The Logic Off Topic list

logic-ot@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> Message: 19
>    Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 10:01:05 +0900
>    From: Dennis Gunn <mightyjohn@...>
> Subject: Re: Stones
>
> For example Prince copies a song off an album by totally unknown
> artist Ecnirp and does a very memorable keyboard solo which makes the
> song a hit for Prince which makes Ecnirp happy because he gets the
> royalties.  Then PeeWee Herman writes a Megahit around his verbatim
> ukulele performance of the prince solo.   In that case Peewee owes
> Ecnirp nothing.  And since Prince's solo was not a copy written part
> of the original PeeWee also owes him nothing,  furthermore he didn't
> use any of Prince's actual recording then PeeWee doesn't owe Prince
> anything for the performance either.
>
> Is this correct?
> --

I'm not sure about foreign copyright law, but in America, arrangements can be
copyrighted.  However, there's this (seemingly) subjective phrase in the law about
"sufficient new material."  In your examples, that would be pretty dicey, but it
is conceivable that Prince's solo could be such a phrase that would fall into that
category.  Next, since it would fall under something "well known," as you
described as "recognizable," it would be pretty hard to deny the source and
originality of it, and the timing of it's "publication."  To avoid such issues,
all of the sampled sounds and phrases I've seen for sale on Sample CDs for
instance, have a disclaimer essentially releasing everything on the disk as "for
use in the creation of musical composition."  Same with keyboard sounds, and if
someone had an issue with it, the musician using them couldn't be sued, but the
manufacturer could be.

Years ago (LONG before samplers), I did some studio sessions and the studio owner
came in after a long mix session and told the engineer to break out the rhythm
section parts and save them.  I asked him what he meant and was told they used
drum parts, bass parts and "other" parts in industrial films and some
commercials.  I thought that unfair at the time and yet, I understand how they got
away with it. Simply because as snippets, these things were totally
unrecognizable.  Hrmpf.  Anyway, you gotta draw the line somewhere, and it's
always the session guys that get screwed.  You can create a bass part or guitar
solo that everyone agrees, sells the tune.  But, what do you get?  Session fees,
and that's it.  Ah, reality.  :(

So, the answer to your question is "maybe."

Regards,
...z


Eat well, stay fit, die anyway...

-- =---Seek the truth, speak the truth!---= --

L.G. "Zeek" Duff
WHAT!Productions!
Blue Wall Studio
303.485.9438
ICQ#35974686

logic-ot@yahoogroups.com wrote

> Original Message:
>    Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:25:31 -0500
>    From: Lee Blaske <lblaske@...>
> Subject: Re: Stones
>
> At 10:50 AM -0600 7/5/01, Zeek Duff wrote:
> >Hrmpf.  Anyway, you gotta draw the line somewhere, and it's
> >always the session guys that get screwed.  You can create a bass
> >part or guitar
> >solo that everyone agrees, sells the tune.  But, what do you get?
> >Session fees,
> >and that's it.  Ah, reality.  :(
>
> Hey, that's the *best* case scenario. Once peer-to-peer sharing
> completely takes hold, there won't be any session fees. ;-)

Well, yeah... I was assuming someone had the coin and desire to at least pay session fees.  :)  I've done many hours of playing "on spec," that I never got a nickel for, some of which eventually got used in jingles anyway (fuckers); most of which, didn't do anything but gather dust er, rust(?) while taking up space on some iron oxide somewhere.  Then there are the
zillion or so demos for friends that never went anywhere...  Looks like all of us who have been bitten on one cheek or another pretty much agree on how to avoid it, at least.  Or, we just don't give a fat rat's ass.  ;)

>
>
>
> Original Message:
>    Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 21:54:55 EDT
>    From: GAmoore@...
> Subject: Re: Stones
>
> Are you saying only the new lyrics are copyrighted or the entire song? What if you wrote new words to an old song re-copyrighted? Could you play/record it royalty free? From what you say, it would seem so.
>
> However, from my experience with the copyright law, the words and music are together. This makes for a dangerous situation. Lets say you write a great tune, and work with a lyricist who writes shit words, you copyright it. Later you write better lyrics. However, you can't simply deal the original lyric writer out. That person owns 50% of the song - not just the words.
>
> For this reason, I think you need to have a contract (between co-writers) covering such circumstances.
>

Not exactly.  *IF* the song is copyrighted as "lyrics by Joe Schmoe" and "music by Pete Feet" for example, you don't need Pete's permission to use the lyrics with completely different music, but you DO need Joe's permission.  Vicey Versy, too.  If the tune is copyrighted "words and music by Joe Lennon Schmoe & Pete McCartney Feet" for example, you need both their
permissions to use either words and/or music.

Then, there's just covering your ass, credibility-wise.  I recall a big flap about Santana not crediting a classical piece he either didn't recognize, or had simply omitted recognition of it in the liner notes/credits, and people had a shit fit last year.  Even the DAW-MAC list went berserk about that one...

Regards,
...z


Good judgment comes from bad experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.

-- =---Seek the truth, speak the truth!---= --

L.G. "Zeek" Duff
WHAT!Productions!
Blue Wall Studio
303.485.9438
ICQ#35974686