Does A DAW Copyright Music?

This forum is for anything not Reason related, if you just want to talk about other stuff. Please keep it friendly!
User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

12 Sep 2017

Hi All!

I've heard, as soon as you record your song in a DAW it becomes copyrighted, or if not copyrighted, you have proof of how long you've had that song, as the song will have the date it was first saved in it's file information.

Is this true?

Also, what's to stop you saving a blank song file with the name "Blank Song" say today, 12th September 2017 and then waiting till a song you liked popped up on the radio or in the charts and then opening your "Blank Song" and doing a rough emulation of that song and then re-saving it as the song you likes name, such as "Mystery Girl" and then claiming you wrote that song x months earlier. Would the date on the file change when you resaved the song with the new name?

I know there's the old way of recording your song, putting it on CD or Tape and posting it yourself recorded delivery way of copyrighting it but that it quite costly if you have a lot of songs and I'm never quite sure if that's good enough to me.

Thanks!
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
Noise
Competition Winner
Posts: 470
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Lisbon
Contact:

12 Sep 2017

Just for the sake of the argument, if I lived in 1797, and made a rough sketch of the Mona Lisa (by Leonardo da Vinci ) , and by chemical analysis, my badly draw sketch (Mistery Lisa) was proven to be the first, I could say that Leonardo just made a better version of my sketch after, and I could claim the master piece has my own ?

#2 - There is always a "creation date, and modified date" on the file, preserving some interesting data, even if you copy the file around.
Albums: BandCamp | Youtubz: Noise Channel
Projects: P1 Easy Remote Mapping | Personal Refill Sale Store: https://payhip.com/noisesystems | Title Generator! untitled.noiseshadow.com

User avatar
FlowerSoldier
Posts: 470
Joined: 03 Jun 2016

12 Sep 2017

Creativemind wrote:
12 Sep 2017
Hi All!

I've heard, as soon as you record your song in a DAW it becomes copyrighted, or if not copyrighted, you have proof of how long you've had that song, as the song will have the date it was first saved in it's file information.

Is this true?

Also, what's to stop you saving a blank song file with the name "Blank Song" say today, 12th September 2017 and then waiting till a song you liked popped up on the radio or in the charts and then opening your "Blank Song" and doing a rough emulation of that song and then re-saving it as the song you likes name, such as "Mystery Girl" and then claiming you wrote that song x months earlier. Would the date on the file change when you resaved the song with the new name?

I know there's the old way of recording your song, putting it on CD or Tape and posting it yourself recorded delivery way of copyrighting it but that it quite costly if you have a lot of songs and I'm never quite sure if that's good enough to me.

Thanks!
Where did you hear that? I would be very skeptical of any more information from that source.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

12 Sep 2017

Neither the DAW, nor the "mail it to yourself" is a legal proof.

By law, it's yours when you write it. Even the big pub companies don't register a song until it's recorded/released - there's no reason to have it registered unless it's generating $$$.

To add to this, when is the last time you heard of someone's song being copied and the creation date being the issue? In most cases it's the similarity that's at issue, not the creation date.

Just thought I'd better do a quick google search to back up all I stated - came up with this at the top of the list, which supports my comments above:
http://www.gcglaw.com/resources/enterta ... right.html

That being said, if you do release your music you should register it, since you're putting it out there in public.

Also consider how many of your songs are worth stealing - register those! Full disclosure: I've only ever registered songs I've officially released, fwiw. And even after being in the business for getting close to 40 years, I've never heard of any of the artists or songwriters I've worked with getting ripped off and having to prove the song was theirs - it is EXTREMELY rare!!!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

13 Sep 2017

I wonder if the blockchain could provide a free alternative, because it is a public ledger that provides pretty solid proof of publishing date and content (or at least its unique hash).

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

13 Sep 2017

avasopht wrote:
13 Sep 2017
I wonder if the blockchain could provide a free alternative, because it is a public ledger that provides pretty solid proof of publishing date and content (or at least its unique hash).
Blockchain?
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

13 Sep 2017

Creativemind wrote:
13 Sep 2017
Blockchain?
That's the technology that powers cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Basically it's a digital ledger that is public, decentralized (managed by millions of computers around the world), and provides high level of certainty that a record was published at a specific time and that the information was not tampered with.

In laymen's terms, it's a mechanism that allows you to prove the date and time you published digital content to the blockchain.

There are now services built on this technology to provide secure contracts and copyright registration. Currently copyright registration is not legally solid [1] but $1.5 million has been awarded in funding to make this service legit [2] (if possible).

