Tag Archives: copyright

‘Happy Birthday’ Still Not Free

Some thought that Wednesday would bring a close to the battle over whether Warner/Chappell would retain the rights to “Happy Birthday.” Filmmakers working on a documentary about the song discovered new evidence that may prove that the song should be in the public domain. The “smoking gun” is in the form of a children’s book of songs from Warner/Chappell’s own digital library. The blurry 1927 edition of The Everyday Song Book contained the lyrics without a copyright notice and the copyright was not filed until 1935. The filmmakers say that the original composers of the song, Patty Smith Hill and Mildred Hill, had surrendered the song to the public.

Though July 29 hearing took a comprehensive look at ownership of the song, the judge hadn’t had time to review the new evidence and the final decision was postponed once again. Ownership of the tune brings in about $2 million to Warner/Chappell each year. If able to prove the tune was dedicated to the public years before the copyright registration, the filmmakers and others will no longer have to pay to use the song.

protect your songs with copyright

Protect Your Songs with Copyright

protect your songs with copyrightThe songwriting process is rarely easy. Giving life to that creative spark is a process that can take countless hours, the behind-the-scenes toil never known to the audience that finally hears the song.

So, it’s important that all the sweat, anguish, and fine-tuning that turned your “kernel-of-an-idea” into a “track-on-an-album” counts for something. Even if your finished song doesn’t get shared with a wide audience, you should protect it nonetheless.

The act of copyrighting your work grants you, the owner, the exclusive right to have your work reproduced. Under the Copyright Act, protection starts the moment your songs are fixed in tangible form–recorded or even just scribbled down. The copyright then becomes property of the author and only the author, or those deriving their rights from the author, can claim the copyright.

With copyrighted works, you also have the privilege to: prepare derivative works based on your original tune; distribute copies of your work to the public, by sale, retail, lease, lending, or other transfer of ownership; and perform and display the copyrighted work publicly.

The more public your music the better, since as an artist, most of your money is made through the sale of your music, as distributed through a music publisher.

But lots more can be earned from paid TV and radio performances. But how do you ensure that you’ll receive the proper compensation if your songs are used in various media?

That’s where performing rights societies such as The American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP); Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI); and the Society of Composers, Authors, and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN) come in.

These are the organizations responsible for tracking when and where an artist’s copyrighted songs are broadcast, whether the exact track is used for background music in an episode of CSI, or if the next American Idol hopeful sings a variation of it.

This applies to international broadcast as well, in every country, save Russia and China, where copyrights are not honored. Every time your creation hits the airwaves, you’ll be compensated with a royalty check, delivered to your door every few months.

Your claim to copyright in the melody and lyrics of your songs can be registered with the Copyright Office. They usually require the copyright owner to deposit “two complete copies of phonorecords of the best edition of all works subject to copyright that are publicly distributed in the US, whether or not the work contains a notice of copyright.”

The proper form to register songs is Form PA (not Form SR). As long as all your music and lyrics are “unpublished,” you may register an unlimited number of songs together as a collection. This will extend the benefits of registration to each copyrightable selection in the collection.

Though not required, it’s recommended that you place a copyright notice on all your work. The notice includes the copyright symbol, the year of first publication, and the name of the copyright owner. Keep in mind, if your songs are published and distributed without a copyright notice, you’ll have relinquished your right to secure copyright and your songs would fall into public domain.

For more information on protecting your original creations visit the US Copyright Office at www.copyright.gov
BMI at www.bmi.com
SOCAN at www.socan.ca
ASCAP at www.ascap.com.

Canadian Appeals Court Mandates Google to Remove Pirate Site

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the Canadian Court of Appeals has upheld worldwide injunctions requiring that Google remove search links from certain pirate sites around the world. It is highly unusual for a court to make an order that could place limits on expression in another country. Justice Harvey Groberman explains, “It has not been suggested that the order prohibiting the defendants from advertising wares that violate the intellectual property rights of the plaintiffs offends the core values of any nation.”

The court battle against Google began when a one-time distributor for Equustek Solutions Inc. relabeled Equustek’s products to pass them off as their own through their website. Equustek alleged trademark violations and misappropriation of trade secrets, and the judge told Google to remove a number of websites used by the defendants from its search indexes. Google removed the URLs from google.ca only, which led Equustek to complain of a “whack-a-mole” approach.

