I sold a song, but am I getting proper credit for writing it?

I

IvyRose

New member
Cliff notes- I sold my first song. I wrote the lyrics, and melody, (and played chords on guitar) and had recorded a video of me performing it on YouTube. From that, a few years later, I sell it. The person changed about 10 words...and sings one part of it different. (I.e. the last time through the chorus, she doesn’t sing one high note that I did.)
But she claims that she co-wrote it? It says written by: (her name), (my name). Is that right?


More to the story: She said that if she changed any words, that makes her a co-writer. Plus she did put thousands into getting a full band production, and she came up with a lot of that. (Mine was just me singing with my acoustic guitar) I think I should get credit for writing the song (lyrics and melody).
And she should get credit for performing and production. I didn’t sign anything when I sold it,...she just paid me, to buy it outright,...and she’s copywrited it. (I hadn’t, I just had it on YouTube)

Any thoughts please?!??
 
Oh dear. She';s probably done you well. You SHOULD have copyrighted it before you made it public. In the UK, PRS for Music and PPL cover writers/composers rights, and performing rights sales.
If anyone performs/plays/broadcasts one of my songs, I get the correct royalites for that.
The music industry is littered (I'm sad to say) with people who's songs were sold for a one off sum and then earned the buyer oodles through further sales.
You could try to sue the buyer for breach of copyright, but to win, you'd have to prove you wrote the song ...
I don't mean to be bringer of gloom, and others may disagree/it may be different elsewhere in the world. But 25 years in music industry here says that's the deal. Sorry.
 
IvyRose said:
I didn’t sign anything when I sold it,...she just paid me, to buy it outright,...and she’s copywrited it. (I hadn’t, I just had it on YouTube)

Any thoughts please?!??
Click to expand...

Well done. :)
You should have thought of all this before you sold it to her.

So now you should still copyright it, because if you plan to take legal action, you will need to copyright it.
That said...there's no point in taking legal action unless she's making money off the song...and then when she is, with your copyright and proof (YouTube) that you wrote the song before she ever got it...you can sue her for the money...though no guarantee you will win much....since you admitted here on a public forum that you sold it to her *outright*...so she can argue that it's 100% her song now, and changing some of the lyrics is her choice.
AFA her singing it different...that's not going to mean much.

Again...if there's no real money involved...then there's not much worth doing anything about it.
 
I'm not sure how it works in the US, but you do NOT have to do anything to copyright it, as copyright is formed as soon as you compose it.

However, let's be practical - do you have it in an email that you are co-writers? If she has told you this, then she has also confirmed the copyright status - a shared product. If you sold it to her, then normally that's 100% assignment, as in you sold the rights. Think about Walk on the Wildside - Herbie Flowers the bass player created the bass line the song revolves on, and sold it for the rent money. End of story. That's pretty much what you did - BUT - she's confirmed you are the co-writer, so 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

I doubt she can copyright it actually, because to do this she needs evidence she owns the rights and you presumably didn't include words to that effect in whatever paperwork you did? The invoice didn't contain rights type wording did it? As the producer of the work, YOU must assign it. I don't believe that US is any different. It's like Youtube - people put in a copyright claim against you using a piece of music in a video. You have that option - but as she's volunteered the co-writing claim, I'd ask her if she has the correct bank account information for any copyright payments in the future - but if she is making money from it, she may decide to ask the courts to decide. I understand the system in the US needs both parties to have funds to do this?

Maybe quietly you can investigate and see if she has registered it, and if she has, but missed your name, then you could start the process to get it sorted.

Personally - I'd not bother yet, unless she's making sizeable income from it. At worst, you can tell everyone you wrote it and sold it to her - that's completely true and can't be disputed.

So much comes down to the wording in the sale discussions.

Here in the UK, before I do anything with a piece of music I write, I add it to my PRS and PPL titles. If I sell it, I don't change that data. So it all comes back to me. In fact - for me I never 'sell' the music at all. I give people licences to use it, retaining the rights.
 
