Should i copyright before mastering or after???

[Leonthe3rd]

just wondering when i should do it

[huejahfink]

Depends what you mean by 'copyright'.
If you are referring to the 'length' of the tracks, for example at PRS / MCPS you can register your works before, and should the length change during mastering you can also log it as an alternative work. PRS / MCPS for example do not require any audio - just the details of the work.

I think this is probably something you should check with your own registration / revenue collection agency.

[Chris Bauer]

A copyright is a property right which is automatically given to the author of musical works and sound recordings. In most countries around the world it is not possible to register it, though the US is an exception.

By the time you have a song mastered, assuming you wrote it, you already own the copyright. The challenge lies in proving it.

Best regards

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by Leonthe3rd

just wondering when i should do it

It doesn't matter if you file a copyright claim before or after mastering.
It's more important that it gets done before distribution.

[lu432]

If it's because ur worried about the sample of ur work to be submitted with ur SR Form that doesn't have to be mastered before it's submitted, but I have always done it after mastering. Like someone said it should be done before distribution.

[grandmasters]

While this is not really a mastering discussion, Chris is right. Around the world you cannot "copyright" a song. Just the act of writing it makes you the copyright owner. It's up to you to prove you wrote it should it be challenged.

All you can do on your part is register it with your local royalty collection society (BMI, ASCAP, SOCAN etc).... but that doesn't prove ownership at all.

[OKB]

You probably [hopefully] already understand this, but perhaps it should be explained anyway.

You cannot copyright mastering.

The copyright for the song[s] / music will belong to the writer[s] and publishers, 50 - 50 split. The copyright in the sound recording will belong to the writers and / or producer and / or record company. copyrights can also be assigned

Copyright ownership and copyright registration are two different things, although you have own the copyright[s] to register them in your name.

Its generally good practice to register copyright early on, before you start making the material available to others [including engineers, studios, other writers / musicians, record companies, internet distribution services, or the general public]. That way, if someone rips off your stuff, you can go after them.

[Waltz Mastering]

Here are some FAQ's about registering your copyright in the U.S.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/

[OKB]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

Here are some FAQ's about registering your copyright in the U.S.
U.S. Copyright Office - Frequently Asked Questions

Best one is, "can I get a star named after me and claim copyright to it?".

[Leonthe3rd]

thx all

[WBM]

Before is fine, just make sure your lyrics are ok, doesn't matter the quality

[Jeff Hayat]

Originally Posted by Chris Bauer

A In most countries around the world it is not possible to register it, though the US is an exception.

Really?!?! You cant register your works in most other countries?

Then -

Originally Posted by grandmasters

While this is not really a mastering discussion, Chris is right. Around the world you cannot "copyright" a song. Just the act of writing it makes you the copyright owner. It's up to you to prove you wrote it should it be challenged.

- if you cant register the work, how do you go about proving that it was you who wrote it?

[Lagerfeldt]

That's exactly why there are a greal deal of disputes over creative works. It's very hard to prove who actually wrote the music, even if you were the one to register the piece first.

Copyright exists only once an idea becomes tangible, i.e. it's no longer simply an idea in your head. In the case of music that means you need to write it down or make a version of the song in some kind of medium.

How you register a work is different in each country. In the US you can file your song with the Copyright Office in the Library of Congress or sign with a publishing or administration company. They can also register your song with ASCAP/BMI and Harry Fox.

In Denmark, where I live, you simply file your song with KODA (performance royalties) and NCB (mechanicals). You can send a copy of your song to KODA and they'll date stamp and return the song in a sealed envelope. This is useful if you later want to prove when you claim the song was written, however it's only circumstantial evidence.

So in any case, registering a song doesn't prove you actually wrote it, but it's essential if you want to collect your money.

[OKB]

Originally Posted by Jeff Hayat

- if you cant register the work, how do you go about proving that it was you who wrote it?

Well, you could register it in the U.S.

Then there is so-called "poor man's copyright", which is the old method of sending yourself a copy of the work through the mail, and leaving the envelope sealed. The strategy is, if a dispute ever arises, to be able to open the envelope in front of witnesses and thereby prove that you had possession of the work at the time of the postmark.

If you are working in "real" studios [i.e. larger, more established facilities, especially in major recording centers] they will normally be generating daily work orders specifying the names of the songs being recorded, with the artist, producer, and engineer's names also specified. There will sometimes be backup versions of Pro Tools sessions kept on file for a period of time.

There are any number of ways of proving original authorship.

Its true that there is a certain amount of idea theft that takes place, and its probably fair to say that it is more commonplace in some "communities", territories, and genres than others. Its wise to guard against those people.

There is only one actual copyright registration in the U.S., and that is registration and deposit with the library of congress. Other methods, while they may be effective when it comes to proving copyright, do not qualify as actual "registration".

U.S. copyright registration is a prerequisite in the U.S. for bringing suit against an infringer. In other words, you have to be able to prove that you have registered the work before you can sue someone for stealing it. Then there are statutory penalties, and damages, that can be claimed and awarded.

The copyright office's new-fangled, on-line registration system has not exactly met with rave reviews, and they are apparently way behind schedule with registrations. I think they say that they haven't got enough employees properly trained to use the "new system" [which apparently cost millions of dollars to establish]. Yay government!

You can still send stuff in through the mail with a paper application, but it takes even longer to get the proof back [although the registration is effective as of the date of receipt by the copyright office]. If you want [or need] the proof of registration back quickly, they have an "expedited" service available for a whole bunch more money. : )

You are actually required to deposit a required amount of copies of any work under copyright that is published in the U.S., with the library of congress, even if you don't register copyright.

[Razik]

I believe that it doesn't matter if you copyright before or after the mastering. If you want to copyright in the US you can use the electronic copyright office online and you can upload your entire album WAV, AIFF, MP3.......for only $35.00.


Razik Mastering

[uncle muscles]

So pro tools sessions do count? Im currently producing/rewriting/mixing a cd for a used to be close friend of mine's band of whom I dont trust anymore. I mean its pretty obvious Im responsible for everything regarding anything that has to do with their songs coming from me. They're simply under the impression all Im doing is slight mixing, because they're assholes, when in reality its much, much more than that. I mean these guys pretend they are completely oblivious which is making me think theyre planning on setting me up. It works like they send me what they consider a full session when in reality it consists of the most horribly sampled and recorded tracks, and the most basic of a structure; a frail skeleton by comparison. And by the time Im done it sounds like JJP and CLA had a beautiful baby. The difference is night and day. In most instances it doesn't even sound 1% close to the "original". And they re just eating it up. I really need to know before I confront them about it if technically the song is mine, per my mix, my production my re written everything, or if there is anything I can proactively do to save my hard earned work and name in the future pending the band does actually take off and start to get big.

[Jeff Hayat]

You cant copyright Pro tools sessions. You cant copyright a mix you have done - regardless of how much you have busted your ass. You can't copyright the song if you have made a better arrangement, added samples, added this added that, added live instruments; you can't copyright the song if you have made it better than the original.

If you wrote the song from scratch and it is your composition, you can copyright it. If someone else wrote the song, you can not copyright it. It really is that simple.

Cheers.

[overdriver333]

Arrangements of existing songs can be copyrighted as derivative works, with permission. You don't need permission if its public domain.

[uncle muscles]

Originally Posted by Jeff Hayat

You cant copyright Pro tools sessions. You cant copyright a mix you have done - regardless of how much you have busted your ass. You can't copyright the song if you have made a better arrangement, added samples, added this added that, added live instruments; you can't copyright the song if you have made it better than the original.

If you wrote the song from scratch and it is your composition, you can copyright it. If someone else wrote the song, you can not copyright it. It really is that simple.

Cheers.

That's what I would have figured.. But almost 90% of the time it really doesn't even come slightly close to remotely resembling anything they could have produced. To me it's like someone trying to copyright a barre chord progression. I mean when it really gets down to it their contribution is that bare. They send it to me under the implicit motive that I will finish what they start. They consider me a part of the band.

[TRJanuary]

Originally Posted by OKB

Then there is so-called "poor man's copyright", which is the old method of sending yourself a copy of the work through the mail, and leaving the envelope sealed. The strategy is, if a dispute ever arises, to be able to open the envelope in front of witnesses and thereby prove that you had possession of the work at the time of the postmark.

It's a shame that this absolute nonsense keeps getting spread around.

Do not do this. Beyond ridiculous.

IT COULD be true that IF you appeared in court with your "package", and you and your lawyers:

1. were willing to spend a little extra money on expert/scientific analysis on the package so that your expert could give his OPINION that the package has not been opened and that the recorded media inside was created during that time frame

2. The opinion was not successfully challenged by your opponent

3. Your opponent ALSO cannot present an offical copyright record or certificate

Then, if all of those are true, it could be accepted by the court as having some "anecdotal value" that supports your ownership.

[uncle muscles]

Is there anything I could do to give myself some footing just in case anything goes sour?

[Jeff Hayat]

Originally Posted by uncle muscles

Is there anything I could do to give myself some footing just in case anything goes sour?

What kind of footing? What exactly were you hired to do?

[huejahfink]

You need a written, signed agreement with the band.
I don't think there's much you can do without that.

[jeb_mcgurkstein]

Originally Posted by TRJanuary

It's a shame that this absolute nonsense keeps getting spread around.

Do not do this. Beyond ridiculous.

IT COULD be true that IF you appeared in court with your "package", and you and your lawyers:

1. were willing to spend a little extra money on expert/scientific analysis on the package so that your expert could give his OPINION that the package has not been opened and that the recorded media inside was created during that time frame

2. The opinion was not successfully challenged by your opponent

3. Your opponent ALSO cannot present an offical copyright record or certificate

Then, if all of those are true, it could be accepted by the court as having some "anecdotal value" that supports your ownership.

You're making it sound somewhat more ridiculous than it is. There are some things that one could do to make "poor man's copyright" more effective, such as using a notary public.

Also, just because someone else shows up with a "legit" copyright registration does not mean that they are "home free". People file previously copyrighted material all the time.

What matters is who can prove that they actually authored the work, however they prove it.

Copyright registration may create a rebuttable presumption of copyright ownership, but its main advantage is that it allows you to claim damages.

The problem nowadays is that the copyright office is so slow in returning the registration document that its ridiculous, unless you pay the exorbitant "expedited fee".

[uncle muscles]

Originally Posted by Jeff Hayat

What kind of footing? What exactly were you hired to do?

Hey Jeff. I wasn't hired to do anything per se.. As in I'm not receiving anything until the cd does well. A contingent agreement. And I'm technically part of the band. Footing as in leverage in case my alcoholic friend decides to have another mood swing and doesn't treat me as a top priority once the ball starts rolling. I kind of caught a whiff of things to come when they went to meet with someone who's interested in picking them up and learned I wasn't included in talks about finances. It's not too late to make my expectations known in written agreement as I haven't even delivered the first final song

[Rodney Gene]

Originally Posted by uncle muscles

Hey Jeff. I wasn't hired to do anything per se.. As in I'm not receiving anything until the cd does well. A contingent agreement. And I'm technically part of the band. Footing as in leverage in case my alcoholic friend decides to have another mood swing and doesn't treat me as a top priority once the ball starts rolling. I kind of caught a whiff of things to come when they went to meet with someone who's interested in picking them up and learned I wasn't included in talks about finances. It's not too late to make my expectations known in written agreement as I haven't even delivered the first final song

Even as someone who has an optimistic outlook, I can tell you from many years producing that you will never be 'top priority' when the ball starts rolling. It is the strangest thing about artists and 'credit' or copyright. I have case after case where this has happened to some degree, even with clients I have trusted. I always, under all circumstances have a producers agreement signed before any work begins. I have co-copywright/publishing credits on close to 100 songs.

I document all co-writing lyrics, arrangments and instrument parts each time something new is added through my contribution during the process. I am a full-hands on producer and often play /write multiple instruments for my clients. Early on I use to have to convince my clients memory that it was ME who wrote the bridge, created the guitar intro, wrote the harmony vocals etc... besides getting the best out of them as a producer and engineer. I ALWAYS keep the orignal demo song I was given or I create one with the artist on acoustic guitar (lyrics and all) before production begins. Always. This is my reference point to help bring the client back to center when they make up thier minds that 'they' already had that part etc.. For clients who only write lyrics, the masters are my property also.

Keep in mind that an agreement is not personal. If your 'mates' do not want to sign it, you are in the wrong gig. Although an agreement is to protect you, it is generally reserved for honest people. If you are honest, an agreement is in your best interest. I have had clients 'balk' at first only to return days later to sign it and begin the project. I always explain that the sole purpose of an agreement is to ensure that since ALL OF US created the music, we all get to enjoy the sunshine when it comes out.

As of now, if you have nothing in writing, expect nothing in return. Your 'contigent' agreement means nothing. You are not protected. It is an unfortunate error that most of us make at some point, but I guarantee it rarely happens more than once. Step up and make a stand for yourself. You are worth it, your time is worth it and it is a good business practice that needs to begin right now.

[uncle muscles]

Originally Posted by Rodney Gene

Even as someone who has an optimistic outlook, I can tell you from many years producing that you will never be 'top priority' when the ball starts rolling. It is the strangest thing about artists and 'credit' or copyright. I have case after case where this has happened to some degree, even with clients I have trusted. I always, under all circumstances have a producers agreement signed before any work begins. I have co-copywright/publishing credits on close to 100 songs.

I document all co-writing lyrics, arrangments and instrument parts each time something new is added through my contribution during the process. I am a full-hands on producer and often play /write multiple instruments for my clients. Early on I use to have to convince my clients memory that it was ME who wrote the bridge, created the guitar intro, wrote the harmony vocals etc... besides getting the best out of them as a producer and engineer. I ALWAYS keep the orignal demo song I was given or I create one with the artist on acoustic guitar (lyrics and all) before production begins. Always. This is my reference point to help bring the client back to center when they make up thier minds that 'they' already had that part etc.. For clients who only write lyrics, the masters are my property also.

Keep in mind that an agreement is not personal. If your 'mates' do not want to sign it, you are in the wrong gig. Although an agreement is to protect you, it is generally reserved for honest people. If you are honest, an agreement is in your best interest. I have had clients 'balk' at first only to return days later to sign it and begin the project. I always explain that the sole purpose of an agreement is to ensure that since ALL OF US created the music, we all get to enjoy the sunshine when it comes out.

As of now, if you have nothing in writing, expect nothing in return. Your 'contigent' agreement means nothing. You are not protected. It is an unfortunate error that most of us make at some point, but I guarantee it rarely happens more than once. Step up and make a stand for yourself. You are worth it, your time is worth it and it is a good business practice that needs to begin right now.

Thank you so, so much Rodney.. I know what I need to do now.