Copywrite question

[Edgar Summers]

Hi guys

 

I suppose I could just Google this question, but you guys are so much smarter than most search engines.

 

Many years back around 1987 I wrote several songs for an album with a local group I was in . No big seller. We sold it at concerts and to any interested friends, family and fans.

 

I believe my Mother may have bought the most copies of anyone.

 

The group broke up on somewhat of a sour note. One of the members tried to get me to sign over any rights to my originals (there were two). I refused and never gave any more thought to it.

 

I've recently thought about redoing both songs

 

Last week my brother mentioned that this guy may have gone ahead and copywrited the tunes anyway.

 

Is there a way to research this online?

 

Just wondering

ed

[linwood]

You can search both ascap and bmi - titles/writers/pub

[iLaw]

Is there a way to research this online?

Start here

Larry.

[Edgar Summers]

Thanks for help-so far i don't think he hijacked me.

[Chris Link]

I believe my Mother may have bought the most copies of anyone.

 

Ed, I like your mom even though I've never met her.

 

BTW, it's "copyright", as in "rightful owner", not "I did write that song, and I own the copywrite".

 

Common mistake.

 

Good luck with the new project. Hey, if all else fails, Mom will buy 'em and give 'em out as gifts.

 

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Yeah, "right", like you own the rights.

 

People do not realise this, but this registration is just a form of proving that you did it when you did it. If you have some other unaltered and unalterable performance that predates anybody elses of the same piece of music, you can prove that you wrote it that way. It used to be common practice to record the song and send it to yourself via registered mail, then not open it. (until you open it in court...)

 

Copyright covers a number of things... a performance of a song can have its own copyright, seperate from the song itself.

 

You can copyright the song, and if he has already gotten a copyright on the song no one will know... nobody does a search or anything like they do with patents. It will only come up if he sues you or you sue him. Then, I imagine that the various members of the original band will be called to testify as to who wrote what when, and 12 of your peers will decide who is right.

 

The long and the short of it is that unless and until there is significant money involved, it isn't going to matter. Because in court, the agrieved party has to prove damages, and for 'damages' read 'loss of money'. So you can record the songs if you like, and until you are ready to pack up and move to Bevery (Hills, that is...) no one can take any legal steps against you.

 

Bill

[Bridog6996]

Actually, the "poor man's copyright" (sending a recording or whatever in the mail to yourself) is a serious misconception, and proves nothing in a court of law, which is what would matter if you happened to find yourself in some sort of copyright dispute. No lawyer would probably even take the case if your whole argument depended on an unopened envelope. It's literally a waste of a stamp. A registration with the Copyright Office trumps all, even if your unopened envelope pre-dated the registration. Even then, it would still probably come down to a jury trial, but you'd have a leg to stand on.

 

Plus, registering with the Copyright Office is hardly expensive. It doesn't really need a "poor man's" method in my opinion. The current fee is $35 per form. The key term is "per form." What a lot of people don't know is that you can register many works as a collection under a single form. If you've got a whole butt-load of songs, register them all at once for the one payment. But, I digress...

 

The point is, "officially" registering your intellectual property is the best, if not the only, real protection. It's true that, technically, you own the copyright to a song the instant you write it. That piece of paper is just a little insurance policy, should you ever find yourself in an infringement situation. Hey, you never know. Some A and R guy might randomly stumble across your song, and hand it to [insert random popular musician here], and you could get screwed out of a nice chunk of dough. It's happened. With frightening frequency too.

[JeffLearman]

Because in court, the agrieved party has to prove damages, and for 'damages' read 'loss of money'. So you can record the songs if you like, and until you are ready to pack up and move to Bevery (Hills, that is...) no one can take any legal steps against you.

 

Bill

Not quite true: even without damages, they can prohibit you from performing/distributing without paying royalties. Note that they can't prohibit you from performing/distributing completely, even without their permission you can obtain "mechanical" rights (see http://songfile.com for how you can do this for someone else's published music, in the US).

 

Definitely read the stuff at http://www.copyright.gov.

 

Summary, for the US:

 

1) You get an implicit copyright when you fix your work in any medium. If you never wrote it down or recorded it, way back when, you do not have a copyright from way back when.

 

2) Registering your copyright with the government establishes your claim to have originated the work.

 

3) If there is a dispute, a registration is assumed to be true, and the burden of proving otherwise is on whoever would claim it's not. If the same song is registered twice, the earliest wins -- but it's a matter for the court to decide whether they're "the same" or not.

 

4) In a suit, what matters is testimony. Evidence is fantastic, but only if you can get a witness to testify to the evidence. This is one of the many reasons why mailing to yourself isn't very good evidence: who do you put on the stand? You aren't a very credible witness on your behalf, even with what seems to be good "proof". (This last is from my father, a retired patent attorney.) A copyright registration is a big exception to this: it's assumed without testimony.

