The HR Bi-Monthly Recording Challenge Poll

[WATYF]

I can't imagine there would be a legal problem with covering other Clinic member's songs... I mean... we screw with each other's stuff so often that if someone was gonna get sued, it woulda happened by now...


Heck,... If that's the case, then Erland could sue half the board...


WATYF

 

[erichenryus]

I know the law pretty well. Performance rights stand regardless of if money is involved.

If they choose to sue your ass for covering them, and you didn't ask permission (and get it in written form), they can.

W.

can we just post a thread that allows everyone who's gonna be covered (aka. Erland) to permit others on the board to cover their stuff? i'm thinking about doing a polka version of some of Jamal's music. Jamal, do you mind?

 

[Lt. Bob]

I'm pretty sure that Powder is right. I've been in several album projects around here and a couple had covers on them. As I remember it...the lawyers said that all we had to do was let them know and pay a royalty.....there was never anything about getting permission. As long as you pay the royalties they can't stop you. And, of course, if there is no money involved, then you don't have to pay royalties.

 

[Jamal Bucket]

can we just post a thread that allows everyone who's gonna be covered (aka. Erland) to permit others on the board to cover their stuff? i'm thinking about doing a polka version of some of Jamal's music. Jamal, do you mind?

hell no i dont mind..in fact if you do it..i swear to god ill put it on my c.d....



liar...
jamal

 

[bpoco]

Cover another member's original ....

The best thing about this site is the fact that I get to hear some new, original music .... and I've been hearing some awesome stuff. I would love to hear some new interpretation of these originals.

As John Fohgerty (sp?) once said "Save the legal stuff for the suits !!"

BPOCO

 

[participant]

Cool poll, Al. Gotta make sure everyone votes. (Well... at least everyone who wants to take part)

 

[A1A2]

I vote for all options but the "writing a song in 2 hrs" because I don't think writing time should be rushed, plus, it probably will encourage people to follow the same old formula, which doesn't really push any insperation in my opinion.

I believe trying different type of music will benefit us more in terms of learning. Just a thought

AL

 

[wes480]

i think covering another members tunes would be awesome....see what old jems we could pull up...

/me looks back through homerecording mp3 collection.

plus it would show respect to those who have gone on before us.

 

[crawdad]

Just a thought--there is no reason why we can't combine some of these ideas--no matter which final idea is chosen.

 

[chrisharris]

Waldo makes a good point about the covers. Does anyone know the legality for sure? I thought once a song was released, anybody could cover it. If there is money involved, then its a different matter. Ah, but I'm no lawyer, so if anybody knows the law here, step up.

I'm not an intellectual property lawyer, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. The word "copyright" pretty much says it all. The owner(s) of the copyright has the exclusive right to make copies, whether the copies be lyric sheets, burnt CD's, or "covers" of the song.

Part of what ASCAP and BMI do is to negotiate payments with club-owners based on estimated DJ spins, juke-box plays, and "live" copies (cover bands) with an understanding that live bands are going to play a certain amount of "cover tunes."

I personally have never heard of a major act going after a cover-band to enforce a copyright, but that's not to say it hasn't happened. Publishing a cover song on the internet is obviously more dangerous, b/c you don't have anybody (like a clubowner) paying the royalties to ASCAP or BMI. Powderfinger is right that if you cover a tune without getting permission, you are required to pay a "mechanical" royalty of a little less than .08 cents PER COPY, but you also have to give a shitload of notices and comply with other statutory requirements that are a total pain in the ass. The best route is to negotiate the terms beforehand through an agency that does this full time. For my last little collection of tunes, I got written authorization from Patty Griffin's label for my daughter's cover of "Sweet Lorraine." They were cool enough to waive the royalty payment (I don't think it would have covered postage ). Since I got permission from the copyright owner, I now have an independent copyright in the new recording of the song.

Long story short...Money doesn't have anything to do with the actual copyright. If you don't own the copyright or have a license from the owner, you're not supposed to make copies, including covers.

There's some decent information on "Public Domain" songs, as well as mechanical license information here: (By the way, it's a copyright violation to cut and paste an article from one web site to another, but posting a link is okay, SO LONG AS you cite the work and author...so here goes:

Do You Need A License to Cover a Song?
by Joy R. Butler, Esq.)
http://www.inyoureye.com/html/jbutler2.html

(I'm still pulling for the 'write a song in 2 hours,'...I need more copyrights!!)

