Posting Cover Songs

Bill,

Depending on the site each has a different take on posting cover songs. But for the most part I think you're dead on.

Cool cus I know that one!

ORIGINAL: Jessie Sammler

Just to be on the safe side, I am limiting my cover activities to "Row, Row Your Boat".

Here's my take on it, for what it's worth.

Anyone who records a 'cover' version of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright holder, or doesn't pay any agreed fee to the copyright holder every time the cover is played, is in breach of that copyright.

Whether you sell your cover version or not is irrelevant, as is whether anyone pays any money or not to subscribe to any site on which it may be accessed.

It's black and white I'm afraid.

Now, if you get caught, you may be subjected to the full force of copyright law - ignorance of any part of this law does not constitute any defence I'm afraid, neither will the excuse that you didn't make any money from it.

However, I'd certainly agree that you are possibly more likely to get caught if you are making any money or selling copyrighted material, but I'm pretty certain the offence is identical, regardless of monetary considerations.

SteveStrummerQC

If I post anything it's gonna be original so I guess I won't have to worry about it. I've heard alot of tunes posted and don't know if they are cover tunes or not. thank for the info. I forget the timeframe for a song to become "Public Domain"

AFAIK Steve, it's 50 years from when the song was first copyrighted in the UK, 95 years in the US. Hence songs written in the '60's are now about to fall into public domain, much to the chagrin of writers/performers who are still alive and kicking, like Ian Anderson (this from 2006);

''...I am horrified that, along with countless other great artists and bands of the 60’s and 70’s, Jethro Tull’s earliest recordings will progressively fall out of copyright in the foreseeable future under current UK legislation. The band’s first album, “This Was” (1968), is due to fall out of copyright in just 12 years’ time. From this date onwards, every year will see more and more of Tull’s records slipping into the commercial quagmire of the public domain along with the all the other great works of British pop and rock music. Sir Cliff Richard’s first recordings start to come out of copyright protection in just over two years time. The Beatles in six.

This means loss of Royalty income not only to the (perhaps well-off, perhaps quite poor) performers on the records but, more importantly from the industry perspective, the loss of income to the record companies, and ultimately to the UK exchequer...''

50 years + 70 years AFTER the authors death.. If memory serves..

as I do remember people like Blueboy getting stung for using samples that were from long ago that he assumed were copyright free.

Steve , Jackson has copyrights on some of the material, not all of it.. it's to do with the publishing though I guess.. and it's 50% of the tunes.
http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/jackson.asp

to license beatles tunes for a film... is SERIOUS money... £250,000 or $250,000 A TUNE (I can't recall if it was in £ or $)... as there as a film that used 13 of them, apple corp have been very good at keeping a tight rein esp with sampling etc.. Danger Mouse's "grey" album etc. was done as an experiment, but if it was a commercial release he'd have got in the s***

ORIGINAL: SteveStrummerUK

ORIGINAL: Fog

to license beatles tunes for a film... is SERIOUS money... £250,000 or $250,000 A TUNE (I can't recall if it was in £ or $)... as there as a film that used 13 of them, apple corp have been very good at keeping a tight rein esp with sampling etc.. Danger Mouse's "grey" album etc. was done as an experiment, but if it was a commercial release he'd have got in the s***

I suppose this sort of fee is why none of the 'Best of the Sixties' type CD's never seem to have a Beatles song on 'em I guess.

Thank Yoko for that.

ORIGINAL: SteveStrummerUK

Here's my take on it, for what it's worth.

Anyone who records a 'cover' version of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright holder, or doesn't pay any agreed fee to the copyright holder every time the cover is played, is in breach of that copyright.

Whether you sell your cover version or not is irrelevant, as is whether anyone pays any money or not to subscribe to any site on which it may be accessed.

It's black and white I'm afraid.

In the USA that is exactly correct also. The owner of the copyright as the writer of the song owns it, period. Note that this may be someone other than the person who performed and recorded the song. You cannot do a public performance of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner. However, there is a compulsory license if you wish to record the song, and there is also a mechanism to license playing the original recording.

What it means is that you can make a recording of a cover and you can sell it or play it on the internet (or radio or tv). THere is a royalty that must be paid to the copyright owner, and that amount of $ is prescribed by law. If you want to record a cover, you have to pay Harry something like 8 cents per sold copy. If you stream over the internet there is some other formula.

In general, the person who produces the CD would pay the required license fees, which means that for folks like us we would just go on the internet to Harry Fox's site and pay it. For a few hundred CDs you would be paying a few tens of dollars in royalties.

Many websites and concert venues won't allow covers because they have not paid for the license. For the live performance it is the venue that must buy the license, not the performer.

In reality, though, if you are doing a cover of a friend's song, nobody is going to know. If you are going to do a cover that nobody makes any money on, probably nobody is going to care unless it is really prominently in public.

Check the ASCAP site for information on this topic. They are the organization that collect the fees and distributes the checks. I got a whopping $.25 check (wish I hadn't lost it) from ASCAP for a song I co-wrote, it got some very light airplay on a few college stations but ASCAP still kept track and paid up.

As far as copyrights in the states, there are two types; one for the actual song and a seperate one for the performance or recording. You can use either type to be protected under copyright laws if you are self publishing and or distributing. If you get signed you would file your work using the form for the song and the record company would resiter the recording seperately because, in most cases, they own the actual recording.

Good to hear all is good, the grey hair club is alive and kicking here too mate

That's great that your daughter's duo is getting regular work - I'll check out the MySpace link.

The so-called 'credit cruch' is biting quite hard at the moment but it seems the whole world's is affected to some degree or other. My new toys are making me feel better anyway!!

Catch you soon

Steve