I know it's not legal to use the original version of a song without permission. But, is it legal to do a cover version or parody of a song without permission?
-
Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.
Is it legal to cover or parody a song?
- Thread starter Arch Stanton
- Start date
As long as you pay he proper writer's royalties you can cover it (I'm pretty sure). Would still need to credit the writer at the end.
As far as parody, it needs to be different enough from the original to avoid paying anything. How different can be vague, there have been several lawsuits in the past with different outcomes.
As far as parody, it needs to be different enough from the original to avoid paying anything. How different can be vague, there have been several lawsuits in the past with different outcomes.
Not only the recording is protected by copyright; the song itself
(music and lyrics) are protected. You cannot record a cover without
permission.
Parody is allowed.
(music and lyrics) are protected. You cannot record a cover without
permission.
Parody is allowed.
Not everyone honors copyright. Not everyone does the right
thing. In fact, most people freely and even proudly violate the
copyright of composers all the time.
I wish I knew how someone can get ad revenue on YT by violating
the right to copy.
Weird Al (Parody King), from what I understand, still gets permission from the artists in question before he parodies their songs-even if he doesn't "have to"
And yea, the YT phenomenon. Its misinformed a generation of people as to Copyright law: People seem to think that by using the music, and then saying in the description "This is not my music, I don't have rights to it," ect gets them off the hook-um no it doesn't.
Nice of you to say that-but you still used the song/footage without permission and are liable for such.
And yea, the YT phenomenon. Its misinformed a generation of people as to Copyright law: People seem to think that by using the music, and then saying in the description "This is not my music, I don't have rights to it," ect gets them off the hook-um no it doesn't.
Nice of you to say that-but you still used the song/footage without permission and are liable for such.
Parodies of songs is a very slippery issue. The lyrics are usually quite different, so there is not a significant issue with copyrights.
The music is a whole different issue. Weird Al asked for permission because he had to; he was copying the exact arrangement and production for many of his parodies.
You can get around the music copyrights issue by making "significant" changes to the music. It's a very subjective thing; it can be as little as one note in a musical riff. Production values are a different issue, and not one easily resolved, especially now with digital musical instrument libraries and, of course, preset sounds on hardware and software synths and samplers.
BTW, back in the '80's no one said "No" to Weird Al Yankovic; to be parodied by him was a very high honor, almost a status symbol. In fact, when his team contacted Michael Jackson about doing a parody of "Bad" not only was he given permission, MJ allowed Weird Al to use the original sets for the "Bad" music video for his parody "Fat".
The music is a whole different issue. Weird Al asked for permission because he had to; he was copying the exact arrangement and production for many of his parodies.
You can get around the music copyrights issue by making "significant" changes to the music. It's a very subjective thing; it can be as little as one note in a musical riff. Production values are a different issue, and not one easily resolved, especially now with digital musical instrument libraries and, of course, preset sounds on hardware and software synths and samplers.
BTW, back in the '80's no one said "No" to Weird Al Yankovic; to be parodied by him was a very high honor, almost a status symbol. In fact, when his team contacted Michael Jackson about doing a parody of "Bad" not only was he given permission, MJ allowed Weird Al to use the original sets for the "Bad" music video for his parody "Fat".
I believe that little disclaimer was at YT's request. It was, so i've heard, when YT's staff went through the videos approving/dissaproving, the one instance that would stop them muting the video in question.
This was after alot of artists demanded not to hear any of their music on YT. So there was a strand of cover videos/Music montages, completely mute with no explanation.
Unofficial though it may be, simply by word of mouth, the disclaimer seems to prevent this.
Perculiar, perhaps not true. I guess we'll never know...
Covers and parody are completely different things.
Parody and satire are completely different things (legally).
You can be sued for anything in America.
If you're selling the work, and money is involved, you can and likely will be sued for violating copyright.
Permission is required, which may entail huge sums of money to music publishers as well as the record label.
If you hook up with unsigned, upcoming talent, they may just grant you permission because they want to be included, for credit.
Parody and satire are completely different things (legally).
You can be sued for anything in America.
If you're selling the work, and money is involved, you can and likely will be sued for violating copyright.
Permission is required, which may entail huge sums of money to music publishers as well as the record label.
If you hook up with unsigned, upcoming talent, they may just grant you permission because they want to be included, for credit.
I'm pretty sure that here, a cover is fine as long as you always cite the real author, and don't use it for commercial purposes.
However, I'm not sure how it works on your side of the Atlantic.
However, I'm not sure how it works on your side of the Atlantic.
Nope, doesn't work that way anywhere; copyrights pertain internationally. You still need to get permission rights from the composer/writer of the lyrics and music. Just because you don't intend to make a profit does not give you any rights to use copyrighted material in any way.
"Copyright is a set of exclusive rights granted to the author or creator of an original work, including the right to copy, distribute and adapt the work. Copyright does not protect ideas, only their expression. In most jurisdictions copyright arises upon fixation and does not need to be registered. Copyright owners have the exclusive statutory right to exercise control over copying and other exploitation of the works ..."
"A bundle of intangible rights granted by statute to the author or originator of certain literary or artistic productions, whereby, for a limited period, the exclusive privilege is given to that person (or to any party to whom he or she transfers ownership) to make copies of the same for publication and sale.
A copyright is a legal device that gives the creator of a literary, artistic, musical, or other creative work the sole right to publish and sell that work. Copyright owners have the right to control the reproduction of their work, including the right to receive payment for that reproduction. An author may grant or sell those rights to others, including publishers or recording companies. Violation of a copyright is called infringement."
Even with parody, you still need some sort of permission. Take Weird Al for example, he still has to pay for permission to use the tunes he makes fun of, he has a parody using the tune of "American Pie", and I guarantee you he had to pay to use it. they copyright music and lyrics.
Even on your side of the Atlantic the right to copy is in the hands
of the copyright holder. You cannot "copy" (cover) a song without
permission regardless of credit or payment.
Alcove hit it right on the head. A musical piece can have three components--lyrics, music, and performance. All of which may be joint efforts. While copyright law provides certain provisions for fair use, inclusion in any medium for sale almost immediately invalidates it.
In a band, each player needs to give consent if they have not given one member decision authority. Backup singers and musicians are 'players for hire' so they don't have a say. However, the sad truth, is that many performers do not own the rights to their own songs. Most sign over those rights to the record label. In the end, you will likely end up getting permission from the Harry Fox Agency which handles thousands of clients.
Despite innocent intentions, they will pursue you. Consider the plight of the Minnesota single mom and her legal battle. In this instance, even the kindly disposition of the musicians could not call off the legal hounds. Get artist permissions, get label permissions, and be prepared to pay for the privilege of poking fun/using a song. But just because you are paying, we are not talking about outrageously huge sums, necessarily. You might only pay $250 for the right. But paying it upfront will definitely be cheaper than legal expenses later!