Question about copyright for song/unplugged song

[davewalton]

Hi,Let's say I write/record an uptempo alternative/punk/pop song (stretch your imaginations here ), something for an "ala" Blink 182 listing or something similar. I also record an "unplugged" version of the same song, something that might do well in television placement, like on a WB program similar to One Tree Hill or something like The OC.Can they ever be considered as two different songs if an exclusive deal comes along for one of the versions? How about copyright? How is something like Clapton's "Layla" handled in those instances?Curious Dave wants to know... Dave

[zink]

Probably wouldn't work. Definitely wouldn't work if they're lyrics involved. You'd have to make it a new song.Why not change it up a little. Substitute some chords and change the arrangement and maybe the key and the tempo. Make sure the melodies are different enough...When you copyright, your usually copyrighting the composition and the arrangement (and a host of other things). I would imagine that the acoustic Layla version would be registered as a different arrangement (if it's re-registered at all).HTHZink

[davewalton]

Quote:When you copyright, your usually copyrighting the composition and the arrangement (and a host of other things). I would imagine that the acoustic Layla version would be registered as a different arrangement (if it's re-registered at all).Layla is actually a good example and maybe more appropriate for a "what if" discussion. Here's a question for anyone. Layla and "unplugged" Layla - lyrics, melody, chords... all the same. Did the exclusive publisher for the original Layla automatically inherit exclusive publishing rights for the "unplugged" Layla?

[arkjack]

There are two types of copyright... one for the composition, and a separate one for a sound recording. The composition is the original work, and can only be copyrighted once. Thus there is only one copyright to the "song" Layla. The sound recording is a copyrightable intangible unto itself. Thus, my "recording" of a my own version of Layla with sitars and Sudenese pan flutes is copyrightable as a recording. If I actually sell copies of that recording, I owe mechanicals to Eric as the owner of the song copyright. (as is what the Harry Fox Agency does....) When my version of Layla is played on every radio station in the country, and every elevator in any building, or at the beginning of major sport events, Eric earns the performance royalty and is paid by his PRO. As the recording artist, I don't believe I get squat in royalty on performance because I don't own the work.Whether you would be able to market a different version of a song that you have under contract would depend most likely on the terms you negotiate. Usually, if you write a song for an artist, the label would ask for a "hold" that is an agreement to not market or release the work to anyone else. So even if you did the unplugged version as your own recording, you would probably piss off the label if it wound up getting placed before the artist had a chance to record and release their version.I just had this come up. I wanted to perform "That Scares Me" as part of my repetoire. I was asked not to until the recording by Van Zant is released, which happened yesterday. I have the OK now to perform it in public. (It is one really great song by the way if you get a chance to check it out.....).ArkJack

[hephaluemp]

Quote:Hi,Let's say I write/record an uptempo alternative/punk/pop song (stretch your imaginations here ), something for an "ala" Blink 182 listing or something similar. I also record an "unplugged" version of the same song, something that might do well in television placement, like on a WB program similar to One Tree Hill or something like The OC.Can they ever be considered as two different songs if an exclusive deal comes along for one of the versions? How about copyright? How is something like Clapton's "Layla" handled in those instances?Curious Dave wants to know... DaveHi Dave,I think the easiest way to look at this, would be thinking of the second one as a remix.As you know, there are two rights involved in a recorded song, the rights to the song (songwriter/publisher), and the rights to the sound-recording (record-company/production-company).So, in your thought-experiment - it's the same song, the second one is a remix.When a song is used to pictures, synchronized - they need both rights although it in some cases are packed together as just one, but it's two different rights that could belong to two different groups.So, you can give away exclusive rights to the sound-recording of the remix of the song. Hepha Luemp

[orionsongs]

Quote:When you copyright, your usually copyrighting the composition and the arrangement (and a host of other things). I would imagine that the acoustic Layla version would be registered as a different arrangement (if it's re-registered at all). Layla is actually a good example and maybe more appropriate for a "what if" discussion. Here's a question for anyone. Layla and "unplugged" Layla - lyrics, melody, chords... all the same. Did the exclusive publisher for the original Layla automatically inherit exclusive publishing rights for the "unplugged" Layla?Hiya Dave, it would depend on the terms in the contract, as from my experience, when a publisher signs an exclusive to a song, it usally means in any form the melody and lyrics take. As we all know chords and arrangements can change but the core of the song remains the same (the melody and lyric). Prime example "I Will Always Love You" by Dolly Parton...also here in the UK a lot of club tracks either take a sample or recreate part of a song with melody and lyric, the publisher still owns the rights to the part used or recreated. It can be a minefield as a friend of mine found out but on the whole, the publishers seem to focus on the exclusive to the melody and lyric, unless it is a very recognisable riff and then thats where it can get complicated, because arrangers/producers and record companies can get involved......oh the music biz, what a wonderful web we weave...lolHugsPete

[zircon]

arkjack hit the nail on the head in every area... I'm taking a course in Publishing and this is exactly what the professor (an entertainment lawyer and hit songwriter) taught us.

[mikehelms]

Quote:Whether you would be able to market a different version of a song that you have under contract would depend most likely on the terms you negotiate. Usually, if you write a song for an artist, the label would ask for a "hold" that is an agreement to not market or release the work to anyone else. So even if you did the unplugged version as your own recording, you would probably piss off the label if it wound up getting placed before the artist had a chance to record and release their version.I just had this come up. I wanted to perform "That Scares Me" as part of my repetoire. I was asked not to until the recording by Van Zant is released, which happened yesterday. I have the OK now to perform it in public. (It is one really great song by the way if you get a chance to check it out.....).ArkJack OK.. help me out here if you would..Let say you write a piece and do a version of it prior to anyone purchasing the rights to it.. and say you have it on Myspace or Utube or something ..Is this detrimental... I can see their asking you to take it down until after it's released by the Artists but does it hurt having it up already? I mean Hell, I'm just trying to sell my capabilities as a song writer" (in the case of the Country music I write) but am I somehow Damaging my possibilities in Moving those pieces? I mean in truth there isn't a whole lot off viewing that gets done on any of those sites...and even combined on my best Vid. with all the sites put together I may have some 10,000 views and maybe another 5,000 listenings...( outside estimates . only)Any thought's .. ' any all knowing beings out there? Michael

[arkjack]

My guess would be that you would want to placate the label/artist as much as possible, and would voluntarily remove the song from the sites so as not to publicize the song prior to the release. I would also say personally, I am concious to only put material that is B++ of my work. the other stuff, (whether its done yet or not)... I keep close to the vest and work with on the pitches. Kind of like that "hit in my back pocket" approach. So I don't think that it initially impairs your chances to have it out there, but once you get some interest in a song that you have a copy of out on the internet, you'll be paying attention.... to what the customer wants....ArkJack