 

5) bottom line: Registering a copyright is worthwhile, since it's cheap. You can file a whole CD's worth of tunes for one fee (a little over $30, last I looked), as long as the authorship is identical for all the tunes. Lawsuits are not worthwhile unless there's serious money involved.

[Mr. Nightime]

Also remember that the copyright date is when it is received by the copyright office, not when processed. When the package arrives, it is immediately date stamped, and that becomes the legal copyright date.

 

 

 

 

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

" If you've got a whole butt-load of songs, register them all at once for the one payment."

 

This has also been challenged. Urban myth has it that you can loose with that sort of 'coverage'. I have no idea, but it makes more sense to me to register individual works. (It was a lot more reasonable when it was only $6 a song, but they raised the rates because everyone who wrote new words to a Louie Louie chord pattern was sending in their work for $6, fewer do for $35)

 

"Actually, the "poor man's copyright".. is a serious misconception, and proves nothing in a court of law, ... A registration with the Copyright Office trumps all, even if your unopened envelope pre-dated the registration. "

 

Untrue. At the very least an unopened registered letter pits the veracity of the Postal Service against the Copyright Office. If the court opens the letter in front of the jury and it is the song in question with lead sheet etc and it predates the other party's proof, it would be very strange if you did not win. As to presuming to know what kind of a case a lawyer would take.... welllllll now.... (g)

 

"even without damages, they can prohibit you from performing/distributing without paying royalties. "

 

On paper. In court you still have to prove damages. If I was to play a bunch of your songs and never pay a dime to you, you have to prove in court how you were materially harmed. So the guy doing it in a local club can probably get away with it, while Paul McCartney or Elton John can be shown to have profitted from your work, and you'll likely get an award.

 

I didn't mention specifically mechanicals, nor did I talk about sampling.... but I've had to obtain mechanical rights for various reasons over the years and it is mostly cheap and easy.

 

Nobody chould take legal advice from a bunch of yahoos like us on the web, but in the specific situation mentioned by the original poster I think that he is safe in recording and performing works that he has written in the past, or works that he has co-written with others. The worst that could happen is that he could have some success with them, and the co-writers would be entitled to a piece of the action.

 

 

 

Bill

[Joe Muscara]

You can now register your copyrights online. The fee is less than the mail-in version, last I checked, and I got my certificate within a few weeks.

[Bridog6996]

"Actually, the "poor man's copyright".. is a serious misconception, and proves nothing in a court of law, ... A registration with the Copyright Office trumps all, even if your unopened envelope pre-dated the registration. "

 

Untrue. At the very least an unopened registered letter pits the veracity of the Postal Service against the Copyright Office. If the court opens the letter in front of the jury and it is the song in question with lead sheet etc and it predates the other party's proof, it would be very strange if you did not win. As to presuming to know what kind of a case a lawyer would take.... welllllll now.... (g)

 

Honestly, the "poor man's copyright" is completely meaningless because it's incredibly easy to forge, and it's not like you'll have the post office to back you up. One example of many ways: mail yourself a handful of empty envelopes today, and they'll have a postmark with today's date. 5 years from now, you could "borrow" a song from someone, write it down, and throw it in the empty envelope you mailed yourself 5 years ago. Seal it up, and suddenly you have "proof" that you wrote the song 5 years ago. Ask a lawyer, or anyone with extensive knowledge of intellectual property law. "Poor man's copyright" does absolutely nothing, and has no legal legs.

 

I won't tell anyone how to live their life, but I would never rely on it, at any rate, and I would never recommend it as a viable option.

[Bridog6996]

4) In a suit, what matters is testimony. Evidence is fantastic, but only if you can get a witness to testify to the evidence. This is one of the many reasons why mailing to yourself isn't very good evidence: who do you put on the stand? You aren't a very credible witness on your behalf, even with what seems to be good "proof". (This last is from my father, a retired patent attorney.) A copyright registration is a big exception to this: it's assumed without testimony.

 

Indeed, an official copyright registration is what's called prima facie (legal term), meaning that it stands on it's own as evidence. An unopened envelope would need a ton of back-up testimony to prove that the contents were actually sealed inside on or before the postmark date before a judge would even consider admitting it as evidence. And even if you went through all of that, and the other person held the official registration, you lose, plain and simple. That's assuming that the court has decided that the songs are indeed one and same (that's a whole different story).

 

It's doubtful that the original poster will ever encounter this situation, but regardless, I think it's essential for anyone to know the legal details of their profession. Too many musicians don't really know about how the business works. Knowledge is power!