The International Federation of Film Producers Association and the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry have since joined with Equustek, bring their own arguments and calling for removal of pirating sites.

“Google raises the specter of it being subjected to restrictive orders from courts in all parts of the world, each concerned with its own domestic law,” writes Groverman. “… it is the worldwide nature of Google’s business and not any defect of the law that gives rise to that possibility.”

Judge Explains Why Pandora Should Pay 2.5% of Revenue to BMI

An article appearing in The Hollywood Reporter explains why US District Judge Louis Stanton decided that Pandora should pay 2.5% of its revenue to BMI. The decision came more than two years after publishers attempted to partially withdraw digital rights from BMI in order to get a raise from streaming outlets like Pandora. BMI argued the court for a 2.5% rate based on interim deals that were struck between the publishers and Pandora. In making the decision, Stanton considered Pandora’s $600 million 2014 revenue, and its stance that it hasn’t been profitable due to lack of success on the advertising. He also looked at what music services are paying—Apple 4.6% of revenue, Spotify (2.5%-6.25%) of label costs, and Rhapsody, just under 2.5%—though he admits “Pandora evades neat categorization.” BMI I was also given a “win” in that the license term will be four years, instead of five, to allow re-evaluation of the licensing relationship given the “rapidly changing nature of the online music industry.”

NMPA Sues Wolfgang’s Vault Over Copyright Infringement

The National Music Publishers’ Association has filed a copyright infringement suit against Wolfgang’s Vault on behalf of several music publishers. Wolfgang’s Vault disseminates concert videos and audio recordings through multiple websites, including ConcertVault.com, Daytrotter.com and MusicVault.com, as well as YouTube.

Wolfgang’s Vault claims to hold the “largest collection of live audio and video recordings online,” however much of the content is not properly licensed. Their websites attract around 50,000 visitors per day.

“The Wolfgang’s Vault websites have profited in large part because of the significant use of unlicensed music, primarily concert footage, available on their sites,” says David Israelite, President & CEO of NMPA. “Systematic copyright infringement cannot be a business model, and it is unfortunate that Wolfgang’s Vault chose not to compensate all of the creators responsible for their content. Hopefully, this lawsuit will bring publishers and many iconic songwriters the revenue they deserve for the use of their music.”

The lawsuit is part of NMPA’s continuing effort to ensure songwriters and their music publishing partners are compensated fairly and that their rights are protected. Members of NMPA have settled claims of copyright infringement with Maker Studios and Fullscreen, both large Multi-Channel Networks on YouTube. These settlements enabled music publishers and songwriters to be compensated for past copyright infringements and license works going forward.

Pandora and BMI

Pandora and BMI Trial Begins

Pandora and BMIIn February Pandora and BMI headed to court in a trial to determine how much Pandora will pay BMI songwriters and publishers. According to The New York Times, recent debates over music royalties with ASCAP and BMI have galvanized musicians and driven the Justice Department to review the regulatory agreements that govern BMI and ASCAP.

Pandora currently pays BMI 1.75% of its revenue, but it wants to reduce that fee to 1.7% to match what radio broadcasters pay for their streams. Pandora contends it is just another form of radio. BMI wants Pandora to raise its rate to 2.5%, arguing that Pandora is a more interactive form of media, and since it has no other programming like news or talk, it makes more extensive use of music than radio stations do.

Also in February, the US Copyright Office released its study, Copyright and the Music Marketplace, with recommendations on how existing music licensing laws should be updated to better reflect how people listen to music today. Among its recommendations were requiring radio stations to pay performance fees and the consolidation of rate-setting activities. Read the study at: copyright.gov/docs/musiclicensingstudy/.

New Business Model = Same Demons

Citing the unfair split of revenues and lack of artistic control, today’s musicians shun the ubiquitous control of yore by the “majors,” and desperately attempt to validate their music by declaring themselves an “indie.” High quality home recordings, self-produced and marketed, are made possible by the technological advances in recent years, along with the promise of untold fortune by distribution through the World Wide Web. “Going viral” no longer means a trip to a physician, but a trip to the bank. Or does it?

Continue reading