Topic: Copyright question

[disco]

I called a jazz player today to see if I could drop in and tape his next performance (Jeff Solon Jazz Duo)
He asked me what I wanted it for, which is a question I've now come to love, and what I planned to do with it. I told him I'm just here to preserve and pass on. I mentioned torrent distribution to which he responded, "what do you do about the royalities for covers?" I told him I thought that only applied to sold music, but he didn't feel real comfortable with my answer. I only had the phish "Cuyahoga Jam" type stuff as a reference (phish limits the length of covers so they pay lower royalty fees, I've been told) so I told him I'd ask the collective brain here to see what the consensus was. Thanks

[DMBprez]

I called a jazz player today to see if I could drop in and tape his next performance (Jeff Solon Jazz Duo)
He asked me what I wanted it for, which is a question I've now come to love, and what I planned to do with it. I told him I'm just here to preserve and pass on. I mentioned torrent distribution to which he responded, "what do you do about the royalities for covers?" I told him I thought that only applied to sold music, but he didn't feel real comfortable with my answer. I only had the phish "Cuyahoga Jam" type stuff as a reference (phish limits the length of covers so they pay lower royalty fees, I've been told) so I told him I'd ask the collective brain here to see what the consensus was. Thanks

Wow, I had no idea. 

[page]

Wow, I had no idea. 

Yep, thats the reason for the splits in Drowned and Rock and Roll when the venture off.

It's cliche, but when I ask someone who doesn't normally get taped (like Jazz bands):

1) Get the show taped, worry about distribution later. You can always ask about distribution after the show is taped. Sharing is nice, but getting it taped comes first.
2) Follow Rule 1.

From what I understand, the venue should be paying royalties for the performance, the band pays it for distribution, and nobody has tested the waters in regards to fan made recordings (similar situation to fansubs in the 90s for imported films). Part of the beef with Phish's stream is that supposidly they dont want to go and get the rights to live broadcasting (which I do understand is a different), so I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't some legal aspect that we are just falling under the radar for.

[Chuck]

Here is a good starting point if you want to start learning about Copyright law:

http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/WEBPAGEINDEXCOPYCORNER.htm

Public Domain info from the same author:

http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm

I'm not a lawyer, so I can't answer legal questions, but I do have to deal with some copyright issues from time to time in my job.

[bgreen]

this is an interesting topic, I've been working on a few things with harry fox and here are some excerpts from their site

mechanical licenses

If you are manufacturing and distributing copies of a song which you did not write, and you have not already reached an agreement with the song's publisher, you need to obtain a mechanical license. This is required under U.S. Copyright Law, regardless of whether or not you are selling the copies that you made.

digital licensing

I am not charging anyone to access these songs on my website. Do they still have to be licensed?

Yes, it is required under U.S. Copyright Law. This is how the publisher - and ultimately the songwriter - gets compensated for the use of their song.

then they follow up with a peer to peer definition that says this

Peer to Peer (P2P)

Also referred to as file sharing, peer-to-peer is a popular type of application in which, rather than accessing files from a central server, users access a common network hub and open up portions of their own computer's hard drive to the public for downloading. Any unlicensed P2P activity is illegal and can result in criminal prosecution and/or fines.

I'm sure there is some loophole or special provision, but I just have to wonder how lma allows streams and downloads of bands playing cover songs without obtaining the proper licenses? I can understand his point, I've wondered about it as well. Another big grey area

[rastasean]

I'm sure there is some loophole or special provision, but I just have to wonder how lma allows streams and downloads of bands playing cover songs without obtaining the proper licenses? I can understand his point, I've wondered about it as well. Another big grey area

this is exactly what I wonder too. Do you really think every cover band in the world pay royalties to bill withers when they sing "ain't no sunshine"? hell no. what if the band plays it for free or performs an a Capella version of "stairway to heaven" (essentially reading versus aloud), is that in violation of a copyright since it is being digitally transmitted via p2p and/or streaming? 

[it-goes-to-eleven]

He asked me what I wanted it for, which is a question I've now come to love, and what I planned to do with it.

I agree with page.  My response to that is always something like "that depends on what you prefer.  I can just sit on it, or we can do something with it."   The fact is, I'm so far behind on shows it isn't funny (though...  I have friends who are years and years further behind..)

this is exactly what I wonder too. Do you really think every cover band in the world pay royalties to bill withers when they sing "ain't no sunshine"?

Typically, the venue plays a flat license so the bands that perform can play those covers.