Of course, the at present time registration is the most appropriate solution.

User avatar
FlowerSoldier
Posts: 470
Joined: 03 Jun 2016

13 Sep 2017

avasopht wrote:
13 Sep 2017
Creativemind wrote:
13 Sep 2017
Blockchain?
That's the technology that powers cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Basically it's a digital ledger that is public, decentralized (managed by millions of computers around the world), and provides high level of certainty that a record was published at a specific time and that the information was not tampered with.

In laymen's terms, it's a mechanism that allows you to prove the date and time you published digital content to the blockchain.

There are now services built on this technology to provide secure contracts and copyright registration. Currently copyright registration is not legally solid [1] but $1.5 million has been awarded in funding to make this service legit [2] (if possible).

Of course, the at present time registration is the most appropriate solution.
People are also thinking of verifying rare vintages of wine and works of art with the blockchain. It's super interesting technology. Especially since no one knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is...Smart Contracts seem to be a more reliable system though.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

14 Sep 2017

avasopht wrote:I wonder if the blockchain could provide a free alternative, because it is a public ledger that provides pretty solid proof of publishing date and content (or at least its unique hash).
Blockchain tech is being actively pursued for music copyright - very well could be the proverbial "next big thing".

Been reading about for a while now, and looks promising if adopted - here's one recent article by Imogen Heap no less:
https://hbr.org/2017/06/blockchain-coul ... oney-again


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
C//AZM
Posts: 366
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

25 Sep 2017

The "poor man's Copyright" a dated envelope containing a cassette mailed to yourself with the US mail date.
It never has worked against a full copyright on the correct form and registered with the Lib Of Congress. But it was better than nothing at all.
Still it wasn't expensive if you packed a 120 cassette with loads of songs...32 cents for dozens of songs.

I knew a studio musician who wrote some songs, showed them to a local producer, then left the area, and later the band I was working with took credit for the song.

User avatar
Carly(Poohbear)
Competition Winner
Posts: 2871
Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Location: UK

25 Sep 2017

Noise wrote:
12 Sep 2017
#2 - There is always a "creation date, and modified date" on the file, preserving some interesting data, even if you copy the file around.
That can be changed in 2 seconds...

User avatar
6502
Posts: 147
Joined: 18 Nov 2015

28 Sep 2017

Here is an interesting link:

http://jeremylimmusic.com/tutorials/how ... -the-deep/

As well, instead of physical mail, I think email would be preferable.

I highly doubt Google's servers and timestamps could be contested in court or be accused of tampering. If you emailed yourself an mp3 or pdf of your music using gmail or other, I would imagine it would be better proof than physical mail (in addition to registering a copyright, of course).

But I am no lawyer :lol:

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

29 Sep 2017

C//AZM wrote:
25 Sep 2017
The "poor man's Copyright" a dated envelope containing a cassette mailed to yourself with the US mail date.
It never has worked against a full copyright on the correct form and registered with the Lib Of Congress. But it was better than nothing at all.
Still it wasn't expensive if you packed a 120 cassette with loads of songs...32 cents for dozens of songs.

I knew a studio musician who wrote some songs, showed them to a local producer, then left the area, and later the band I was working with took credit for the song.
Assuming it's accepted in court (don't think it is), that only works for one song (or a group of songs) at one time. As soon as you open the envelope, the rest of the songs are no longer "protected". But again, it's not going to be accepted in court from what I've always heard…

About the band taking credit for the song - only matters if they had a hit and are cashing in, in which case "see you in court". Otherwise why bother, because it's not cheep to go to court (so there had better be some way to re-coup expenses).
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Oquasec
Posts: 2849
Joined: 05 Mar 2017

29 Sep 2017

If there was one thing you need to read it is definitely terms of service and copyright laws involving the use of audio and stating the uses for the audio in question.
As well as the original recording and projects as to back up your claims, with proof of ownership and demonstration purposes.

So basically you need to be prepared for anything.
Producer/Programmer.
Reason, FLS and Cubase NFR user.

User avatar
C//AZM
Posts: 366
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

29 Sep 2017

selig wrote:
29 Sep 2017


...About the band taking credit for the song - only matters if they had a hit and are cashing in, in which case "see you in court". Otherwise why bother, because it's not cheep to go to court (so there had better be some way to re-coup expenses).
This was a top 1980s R&B band from Detroit whose singer went on to be one of the biggest sellers of the 90s. But yes, it doesn't matter if all you're doing is recording and/or gigging with no expectation of sales.

