<p>Hi all,</p>
<p>My S is composing music. We have talked a lot about copyrighting some of his pieces so that he can then distribute a CD of his work. so he can ultimately sell his services as a composer. Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about this? </p>
<p>I actually have a friend who is a copyright lawyer, so I do not have to worry about that part of the process. What I am really wondering is if this is the right thing to do...Does it make sense to copyright his compositions at this time?</p>
<p>What about "soundcloud"? Does anyone have any experience their? I think you upload your pieces there but I don't think it offers any protection. Once it is uploaded it can go anywhere. Or am I wrong?</p>
<p>Hmmm, always something to think about...</p>
<p>Eventually your son will want to join either BMI or ASCAP who collect the royalties. Copyright law changed awhile ago and your son’s work is protected even without formally filing. If he wants to fill out the forms and submit to the Library of Congress the forms are online. If he publishes his own work, he can protect the mechanical rights by signing up with a service which will collect fees if anyone records and sells their own versions of his pieces.</p>
<p>Right now he needn’t worry too much. But once his work starts getting performed he’ll want to belong to BMI or ASCAP.</p>
<p>With BMI and ASCAP he will fill out a registration form for every piece with orchestration, length, titles, etc.</p>
<p>Interesting…Thanks for that info. (must remember!!!)</p>
<p>But I think I am looking at it from a different angle. Eventually we are talking about selling his music and collecting royalties. But for now I am worried about someone stealing one of his pieces and claiming it as their own. Are we still talking about copyrighting for that protection or am I still missing something?</p>
<p>Books covering this in detail that should be required reading for anyone looking to earn money by composing or performing:</p>
<p>This Business of Music: Definitive Guide to the Music Industry, Tenth Edition by M. William Krasilovsky, Sidney Shemel, John M Gross, Jonathan Feinstein</p>
<p>All You Need to Know About the Music Business: Seventh Edition by Donald S. Passman </p>
<p>Both should be available in a good library, or you can order them online for less than $15 each. Money and time well spent.</p>
<p>Gosh, I feel so naive. I never even thought of this. I guess my daughter doesn’t have this worry because she so carefully controls who hears her music and where. Plus she figures it will be quite a long time before it becomes an issue, commercially. But she could be wrong, who knows. It’s smart to think of these things in advance.</p>
<p>One interesting thing she has run into. When she takes her scores to a copy place to make copies for musicians, some copy places refuse to make copies because of copyright worries. She tells them she is a composer, but the employees are not used to thinking of composers as regular people you might see on the street!</p>
<p>This isn’t a problem in places like Cambridge MA, but it is in the 'burbs.</p>
<p>So in that case, compositions are too protected!</p>
<p>This may sound crazy, but someone once told me to mail any intelectual property to myself, then keep the unopened envelopes. The concept was that you would have the postmark to prove that you originated the material, and I assume that if you got involved in a court issue, the envelope could be opened in court or in front of wittnesses. The guy who told me that called it a “poor man’s patent”.</p>
<p>I am not vouching that it is a good idea though, I have no idea. It seems to me that if there wasn’t a large amount of money at stake (like tens of thousands of dollars or more) that it would be highly unlikely that you would sue anyone for stealing one piece of music.</p>
<p>@imagep - that is a standard method for proving a copyright date - used for literary works, as well. Your friend was correct.</p>
<p>compmom, you would think that a printing company who is in the business of printing items as a contractor for customers wouldn’t have much liability for making copies of music. After all, if someone is doing something “evil”, it’s the customer, not the printer.</p>
<p>I have always found it amuzing that at the coin operated copier in our local library there is a sign saying that you can’t make copies of copyrighted material. If it is illegal, then why do they have a copier in the library?</p>
<p>Mom2Winds, I feel it is never too early to teach a young artist how to protect his or her work. Do not fear soundcloud, BTW, you can make it so that your songs are not downloadable and you can also make it so that people can pay to download using paypal, for example. </p>
<p>Membership to BMI and ASCAP is not particularly expensive and it is a good way to access industry information. For whatever reason my son choose BMI.</p>
<p>Whether he chooses to at this point or not does not matter. What matters is that he keep good records of his work, dates in-progress files, and that he use copyright marks where possible, in file notes, etc.</p>
<p>Thank you all for helping. This is all so important for us to understand. Just another step in this long and exciting process…</p>
<p>Imagep-</p>
<p>Copying copyrighted material is legal under certain circumstances (and take this with a pound of salt, I am not a lawyer). </p>