Live and learn. Next time you'll know better. 'Sold it outright' means you gave away all rights to it, including PRO writing royalties. If you copyright your version now, the copyright date will be after hers, so probably not valid if you try to take it to court. Yes, you 'own' the original copyright from the moment you create the song, but in the USA, no one has ever won a case based on that.
 
What others have said - there's no point in looking at any kind of legal recourse unless there's some serious money involved, or the anticipation of some I suppose, but without a government issued copyright that establishes you as the person with the rights to the lyrics, no lawyer would consider the case unless they just wanted to take your money. Plus it seems like the "co-writer" may have already established that you transferred at least some rights in the sale of the song - and historically this was usually 100% of the rights.

Yes, your performance on YouTube might establish some copyright, and IANAL but from everything I've read, the only thing that matters is a real copyright registration once you start talking about legal claims.

Books have been written on this topic. If you're in the business of writing songs with the hope of publication and money, you should already have an attorney that guides you through this. At the least, get in the habit of submitting copyright registration. Batch them up and send them in online.
 
Thank you everyone for your comments. To specify my question:I don’t care about money/royalties etc. What I do care about is her listing herself as a co-writer. She believes that since she bought it outright, (just a verbal agreement) that if she changes ONE word, than she can rightly be called a co-writer. And since she did all the work with the production (adding a guitar solo, piano, drums, ((even a music video))) and sings one line slightly different, that she also co-wrote the ‘melody’. I disagree. I wrote it, the lyrics and melody. She produced her ‘version’ of what I wrote. I have learned my lesson for next time!!!!
I’m not pursuing legal action, i just want to know if she is right, or is she being dishonest or deceptive by claiming herself as co-writer?
 
Again, IANAL, but since you don't have a registered copyright, and there were no explicit terms in your sale agreement, I'd say she's done the right thing by listing you as an author. The fact that she puts her name on something that includes her original contributions seems completely valid to me. You didn't write everything in the performance, so why would you expect to be the sole author?

If this kind of thing is something you want to avoid, the only way to do it is to have a lawyer draw up your contracts, and to insure your work is copyrighted from the start (IMO, YMMV, FWIW, repeat: IANAL, etc.). Go consult an attorney experienced in these matters if you want the official/legal answer to this specific set of circumstances. Be prepared to pay for that.
 
Remember that it is common practice for big names to claim co-writing status when they probably did just alter a word or two. In fact, the theatre production I just completed with a Broadway star had exactly this. He was given a song to sing, and considered the words didn't fit the character so he changed four or five words to frankly more suitable ones. I guess that technically it would have given him a credit - if he'd asked. He didn't.
 
The fact that she registered the copyright before you did would negate any legal action you could take. Never, ever sell your songs. If you write a song and someone else wants to cover it, they need to pay for a mechanical license and/or performance royalties.

You write a song, you should register the copyright. Then register that song with a PRO, like BMI or ASCAP (in the US).

If you register the copyright and she decides to change a word or two, she does not become a co-writer. You 'sold' her the song and she registered the copyright means she can do whatever she wants with it. The fact that she paid money for a full demo doesn't have any bearing on song ownership.

Any future co-writing ventures should be covered by some kind of written agreement.

Are you in a contentious relationship with the other person? Did she list you as a songwriter on the copyright?
 
rob aylestone said:
I'm not sure how it works in the US, but you do NOT have to do anything to copyright it, as copyright is formed as soon as you compose it.
Click to expand...

True enough. Copyright of a composition incurs automatically as soon as the idea exists in a tangible form: a recording, or sheet music.

However in this instant, to fight a case means having proof of your copyright, and that's where registration comes in.
 
