Copyright Question

pistonsvox

Original Thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056413006

First Song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4E95QgplQk

Claimed "Original" Song

Just curious what are the copyright laws in "riffs"? Is the recorded music copyright law regaraded as in full compositions or can you get sued for even using 2 bars or so of a similar phrase.

How many bars does it take for you to break mechanical recorded copyright law? Say if you recorded a song, which may have a similar riff or fill, and a friend or peer says to you, "that sounds exactly like this song..." Do you give up and start over, or risk the chance of a court case? Where does one draw the line?

Neurojazz

Best to find a good entertainment layer. If something obvious is stolen that is key to the character of the original you can take action.

The better the lawyer, the better the result usually.

Very little can be used and be cause for legal action, and not even the exact same notes/harmonies - if they allude to the original in some way.

krd

pistonsvox wrote: »

Just curious what are the copyright laws in "riffs"? Is the recorded music copyright law regaraded as in full compositions or can you get sued for even using 2 bars or so of a similar phrase.

If the cool hearts didn't get clearance for using that sample, then they're open to being sued. The upside is, if they don't make any money, or don't have any money, they won't be sued.

You can't just sample riffs, however short, and use them without permission. Even tiny snippets. You can risk it. But if you end up getting a legal challenge, you could end up having to hand over all the money or at least a portion to whoever you sampled.

How many bars does it take for you to break mechanical recorded copyright law? Say if you recorded a song, which may have a similar riff or fill, and a friend or peer says to you, "that sounds exactly like this song..." Do you give up and start over, or risk the chance of a court case? Where does one draw the line?

There isn't a bar rule. Use a sample from someone else's record and there's a possibility you can be sued - if it's decided in court that the sample contributed to the success of the record, then a portion or all of the proceeds from that record could be handed over to whoever is doing the suing.

The Bressie riff is a simple common riff that thousands of people have done before. If you copied the riff - actually got a guitar and played those chords, they wouldn't have much chance suing you. If you can prove people have used the riff before Bressie, then in court Bressie can't make the claim that the riff belongs to them, and they didn't steal it from someone else.

Now days, people generally do not use original samples on records. If they have a budget, they may start with a sample - but then they go and record a soundalike snippet to replace the original sample. This means they generally do not have to pay anyone.

Though if there's something unique or instantly recognisable about the riff - even if you record your own version, you can be sued. If you recorded your own version of the Rollingstone's Satisfaction riff. Or Nirvana's Teen Spirit. You will be sued.

The Verve had to pay the Rolling Stones for a short sample the used on Bitter Sweet Symphony. I think the Rolling Stones got nearly everything from it.

Dance music producers mostly tend to get away with egregious sampling. Because there just isn't any money to be made from suing them. If you sample Queen...you'll get away with it, unless the record is successful. If it is successful, their publishers will simply seize it and all the royalties. They may even have the brass balls to release it themselves - with their publishing companies details on it. For a dance music producer you're onto a double loser - you'd have to prove it's not there's and since you've sampled their property, you'd have to pay them something, or everything, if you did win

You can always be sued. There's a saying, where there's a hit there's a writ. If you have a successful record. People will come out of the woodwork claiming they have a right to some or all of the royalties. R.E.M had to pay a royalty to the copyright holders of The Lion Sleeps Tonight for The Sidewinder Sleeps Tonite. U2 have had to pay and credit the RollingStones, Elton John, Joy Division, The people who wrote Send In The Clowns, all for little ad libs Bono has done on live recordings.

There's also a dirty trick publishers have used against each other. If they know a big record is about to be released. With a big marketing budget behind it. They can threaten to get a court injunction against the release unless they get paid off. So, they get paid off.

On the other hand people have gotten away with murder. Dinosaur Junior went as far as crediting the entire publishing for a cover of David Bowie's Quicksand to themselves.

Getting sued is only something you have to worry about if you become successful - unsuccessful people are never sued. And it's all about money.

pistonsvox

Cheers for that! As far as I can remember when my Dad was recording an album a few years back he had a few covers on it, he had to fill out a form of all the songs and send it to the MCPS. Wasn't a popular album but he's still paying royalties for the covers for every sale I imagine.

Interesting topic though would love to look into it more!

krd wrote:

If the cool hearts didn't get clearance for using that sample, then they're open to being sued. The upside is, if they don't make any money, or don't have any money, they won't be sued.

It was actually the cool hearts that originally had that riff out first. And they're not samples. There was also a twitter post from Bressie claiming that he wrote that riff in the studio and shunned people who claimed it sounded like the cool hearts.

krd wrote:

The Bressie riff is a simple common riff that thousands of people have done before.

Then again even the overdub guitar lick is the even the same!

krd

pistonsvox wrote: »

It was actually the cool hearts that originally had that riff out first. And they're not samples. There was also a twitter post from Bressie claiming that he wrote that riff in the studio and shunned people who claimed it sounded like the cool hearts.

Yep......I've listened again. And it's not a sample. But it's not really anything you'd call a riff - it's a done to death chord progression. I've got G, D, Em, and then back again.

Bressie is not going to get sued by anyone. Because outside the world of "Irish ram our well connected mini-mini-celebs down your throat, until you think they're special because they're on RTE"..No one gives a shit who he is. If the record was internationally successful, he might have quite few problems - since it's "borrows" very heavily from lots of different people. Outside Gilligans Isle - AKA the republic of Ireland - or to give the place its' full title: The licensed vinters, small shop keepers and farmers, agricultural republic of the ancient peoples of Hibernia.

Bressie ain't no Van Morrison.

The riff wouldn't have caused Bressie problems, had the record been and international hit. Other parts would have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZdQcmz5IKw

Deacon Blue's publisher may have thought "Pay DAY!!!!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHTI31XuQxk

Bressie isn't really a musican ........but he's done some cool stuff

My favourite!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32PBZ870ymg

flyswatter

It's not a sample? It sounds the exact same to me. Even if it's not a sample (which I think it is) it's most likely a carbon copy played by a studio musician.
Rappers Delight contained music from Good Times by Chic but it wasn't sampled conventionally, in this case it was played again by studio musicians for that song. Nile Rodgers and Bernard Edwards were still credited as co-writers on it.

If you were to take Boston's More Than A Feeling, Smells like Teen Spirit is based on that and similar but noticeably different. This is just a blatant copy.

Either way, I'd hope that there are royalties been given to the original writer of the riff.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

sound to me like Bressie needs to get a laywer - hes ripped that off pristinely

krd

flyswatter wrote: »

It's not a sample? It sounds the exact same to me. Even if it's not a sample (which I think it is) it's most likely a carbon copy played by a studio musician.


I don't think you understand.


There was a court case between T'Pau and Enya in the 80s. Enya won.

Here's the contentious clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEbvsA_TE0o

And here is a track recorded around the same time.......but only released as a b-side. Then more than 10 years later, released as an A-side. 11'o'clock tick tock has better story - which I'd love hear. But, anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WybiA263bw

Either way, I'd hope that there are royalties been given to the original writer of the riff.

Two things.

One. There are no royalties. Bressies record was not a "hit". He only gets exposure because he. or someone connected to him, rubs vaseline jelly over someone's balls.

Two. Because the entire track is made of bits lifted from better records.

Three. It's only three f'ing chords. And if you can't think that riff up yourself, the guards should come around and seize your guitar.

krd

I've realise something.

Because, I do music for fun and a hobby, and Am not dependant on it for a livelihood

I can say things that other people can't

Like

Bressie makes Linda Martin look like Scott Walker.

Removed a big chunk of stuff before I get in trouble for it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZkZAW2eU3g

madtheory

krd wrote: »

There was a court case between T'Pau and Enya in the 80s. Enya won.

That's an urban myth surely? There's only a passing resemblance- different chords, vaguely similar rhythm, both pizzicato.

woodsdenis

madtheory wrote: »

That's an urban myth surely? There's only a passing resemblance- different chords, vaguely similar rhythm, both pizzicato.

