No. Except you do if you post it to YouTube because they've done a deal with the organizations that collect royalties on behalf of the artists.
Let me get this straight, you mean I (or the bloke next door) can do a cover of a song, or perhaps even my own interpretation of a particular song, upload it to UToob and they automatically take care of paying the royalties? No strings attached? What if I were to segway from one song to a different song by two different artists, that ok?
Do you have a link to this deal or more info, please?
PS I went to merriamwebster to get the right spelling for segway but it couldn't even give me potential hints as to what the f I was trying to spell. I was thinking segueway and some other way of spelling it to no avail, help a teribla spellier, please.
I think that only covers songs written by people who are members of the societies mentioned in the link.
AFAIK if the composers are non-members, then normal copyright law would apply and you wouldn't be allowed to perform a song without the composer's permission.
does that mean that those bunch of shit-necks who ruined Gary Numan's ARE FRIENDS ELECTRIC? a while ago didn't get any money from it, and had to pay Gary ? (I hope so...)
does that mean that those bunch of shit-necks who ruined Gary Numan's ARE FRIENDS ELECTRIC? a while ago didn't get any money from it, and had to pay Gary ? (I hope so...)
does that mean that those bunch of shit-necks who ruined Gary Numan's ARE FRIENDS ELECTRIC? a while ago didn't get any money from it, and had to pay Gary ? (I hope so...)
If they got his permission (which probably cost a few bob) then they would have been allowed to keep profits from their cover version.
If they didn't get his permission then he could have demanded all the profits (which has happened to quite a few people over the years who didn't get proper copyright clearance on samples etc).
Does this mean I can distribute my cover or version or w/e for free, becauase when the original artist comes along and demands profit there wouldn't be any profit to give him?
Also, regarding this youtube business: does this mean it's legal to watch it from youtube, but not from my fileserver if I chose to mirror the same file there?
Does this mean I can distribute my cover or version or w/e for free, becauase when the original artist comes along and demands profit there wouldn't be any profit to give him?
I think there are fines as well if you break copyright law.
Also, regarding this youtube business: does this mean it's legal to watch it from youtube, but not from my fileserver if I chose to mirror the same file there?
No idea, but it's possibly the same kind of grey area that you get with people making mix tapes of CDs they own legally.
The writer(s) of the lyrics
The writer(s) of the music
The performer(s)
If you are the performer then you still have pay the first two.
If the performance is over 50 years ago then you don't have to pay the last one.
If the writers died over 100 years ago then you don't have to pay their royalties.
This could be wrong.
If YouBend are publishing the performance they could be the ones liable and should pull content that breaches copyright.
If you are distributing the material you have to pay the royalties. I would also hazard that the amount of the various royalties have no bearing on the profit you are making.
Comments
Let me get this straight, you mean I (or the bloke next door) can do a cover of a song, or perhaps even my own interpretation of a particular song, upload it to UToob and they automatically take care of paying the royalties? No strings attached? What if I were to segway from one song to a different song by two different artists, that ok?
Do you have a link to this deal or more info, please?
PS I went to merriamwebster to get the right spelling for segway but it couldn't even give me potential hints as to what the f I was trying to spell. I was thinking segueway and some other way of spelling it to no avail, help a teribla spellier, please.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/segue
AFAIK if the composers are non-members, then normal copyright law would apply and you wouldn't be allowed to perform a song without the composer's permission.
If they got his permission (which probably cost a few bob) then they would have been allowed to keep profits from their cover version.
If they didn't get his permission then he could have demanded all the profits (which has happened to quite a few people over the years who didn't get proper copyright clearance on samples etc).
Also, regarding this youtube business: does this mean it's legal to watch it from youtube, but not from my fileserver if I chose to mirror the same file there?
I think there are fines as well if you break copyright law.
No idea, but it's possibly the same kind of grey area that you get with people making mix tapes of CDs they own legally.
The writer(s) of the lyrics
The writer(s) of the music
The performer(s)
If you are the performer then you still have pay the first two.
If the performance is over 50 years ago then you don't have to pay the last one.
If the writers died over 100 years ago then you don't have to pay their royalties.
This could be wrong.
If YouBend are publishing the performance they could be the ones liable and should pull content that breaches copyright.
If you are distributing the material you have to pay the royalties. I would also hazard that the amount of the various royalties have no bearing on the profit you are making.
Again this could be wrong.