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

I called a jazz player today to see if I could drop in and tape his next performance (Jeff Solon Jazz Duo)
He asked me what I wanted it for, which is a question I've now come to love, and what I planned to do with it. I told him I'm just here to preserve and pass on. I mentioned torrent distribution to which he responded, "what do you do about the royalities for covers?" I told him I thought that only applied to sold music, but he didn't feel real comfortable with my answer. I only had the phish "Cuyahoga Jam" type stuff as a reference (phish limits the length of covers so they pay lower royalty fees, I've been told) so I told him I'd ask the collective brain here to see what the consensus was. Thanks

When I talk to questionable artists, I usually make sure they know that they can have a copy for their own use.  I also make it clear that if they prefer, I will not distribute the recording.  I tape for my own use, and distribution is just a benefit...  If an artist prefers I not spread a tape, I'm happy to do so...

Somewhere around here, there is a "contract" that I wrote up when I taped an Sitar and Table duo from India once.  I basically signed that I would provide a copy to the artist, and that I wouldn't distribute the recording.  He was VERY sceptical at first, but once he realized what I was wanted to do, he was very cool about it.

As far as the "copyright" issue, the venue generally pays fees that provide for "covers".  If your particular artist is worried about being sued by another artist for covering a song (and your tape is proof), I'm not sure how you placate him... 

Good luck!

Terry

[disco]

i'll prolly try terry's route of "I'll tape, we each get a copy and it goes no further."
see if that works, but who knows. Being in a small town the venues are often restaurants or bars, I doubt they pay a license of any sort.
Certainly a fun gray area that won't go away anytime soon I'm guessing.

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

Certainly a fun gray area that won't go away anytime soon I'm guessing.

If this is so, then "help" the artist.  If you can offer them a free service (a free tape of their show that night) with a reasonable guarantee that they won't be bootlegged, I think most artist would be cool with it...

Terry

[stevetoney]

My response to the question the OP received ('what are you taping for and what will you do with it') is always the same...I'm a hobbyist that records for my own enjoyment and, if you allow me to record, I'll do with it whatever you (the artist) prefer me to do with it.  At that point 95% of the time the response is simply that they ask for a copy (they don't even say 'don't sell it).

If a copyright question were ever to come up (which it never has), my response would be simple...this is my hobby and I insist there's never anything financial related to what I do.  I'm not a business or a profession, so there's no need for legal agreements beyond a handshake.  If they insist on taking it further, I'd break down and wouldn't record.

[printguy]

Maybe it's different in the US than in Canada but to my knowledge there are no royalties to be paid when an artist performs a cover in concert; only if they sell the recording of that performance. And if an artist wants to put a cover version on their CD they do not need the permission of the original artist - they just have to complete the correct paperwork, and fork over the corresponding share of the profits.

But that notwithstanding, the suggestion from tonedeaf is the route I take.

[rastasean]

while we're on the topic of copyright, here's two interesting articles on sharing music. the first one is a little dated, 2001, and the next is just a couple years old but both very accurate, IMO.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/im-not-afraid-to-try-popular-new-things,10767/
http://www.newmusicstrategies.com/2008/04/03/should-i-be-worried-about-piracy/

[datbrad]

My response to the question the OP received ('what are you taping for and what will you do with it') is always the same...I'm a hobbyist that records for my own enjoyment and, if you allow me to record, I'll do with it whatever you (the artist) prefer me to do with it.  At that point 95% of the time the response is simply that they ask for a copy (they don't even say 'don't sell it).

If a copyright question were ever to come up (which it never has), my response would be simple...this is my hobby and I insist there's never anything financial related to what I do.  I'm not a business or a profession, so there's no need for legal agreements beyond a handshake.  If they insist on taking it further, I'd break down and wouldn't record.

I agree completely with this approach. Usually, offering the artist a copy of a performance that would otherwise not be recorded and assuring that you will keep it to yourself if that is desired will often allow you to keep rolling. It's always worth it to ask nicely.

[SmokinJoe]

I have a friend who plays in a Bar band where they sing mostly covers.  The story he tells me is that years ago he was approached by someone from ASCAP telling him the band needed to buy a license every year.  So the band broke up and reformed under a different name, to keep under the radar.

I record a local "Open Mic night" and we are putting out a CD, and 80% of it is covers.  We were nervous about it, and someone (who is a lawyer and seemed to know what they were talking about) agreed that what we were doing was technically gray area, but that since we were going to donate any profits to a charity (which we are), we are not "low hanging fruit".  The ASCAP folks and RIAA have bigger fish to fry (the Napsters of the world), and if/when they found out about us and the charity they would leave us alone for fear of bad publicity.