Opinions of odd (C) issue ?

[d halfnote]

The Dealio:

In the past, working with a partner, we composed numerous songs.

Most were either clearly created by one or the other.

A few were very mixed.

We're currently at odds (over completely separate, non-musical issues).

 

My intent is to use some of those compositions for a project that would involve copyrighting them, assigning publishing, etc.

Most are clearly my creations in terms of lyic, melody, etc., involving the former partner's chord progs &/or ideas for title, non-copyrightable things.

 

However, I'd like to include him as co-author as a gesture of respect (& to avoid charges of rip off). I could just leave him out & be on solid legal ground as author.

 

What's yer opinion on © &/or publishing material without someone's previous aggreement to be listed as co-writer ?

[brenner13]

I wouldn't burn bridges no matter how rickety they may be. However, is there potential monetary gains to be made from publishing part of this previous collaboration? What percentage if any, will the other party assume or expect?

 

That's tricky stuff, for sure.

[d halfnote]

Monetary compensation would indeed be the point of publishing.

My policy is equal division between listed authors (minus, of course, administration charges).

There are usually other ways of handing "work for hire" contributions.

[brenner13]

Silly question on my behalf...obviously this conversation is way over my head.

[WesG]

"involving the former partner's chord progs &/or ideas for title, non-copyrightable things."

 

Chord progressions are most certainly copyrightable.

 

Wes

[DulceLabs.com]

"involving the former partner's chord progs &/or ideas for title, non-copyrightable things."

 

Chord progressions are most certainly copyrightable.

 

Wes

 

I would tend to agree. Even he came up with the old I IV V I, it was his idea to use for that particular song. I don't envy - this is a tough spot to be in. You really should be talking with a lawyer who specializes in intellectual property issues.

Good luck.

[J. Dan]

"involving the former partner's chord progs &/or ideas for title, non-copyrightable things."

 

Chord progressions are most certainly copyrightable.

 

Wes

 

I would tend to agree. Even he came up with the old I IV V I, it was his idea to use for that particular song. I don't envy - this is a tough spot to be in. You really should be talking with a lawyer who specializes in intellectual property issues.

Good luck.

Or change it up just enough to not be his idea anymore.

[Michael W]

I am not an attorney, but this is my understanding:

 

- In the US, something is copyrighted the moment it is created.

 

- You can help protect your copyright by registering it with the U.S. Copyright Office in Washington.

 

- You can register your copyright on anything - full scores, melodies, chord changes, lyrics... anything you want. You can even register a copyright on a C Major chord. Or a recording of your performance of a C Major chord.

 

- Registering a copyright on something doesn't necessarily give you any rights that you wouldn't have had otherwise. Anyone is free to hire an attorney to try and enforce their copyright registration on the C Major chord, or the I-IV-V blues progression. This would be a waste of money, unless someone was using your copyrighted recording of a C Major chord, or the blues progression, without permission.

 

- But back to the OP's issue: The only wrinkle MAY be that in the paperwork to register your copyright with the USCO, if you want to list the other guy as a co-author, he may need to sign the registration paper as well. I don't know the answer to this.

 

As has been previously suggested, I would think that it would be best to err on the side of caution.

 

And - remember that your posts here will live forever on the internet, and the person could always use them as evidence in any future litigation.

 

I think there are probably some excellent sources of copyright information online. The U. S. Copyright Office website is probably a great place to start.

 

 

[Bobadohshe]

Can't you just ask your partner?

[Steve Nathan]

I could just leave him out & be on solid legal ground as author.

 

SAYS WHO

 

You are co-writers. With no prior written agreement otherwise, you each are entitled to half. You can take your half and keep the publishing or assign it to whomever you like. So can he.

No one counts words. No one assigns more ownership to one part of the creative process over others. Your words are not worth more than his chord progressions. Even if one of you had nothing more than the "idea", and then sat in the room nodding approval as the other constructed everything else, you are still co-writers.

 

And you can't take your words and write new chords and call it 100% your "new" song either. Those words are already part of the song you wrote together and the Judge will side with him when he sues you, which he will rightly do if you have any success at all.

 

I suggest you stick with that "Gesture of respect" thing. Then concentrate on promoting this endeavor so there will be plenty to go around. And next time, if you want "all the money", write by yourself.

[Baldwin Funster]

I had an issue a couple of years ago where we let the vocalist in our original band go home to write lyrics. He comes back 2 days later with lyrics his wife wrote. Now the band involuntarily lost 20 percent each or our 25 percent and the drummer was entitled to an extra share as representing his wife. That's called the Yoko maneuver.

