. Rewrite the damn song, until it does not rise to the level of a copyright infringement. Just do it.
I can tell you all of this because my album, "Reunion", which I produced, has one song that could be argued, I believe in error, to be derivative, and one cover, as well as some co-written pieces. Always remember- titles and "short phrases" are not copyrightable. It's up to a jury to decide if they can tell your work is derived. Thank God for my wife, the executive producer of this puppy, who figured a lot of this out. And we did pay the mechanicals on Ira Gershwin's "Summertime", and duly copyrighted the whole mess. What a monumental pain in the ass. But it was a learning experience. Now we know how to handle it going forward, as we begin to release other people's stuff on our label. Yay.-Richie
Then you have 3 ways you can go-
1. Ignore it all, and hope you don't make any real money. The potential liability would be $500,000 for each album it's on (not each copy). Most likely, if you don't have deep pockets, nobody will ever come after you. You'll just be a petty, song stealing, bottom feeding thief.
2. Contact the suits (legal staff or executive producer) at whatever label (most likely) who have the copyrights and beg them to let you do an adaptation of the song for free or cheap. Explain that you are nobody, and are just trying to do the right thing. They might be kind, but whatever deal you work out, if any, it doesn't count for diddly unless you have it in writing. If they are in a good mood, they might just let you do it. Or- they can try to shake you down for any amount of money they think they can wring out of you, and can prevent you from doing the song. or actually go after you for that $500,000 or a portion of it,if you release it, if they are bored, and their lawyers have nothing better to do.
Please note- your problem is this- You aren't recording their song, that would be much easier. You are trying to publish a derivative work, that is, an adaptation of their artistic property. If you were just covering the song, you would contact the Harry Fox Agency, the lawyers who process mechanical royalties for ASCAP and BMI. They are called mechanical royalties, because you don't need their permission, you just have to pay. It changes from year to year, but last I knew it was $.08 per copy, with a minimum license for 500 copies. That's $40.00 and all the paperwork pain in the ass you can stand, if the arrogant suits will even talk to you. They will if you are persistent. In the rare case that the song is not registered to ASCAP or BMI, you can just pay the mechanicals to whoever owns the copyright.
The problem is that derivative works or adaptations are not subject to mechanical license. You *have* to have the written permission of the copyright holder to do a derivative work.
3. Rewrite the damn song, until it does not rise to the level of a copyright infringement. Just do it.
I can tell you all of this because my album, "Reunion", which I produced, has one song that could be argued, I believe in error, to be derivative, and one cover, as well as some co-written pieces. Always remember- titles and "short phrases" are not copyrightable. It's up to a jury to decide if they can tell your work is derived. Thank God for my wife, the executive producer of this puppy, who figured a lot of this out. And we did pay the mechanicals on Ira Gershwin's "Summertime", and duly copyrighted the whole mess. What a monumental pain in the ass. But it was a learning experience. Now we know how to handle it going forward, as we begin to release other people's stuff on our label. Yay.-Richie
Jeez, such a minefield. Thanks for the responses guys, you all generally confirmed my worst fears. I think I will just change the melody of the hook, not really worth getting done, plus I can't afford to pay anyone anything anyhow. It's for an album on which I already have 12 original tracks, certainly not worth getting into trouble for one hook. Thanks again.
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
You're welcome. Right answer. This is one where it was worth it to pay a lawyer specializing in entertainment law.-Richie
Shack said:
That's the best approach. But let's face it, there's a hardly a song in the charts, in fatc there's NO song in the charts that doesn't include some part of a previously released song, if you want to analyse things closely enough.
Thing is, was the borrowed hook OBVIOUSLY taken from the original song or not. Could friends immediately spot the origins when hearing it or did you have to point it out to them? If it was sufficiently well disguised you'd probably get away with it, the professionals do all the time! But then they have money and lawyers to back them up :-(
junplugged
Taking the slow road
if you must steal, then at least steal from the public domain.
"In 1964 they were signed by the Publishing firm Genius, Inc., which teamed them with the songwriting duo Sandy Linzer and Denny Randell.... The writers took a classical finger exercise from Bach and put a Motown bassline to it and "A Lover's Concerto" was born.
September 1965: "A Lover's Concerto" on the Dynavoice label went #4 R&B, crossed over to pop charts #2, and also became a #5 hit in England. In 1965 the song sold over a million copies....." -
http://www.history-of-rock.com/toys.htm --
"In 1964 they were signed by the Publishing firm Genius, Inc., which teamed them with the songwriting duo Sandy Linzer and Denny Randell.... The writers took a classical finger exercise from Bach and put a Motown bassline to it and "A Lover's Concerto" was born.
