Covering Songs = Infringing Copyrights?!?!

[mclethal]

wow.

Sooner or later Randy Blythe (lamb of god vocalist) will come after my YouTube videos of my covering their songs LOL.

But I don't really see why covering is a subject to copyright infringements? I mean, who don't do covers nowadays? I believe established bands plays covers first, only difference is they don't have YouTube yet to publish their acts.

Well, there's absolutely no way we could get in touch with these great bands as they have literally millions of unread fan mails. Good luck trying to get their blessings/approvals/whatever (especially if you are nobody yet).

Maybe you're just unlucky. There are still million other videos out there in YouTube that has yet to be removed.

 

[someone]

If you want to ride my bicycle you need to ask my permission first, if you want to use governments road also must get permission(license) first.

Its the same with a song.

want to use my song (which includes singing it yourself) you need to get permission first.

Or at least in principle.

The reason youtube has so many covers videos is that its very hard to regulate something so big. Only those artists with really anal management (e.g. MCR) will bother to pull them down. They probably employ someone just to search youtube for videos tagged with MCR and flag them for copyright! If you are spending millions promoting an artist you want to make sure that when people search online they only find the content you have control over. You don't want a bootleg video where you can hear the band screw up, or vocals off pitch. You also don't want people to find some lousy cover version (no offense I haven't even heard your cover just making a point). You want them to get the specially crafted promotional messaging you have spent so much money on!

in the case of Prince maybe he took the clip down because he thought he sang in a lousy manner. He may not own the song but artists on that level do register themselves as a copyright. (e.g. you can't anyhow use their face without approval). So he could bring down the clip on that grounds.

Of course on the other side of the coin, some artists who don't have multi million dollar marketing budget are happy to accept these online covers and bootleg clips as free publicity. Which is where some of the other cases quoted come in.

 

[Soundaholic]

yeah it depends on the band actually. Speaking of which, I just remember youtube's most watched video is Avril's Girlfriend lolol (over 111 million views). I'll bet they'll never take that down

 

[500]

actually, covering music for public showcase is infringement, whether is it profit or non-profit. Covering music for public showcase need to have clearance from the owner of the music. Even using music for student film works needs to be cleared, before being allowed to be even showcased in the school auditorium for public exhibition. Some companies would allow usage of the songs for free for non-profit usage, but some would want you to pay.

there are cases which a few owners own a single song, like company a owns 0 to 12.6 secs, and company b owns from 12.61 secs to 24.3 secs. and I had to contact 2 companies to clear 1 portion of a song. this is very common.

as for why youtube took off your video, it is because that music company asks youtube to take it off. youtube has already said it will not take initiative to monitor which video to take off, they tell users to flag, and companies themselves to ask for videos to be taken off.

some companies are not so strict on these laws, because they think its free publicity, or they just dowan to "tekkan" as average joe, or they are youtube users themselves they understand. but they have every right to sue you if they want to.

those bands that cover songs from their heroes, like srv covering and selling hendrix's songs, the copyright has already been cleared, royalties have been paid.

 

[indianstallion]

He may not own the song but artists on that level do register themselves as a copyright. (e.g. you can't anyhow use their face without approval). So he could bring down the clip on that grounds.
.

I don't know if that is possible in a legal sense cos if it was then what about the paparazzi? They would have to clear all their pics with the celebrities first.

But the irony of this was that apparently Radiohead wanted to see the cover themselves, but it was pulled off youtube before they could see it. It's a bit bizarre when you don't have the legal right to listen to your own song isn't it, even if it's a cover.

But yeah I am no lawyer. In the end, legal or not, I feel these actions are dumb because you are only hurting/pissing off the fans , the people who buy your music and go to your concerts. These videos whether bad or good are there because people care about the band and their music, it's not like they are making money off it. If I was a band or label I would be even more worried if I CAN'T find any videos of people covering my band's songs.

 

[500]

I agree there are loopholes in the copyright law. How come no one sue sum41 for ripping off so many other artists?

I once "ripped off" chords from a song, improvise on the melody, and it sounds like my "own" song, for my work.

 

[159]

Wonder if Marie Digby paid her royalties...

