Soundcloud Copyright Rules

[hookjawbrown]

I know that a lot of the members are posting and sharing their music on Soundcloud. I was perusing the Soundcloud copyright rules for posting original content and came across this:

"Can you answer “no” to all of the following questions?

Were you signed to a record label when you recorded the track?
Do you have a publishing deal?
Are you a member of a performing rights organization or collecting society?
Have you licensed your track to anyone else?"

Most all if not all of the members of Taxi are also members of a PRO. This bit of rules seems to prohibit any songwriter/composer who is commercial from posting to Soundcloud.

[6bq9]

It doesn't say that you can't upload your tracks if you can't answer no to all those questions, it says that if you can answer yes to all the yes questions and no to all the no questions that you likely don't have to worry about copyright problems.

Copyright Checklist
Copyright is complicated. If you have any doubt regarding the extent of your rights in any sounds, you should consult with a suitably qualified lawyer before uploading anything to SoundCloud or making any claims or counter-claims regarding your rights. However, as a general guide, here are some of the issues you might want to consider before uploading anything to SoundCloud:

If you can't answer yes to the yes list and no to the no list, you may need to do more research before uploading or you could potentially run into copyright problems. I.E. "Don't blame SoundCloud, we told you to talk to a lawyer first."

[hookjawbrown]

Makes sense, but I received an unauthorized use notice from Getty Images. It turns out they copyrighted a picture of blue sky and their bot said my blue sky background on my website was the same as theirs......

I am hearing more and more of automated copyright robots kicking stuff off of YouTube. I wonder if Soundcloud just doesn't want to run afoul of the PRO's robots.

[DesireInspires]

I wouldn't worry about these things.

[mojobone]

Word is, Soundcloud has been/is being absorbed by Getty Images, which some of you may recall subsumed the former Pump Audio. I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules by mentioning a still-extant licensing agency, but from personal experience, it appears Soundcloud has software that's plenty capable of sniffing out 'derivative works'. A couple of measures of a naked (even though modified) Addictive Drums preset was all it took to have my WIP linked to a demo of the Addictive Drums preset it was based on. On SoundCloud, it shows up in the same way a "related video" does on YouTube. Point to ponder.

[Len911]

I just heard someone's version of a Paul Simon song just yesterday on Soundcloud. The interesting conundrum is that with the automatic robots used to detect copyright infringement, if they dumped everything in violation, there wouldn't be a youtube or soundcloud.
How then does a company answer the accusations of selective enforcement? When two people have the same violation and only one is charged and the other isn't. Technically, Paul Simon couldn't even legally post his own song and not be in violation.

[andygabrys]

interesting point Len.

as I understand it - the bots can only recognize actually copyrighted sound recordings. similar technology on Shazam on the iPhone.

they cannot recognize copyrighted compositions.

so somebodies cover version of X tune won't necessarily be yanked.

Part of it is the commercial revenue derived from the posting.

If Paul Simon's record company owns the master, yes he would be infringing on their copyright if he posted it to his VEVO channel - although I am sure that his record company probably administers his VEVO channel anyways.

On the other hand, if someone posts a cover version of one of his songs, the record company won't necessarily yank it unless that cover artist is making $$$ of that posting. The way the revenue stream actually gets paid from YouTube at present is a little convoluted and hard for me to understand, but I wouldn't be surprised if said record company is making money off that cover artists upload. I would be interested in how this all really is working at this point.

[CabDriver]

YouTube and SoundCloud only enforce a copyright infringement by talking the content off their server if they have been specifically instructed to do so by the copyright holder. You will have to fill out a form to notify YouTube of a video with infringing content.

They protect themselves from legal liability or from having to pay ASCAP/BMI a large sum of money by having you agree to their copyright rules. Once you have agreed you are solely responsible for the content that you upload and they are under no legal obligation to monitor or filter each new track /video that you upload.

The robots can only detect songs via the same digital fingerprint technology that is used by Shazam. It is virtually impossible to recognize a new cover version of a hit song until it is added to the database.

[Len911]

Shazam? I thought the program was called "prism". Or maybe prism is where they all send their data to be "shazamed" by the NSA for copyright infringement?

[andygabrys]

Shazam? I thought the program was called "prism". Or maybe prism is where they all send their data to be "shazamed" by the NSA for copyright infringement?

naw I mean shazam, the iphone app. listens to a few seconds of a song and can name it out of a database.