September 1965: "A Lover's Concerto" on the Dynavoice label went #4 R&B, crossed over to pop charts #2, and also became a #5 hit in England. In 1965 the song sold over a million copies....." -
http://www.history-of-rock.com/toys.htm --
don't worry,
you can't copyright arrangements of a song,
or copyright ideas or suggestions,
now u can say that the other song gave u inspiration,
maybe it even are the same notes doesn't matter,
thank god you changed the lyrics, eventhough i'm not sure but i think you can't even copyright ONE sentence....
or u gotto be able to prove that its extremely special and that YOU kinda invented it
so stealing melodies is easy, but keep it just a few notes,
don't start copying an entire song...cause then the situtation might be different....
"fair use" ...maybe we can use that term here too,
u can sometimes get away with copying a cd or using a tiny sampling if u don't release the cd or keep everything amateuristic...
so as long as u don't exagerrate u can get away with alot of things...
there's always a backdoor... but most of the time u need a loyer to open that door for u
my 2 cents
you can't copyright arrangements of a song,
or copyright ideas or suggestions,
now u can say that the other song gave u inspiration,
maybe it even are the same notes doesn't matter,
thank god you changed the lyrics, eventhough i'm not sure but i think you can't even copyright ONE sentence....
or u gotto be able to prove that its extremely special and that YOU kinda invented it
so stealing melodies is easy, but keep it just a few notes,
don't start copying an entire song...cause then the situtation might be different....
"fair use" ...maybe we can use that term here too,
u can sometimes get away with copying a cd or using a tiny sampling if u don't release the cd or keep everything amateuristic...
so as long as u don't exagerrate u can get away with alot of things...
there's always a backdoor... but most of the time u need a loyer to open that door for u
my 2 cents
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Earworm, your knowledge of US law is not that good. You absolutely *can* copyright an arrangement, and you can be found guilty of plagiarism for using a copyrighted arrangement even when the piece itself is in the public domain, and you can be forced to pay the arranger or his estate mechanical royalties. Of course, I have no idea what the laws are in Belgium. Don't you love lawyers? -Richie
ok,
additional question;
an arrangement, is that only "the structure of the song"
or even Chords, notes, melodies?
cause i do believe that u can't steal a melodie,
but just an arrangement?
how can u proove that a break-chorus-verse-special fill in,
blabla, is ONLY yours....
as far as i know you can kinda copy a structure and get away with it,
but i bet, ,,, from the moment some band pays for a lawyer to sue you...
you're doomed
of course, i'm not a lawyer or anything, i can only Guess and repeat what i read in books....
do we have lawyers here?
additional question;
an arrangement, is that only "the structure of the song"
or even Chords, notes, melodies?
cause i do believe that u can't steal a melodie,
but just an arrangement?
how can u proove that a break-chorus-verse-special fill in,
blabla, is ONLY yours....
as far as i know you can kinda copy a structure and get away with it,
but i bet, ,,, from the moment some band pays for a lawyer to sue you...
you're doomed
of course, i'm not a lawyer or anything, i can only Guess and repeat what i read in books....
do we have lawyers here?
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
The answer is- whether you stole *anything* that is protected by copyright will be determined by a judge or a jury, if a charge is made. A judge will decide if the charge has enough meritto proceed to a trial, and then, depending on what the defendant agrees to, either a judge or jury will review all related material and testimony, and decide if you stole something. The laws themselves are fairly vague. If it sounds to them like you stole something, then you did.-Richie
"The laws themselves are fairly vague. If it sounds to them like you stole something, then you did.-Richie"
thats nice said, i guess thats exactly how it goesn
honestly, i just avoid using samples or copying anything when i record a band...its hard to tell a hiphopband: 'men, you might get in trouble with this sample... '
thats nice said, i guess thats exactly how it goesn
honestly, i just avoid using samples or copying anything when i record a band...its hard to tell a hiphopband: 'men, you might get in trouble with this sample... '
There's copyright on a song and also copyright on a recording.
If you sample part of a recording without permission and put it out you are in breach of the copyright on the recording, that's plain and simple.
There's no copyright on song structures, verse, chorus, bridge, blah.
Melodies, tunes and words are copyright. That could even extend to guitar riffs i guess, for example if you took the backing track to Hendrix's 'Purple Haze' and did a rap over it without permission then you'd be in breach of copyright, on bot the written song and the recording (assuming you ripped the backing from the original recording that is).
A chord progression is not copyrightable. So you could take the chords from, Purple Haze, recrod a new arrangemnt of instruments and put over a new melody and get away with it, providing it sounded different, only the original chord structure.
Hope that clarifies things a bit.
The important one for you is that if you sample any recording to which someone else has the copyright, and if it's out on a label it is copyright, then you MUST get permission.
