Hey Doubledecker
That's quite a read, 5 stars for taking the effort to pen all these down. It's not an easy feat, took me quite a while to read through.
You're welcome. Understanding the law and issues takes time as well.
I have to disagree in this form of description, sadly. Be it bedroom recordings, or studio recordings, they are still original creations which face the same problem of being stolen. While you are right that they may not or probably will not use sound recording directly, using in parts or in full of the entire musical structure (lyrics, melody etc) is good enough a killer.
Dude, sarcasm was wholly intended. Come on!
But practically speaking. An independent creation created at a later date will not be able to trump a later identical composition (by coincidence - no bad faith involved) just by virtue of copyright. In other words, if you write a song in 2003 and for some reason in 2006 My Chemical Romance comes up with the exact same melody in a song, if you sue them but they can prove it is mere coincidence and they did actually write the song and have never heard of you, you don't get a cent. And you pay costs too.
In fact, alot of electronic dance producer pen their track from home or from home studios, and it doesn't makes them any less credible in their composition. While a band or artiste may be signed up by a record label, but that doesn't imply bedroom producers are any less inferior.
Yes of course. If I did feel that way, would I have bothered penning this fricken treatise?
Assuming that we have an electronic track now, where there are no scores and notations, what do we do to affix this?
The final sound file of the song - that is a sound recording embodying the musical work. You have already affixed the expression of the idea in that form. If you can transcribe or notate it, even better, but if you can't no big shakes. No publisher or COMPASS will insist you do that when you assign a musical work.
So the "exclusive right" only applies to the first publication? And which in this instance, you mentioned about the 5% royalty of the retail selling price, meaning as long as anybody is paying that 5% after our first pubilcation, we are not able to reject the use by others?
only for the making of CD compilations. other rights eg synchronisation for TV / movie / advertising rights need clearance of the musical work's owner. And any use of a sound recording will require clearances from the owner of the sound recording (ie traditionally, the record labels).
So to sum it up, as long as we do not assign ourselves to a record label or COMPASS, we stand to lose any rights over our works?
Publishers administer the musical work. Record labels control the sound recording. As i first said, different sets of rights in a song.
No, you don't stand to lose any rights either way. But publishers/labels may be able to exploit these rights better than you - unless you start to learn about the music industry and get a deeper knowledge of the business.
So can we say that with this, we only have our rights (after first publication) only if COMPASS accertain it after their "required number of use"? Sorry if I sound confused... but it's giving me the impression that our rights after the first publication is governed by how many times it has been used and not by the authorship. Please correct me if I have understood this part wrongly.
Nope, you've got it wrong i'm afraid. Once you have actually published a work, it's yours. But before you publish a work, if you have a publishing deal, your publisher will administer the work on your behalf. Does it have retrospective effect? It depends. Say you've released and sold CDs at HMV or Roxy independently. Assuming it has been published (I say assume, because the Copyright Act warns against "colourable" publications, or works, so there has to be a certain significance of the reach of that work - eg if you sold 3 copies at your auntie's cafe it may not be deemed published as it may not be deemed to have reached the public). You thereafter want representation from a publisher/COMPASS to administer. Whether they want to include those past works in your catalog and thereafter publish them, is their choice. But they will take those priorly published songs into consideration when assessing your criteria for being represented by them.
In the event of an independent producer/composer (not belonging to any record labels or publisher), can we say the worries of copyright infringement falls on them?
Yes. Publishers and record companies supposedly have deep pockets and reach to effectively counter and address lawsuits and infringement cases - which as an individual, you won't have.
It is common knowledge that when a producer/composer is unsigned, it is only by logic, that he/she would have to seek out his/her own marketing avenues. But that shouldn't stand to the point they have lesser protection than artistes that belongs to a publisher. Or am I understanding it wrongly?
The protection levels are the same. But the expertise, and financial backing to withstand lawsuits and/or pursue infringement proceedings are different. Therein lies the difference.
Sorry if I understand your entire post wrongly, please correct me if I am wrong at any parts. But having gone through the entire passage, it is indeed informative to have alot of parts broken down into simple terms. But at the same time, breaking down the parts has also raised new doubts.
exactly. there are no right answers are there. it's what you as an individual choose for yourself. I'm just trying to give you the ability to make an educated reasoned decision.
Somehow, it leaves me with the vague impression that we are being "forced" into a corner - either you register with COMPASS or find a publisher, otherwise an independent producer is deemed to be "unprofessional" - depite the fact, a home composition can be mixed and mastered by a professional studio. Also, that may also mean an unsigned producer/composer are less protected, or simply not protected the same way signed artistes are. Is the music industry supposed to be in this manner?
welcome to the music industry, leave your pants on the floor and bring your lube. you will get shafted, that goes without saying. have you not realised all the big players in the industry are big for a certain reason - backing? there are many cogs in the industry and ways they turn boggle the mind. and it all gravitates where the dollar bills are.
And independent artiste can have a fantastic piece of work produced in every aspect. The law will not cast any aspersions or prejudice against him. But the industry will. whether it gets heard, gets picked up by radio, gets promoted, gets released, gets bought and sold - depends on you, them team you have, and the business decisions you make. no man is an island bro. at one point of time or another, we will have to rely on others. and you better hope you've done your homework by then.
what you think you post a song on myspace then all of a sudden you'll be given a million dollar contract and will be billboard's next best thing? no free lunch. it's a tough ride that i hope you have braced yourself to withstand. understanding its pitfalls is the first step. all the best.
[/quote]
artyman: