|
Copyright your work (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Mmanu |
| quote: | Originally posted by richg101
send it to yourself via recorded delivery. (so it has to be signed for) and keep it unopened. if someone says they made it then you can stand up in court and show a unopned parcel with a date on it. they open it up and play whats inside. and you win the case.. |
^^^ what he said.
+ your unopened copy is valid for 70 years from the recorded date |
|
|
| Freak |
| quote: | Originally posted by RichieV
that wouldn't hold up in court. |
It has been tried and tested in court |
|
|
| RichieV |
do you have a link ?
If you are actually going to go to court over copyright issues , you are going because the person using it has made alot of money. It wouldn't be worth your time or money otherwise. Now assuming the guy has made alot of money using your track , he will most likely have a good lawyer becasue the label will want to keep making money. Any good lawyer would tear big swiss cheese holes in that " send it to yourself " argument. It might help your case but it isn't proof. If you are really worried , i would'nt rely on that. |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
| quote: | Originally posted by RichieV
do you have a link ?
If you are actually going to go to court over copyright issues , you are going because the person using it has made alot of money. It wouldn't be worth your time or money otherwise. Now assuming the guy has made alot of money using your track , he will most likely have a good lawyer becasue the label will want to keep making money. Any good lawyer would tear big swiss cheese holes in that " send it to yourself " argument. It might help your case but it isn't proof. If you are really worried , i would'nt rely on that. |
How would they tear holes in it? It's incontrovertible proof that the recording existed at that date, signed by a government official. The only way I can think a lawyer could invalidate it is by suggesting that it's a forgery, but that would have to be determined by the judge, not the lawyer.
Actually, Donald Passman says this in All You Need to Know About the Music Business: "The old trick of mailing a copy of the work to yourself actually does work." Just make sure the judge himself opens it to ensure that no lawyer can pull out some asinine technicality.
| quote: | | The 'other means' aren't always admissible in court. thus, waste - o - time. I say if you're serious about it.. and you think someone might heist your track, register it with your government and pay the fee. |
Very true. Like I said, registration is the best proof |
|
|
| RichieV |
taken from copyright society or USA
If you register with the Copyright Office before the infringement or within three months after publication you are entitled to the following additional benefits: - in an infringement lawsuit, you have the right to claim statutory damages, and, therefore, would not have to prove the actual monetary damages resulting from the infringement of your work. Also, you may be able to collect your attorney's fees, - your copyright registration may be entitled to certain presumptions in your favor; and - once your copyright is registered, you can file a lawsuit for infringement. The self-addressed letter approach (described above) is open to challenge as an unreliable indicator of when your work was created.
sending things to yourself does not prove you made it. It only proves that it was made before a certain period of time. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
And that's exactly what you need. If a track is stolen, and you can prove you had it earlier than the so called 'creator' you're done. ;)
How can it not be stolen if you had the track in your possesion earlier than the 'creator'? :). |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
And that's exactly what you need. If a track is stolen, and you can prove you had it earlier than the so called 'creator' you're done. ;)
How can it not be stolen if you had the track in your possesion earlier than the 'creator'? :). |
Well, it may not be stolen if the creator never heard your work, but created the same thing by coincidence... Usually people will only take a certain element from a track which they are ripping off, like they'll grab the main riff or the general structure of the track and switch some bits around or something. Then you need to prove that they had a chance to hear it. which is why I say to keep records of who has your work. (obviously if your works on the internet and has had some notice then this is sorta irrelevant, as it is quite possible that anyone has heard it)
Of course, this is all just what I've been told will work in theory... |
|
|
| flutlicht junky |
because the 'creator' could have made the song a few years ago but released it later.
A possible way would be to arrange storage with a solicitor and include the cubase (or whatever) seq files on the CD? |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
| quote: | Originally posted by RichieV
sending things to yourself does not prove you made it. It only proves that it was made before a certain period of time. |
Exactly. If your opponent can't prove that they made their work before then, you're halfway home. This is a fairly simple concept. |
|
|
| substorm |
Well you can copyright your work in many ways. However, if you look in to a relese contract, it often says that you are generally selleing those rights to the label during the contract time.
..
This is taken from a contract:
The Artist hereby grants and assigns an exclusive right worldwide to the Label to do the following:The Artist hereby grants and assigns an exclusive right worldwide to the Label to do the following:
a) gain the ownership for all the countries of the world of the original master recording(s) of the Work;
b) reproduce, authorize others to reproduce, market, sell (in all present and future media) and distribute the Work and derivative works thereof;
c) publicly utilize his/her name, trademark, photograph or any other image or name associated with the Workc) publicly utilize his/her name, trademark, photograph or any other image or name associated with the Work for advertising purposes;
d) gain an option on the following three works produced by the Artist using the same name used for the Work
Meaning, that its often no use to pay a fee to get it copyrighted, if you´re planning to release it on a label, cu they will take care of it, cus thats why you do it..right?.
But sending it to your self with post is always good to have one in you archive. And its like this in Sweden, that once you have made your tune, its your tune and you own all rights on it.
However, if your planning to release the track on your own, i would suggest you copyright it, tag in with a barcode number etc etc.. depending on what you wanna do with it.
But personally this have never conserend me in any way... cus i havent relesed anything that has been in the top:10...yet:p
Then you should be smart. I mean if you just made a track and think it has relese pontential, you shouldnt send it around until you know what is going to happen to it. Then you dont have to worry about someone rips off you rank 1 tune ;)
Cheer
C |
|
|
| iast |
http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp
If you live in the states, I guess this applies to you. Not sure about the laws elsewhere.
edit:
Well, I guess it's a blessing in disguise if you're in the states. You know for sure you're going to have to make a great tune because at $45 dollars to register your work, you're probobly gonna want to make sure it's a great song. |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
| quote: | | Well you can copyright your work in many ways. |
Technically speaking, as has been pointed out, there is only one way to copyright a work, and that is to make a physical recording of it. Registering it just makes it easier for the government to protect your rights, but that's all. |
|
|
|
|
