uatrmpt

There was a big stink about Vanilla Ice sampling David Bowie and Queen for his songs. I'm not sure if it ever went to trial though.

__________________
--Matt--

ebtromba

man you guys are all idiots. while you waste time, I am entering a I - IV - V - I progression into finale, transposing it into the 12 keys, and taking a trip to the patent office.

I think I'll charge 1/12 of a cent per usage. That should be enough to buy a couple small countries.

__________________
www.Ebtpt.com

trpt2345

Except the only thing you can copyright are melody and words. Now give me back my $.0012!

Michael McLaughlin

"When I was younger I could remember anything, whether it happened or not."
Mark Twain

__________________
Chicago MM

NickD

I guess the upshot is, practicing law without being a lawyer is a lot like trying to play trumpet without study!

This is certainly an intersting thread, but since I am writing music, for me the point is - BE CAREFUL! If you are contemplating quotes, talk to an intellectual properties lawyer.

In Chicago there used to be an organization called "Lawyers for the Creative Arts" which would offer cheap legal services for musicians. I attended some seminars many years ago in the days of the "Brothers Drozdoff" band. They had great ideas on copyright law.

It might be wisdom to look for organizations such as these in your neck of the woods.

As to these big shot movie composers ripping off the classics? Again, "boo-hoo!" They knew the score!

Nick

__________________

NickD
"Free Online Lessons in Extreme Trumpet Playing"
http://www.nickdrozdoff.com
http://www.newyorktrumpetcompany.com/
http://www.myspace.com/nickdrozdoff

brianwhitehead

Hi,

As an intellectual property lawyer and (amateur) trumpeter I thought I'd add my two pence (cents) worth. I ought to point out at the start that I'm qualified only in English law, so to the extent thtat US copyright law differs, what I say below will not be applicable.

In English law you infringe copyright in a work if you copy a substantial part of the work (there are other ways to infringe, but this is the most relevant to this discussion).

So the Holst estate would need to establish i) that part of Holst's work has been copied; and ii) that the part copied is a substantial part of the work. Both of these can cause difficulties. Where someone simply photocopies a piece of music, for example, this is easy to establish. However, it gets more difficult in the case of altered copying (I have seen Gladiator, but can't remember the score - I assume that the score is not absolutely identical to Mars, but is instead very similar). If there is sufficient objective similarity between the works, the court may be prepared to presume that the film score was copied from Mars, and it would then be up to the film composer to prove that he didn't copy. In this regard, the nature of the material copied is of great importance - for example if a mistake in the original gets copied over, this provides very good evidence of copying.

Even if copying can be proven, the copyright owner still needs to establish that what was taken was a substantial part of the work. In English law, at least, there is no rule that you can take, say, four bars without infringing. Instead, the court would look at what has been copied and looks at the importance, qualitatively, of that part to the work as a whole. As I said above, I don't know precisely what is alleged to have been copied, but I would argue that, for example, the insistent rhythmic element underlying Mars is very important to the work as a whole, and that copying it would amount to copying a substantial part of the work.

It is important to point out that copyright does not give the composer (or his estate) a monopoly in the idea of a rhythmic element, or a chord sequence etc. Anyone else is free to compose a piece using the same type of idea, even if it sounds similar, provided they don't copy. Also, it is important to point out that the more commonplace the part alleged to have been copied (a V-I cadence, to use the example cited above), the harder it will be for the copyright owner to prove copying.

Hope this is interesting to someone!

Brian

robertwhite

Thanks very much, Brian. Great stuff!

trumpet blower88

The thing that makes this whole issue difficult is that people will hear the music differantly by the way they interpret it. Who's to say that one song sounds like something thats already composed? Now, I agree, to my ears the Gladiator soundtrack does sound an awful lot like Mars, but I'm no judge, and neither is anyone else here. I'm just curious, in a situation like this, who makes the final call and what makes him (or her) so special that their opinion is the one that matters?

Another thing is, how could one prove (for or against) that they did or did not copy? An example from my AP Music Theory class. For our final project we had to compose a short litle 4 part harmony. One of the kids in the class worked so hard, every day he would come into class, sit down at the piano and go to work with his manuscript paper. He would play a few notes and everyone would notice that the melody he was playing sounded familiar, but we couldn't put our thumb down on what it was. Finaly, the day before it's due, it finaly comes to me; Tchycovsky's Morning Prayer! We compared the scores, and other than the differance in key, it was note for note, perfectly exact for the first 8 bars. We know he didn't copy it, because we saw him work on it every day and he wasn't copying a score. But how would someone go about proving that? The same goes for the opposite, what if he realy did copy it but say he didn't, how could you prove that he did copy it?

__________________
-David Jacques

robertwhite

David, if your friend used that thing he composed as part of a multi-million dollar film score, it would be a different story. Composers have many stories about coming up with something that already existed. It seems pretty clear though that Gladiator is, ummm, at least "inspired" by The Planets.

What will be interesting to see is if the lawyers can prove that Mars was in fact directly imitated. I have a feeling they'll have "experts" (composers?) point out the similarities in the rhythmic ostinato, orchestration, tonality, melodic materials, etc.

Zimmer could of course play dumb - that's probably his best defense actually.

brianwhitehead

In a trial for copyright infringement, it would be the judge, guided by expert evidence. What makes the judge so special? It's the judge's job!! Most judges would probably admit they are not experts in musicology, hence the need for expert evidence. The judge would give due consideration to the experts, but ultimately it would be his/her job to decide.

The burden of proof lies with the person alleging that his copyright work has been copied. However, for obvious reasons one can rarely prove copying in the strict sense that the alleged copier sat down with the original on date x and copied part y. Hence the presumption I referred to in my earlier post - if there is sufficient objective similarity between the works (to be decided by the judge, guided by expert evidence), the court will presume that copying took place and the alleged copier will have to prove that he didn't copy.

In the example you cite, assuming the final work is sufficiently similar to merit the presumption of copying, in order to try to prove he didn't copy, the student would give an account of how he came to compose the piece, stage by stage. If he retained drafts as he went along, these would be good evidence of independent origination on his behalf. He could also adduce evidence from his fellow students as to his compositional process. Ultimately, the judge would have to decide who he believes.

Of course, it is highly unlikely that such a trivial case would be brought. In the case of a professional film composer, he may well retain detailed sketches, drafts etc of the stages in the composition process (it is a good idea to do so!!). These may well give a convincing account of how the piece was originated without copying.

B

stchasking

I published a CD last year. I actually inherited the studio transcrips made by the radio station 60 years ago. The radio station wished me luck. I hired a person to find the copyright holder of every song. We found most of the information at Harry Fox. Some pieces I couldn't find. One tidbit of info I was provided stated that songs written before the 1920's are in the public domain. I think Victor Herbert and the song writers of this era formed ASCAP and fought for royalties. They won.
So what I understand is that if the song is pre 1920's you can steal all you want.
I was also informed that even if I couldn't find a copy right holder, I am legally required to pay them the 6 cents or so per CD and they have to take it as long as someone else recorded the song before me.
The bottom line is..
You have to pay the composer if the composer or assigns still owns the rights.

The good news. Every person I paid was greatfull and was happy I was using their song. Some hadn't received royalties for years.

Sorry, I didn't contribute anything useful to this thread.
The US copy right internet site has all the details.

__________________
"I was performing professionally at age 17 and have never had a real job." Allen Vizzutti

http://cdbaby.com/cd/mcking