If you sample part of a recording without permission and put it out you are in breach of the copyright on the recording, that's plain and simple.
There's no copyright on song structures, verse, chorus, bridge, blah.
Melodies, tunes and words are copyright. That could even extend to guitar riffs i guess, for example if you took the backing track to Hendrix's 'Purple Haze' and did a rap over it without permission then you'd be in breach of copyright, on bot the written song and the recording (assuming you ripped the backing from the original recording that is).
A chord progression is not copyrightable. So you could take the chords from, Purple Haze, recrod a new arrangemnt of instruments and put over a new melody and get away with it, providing it sounded different, only the original chord structure.
Hope that clarifies things a bit.
The important one for you is that if you sample any recording to which someone else has the copyright, and if it's out on a label it is copyright, then you MUST get permission.
true-eurt
Maneater
As far as just the words go....I believe you can only copyright IF they are published AS a work of poetry....compiled by you only(and you have to pay big bucks for type setting...or in a compilation of many poets work(which the publisher pays for..and you retain the rights)...But not as a lryic alone...After the first type-setting, the other copies are fairly affordable...I had also been told to seal original words..hand-written, in an envelope...special delivery...to yourself...and signature needed...and to put in safety deposit box...UNBROKEN SEAL..INCLUDING the one from post office..
I have done this....AND made sure postal seal is on closure of env...Of course I have been told that it does not matter...BUT..If it is truely up to the Judge..(and he has not been bought)..then posssible it could go in your favor...especially if the other person can not show thiers to be dated before yours in this or a better manner....So I figure, it is best to give it a shot ..just in case...Of course if you already have your musical composition to go with it ,then copyright as a song....But anything you put out there unprotected is up for grabs..and remember..even the silliest of songs has made some rich...geeze...that just may be a hook....anybody up for grabs...
Hope this is correct info...if not , sorry...you can take the strings off my geetar...that would make my family happy...they might even pay for your copyrighting process....
I have done this....AND made sure postal seal is on closure of env...Of course I have been told that it does not matter...BUT..If it is truely up to the Judge..(and he has not been bought)..then posssible it could go in your favor...especially if the other person can not show thiers to be dated before yours in this or a better manner....So I figure, it is best to give it a shot ..just in case...Of course if you already have your musical composition to go with it ,then copyright as a song....But anything you put out there unprotected is up for grabs..and remember..even the silliest of songs has made some rich...geeze...that just may be a hook....anybody up for grabs...
Hope this is correct info...if not , sorry...you can take the strings off my geetar...that would make my family happy...they might even pay for your copyrighting process....
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Wrong-O True-eurt, at least in the U.S. Words, other than titles, or "short phrases" (Example- Go Girl!), which are not copyrightable, are the protected property of the artist from the moment they are "published". Publishing is defined as any distribution of the protected material in a public forum, which includes, but is not limited to- any performance, distribution, or broadcast of recorded or written material. If you make five copies of a song's lyrics, and hand them to 5 total strangers, it's published, and copyright protected.
The hard part will be proving that. While the system you describe of sealing archival material has won in some court cases, it has lost in others. It may depend on whether the judge got laid yesterday. Registering a copyright is just a way of increasing your ability to prove that a piece of material is copyright protected.-Richie
The hard part will be proving that. While the system you describe of sealing archival material has won in some court cases, it has lost in others. It may depend on whether the judge got laid yesterday. Registering a copyright is just a way of increasing your ability to prove that a piece of material is copyright protected.-Richie
BentRabbit
New member
true-eurt said:
From the US Copyright Web Site:
"Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration is necessary for works of U. S. origin."
So if all you have is the 'poor-man's copyright' (i.e. mail it to yourself), U.S. copyright laws pretty much say you will never even get a chance to present your case to a judge for him/her to rule on...
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
That is true, but the copyright application can be made at any time, including years after the material in question was published. It's not the date of registration, but the date of publishing that will determine copyright infringement. The material can be, and usually is, protected by copyright long before it is registered. So- if you steal my unregistered artistic property, and register the copyright in your name, but I can prove I published first, I can take you to court and win. You will also be subject to criminal charges, potentially, after I shake you down in civil court. Registering published material and falsely representing yourself as the author is a Federal offense. Oddly enough, if the material isn't published, it's pretty easy to steal it. So I can steal poems from my brother. He gave it to me, but that is not distribution in a public forum.
It all comes back to- if your material is registered with the copyright office, your chances of receiving justice in any legal action is greatly increased. What your rights are, and whether you can enforce them, are often two different ball games.-Richie
It all comes back to- if your material is registered with the copyright office, your chances of receiving justice in any legal action is greatly increased. What your rights are, and whether you can enforce them, are often two different ball games.-Richie