Anyway, will it still be considered a cover if you play the song, but in a different arrangement? Example, if the arrangement is "verse,chorus,verse,chorus,verse,chorus,solo,chorus" and I did it in a "verse,chorus,verse,chorus,solo,verse,chorus" arrangement and improvised on the solo, would it still be a copyright infringement?

 

[theliverevolution]

MArie Digby would have paid her royalties for releasing the songs, at least on CD. on Youtube i'm not sure.

But yet again, I feel that the bands that others are "infringing copyrights" upon must be a little flexible about it. Fair enough, one may argue that it is infringment. But also, it is also, in a sense, a "free" way for bands to promote their songs. Don't forget today's Gen Y is very tech savvy, all using MP3 players. Surely these teens would want to pay for the music so they can listen onto their MP3s right?

 

[bigblackbear]

well, if that is the case, then what about shows like *insert country here* idol or don't forget the lyrics?

 

[Ocean]

well, if that is the case, then what about shows like *insert country here* idol or don't forget the lyrics?

i believe the producers of the shows have already asked permission to use the songs beforehand.

 

[bigblackbear]

i believe the producers of the shows have already asked permission to use the songs beforehand.

but i'm pretty sure that doesnt happen in the auditioning rounds of american idol, right? haha the law is so... weird

 

[fuzzmusick]

Wonder if Marie Digby paid her royalties...

I think she's too cute that youtube wants her there.. And take no action.. Haha!

 

[someone]

TV companies pay a blanket license but they do have to account for every single second of music used in their programmes so that the collection agencies know who to allocate the funds too (altho its much more complicated than that in practice!).

And ever wondered why we don't see any music videos being played on Channel 5? well thats because they haven't paid for the license required so if they were to screen one music video they would have to pay a much higher one time license fee.

 

[recklessnick]

i tot it wouldnt matter as long as you're not earning money from it.
i think its the record companies that have a problem with it, i believe bands would be flattered if you cover their songs.

 

[someone]

If it belongs to someone else and you use it then it matters what.

If you are hanging out in school andsome stranger walks up picks up your mp3 player from the table and starts listening without asking you would be pissed right?

Its the same concept here.

If someone else wrote it, they should have the right to give/refuse permission for using it

 

[indianstallion]

If you are hanging out in school andsome stranger walks up picks up your mp3 player from the table and starts listening without asking you would be pissed right?

Its the same concept here.

Don't agree with your analogy. You are referring to something tangible, where if it is taken from you, you lose access to it and can't use it as long as the stranger has it, then of course you will be pissed.

My idea of a suitable analogy would be if you wrote an article, and some stranger reads it and then likes it so much that he quotes it in an article which he publishes online, but it is credited to you. Would you be pissed, even if the article he wrote was crap?

 

[visa]

That's conventional wisdom, which are at the heart of the legalities of our industry. That said, I think it's time that everyone in the industry woke up and realize that publicity is a good thing.

MCR doesn't stand to lose anything if someone covers their song. If somebody plays their song in the streets, that's added publicity for them, which is a good thing.

If perfomer X earns money from playing MCR's song, that is not money that MCR loses, that is money that X gains. No money slips out of MCR's pocket. If X didn't play the song, would MCR be better off or worse off? It doesn't make a difference to them financially at that moment, but it does make a difference to their status as a musician/songwriter in the long run.

But so what if MCR doesn't earn money from people playing covers of their song? Everybody who chooses to play their song helps to publicize and increase awareness of their music, in turn expanding their audience, and potentially, buyers of their music and merchandise. This will definitely benefit them in the long run.

So I think the argument that "I will lose money if people cover my song without paying me" is bullshit. Payment is nice to have if you can get it and you should fight for it as much as you can, but if you can't, so be it!

And finally, If you get into music thinking that nobody else should be allowed to play your songs, you are a sad, deluded and selfish person. Music is a gift to be shared and interpreted.

 

[astaroth]

remember not to sing in your bathroom too loudly! copyright infringement! IP Man will come down hard on you

 

[wjl123]

Totally agree with visa's point. Somehow music has turned into a product now, strictly for marketing and stuff... But I like how Metallica actually thank their fans and comment on those who posted videos of their DM songs like within a week of its release and other videos too...

It somehow also applies to Funtwo's canon rock cover, although he covered it, he gained so much popularity then also helped JerryC the original arranger to gain some credit too.

 

[maven]

bro that means your cover is damn good