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 Sep 2017

In fact the date of creation can be the legal grounds in case theres a dispute. And most of the time we're talking about songs that became hits later. Small bands stealing each others songs etc. are more often becoming legal issues than one might think.

But a DAW file date won't help you much if it comes down to it. Leave a CD, sheet music and the lyrics of your creation with a notary. That is definitive proof of when you created that song and it will allow you to claim the natural right you have to your creation.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

29 Sep 2017

normen wrote:
29 Sep 2017
In fact the date of creation can be the legal grounds in case theres a dispute. And most of the time we're talking about songs that became hits later. Small bands stealing each others songs etc. are more often becoming legal issues than one might think.

But a DAW file date won't help you much if it comes down to it. Leave a CD, sheet music and the lyrics of your creation with a notary. That is definitive proof of when you created that song and it will allow you to claim the natural right you have to your creation.
I thought all a notary could do was to notarize documents, not store them for you? Maybe it's different in different countries…

Still the best bet is to register anything worth stealing with the copyright office, because it is the only sure way to protect your songs if that's a real concern for you…

Also worth noting many cases are not about creation but about fair use, which none of these solutions will automatically 'solve' for you…

EDIT: put in a quick email to a music business attorney friend of mine to find the correct answer for the US…will report back shortly!
Selig Audio, LLC

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

29 Sep 2017

A 'DAW copyrighted file', for me usually just means the DAW I used to make it has corrupted the file and it will never be loaded again, in anything... :lol:

User avatar
platzangst
Posts: 728
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

02 Oct 2017

From the US Gov's own flyer on copyright:
In addition to establishing a public record of a copyright claim, registration offers several other
statutory advantages:

• Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration (or refusal) is necessary for
works of U.S. origin.

• Registration establishes prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright and facts stated in
the certificate when registration is made before or within five years of publication.

• When registration is made prior to infringement or within three months after publication of a
work, a copyright owner is eligible for statutory damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.

• Registration permits a copyright owner to establish a record with the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) for protection against the importation of infringing copies.

You do not have to receive your certificate of registration before you publish or produce your work. Nor do you need permission from the Copyright Office to place a copyright notice on your work. But the Copyright Office must approve or refuse your application before you can file a lawsuit for copyright infringement, except in cases involving a foreign work. You may seek statutory damages and attorneys’ fees in an infringement action provided that the infringement began after the effective date of registration. The law, however, provides a grace period of three months after publication during which full remedies can be recovered for any infringement begun during the three months after publication if registration is made before this period ends.
Basically, as I understand this, this means that for the US, you pretty much have to have your copyright registered for a lawsuit to even get off the ground, and you have to have it registered before someone else tries to violate your copyright, or else the amount you can sue someone for is drastically limited.

Everything else - all the "self mail" or other ways people try to get around the fees and paperwork and hassle of actually registering a copyright - all that is legally bupkis. If you go into court and say "but my DAW copyrighted my song!" and the other guy whips out a properly filed document with the copyright office, you're probably going to lose, even if the song is actually your own creation.

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

02 Oct 2017

The above is only true for the US mind you.

User avatar
SteveDiverse
Posts: 108
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

03 Oct 2017

My best comment on this is that you need to keep a few things in mind:
(1) Copyright is a matter of law within each country. There is an international copyright agreement that many, but not all, countries recognize.
(2) Like all laws, copyright laws, however written, only matter in terms of how they end up playing out in court.
(3) Will your claim prevail in the courts in your country AND/OR will your claim prevail in the courts of the country where the person you sue for violating your copyright resides?
(4) Do you have the financial means to pay the cost of litigation in ALL jurisdictions in which your suit could prevail?

If you have very lucrative copyrighted material that has been 'stolen', and the legal council you hire believes you could win significant damages, they ( that legal council) might represent you for a percentage of what you (could) win in court. But if your claim on the material is tenuous, you will more likely have to pay the costs out of your own pocket - could you afford that?

If the person who steals your material is in a country that doesn't honor international copyright, you're SOL.

It's easy to think you can sue, but always keep in mind that suing costs money, and is more difficult and more costly when the two parties do not reside in the same legal jurisdiction.
:reason: :reload: :record: :ignition: :refill: :re: | :rt: FTW

User avatar
mcatalao
Competition Winner
Posts: 1826
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

03 Oct 2017

You must check this in your countries Laws, but here in Portugal, copyright (or how it is call here, imho more correctly author's rights ) doesn't require Register.

And i think this is general to all countries.
In the case of an usurpation of a work, it is good to have proof it is yours. For better and worse.
I register all my songs on IGAC. IGAC only registers creative stuff, even if they are not generating income. That's the difference between a copyright manager, Like ascap or SPA in Portugal, and a register office, like IGAC. IGAC allows you to register a body of work even if you don't publish it.

Despite my big consideration for Giles (SELIG), i find important to register a song even if it's not published because when you get in the process of promoting your song the music marketing, you have proof of ownership of that title. A lot of artists were robbed in the process.

User avatar
mcatalao
Competition Winner
Posts: 1826
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

03 Oct 2017

PS.: The poor man's copy right made me laugh.

Registering a creative work in Portugal costs 25 eur per work (and you can use 1 work for all your songs), and changes to the body of work cost 5 eur (no maximum). So you create a work with 20 initial songs, 25 eur. You want to add 20 songs, 5 eur. It's like this to the rest of your life. That's how i have my stuff registered. They even accept you to upload. This will defend an Author in any courd of law in Portugal.

The "work" is not bound for example for an album (you can release parts of "the work" in different albums), so from those 40 songs, i can make 4 CD's and register them o SPA (or not).

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

03 Oct 2017

mcatalao wrote:
03 Oct 2017
You must check this in your countries Laws, but here in Portugal, copyright (or how it is call here, imho more correctly author's rights ) doesn't require Register.

And i think this is general to all countries.
In the case of an usurpation of a work, it is good to have proof it is yours. For better and worse.
I register all my songs on IGAC. IGAC only registers creative stuff, even if they are not generating income. That's the difference between a copyright manager, Like ascap or SPA in Portugal, and a register office, like IGAC. IGAC allows you to register a body of work even if you don't publish it.

Despite my big consideration for Giles (SELIG), i find important to register a song even if it's not published because when you get in the process of promoting your song the music marketing, you have proof of ownership of that title. A lot of artists were robbed in the process.
If you live where a lot of artists are robbed, you should definitely register your songs. ;)

BTW, it's the same here - copyright doesn't require registration. But litigation does, or at least it's going to be easier for you if you do.

For me, I've never had any songs stolen nor do I know anyone who has - not saying it doesn't happen, I'm saying even in working in Nashville and being a staff writer for Warner/Chappell I never heard of it happening.

BTW, here's what my attorney friend wrote on the subject of "poor man's copyright" (from his blog: http://tripaldredgelaw.blogspot.com)

"For the past 15 years, I have taught copyright law at a local college. Every year, without fail, I wind up in an argument with a student over the legitimacy of a so-called “Poor Man’s Copyright.” Folks, the Poor Man’s Copyright does not exist.

However, the myth is so pervasive that many of my students have told me that they were been advised by other professors of the important merits of this method.

Basically, the strategy is this: you take whatever work you have created that you want to protect (song, novel, epic poem, etc.) and mail it to yourself (sometimes the myth suggests certified or registered mail but I am not sure of the distinction for this purpose). The belief is that this somehow proves you created the work. In actuality, this proves that you mailed yourself a package.

The problem lies in a fundamental misunderstanding of copyright law. Our law provides that one’s copyright exists in an expressive work as soon as it is “fixed in a medium of tangible expression” (i.e., this is what creates the actual “copyright.”) The second step is registration of the copyright. Registration is not required to sustain a copyright. It is advisable, though, for purposes of proof AND it is a prerequisite to any sort of copyright infringement litigation. For those purposes, there are no short-cuts or alternatives to copyright registration; one must follow the procedures laid out in the Copyright Act.

I am not sure what the historical background of the Poor Man’s Copyright is. A quick Google search reveals that it is a system recommended to this day in several European countries where there is no central copyright registration authority. It also may date back to the days before the Copyright Act of 1976, when there were legal concepts like “common law copyrights” and other anomalies.

I suppose there is nothing wrong with mailing yourself a package, but please do not rely on that action as any sort of substitute for proper registration."
Selig Audio, LLC

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

04 Oct 2017

A letter mailed to yourself would be torn apart in court. How can you prove you never sent an envelope that wasn't sealed, or wasn't in some way able to inject your recording in after.

I'm sure with enough money behind a legal team they could find a way to demonstrate in the courtroom how it is possible to send yourself a recorded letter and later insert a CD..

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests