Copyright question

No violation if you play it for free as far as I know... 8)

We're back to the old problem aren't we. I've got a London College of Music Grade 4 book on my desk which says at the top of every page "Photocopying this music is illegal"

A :-(

Is that two issues?

Is the photocopying illegal and can I perform it without paying royalties if I don't charge for the performance?

The answer to number 1 is yes it is illegal. When you buy music for a choir or for an acting troupe performing a musical, you need to buy a copy for each member that is performing.

The second answer is no you can't, you owe royalties unless you get a waiver from the copyright holder. Does anybody really do this? Nope, not that I know of.

What is the name of the book that all the jazz players used?

I can't remember the name, but I think it is the same type of thing that Musen is trying to do.

I suppose one could skirt the issue by learning the music and then teaching it to others. At least the first issue.
Or, of course, everyone could buy all the music!
Thanks!

What is the name of the book that all the jazz players used?
If I remember correctly it was called the "real book" as opposed to fake books which you can still buy.

Put aside the copying of sheet music issue which we know is illegal this leaves the open question "Is it really illegal for a band to COVER a song". The way the law is written it sounds like it is illegal but it does not get enforced.

Is that true?

Thanks Nils
"Is it really illegal for a band to COVER a song". The way the law is written it sounds like it is illegal but it does not get enforced.

Is that true?

I know in Bar's, they have to buy the right to do cover songs in said bar. From what I understand it is an annual fee.

Hi Musenfreund,

You might find a few more opinions on this in the "Songwriting and Copyrights" section of the forum.

There are several threads that touch on the questions, including a sticky that quotes some legal opinions about copywriting songs that Nick got a while back.

As far as I know, technically you should pay for each written copy of a song, and a copyright owner is entitled to get compensated for performances. Mostly, the last one is impossible to organise so there is some sort of general performing licence that covers public gigs (as Tracker mentioned). The money goes into a general fund that is split among all copyright holders, but not apparently on a "who sang what" basis. I'm not sure who administers it all.

In general there seems to be a wide variation between the "Letter of the Law" and what you might call "Accepted Community Practice" on most issues. Ownership of "Intellectual Property Rights" is always extremely hard to police and protect. Just look at photocopying of written work - public libraries actually provide photocopiers to assist us to rip authors off! There is some sort of rule about how many pages and how you use them, but nobody seems to know the rules or attempt to enforce them.

There's always a difference between what you'd like and what you can achieve.

Microsoft recently announced they'd bring out a cheap regional version of Windows (I think it was around $20 or $30) to sell in India, as few people could afford the prices they charge elsewhere, and piracy rates had been estimated at 70%. Even they have to face reality - occasionally.

Copyrighting is tough from other angles too. I looked into the practicality of registering some designs I'd done (furniture and three dimensionall puzzles) and it was pretty much a waste of time. The changes only had to be reasonably minor to get round it, and only the rich could afford the cost of a legal argument about it anyway.

I once spent a week ringing around Perth trying to discover what our State laws were regarding the copyright involving computer games. The EULA seeks to forbid a huge range of things - copying, selling, renting, and even given it away in many cases. Bluff or law? I rang the cops, a wide range of consumer group, legal organisations, government departments and so on. Nobody had any idea. The only reply other than "don't know" came from a lawyers' body who offered to give me a list of law firms who I could employ to mount a test case. Gee... thanks.... :?

The reality is that it seems to boil down to:

a) Conscience of the individual(s)
b) Were the legal owners actually disadvantaged or cheated of their rights to any significant degree
c) Is there any mechanism in place to police and prosecute possible violations and
d) Are the parties worth suing, and can anybody be bothered anyway.

Cheers, Chris

Thanks Nils
"Is it really illegal for a band to COVER a song". The way the law is written it sounds like it is illegal but it does not get enforced.

Is that true?

I know in Bar's, they have to buy the right to do cover songs in said bar. From what I understand it is an annual fee.

Right - Bars and other places of business that use music (live or jukebox) pay annual fees to BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC. Radio and TV do as well, and also Internet radio (live365.com is licensed by BMI and ASCAP, for example).

I've know of at least one live music bar in my area that got shut down because of failure to pay this fee and I've played at another club that requires that bands play no cover tunes, as they don't pay any of the PROs (performing rights organizations). As far as playing in your basement once and charging a cover, I have no clue of the legalities of that...

I've played at another club that requires that bands play no cover tunes, as they don't pay any of the PROs (performing rights organizations). As far as playing in your basement once and charging a cover, I have no clue of the legalities of that...

Interesting info about the distinction made between playing the cover tunes. I guess pubs/clubs/halls etc whose livelihood depends on those issues have to take care to cover themselves (um.. no pun intended there... ).

When I was involved in a theatrical group that put on musicals we often just hired a local hall ourselves. These were just town halls, scout halls or whatever. They were used by the community for all manner of things and had no regular staff or specific purpose. But we still had to pay for a short term performing licence, even though much of the material was often written by members of the group. At least, we did usually apply for one. I doubt if we would have been nailed like a club would if we'd forgotten now and then. :oops:

Cheers, Chris

Chris,
I'll have another look in that forum. I had checked quickly and missed the thread.
I had asked the question because I wondered if there was a distinction between a band that was getting paid and one that wasn't in terms of copyright issues. Apparently there isn't -- which is what I expected.
I do think the royalties question is another interesting dimension of the issue.
Thanks, everyone!

If you are performing for a private function (for example, a church group teen night or something) even if attendance is open to the public, you are not in violation of the copyright. Just as you can show a movie to the group. If you charge money for ANYTHING at that function (pop, chips, whatever) then you need to pay royalties, as your performance is generating revenue and is therefore a commercial production.

If you want to show a movie to a church group at no charge, you still have to pay royalties.

If that is voilation , what about downloading of songs via Kaaza and gnutella , it happens every second and nothing has been done over it. :?