<p>With a library I believe it is okay to make copies of material used as reference (would be the equivalent of taking notes on notecards). When you look up a newspaper on microfilm and print it (going back into the dark ages) it is considered fair use for research. As long as it is for research in a library, it is considered fair I believe. On the other hand, taking out a dvd or tape from a library and copying it is illegal, since the intent is to deprive owner of their rights.</p>
<p>If you buy a book or magazine, you have the right to make copies for your own use, like copying a recipe or a diagram from a book. Likewise,with music you have the right to make copies for practice use, orchestras and the like do this all the time, as long as they have a purchased original for each copy, and you use the original in performance, it is legal.</p>
<p>On the other hand, copying a whole magazine would be illegal in a library or a whole book,since the intent is obviously to defraud the owner of the copyright (obviously, if you are using one of those 10 or 15c a page, might end up costing you more then the book or whatever would anyway). </p>
<p>As others have pointed out, created material has automatic copyright protection, though it isn’t easy protecting it no matter how you copy it. Enforcing copyrights generally takes legal help, whether it be ASCAP/BMI or a lawyer, and it can be expensive to do so. Another way, besides the mail way, may be to get a notary to endorse the original score, it doesn’t cost a lot and it is proof that the work existed at said time, in case there is dispute.</p>
<p>musicprnt, what is your source for saying that originals must be used in performance? Using a copy for rehearsals and the original for the performance means that you would have to transcribe all of the markings made on the copy during rehearsals to the original before the performance. That rather defeats the purpose of having used a copy at all. I’ve been performing for something like 40 years and have never known anyone who did that. My understanding was that, as long as an original is purchased for every performer, there is no problem with rehearsing and performing from copies so long as the originals can be produced on demand. Of course, it would not be acceptable to keep either the copy or the original and let someone else use the other.</p>
<p>For a couple of DD’s auditions, she had to have the original with her even though the accompanist worked from a copy. Since then she has made it a practice to always have the originals with her and work from copies and that has never seemed to be an issue.</p>
<p>Bassdad-</p>
<p>I was a volunteer librarian for a youth orchestra, and we were specifically told that, that in performance the original is supposed to be used, and I heard the same thing from someone who was the librarian for a chamber orchestra here in NYC… I understand about the markings and it would make sense to me that the copies be used in performance since they were marked, but we were told that technically you were supposed to use the originals in performance and marking were supposed to be copied onto the original. </p>
<p>Personally, I already think publishers are living in the dark ages, they worry as do others about illegal copying and the like, and have rules about buying original copies which is a pain in the tail, rather then finding better methods of distribution. For youth symphonies and student programs, for example, if you think about it these represent future audiences/consumers of published music, yet they treat youth symphonies like professional orchestras. Maybe they should think of doing what is done with computer software, make site licenses and distribute the music electronically and let the orchestra print what they need, figure out ways to do that. Doesn’t surprise me, though, in many ways the publishing industry is like a lot of classical music as a whole, it seems to often live in the 19th century…the point being that with scanners and copy machines being common, it is already easy to ‘pirate’ music, buy a few copies of the original and give copies to everyone, etc…they may have better luck controlling that digitally then they current can with hard printed music.</p>
<p>Here is something from a website:</p>
<p>[Printed</a> Music & Performances - Copyright & Fair Use Information | Wartburg College, Waverly, Iowa USA](<a href=“http://www.wartburg.edu/copyright/music.html]Printed”>http://www.wartburg.edu/copyright/music.html)</p>
<p>Under Fair Use, the following are expressly prohibited:
- Copying to create or replace or substitute the anthologies, compilations or collective works.
- Copying of or from works intended to be “consumable” in the course of study or teaching such as workbooks, exercises, standardized tests and answer sheets and like material.
- Copying for the purpose of performance except for emergency copying to replace purchased copies as outlined in (1) of the Fair Uses.
- Copying for the purpose of substituting for the purchase of music, except as in Fair Uses (1) and (2).
- Copying without inclusion of the copyright notice which appears on the printed copy.</p>
<h1>3 above seems to say that copying for purpose of performance is illegal, unless it is an emergency copy. I suspect as you pointed out, Bassdad, that this is probably widely ignored, that they simply assume if they have an original ‘backing’ the copy, it is okay, and I suspect it isn’t enforced much or at all.</h1>