[JeffLearman]

Here's the form:

 

http://www.copyright.gov/forms/formpa.pdf

 

There's space for only one signature, which needn't be the author: it's the person attesting that the information is correct. There's a space for "Nature of authorship" under each author, so you can say "music" for him and "words and music" for yourself.

 

I suggest you inform your partner that you'll be copyrighting the works. I doubt you need his permission; just state the facts fairly in the copyright claim.

 

You can submit any number of works in one submission (and one fee), but all works submitted together have to have the exact same authorship.

 

As mentioned above, the copyright already exists; one is created implicitly whenever a work is recorded in any fixed medium. (Actually, if you record the audio, you get two copyrights: the PA for "performing arts", which covers the concepts, and the SR for "soundrecording" aka PR or (P) for "phonorecording", which covers only the specific recording.) You can use © and (p) without filing forms.

 

If you are first to file the forms, then you are considered the rightful author by default, and anyone making counterclaims has the burden of proof. Like a land title (but unlike most legal documents) it is accepted into the legal record without requiring testimony.

 

The other principle benefit of filing is that, if someone violates your copyright, in addition to suing for "actual damages" (lost income) you can also sue for "statutory damages" and attorneys' fees. If I understand it correctly, statutory damages are punishment, and can be up to 3 times the actual damages. If you don't file, you lose the right to sue for statutory damages and attorneys' fees.

 

Kas, IANAL, but the drummer/vocalist should get an extra share for "representing" only if you all agree to it; it's not automatic. But your math must be off, or I'm misunderstanding. If there are 4 of you plus the wife, and the drummer is getting an extra share, that's a total of 6 shares, not 5.

 

In any case, if he's paid as his wife's representative wife, that should come out of his wife's share, and be based on an agreement between them. He should get only his 20% as co-author, assuming 5 co-authors: the four of you plus the wife.

 

Agents, legal counsel, and other representatives are not "authors" and do not get full shares. They get whatever percentage they negotiate from each of the authors they represent.

 

Of course, there's also "work for hire". If the drummer hired his wife to write lyrics, he would be listed as an author and the "work for hire" checkbox would be checked, and his wife's name wouldn't appear at all.

[Baldwin Funster]

I should have been more clear. The drummer was the singer on that song. So 4 writers became 5. For us it ended up not matter ing. The tunes were only released locally on CD®. The lazy turds didn't want to put the effort in to copyright and put on itunes. I left over stuff like this.

[Aidan]

I could just leave him out & be on solid legal ground as author.

 

SAYS WHO

 

You are co-writers. With no prior written agreement otherwise, you each are entitled to half. You can take your half and keep the publishing or assign it to whomever you like. So can he.

No one counts words. No one assigns more ownership to one part of the creative process over others. Your words are not worth more than his chord progressions. Even if one of you had nothing more than the "idea", and then sat in the room nodding approval as the other constructed everything else, you are still co-writers.

 

And you can't take your words and write new chords and call it 100% your "new" song either. Those words are already part of the song you wrote together and the Judge will side with him when he sues you, which he will rightly do if you have any success at all.

 

I suggest you stick with that "Gesture of respect" thing. Then concentrate on promoting this endeavor so there will be plenty to go around. And next time, if you want "all the money", write by yourself.

 

Absolutely agree with Steve on this.

[d halfnote]

I guess my premise wasn't clear.

Questions of authorship aren't the issue.

 

The snag here's former partner's refusal to respond b/c of some attitude.

 

This leaves me with option of shelving use (unacceptable) or proceeding along an apparently (from what I'm learning in tryna get opinions for various sources) unusual situation.

 

This precedes a planned online marketing campaign & would involve both creative © & mechanicals of various sorts (I hope) as well as the intention to not exacerbate animosity...or at least avoid annoying disputes.

 

Accounting can handle held royalties but the questions of [1] assigning someone authorship if they then claim not to want it (potentially "damaging their reputation") & [2] consigning material to a PRO (as Scott F, saliently addressed above, & which may decide the matter for me) seem tricky.

 

VARIANT QUESTION: Does certified notice of intention to procede sound adequate ?

[Baldwin Funster]

How about registering the material as yours but being ready to surrender rights and money if a lawsuit is ever threatened? Send him a registered letter informing him that you are following this course because of his non response to earlier attempts. Then you have shown some goodwill. Chances are that unless the material has some high profile success it will never come up.