Two copyright questions

[thistle3585]

I was listening to the intro of a song and I would say the first 4 or 5 measures were identical to a very unique and well known song from another artist. The riff was played often throughout the song. How many notes or measures constitute an infringement?

Second, I know that Bluegrassbox got shut down for various reasons, but if an artist posts videos of themselves on something like Youtube.com then are they basically putting it in the public domain for copy. I am curious because there are a few specific songs on youtube, some by cafe members, that I would like to compile on a CD for my own listening and maybe to hand a few copies out to friends. For those of you that post stuff, what are your thoughts?

[thistle3585]

Well, I found my answer to my second question under Youtubes "Intellectual Property" policy.

"Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only and may not be used, copied, reproduced, distributed, transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, or otherwise exploited for any other purposes whatsoever without the prior written consent of the respective owners."

Guess I can make a recording for my personal use, but not distribute it.

[kww]

And even then, the performer that posted the video needed to get permission from the songwriter to post it, which they usually fail to do. Unless it's a public domain song, you don't really even have the right to listen to it, much less record it.

[OlderThanWillie]

kww: Tell us about what we know as the "fair use" practice. (The use in this case being for the copier's personal use.)

[Soupy1957]

I know that "permission" is a big thing, no matter what "thing" you use that gets public viewing.

In our church, when we wanted to put up overhead projections of the lyrics of songs, we COULD have simply printed them on slides and shown them, but legally, we had an obligation to request permission to reprint, and I think we even paid a small fee for the permission to do it.

If it is for your own use, and you are not going to be performing a piece for pay, or such, then you are ok not to bother.

I note that on TV there are a ton of "close" but not "exact" replicas of songs, and I often wonder if they are "ok" to do it without a fee or without "permission."

-Soupy1957

[kww]

Olderthanwillie:

Fair use applies if you have a legal version in the first place. If you own a CD, you generally have the right to make copies of the CD for your own use. If you wanted to post a few second snippet so you could ask a question about playing technique, that would probably be OK as well. Same goes for DVDs, video tapes, sheet music, etc.

In most cases, the videos on YouTube are simply illegal. The performer never got permission from the songwriter to record a version of the song, and the recordings are generally of complete songs, so you can't try to claim that it was an excerpt for review or educational purposes.

Since the original recording isn't legal, no copy of it can be legal. Pretty basic principle, there: you can only transfer and grant permissions you have. Since the recorder didn't have permission to record, he can't grant you permission to re-record.

-----------added a few moments later-------
Just to clarify: if you recorded a complete version of a song and were the only one that ever listened to the recording, that would be covered under fair use as well. It's sharing the recording with others that requires permission.

[J. Mark Lane]

Just to clarify: if you recorded a complete version of a song and were the only one that ever listened to the recording, that would be covered under fair use as well. It's sharing the recording with others that requires permission.

What if you learned it from sheet music that was copied without permission? What if you played it in a public place to listen to yourself and someone else overheard it? What about if other people were present when you recorded it (and overheard it), but did not receive copies of the recording?

....Copyright law is a lot more complex than most people realize, and is full of surprises that don't seem to make sense. I always recommend the US Copyright Office website (use Google, if you can't find, it, sell your computer). It has a lot of very good information, written in plain English.

Suffice to say, most of what is said here (and in practically every other Internet discussion I have ever come across) is just plain wrong.

[kww]

I agree that there are a large number of exceptions, and that any 10 sentence post is going to oversimplify. Still, if you follow the basic rule that you do not have the right to distribute recordings of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright holder, you aren't going to go far wrong.