I know lots of people say it's old fashioned and not valid, but as all that's needed is proof - then the old post it to yourself and don't open it technique is still a valid and provable way to have the evidence of existence. That's all that's required - you prove you did it on a certain date.
 
rob aylestone said:
I know lots of people say it's old fashioned and not valid, but as all that's needed is proof - then the old post it to yourself and don't open it technique is still a valid and provable way to have the evidence of existence. That's all that's required - you prove you did it on a certain date.
Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer, nor play one on tv, but can you cite any instance in a US court where this worked?
 
rob aylestone said:
I know lots of people say it's old fashioned and not valid, but as all that's needed is proof - then the old post it to yourself and don't open it technique is still a valid and provable way to have the evidence of existence. That's all that's required - you prove you did it on a certain date.
Click to expand...


It is valid in the UK, but not the US.
 
Regardless of copyright, magic word here is you sold it "outright". Paul McCartney no longer owns the rights to his songs, John Cougar, etc. You might get the writing credit, but the money has been exchanged and it no longer belongs to you.

If you played on an album and you were considered "musician for hire", you get no royalties for playing on the record when the song is played. This I know to be true based on real events of a band being considered musicians for hire and only the singer/song writer being the performer of the song. Yes, the others got credit, but not the kind you can spend.

If you sell the song, like a painting, you no longer own it. Copyright doesn't mean anything any longer since it isn't your song. Now maybe you can fight the writing credit thing, but if other version is what was released by the other person, not sure she can't take the co-writing credit.
 
If you have firm evidence of when you first made it public, that can count as copyright if this went to court. She would in fact have to prove she published it first.

Regarding changes, if you own a song and someone wants to use it with changes, all changes have to be approved by the original writer. This is to protect the writer if say someone bought the song then changed the words to something you did not feel was suitable.

When you do copyright or register the song, as I do here with APRA, the lyrics count automatically for 50% and the music side counts for 50% of royalty.

If she changed anything that is an arrangement so she would only be able to say, written by you, arrangement by her.

Alan.
 
It's not a standard practice here, but as I understand it in both countries it serves a purpose still. In any copyright claim, the posting process has no legal standing, no actual recording of the data contained inside - but it does serve as evidence. In fact, the forensics today are more able to confirm before opening, that the package has not been tampered with and resealed. So it is still evidentiary from the point of view that what is inside was 100% in existence on a certain date. So in court, in the US or the UK, the judge could order the package opened and entered in evidence. Of course, there's still the question of if the content is the same as the contested product - that's actually the same here. Somebody musically inept or musically experienced has to decide if it is substantially the same product. In the case of a tune and words it would be pretty useful as evidence of existence, while if it's a totally different version, but perhaps having the same musical structure that's less certain.

For the cost of mailing it to yourself with signature for delivery - which for a USB stick or a CD here is less than $5, it's a very handy tool. After all, in court, if the other side know you can prove the date of the contested item, they might well settle!
 
The OP has stated there's no money involved and it seems to be just a dispute over the addition of the song purchaser's name as an author. This is something only an attorney experienced in these matters could really answer with any finality, as I'm sure there is some case law somewhere.

The rest of this stuff about obtaining a copyright "after the horse has left the barn" is silly.

Now, at least in the USA, the "poor man's copyright" (mailing your work to yourself) is not considered useful when there is actual money involved, so please stop suggesting this.

There are many, many online articles about this topic. Here's one:
How to Copyright Your Music - Easy Song Licensing
 
the main question is, was she in her rights to put herself down as co-writer after I sold it ‘outright’ and she changed some lyrics? It seems that the consensus is yes. This was the first song that I have sold, and in that excitement, I didn’t take the time to research. I have learned a very valuable lesson! Thank you everyone for helping me out!
 
Did you write the lyrics that she changed? Or to be more specific did the 10 words she sang in the final product come from you or did she come up with them on her own? I'd say she's a co-writer if she wrote them herself, as long as it wasn't something like changing "Us" to "Them" or "You" to "Me" or "Bob" to "Steve"... etc... if you didn't write them and she did, isn't she a co-writer? The bigger question is, why does this matter? Guess I should ask Ozzy that question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top