Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

A creative space for business discussions.

Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff

Post Reply
rk000
Active
Active
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:17 am
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by rk000 » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:55 am

Hello wonderful Taxi community,I'm familiar with the way to copyright many songs as one collection (and I appreciate the clarification others have provided on here!). But after spotting a short paragraph in "The Craft and Business of Songwriting" (3rd ed.) by John Braheny, I was hoping someone could explain another part of this to me. He points out that: "if your song is not registered (and your song cannot be verified as registered if it's not registered individually), you are not eligible to collect compulsory license fees if another artist records it or it's used in an audio/visual production" (161). I have a few promising songs that, to save money, I was hoping to copyright with others as a single collection, but I also want to protect the rights addressed above.So, my question is: does including individual song titles (whether as 'alternative' or 'contents' titles for the collection) mean the same thing as individual registration of each song in the collection that would preserve these rights?I would really appreciate help on this one!Thank you,Bobby

rk000
Active
Active
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:17 am
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by rk000 » Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:06 am

Here's the best advice on this issue I've been able to find, in case it will be useful for someone else:http://www.musicbizadvice.com/qa_copyri ... _later.htm(after looking at the preview here, it looks like you'll need to remove the space within 'title' in the address before the link will work)

edteja
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 1171
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:07 am
Gender: Male
Location: Siver City, New Mexico
Contact:

Re: Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by edteja » Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:11 am

So the continuation form seems to solve the problem. It can't be searched, but it is proof that a song was part of the collection. Thanks.
"In the future, when we finally get over racism, bigotry, and everyone is purple, red, and brown ... then we'll have to hate people for who they truly are."--George Carlin

rk000
Active
Active
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:17 am
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by rk000 » Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:55 am

The CON form helps the cause for your own proof, but I think the main point is to include the individual song names as the actual title, so they show up in the online search when someone else looks. Of course, the article still says the best (but most expensive) way is to copyright songs individually.I'm still puzzled, but I think I've figured out something that will at least work for the PA form:The maximum number of characters that shows up in the online 'title' field appears to be 400, including spaces and all punctuation. You can find movie titles that stretch onto two lines and the total character limit for one line is 200.However, you can only fit 116 total characters in the 'title' field of the .pdf forms before it jumps to the next line and is not visible in the final product.So, to play it safe, at least for the PA form, it seems the best option is to include as many song titles as you can within the 116 character limit.I'm still not sure what to do to list individual track names for a published album on the SR form - I wonder if listing them as 'alternative' titles instead of 'contents' may work. Otherwise, John Braheny says you can add individual titles as 'amplifications' to an already-registered work by completing Form CA and sending in another $30.It looks like John Mayer registered some of his earlier material using a similar approach as described in the article (see below) - where he included the individual track names both in the 'title', 'alternative', and/or 'other' fields. I suspect the 'appears in' information may have been added later when he published the album and assigned the copyright to the other parties. He may not have originally used a title for the collection. I hope that helps anyone else trying to protect their work on a budget.=================Type of Work: Music Registration Number / Date: PA0001239562 / 2003-07-16 Title: Back to you ; My stupid mouth ; Victoria ; Quiet. Appears in: Inside wants out. Columbia CK 86861, c2002. Compact disc Publisher Number: Columbia CK 86861 Performer: Performed by John Mayer. Copyright Claimant: Sony/ATV Tunes, LLC, Specific Harm Music Date of Creation: 2002 Date of Publication: 1999-09-24 Authorship on Application: words & music: John Mayer. Variant title: Back to you Other Title: My stupid mouth Victoria Quiet Names: Mayer, John Sony/ATV Tunes, LLC Specific Harm Music

rk000
Active
Active
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:17 am
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by rk000 » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:25 am

I finally emailed the Copyright Office directly about this. Here is their response in an email from earlier today:My question: Using Form PA, if I list individual song titles as 'alternative' titles, will they show up individually when searched? Using Form SR, can I accomplish the same thing listing individual song names as 'alternative' titles?Their answer: When you list the individual titles in those spaces, and then search the catalog under one of those titles, the record of registration for the collection will be retrieved. The viewable record, listed under the collection title, will then contain a list of all the individual titles in that collection.My question: On Form SR, if I list them as 'contents', am I correct that individual song titles will NOT show up when searched - even if the name of the collection is known?Their answer: This is not correct. The same as above would apply. In addition, you may alternatively enter "See Form CON" in the in the "Previous or Alternative (and Contents) Titles" space and complete Spaces A and C on the addendum Form CON.Conclusion: I think either the Braheny book may need to be updated or I'm still confused.

edteja
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 1171
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:07 am
Gender: Male
Location: Siver City, New Mexico
Contact:

Re: Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by edteja » Sat Mar 29, 2008 2:50 am

Well I searched my previous collections that used CON sheets for the titles and the titles don't come up. That was for two PAs. So you are saying (that they said) I need to list all the song titles as alternate titles for the collection?
"In the future, when we finally get over racism, bigotry, and everyone is purple, red, and brown ... then we'll have to hate people for who they truly are."--George Carlin

rk000
Active
Active
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:17 am
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Copyright Question Re: Compulsory License

Post by rk000 » Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:32 pm

That seems to be what the copyright office was saying, but I'm still not certain myself...I decided to give it a try including individual song titles as 'alternative' titles. If you want the individual songs in your already-registered collection to show up in a search, the Braheny book says the Corrections and Amplifications (CA) form can take care of that. Good luck!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests