The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
copyright question Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 3rd December 2009
  #61
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Even if the recording is in the public domain, it doesn't mean that the underlying songs or even the last remastered version is.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #62
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
Even if the recording is in the public domain, it doesn't mean that the underlying songs or even the last remastered version is.
that is true.

The one instance whereby a master does constitute a new copyright - but that is specifically because the recording is no longer under protection. However - it's a copyright of very little worth since all the budding re-masterer has to do is use the original recording. And of course - pay proper dues to the publishing.

You can have new recordings of public domain songs whose recording is copyright. Maybe even a new arrangement for some publishing protection.
You can have protected songs but recorded versions are out in public domain - but be careful which version you source from oh you great advertisers of the world!!
You can have new masters of public domain recordings that create some form of new copyright... but easily countered with using a source recoding f
But you cannot have a new copyright generated from a remaster of a currently protected recording. Which is all I've been arguing!!

cheers
Old 3rd December 2009
  #63
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post

You asked me to justify "publishing copyright" - I did.... the {p} symbol

You asked me to justify "recording copyright" - i did . the {c} symbol.
Again, show me then "publishing copyright" and "compositional copyright" described as terms. The last time I checked (P) meant symbol for recordings as in PHONOGRAPH not "publishing". And both are symbols of copyright protection which denotes that there maybe a registration submitted in the first place. It doesn't mean it was registered in the US Copyright office.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #64
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
Again, show me then "publishing copyright" and "compositional copyright" described as terms. The last time I checked (P) meant symbol for recordings as in PHONOGRAPH not "publishing". And both are symbols of copyright protection which denotes a registration was submitted in the first place.

Calling me an "ignorant" with no other justification than you don't agree with me, it's a personal attack.
"Recording" and "publishing" essentially go hand in hand. And at this point, it's more semantic than anything. In order to have a right to publish, you have to own the copyright in the recording. Any independent artist not under contract with a separate publishing party, naturally owns this. But again, for situations where publishing/recording/mechanical and authorship of the actual material are divided between different parties these symbols then hold meanings for that distinction and legality.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
"Recording" and "publishing" essentially go hand in hand. And at this point, it's more semantic than anything. In order to have a right to publish, you have to own the copyright in the recording. Any independent artist not under contract with a separate publishing party, naturally owns this. But again, for situations where publishing/recording/mechanical and authorship of the actual material are divided between different parties these symbols then hold meanings for that distinction and legality.
The things you are referring are not in dispute here TrascendingM. I have answered clearly what the OP asked before.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #66
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodreason View Post
there is getting to be quite a bit of misinformation in the thread.

the "p in a circle" does not mean "publishing". it is the symbol used to signify copyright in a sound recording, as distinguished from copyright in the underlying composition.

the "c in a circle" does not mean "composition". it means copyright, in a composition, or a literary work, or whatever.

publishing royalties can come from several sources, and not solely from the sound recording. print music, for example, is a source of publishing revenue.

a copyright is a 100% block, divided equally into two 50% parts, the author's share, and the publisher's share. the author's 50% share resides with the author[s], and efforts to interfere with that are disapproved in any case. the publishing share can be assigned, or not. the author[s] may also be the publisher[s], thus enjoying the entire 100% of the copyright. however, it is common for record companies to seek ownership of all or part of the publishing portion of the copyright. if the author is working with a separate publisher, then the publisher will definitely have the publishing portion of the copyright, although a significant and desirable author / artist may be able to retain some of his or her publishing even then.

some of the posters also seem to be mixing up mechanical royalties and performance royalties.
sorry - my bad. I certainly didn't make my self very clear on that front - I was just trying to explain the underlying acceptance in the two copyright areas. I generally referred to the {c} and {p} referring to the composition and the recording aspect. I did not deliberately mislead - but rather accidentally got them the wrong way round. A none thinking error!!

But yes - you are right. I made a daft error. It does not change the argument though!! The two are quite distinct.

So lets say it again - I got it the wrong way round and the reality is

P - the recording
C - in our case - the composition.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #67
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
I think the P symbol became synonymous with publishing because often a publisher's name could follow the date of the recorded material along with the P symbol.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #68
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Eh? I didn't attack you! At all - you told me I was unpleasant and what not- and people like me shouldn't be on forums!! Go back and read your posts.....

You asked me to justify "publishing copyright" - I did.... the {p} symbol
{snip}

But I know this stuff Edward! Really and honestly and seriously !! I know maths, I have opinions on songs {often completely daft ones}, and I know copyright law. Not much else!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
hey
Being ignorant of something doesn't imply an insult. It implies you don't know. Not a nasty thing at all. It implies that one doesn't know something. It doesn't imply stupidity or any other such term. Calling someone ignorant is only offensive if the person on the receiving end thinks of themselves as all knowing. I am ignorant of practically anything "biology" or "chemistry" related. The justification for inferring your ignorance of this matter was more in line with apparently having no professional experience in the matter. Maybe too strongly worded - but I meant to convey that , from what you have said - you are not fully versed in copyright law and what pertains to what. No insult meant by it - attack? Why would I attack? Because someone on the internet is wrong? For what gain? You have inferred an attack when none was forthcoming. If I wanted to intellectually attack you I would have made it quite clear....

You don't , as far as I can tell, work in licensing or copyright approval part of the industry. I do. In fact I own a company dealing in precisely these matters - I own a music outsource company managing composers, clients repertoire. As a useful aside we also run a well equipped studio. I'm pretty sure you're a recording chap - sig strip kinda gives that one credence. My level of experience in this matter is a professional one. It is of paramount fiscal importance that I comprehend and fully appreciate the various intricacies of copyright law and the various components that go into it. when you clear a license for sync usage you must be equipped with information regarding the compositional copyright and the recoding copyright. Generally means dealing with labels and publishers as well as writers. That's it. No further.

Never said the {p} STOOD for publishing - as in the 'p' letter means that. But it IS the phonographic reproduction of a published work. And that is it. The {c} refers to the copyright of the performance itself.

I have not indicated either way any understanding that a work must be "registered " with the LOC t all. That's a USA thing alone - there are mechanisms outside of the USA that wrk in similar ways - but they are not international organisations. It's a good thing too - because it does centralize the registration of said works. But it is not infallible and nor does it - in one copyright - cover the recoding an the composition. The two are distinct and require clearing for any legal use of music in picture OR as product.
I think we just disagree.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #69
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodreason View Post
.... i think some record companies are just doing a "digital master version" of old sides and claiming that it constitutes "new material". that is going to cause trouble for them, i would think.
I think it's an issue that is in enough of a grey area that challenging a record label's re-master in court would be a very expensive proposition.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #70
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodreason View Post
actually, often the record producer's name. and if no other name appears in connection with the the "p in a circle" symbol, and the producer's name is on the album cover, then the producer's name is deemed to be a part of the notice.
heh "often" is a loose term here. In my world of extreme metal, producer is often the band. And the band is often the publisher. Often the band's chosen publishing name ends up there.

EDIT: any way thats besides the point here of how the confusion most likely originated.
Old 3rd December 2009
  #71
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
I think it's an issue that is in enough of a grey area that challenging a record label's re-master in court would be a very expensive proposition.
Yeah I think goodreason is right about that, if one wants to be straight up about it, the labels are full of crap when they do that. But Bob has a point, the reality of it is a muck.
Old 4th December 2009
  #72
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodreason View Post
in the U.S., although the composition and the sound recording are separate copyrights, registration for both can be made simultaneously, on form sr, when the same person[s] make claim to both copyrights.
absolutely. But they are distinct and that has been the main thrust of my point. Not only that - the copyright the OP was asking about was and is distinctly the recording copyright.
Old 4th December 2009
  #73
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
I think the P symbol became synonymous with publishing because often a publisher's name could follow the date of the recorded material along with the P symbol.
no - that was just my error. A silly one at that. But I think we're all clear on the right way round yeah? The concept is still the same.
Old 4th December 2009
  #74
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodreason View Post
yes, i think i understand what you have been driving at. in the U.S. the terminology is "sound recording", and the tangible media [of any type] containing the composition[s] and the sound recording is known as a "phonorecord" [apparently the source of the "p in a circle" symbol].

for anyone interested in this stuff, ownership of the physical masters can be separate and different than title to the copyright in the sound recording[s] they contain. so sale of the master tapes [or files] does not necessarily imply transfer of title in any copyright.
exactly that !!
Old 4th December 2009
  #75
Lives for gear
 
oceantracks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
So said the first judge. Coincidence says I !!
Way too close for coincidence, same progression as well. I'm sure George didn't set out to lift it, it's quite credible that it was unconscious, but far too alike they are...and it could have been solved out of court with an acknowledgement of same and some kind of compensation worked out, as Lennon had to do (really unfairly in that case) for "Come Together."

TH
Old 24th December 2009
  #77
Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
I think the P symbol became synonymous with publishing because often a publisher's name could follow the date of the recorded material along with the P symbol.
This is very misleading. The P symbol has nothing to do with publishing and the publisher's name should not follow the P symbol. The name of the owner of the copyright in the phonorecord should follow the P symbol. "Publisher" (as used in the music industry) relates to the copyright in the song (ie word and music- but not recording). Thus, the publisher's name should follow the C symbol - if that copyright refers to the words and music.

note that in relation to phonorecord packaging (eg, a CD insert), you will often find both the P and C symbols preceding the record label's name. in this case the C refers to the packaging (the layout, verbage, etc., coopyright of which is typically owned by the label, be it big or indie) and not the words and music.
Old 24th December 2009
  #78
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildplum View Post
This is very misleading. The P symbol has nothing to do with publishing and the publisher's name should not follow the P symbol. The name of the owner of the copyright in the phonorecord should follow the P symbol. "Publisher" (as used in the music industry) relates to the copyright in the song (ie word and music- but not recording). Thus, the publisher's name should follow the C symbol - if that copyright refers to the words and music.

note that in relation to phonorecord packaging (eg, a CD insert), you will often find both the P and C symbols preceding the record label's name. in this case the C refers to the packaging (the layout, verbage, etc., coopyright of which is typically owned by the label, be it big or indie) and not the words and music.


Yeah, I think you missed my point. Please re-read what I am saying there.
Old 25th December 2009
  #79
Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
I think the P symbol became synonymous with publishing because often a publisher's name could follow the date of the recorded material along with the P symbol.
I took this statement to mean that you thought that the publisher's name often followed the P symbol. If that is not what you meant, pray tell, what did you mean?
Old 25th December 2009
  #80
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildplum View Post
I took this statement to mean that you thought that the publisher's name often followed the P symbol. If that is not what you meant, pray tell, what did you mean?
No, no. Why would one think that?

What I was stating is perhaps a reason as to why the publisher's name became synonomous with the P symbol. Or in other words, a theory on the origins of this error. Maybe out of convention?... I've personally seen many bands do that and my thought process is that maybe because some did initially, others followed suite and it was taken as this is what "P" signifies.

Also with many underground metal bands, they are usually the copyright of the recording as well as their own publisher. In these cases, they'd use their publisher name as the representation. This however I'm not sure of the legitimacy on paper.
Top Mentioned Products
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
10 Dollars / So much gear, so little time
14
homestudioguy / So much gear, so little time
4
djsandman / Music Business
14
emazeone / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump