Sax on the Web Forum banner

Recording Of Local Bands For Their Demo's

6K views 29 replies 9 participants last post by  Al Stevens 
#1 ·
I know if I record a cover band, so they can promote with a demo, they can not sell it for $$........................any other legal issues to be concerned with??
 
#27 ·
In a related area of interest, is a performer's ad lib solo over a tune's changes subject to copyright protection? One gains copyright protection as soon as one produces and original work (arguably an ad lib solo could be) and fixes it in time (via some form of electronic medium). So, if one transcribes the solo, and then publishes the transcription without first obtaining a performance license from the artist, does he or she have exposure to copyright infringement? Bear in mind, copyright protection begins when the original tune is fixed in time - and does not require registration. Registration simply provides others notice of the protection. Something to mull over. :D
 
#28 ·
Since we have kind of opened up the doors to some interesting discussion, it might be cool to talk a bit about "hold harmless" agreements. So, let's say the Gate Crashers come to you and say "we want to record a demo CD and include the Bullwinkle and Rocky theme." They further tell you that they have already obtained the mechanical license from the publisher. Being a suspicous sort (the lead singer of the Gate Crashers dated your sister and you know him a bit too well) you demand a hold harmless agreement saying that the Gate Crashers hold you harmless if they didn't quite tell you the whole truth on the license deal. Your name is on the Demo CD as the recording studio so aggrieved publishers will know where to find you. And wouldn't you know it, the Gate Crashers exaggerated a bit about having obtained the license, and now the publisher has sent you a friendly summons and complaint. :D Does the hold harmless agreement protect you? Probably not against the publisher's action. The publisher likely could care less about your agreement with the Gate Crashers. The publisher was not a party to that agreement and is not bound by its terms. You might have an action in contract against the Gate Crashers for them to indemnify you for your damages after the publisher gets through with you, but the hold harmless doesn't help you much against the publisher. So, by all means, get the band to sign a hold harmless agreement. But, just understand that it probably will be worth about as much as the paper it is written on if the other party is judgment proof (assuming that you take the other party to court and win). Perhaps a more meaningful solution in terms of prevention would be to verify the license before recording the tune. :) ;) And, just to add to the fun, it doesn't matter one iota if the band gives away the CD if they haven't obtained the license (unless they can demonstrate an exception such as the Fair Use Exception (unlikely under these facts)).
 
#29 ·
Al Stevens said:
; titles can't be copyrighted and neither can chord changes. The copyrighted parts of tunes are the melodies and lyrics. QUOTE]

Now I see how the Real Books came about...........;) (another topic)

-------

Thanks for the dialog people........learning some new things here.........It is impossible for me to find a lawyer up here in the sticks.............I will depend on HFA for doing things right............we'll see where I am in a couple years:D I'll probably go nuckin' futs:shock:
 
#30 ·
rcwjd said:
In a related area of interest, is a performer's ad lib solo over a tune's changes subject to copyright protection?
Improvisation is a special case in copyright law. A written arrangement is a derivative work. An improvisation is not. The idea is to free the improvisor from needing the composer's permission to make an improvisation, whereas the arranger does need that permission.

Since an improvisation is not a derivitive work subject to copyright protection, is it an original work subject to copyright protection? Very gray area. How much, if any, of the original melody exists in the improvisation? I think the framers and the lawyers and the courts avoid this issue, because (1) it's too thorny, and (2) they don't understand the difference between the head and a ride.

I could argue that since the head of my recording is less than five minutes and the ride, which is my impromptu composition based on the chord changes, takes up all the time above five minutes, I should not have to pay HFA the extra fees for the mechanical license. I wonder how far that would get if I went platinum with a high-visibility recording?

Does Supersax owe royalties to Bird's estate?

It would probably take court cases to establish such precedents. There is probably not enough money at stake to justify them.

Copyright and other parts of intellectual property law have a lot of untested gray areas.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top