[edit] - Powderfinger...Weird Al fits into an odd little exception dealing with "parodies," which are considered original works.

 

[JR#97]

I personally have never heard of a major act going after a cover-band to enforce a copyright, but that's not to say it hasn't happened. Publishing a cover song on the internet is obviously more dangerous, b/c you don't have anybody (like a clubowner) paying the royalties to ASCAP or BMI. For my last little collection of tunes, I got written authorization from Patty Griffin's label for my daughter's cover of "Sweet Lorraine." Since I got permission from the copyright owner, I now have an independent copyright in the new recording of the song.

(I'm still pulling for the 'write a song in 2 hours,'...I need more copyrights!!)

Bruce Springteen sued a band after hearing them cover one of his tunes in a bar. He's lucky that Santa hasn't gotten on his ass for his big xmas tune!

 

[chrisharris]

Bruce Springteen sued a band after hearing them cover one of his tunes in a bar.

I figured it has happened. But in Bruce's defense, a copyright owner can implicitly waive his copyright if he's not careful. If he was actually sitting in the bar and heard it and did nothing about it, some lawyer could later argue that Bruce waived his copyright to that tune. I can't imagine that he was trying to make a point so much as he was just protecting his ass. I mean, he grew up playing covers. Why else would he sue a cover band? Money?!?!?! LMAO.

BTW - There's a tiny metal-shop (actual ironworks store) here in town that got sued by Metallica for its name: "METALIKA" (trademark infringement, not copyright). The defendant actually had a decent case, since the two are in TOTALLY different fields, there was little or no "likelihood of confusion or affiliation," but it couldn't afford the lawsuit. The store changed its name, but it got more publicity from the story than it ever did on its own.

 

[erichenryus]

BTW - There's a tiny metal-shop (actual ironworks store) here in town that got sued by Metallica for its name: "METALIKA" The store changed its name, but it got more publicity from the story than it ever did on its own.

When named our kid Metallica and they quickly called the hospital to sue so we switched his name to Alvin. The chipmunks haven't heard about it yet so I hope we can all agree to keep it quiet cause I'll never be able to explain another name change to him at this point.

i'm the only one who voted for the drum circle so far .

 

[Lt. Bob]

BTW - There's a tiny metal-shop (actual ironworks store) here in town that got sued by Metallica for its name: "METALIKA" (trademark infringement, not copyright). The defendant actually had a decent case, since the two are in TOTALLY different fields, there was little or no "likelihood of confusion or affiliation," but it couldn't afford the lawsuit. The store changed its name, but it got more publicity from the story than it ever did on its own.

Ya' know ...... that's CRAP! There's NO possibility of confusion between the two and that's the whole point of copyrights. I don't see why the shop would have to spend a cent to defend itself. Any decent judge should just toss it out. I also believe that people who file these sorts of crap lawsuits should have to pay a substantial penalty for wasting the courts' time. that would cut down on some of this bullshit.

I also think the penalty for running a red light should be just as severe as DWI because you put peoples' lives in danger just as surely as drinking and driving.

And don't even get me started on class action lawsuits where the lawyers (sorry Chris) get all the money and the plaintiffs' get $6 apiece. Clearly these class-action things are simply lawyers looking for someone to enable them to pick up a fat paycheck.


Lets see.....anything else?......no....that'll do for now.

 

[Lt. Bob]

BTW....what the hell is a drum circle?

 

[chrisharris]

UNEDITED TIRADE BY LT.BOB

hehehehee ... Well, SOMEBODY certainly woke up on the wrong side of the bed today.


-The Lawyer Jerk

 

[Lt. Bob]

 

[Guernica]

I also think the penalty for running a red light should be just as severe as DWI because you put peoples' lives in danger just as surely as drinking and driving.

......dude..... HARSH!! I just got a ticket for runnin' a red last week. .....shit, Judge Judy's a pre-teen wuss compared to you.

 

[scottboyher]

Hmmmmm.....

 

[JMarcomb]

give a window time frame and anybody can do whatever they want.... from singing with a friend to using a condenser mic on the legs of a grasshoper

im not a rule person
hmmm... the word rule shouldnt even be in the dictionary

everybodys happy