pandamonk
Well-known member
I quite believe it. It definitely doesn't hold up in the US.
X
XLR
______
Even just logically/mechanically, a sealed and postmarked evelope is no proof of anything. Hasn't anybody here ever steamed or sponged open an evelope? Then resealed it with a glue stick? 5 minutes careful work and it's undetectable by anyone but a forensic lab.
None the less, this thread series is groundbreaking. It's the first one I've seen anyway where more than half the posters know it's "copyright", not "copywrite". It's about rights, not writing. A copywriter is something else entirely.
None the less, this thread series is groundbreaking. It's the first one I've seen anyway where more than half the posters know it's "copyright", not "copywrite". It's about rights, not writing. A copywriter is something else entirely.
Last edited:
D
DAS19
New member
Sadly if you want to copy-write your songs for real you have to pay the 40 dollar fee and send it in to get copywriten its really not that big of a deal.
Xeries
Earth Member
That's pretty sad, alright. It's $45.00 for the PA or the SR registration. $35.00 if you do it online, which I could walk you through on another thread if you search it.
I was trained as a copywriter and got a degree back in 76' from the U of F.
Didn't have anything to do with copyright, though.
X
XLR
______
The fee is inconsequential since you can copyright groups of musical works. I've done it that way. And it's easy to do online and with their paper form. I mean really easy. Fill out a simple form and submit a recording. Doesn't even have to be a good recording or a definitive version, just one that shows the work's musical details.
Xeries
Earth Member
Right you are, Sir. I've registered over 120 songs in five volumes since 1979.
I recently asked them (an actual human) whether I had to re-register if I made changes to a song, like added a verse or an instrumental break. The answer was, noper, unless you drastically change the song, you're still protected.
That was good news to me.
Chili
Site Moderator
Your songs are automatically copyright protected as soon as you put them in tangible form, such as on paper or a recording. Submitting them to the copyright office is only registering that copyright with a government entity. You can put as many songs as you want on the PA form and pay the $45 (or $35 online) fee once. That's money well spent if you ever get ripped off and have to go to court.
Cheers,
C
cmhansen
New member
The proof is in the registration, and not having a piece of paper or recording of the song. Period. Sure, they tell you that it's copyrighted when it's in tangible form. But without a registration, you're not protected.
gecko zzed
Grumpy Mod
There are two concepts that sometimes get blurred in copyright debates.
1 Copyright is automatically vested in the composer on the creation of a work. You do not need to take any specific action to acquire copyright.
2 However, sometimes you have to prove that you are the composer. In this case, legal registration is a way in which you can prove and secure the copyright you already own.
Copyright varies from country to country, and Australia is no different in that. However, there is useful informatin here (if you are interested or Australian):
http://www.copyright.org.au/information/specialinterest/music.htm
As I've worked through this thread, I've been intrigued by the debate, which consists largely of a series of assertions and counter-assertions. I expect there is reasonable wisdom behind these, but I'm surprised that there was little reference to any supporting legal opinion. Actually, I expect that the body of legal work on this would make it difficult to identify a specific ruling offhand, which brings me to my other puzzlement.
For quite some time the debate has been to-ing and fro-ing, and it seemed evident that it was not going to be resolved here. So I'm puzzled why someone didn't say "hang on a minute, I'll see if I can get a specific ruling on this example".
1 Copyright is automatically vested in the composer on the creation of a work. You do not need to take any specific action to acquire copyright.
2 However, sometimes you have to prove that you are the composer. In this case, legal registration is a way in which you can prove and secure the copyright you already own.
Copyright varies from country to country, and Australia is no different in that. However, there is useful informatin here (if you are interested or Australian):
http://www.copyright.org.au/information/specialinterest/music.htm
As I've worked through this thread, I've been intrigued by the debate, which consists largely of a series of assertions and counter-assertions. I expect there is reasonable wisdom behind these, but I'm surprised that there was little reference to any supporting legal opinion. Actually, I expect that the body of legal work on this would make it difficult to identify a specific ruling offhand, which brings me to my other puzzlement.
For quite some time the debate has been to-ing and fro-ing, and it seemed evident that it was not going to be resolved here. So I'm puzzled why someone didn't say "hang on a minute, I'll see if I can get a specific ruling on this example".
Xeries
Earth Member
"Hang on a minute, I'll see if I can get a specific ruling this example."
Oh, that's right, I'm not a judge. Rats
But here is a specific ruling as it pertains to the US of A. When you find that someone has infringed upon your rights to intellectual property, you can issue a cease and desist order to stop them from doing so in the future. As far as recovering any actual monetary damages, you have to have registered the work within three months of its publication.I didn't make that up, I got it from the copyright office. So if you publish a song or an album, I would recommend that you register. Not to protect your copyright, but to protect your right to recover damages or compensation for lost revenue.
Of course, I'm not sure what the damages would be. Perhaps if someone published your song, it would not be fresh anymore so you potentially lost some first time listeners to that song.
But anyone can cover your song, so the guy who ripped you off could continue as long as he acknowledges your authorship and gives you the $.08 per copy per song.
That's the standard royalty in the US. I don't know about Australia.
Also, royalties are paid quarterly by BMI or ASCAP here in the US. When there is a dispute, the courts freeze all assets connected to the work until the dispute is resolved in a court of law.
Personally, I would love to get ripped off, although I copyright all of my work. I think that the publicity would enhance my chances of getting the ear of a producer or agent that might like to look at my portfolio. VERY cheap advertising IMO.
DavidK
New member
You wont find one, because cases like this dont make it to court as is. Sure, it would be easy to link to one of the millions of pages dealing with intellectual property laws, but it doesnt accomplish much. We dont have enough info, only enough for a fun lil debate.
Nowhere in any link will it say "If you said you would record your buddies for free etc"...
This would have to go to a completely different level before it actually involves any laws, courts, blah blah. In other words, people involved would have to get to the point that they change their stories, hone their stories, etc. THEN, you pull out the links to the copyright pages. Right now, its not remotely close to that level.
gecko zzed
Grumpy Mod
Xeries;2935348 Personally said:
pandamonk
Well-known member
I referenced.