I think that is a myth too MT, Enya was sued for Orinoco Flow and was settled in her favour, Where there's a hit there's a writ !!!

I think the OP is confused as to what a Mechanical Copyright infringement issue is. In general there are a number of factors involved.
Lets take "Orinoco Flow" as an example. Enya, Nicky and Roma Ryan are the writers, Enya is the performer and Warner Bros Records own master.

If you lift any section of that recording you are infringing on the writers copyright and the record companies mechanical one. The Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society (MCPS) is an organisation that pays royalties to composers, songwriters and music publishers when a composition is manufactured into any format. This is very clear cut if you can prove it.

It is completely different from the OP example where the same guitar riff was used. It is NOT a sample of the original recording although the structure is similar. There is a big difference.

Can a chord progression be copyrighted, generally no but when does it become an independent piece in itself?. Satisfaction/Smoke on the Water riffs would be identified has music not just chord progressions. The Verve got caught with the Stones string riff for example.

Simple answer, if you lift or use a nano second of somebody else's record you will lose. This is primarily infringing the owner of the master recordings copyright. If you use a piece of "Orinoco Flow" on a You Tube video its Warner Bros who will go after you first. The writers will of course sue you as-well if it is in their interest. This is important as they are two separate entities with different interests. If I write a song that is identical to "Oronoco Flow" its the writers who will sue me not Warner Bros. Warner Bros Records have no entitlement to the composition just Enya's recording of it.

If you write a piece of music that is similar to another, its a case for judgement. Different criteria apply in different countries and also for different scenarios (Film TV Advertising have a different set of guidelines)

krd

madtheory wrote: »

That's an urban myth surely? There's only a passing resemblance- different chords, vaguely similar rhythm, both pizzicato.

What it came down to was money. Enya had an absolutely massive international hit with the song. And her album sold as big as a big U2 album.

T'Pau thought it was worth their while to chance their arm. The pay off would have been in millions.

I haven't heard of any big cases in years. It think because record companies are so consolidated, they know they're onto a hiding to nowhere if they sue themselves. But in the past, people would try it on with songs that didn't even have passing resemblances.


You can get away with murder - and some people have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g5vm2mLb2c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAgAvnvXF9U

woodsdenis

krd wrote: »

You can get away with murder - and some people have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g5vm2mLb2c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAgAvnvXF9U

In your last example you use the Bob Dylan / Clancy Bros controversy. It's important to remember that the issue was NOT the melody. It is a trad tune out of copyright. Behan suggested that the lyrical structure was the same, not the same words, but the structure. WTF. Needless to say he got nowhere with that one.

alphabeat

anyone think these are pretty similar ?

elvis costelloe - orig - pump it up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpprOGsLWUo


u2 - get on your boots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcDNilZbZg8&ob


seems they both thought so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXUaE2D7_cU

madtheory

The confused information/ misinformation in this thread just goes to show how difficult the issue is to contest in court, unless as woodsdennis has pointed out, it's a clear cut mechanical copyright violation. Bunch of musos here differing over perceived similarities, how is a judge with no musical ability going to decide?

Moses Avalon has written about this in his book, it's a must read if you're interested in this kind of thing.

PS thanks woodsdennis for the only sensible post.

krd

madtheory wrote: »

how is a judge with no musical ability going to decide?

Precisely why you do not want to go to court.

madtheory

krd wrote: »

Precisely why you do not want to go to court.

Unless you're very popular and have a charismatic lawyer. More here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Confessions-Record-Producer-Moses-Avalon/dp/0879309482/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332182235&sr=8-1

Neurojazz

madtheory wrote: »

Unless you're very popular and have a charismatic lawyer. More here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Confessions-Record-Producer-Moses-Avalon/dp/0879309482/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332182235&sr=8-1

'Once considered to be the immortal trio, manager/lawyer/producer has now become webmaster/aggregator/viral marketer.'

That is so true now.

BumbleB

krd wrote: »

I haven't heard of any big cases in years.

There was .
http://www.spinner.com/2010/02/04/men-at-work-lose-down-under-court-case/

Most ridiculous case I ever heard.