Music copyright question for book

Do any of my friends know about music copyrights and liscensing? I would like to write a unique book on chord melody, using a couple of popular songs from the 1920s as examples of how to do it.  Anyone know how I can do that legally?

Phew! Complex question. The music world is a bit of a beast from a copyright perspective, with the writer and arranger and recording artist(s) all holding certain rights, all of which translate into cash money.

In the wordsmith/literary world, copyright provisions have "fair use" aspects, where quotes of reasonable size can be included as long as they are properly attributed to the writer. That covers academic and newspaper articles, with some license for literary riffs. A publishing house would seek out the lawful copyright holder and seek permission, and rightly so.

I'm not sure copyright (aside from fair attribution) survives for a century, but that varies from nation to nation. Can you post the songs/writers/arrangers on the music you have? Maybe we permie-headbangers could sniff around and learn more.

Given that you actually care about this, I tip my hat and designate you a good egg. Too many fat online organizations don't care a feather or a fig about copyright, and ultimately that's a loss to us all. My 2c.

Douglas Alpenstock wrote:Phew! Complex question. The music world is a bit of a beast from a copyright perspective, with the writer and arranger and recording artist(s) all holding certain rights, all of which translate into cash money.

In the wordsmith/literary world, copyright provisions have "fair use" aspects, where quotes of reasonable size can be included as long as they are properly attributed to the writer. That covers academic and newspaper articles, with some license for literary riffs. A publishing house would seek out the lawful copyright holder and seek permission, and rightly so.

I'm not sure copyright (aside from fair attribution) survives for a century, but that varies from nation to nation. Can you post the songs/writers/arrangers on the music you have? Maybe we permie-headbangers could sniff around and learn more.

Given that you actually care about this, I tip my hat and designate you a good egg. Too many fat online organizations don't care a feather or a fig about copyright, and ultimately that's a loss to us all. My 2c.

Thanks!  Because the book would be on chord melody, I need to show the original sheet music/lead sheets for a few familiar early jazz songs like "Dinah", "Avalon", "Nobody's Sweetheart" and/or "I Can't Give You Anything But Love" in a way that doesn't get me sued or fined.

The website PDInfo will list songs that are available in the public domain.

Mostly these are songs composed or recorded before 1926.

You can also hire a "copyright expert".

Anne Miller wrote:The website PDInfo will list songs that are available in the public domain.

Mostly these are songs composed or recorded before 1926.

You can also hire a "copyright expert".

I was just checking out that site - looks like every song I was considering except "I Can't Give You Anything But Love" is listed there as being int he public domain.  That gives me enough confidence to get started on the book, at least.  

Copyright and intellectual property (IP) law are very complicated.  It's even more complex if there's more than one country involved.  

The safest thing to do is to consult a lawer who specialises in IP law (note, if they call copyright law, get someone else - copyright is such a tiny insignificant aspect of IP law and as we are talking music, there are many levels of intellectual property law at work here).

Some things to think about.  

In the USA, copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator with the option for the estate to extend that period for a huge chunk of time.  (basically, Disney has a huge say in how the law is written to protect their IP, so I would be nervous with anything post-1920 without getting the rights to use the content).  I would also be very nervous using any publically generated content (like archive.org) to say something is the in the Public Domain.  People often make mistakes and upload things that are still covered by various IP law.

With music you have a lot of people involved who have IP rights to a publication.
- original composer
- if it's been rearranged, they also get rights
- lyric writer and music writer (not always the same person)
- Publisher usually assumes some rights even if it's just the formatting.
- any illustrations, words that go with it, or type setting can also have IP rights depending on stuff

And then every performance also has different IP rights.  

And now you know why lawyers get paid so much.  They need to know all this stuff and find out what applies to what.


The thing about IP law is that it depends on the rights holder to assert their rights.  So you might be absolutely fine using something, until one day someone else buys the rights and then they slap you with a massive suit for monies lost or reputation damage or whatever.  Or they may never assert their rights.  


Fair Use is a work around but there are serious limits what can be done with this.  It would be scary to rely on this.

Here's a great primer on copyright law.  It's in relation to publishing on youtube, but a lot of it applies to other publishing.




In my own publishing, I tend to avoid quoting anything published after 1880.  Partly because I know for sure this is a safe date (except sometimes it isn't like for some works of art or cultural or ... ) and Disney is trying very hard to change the international copyright law to be for a lot longer than it is now.  So it may be fine to use something from 1921 now, but it might not be in 10 years.  

Also, we don't have Fair Use in my country, we have Fair Dealings which is very different in what it allows me to do.  Yes, an argument can be made that my content can be called educational.  Then again, anything that has "an argument can be made" sounds like it's going to cost a crazy amount of money to defend in court.

If I do use something more modern than that, I would want to consult a legal advisor.  It wouldn't cost as much as going to court and if they get  it wrong, well, that's what their malpractice insurance is for.  

r ranson wrote:Copyright and intellectual property (IP) law are very complicated.  It's even more complex if there's more than one country involved.  

The safest thing to do is to consult a lawer who specialises in IP law (note, if they call copyright law, get someone else - copyright is such a tiny insignificant aspect of IP law and as we are talking music, there are many levels of intellectual property law at work here).

Some things to think about.  

In the USA, copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator with the option for the estate to extend that period for a huge chunk of time.  (basically, Disney has a huge say in how the law is written to protect their IP, so I would be nervous with anything post-1920 without getting the rights to use the content).  I would also be very nervous using any publically generated content (like archive.org) to say something is the in the Public Domain.  People often make mistakes and upload things that are still covered by various IP law.

With music you have a lot of people involved who have IP rights to a publication.
- original composer
- if it's been rearranged, they also get rights
- lyric writer and music writer (not always the same person)
- Publisher usually assumes some rights even if it's just the formatting.
- any illustrations, words that go with it, or type setting can also have IP rights depending on stuff

And then every performance also has different IP rights.  

And now you know why lawyers get paid so much.  They need to know all this stuff and find out what applies to what.


The thing about IP law is that it depends on the rights holder to assert their rights.  So you might be absolutely fine using something, until one day someone else buys the rights and then they slap you with a massive suit for monies lost or reputation damage or whatever.  Or they may never assert their rights.  


Fair Use is a work around but there are serious limits what can be done with this.  It would be scary to rely on this.

Here's a great primer on copyright law.  It's in relation to publishing on youtube, but a lot of it applies to other publishing.

In my own publishing, I tend to avoid quoting anything published after 1880.  Partly because I know for sure this is a safe date (except sometimes it isn't like for some works of art or cultural or ... ) and Disney is trying very hard to change the international copyright law to be for a lot longer than it is now.  So it may be fine to use something from 1921 now, but it might not be in 10 years.  

Also, we don't have Fair Use in my country, we have Fair Dealings which is very different in what it allows me to do.  Yes, an argument can be made that my content can be called educational.  Then again, anything that has "an argument can be made" sounds like it's going to cost a crazy amount of money to defend in court.

If I do use something more modern than that, I would want to consult a legal advisor.  It wouldn't cost as much as going to court and if they get  it wrong, well, that's what their malpractice insurance is for.  

That is a serious bummer, but better to be safe than sorry.

It doesn't mean you can't do it.

It just shows there is a lot to learn about first.  

From talking with people who have done it, getting the rights to use a work can be quite affordable and sometimes no money at all.  

That would be a path worth exploring.