Copyright Law? Are chords entitled to a songwriter's %?

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:05 am

Here is a question that I think many producers could benefit from.

I want to discuss this:
If a songwriter comes into my studio with words and a melody he sings, but does not know his chords, (usually hasn't even a clue as to the chords), and I have to write the chords, am I entitled to songwriter's for this?

In my opinion, the answer is yes and the share should be 33%, dividing the song into lyric, melody and chords.

Please chime in and voice your knowlege on this.Exact copyright law quotes to back up your point and a reference to where they may be found would be very helpful

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:16 am

I don't think chords themselves are copyrightable, but the fact that you had to write it makes you co-writer. I don't know the law on that, but I'd simply make them sign an agreement. If they don't want to sign, they can go somewhere else and get someone who will write it for free.

Just make them give you some points to co-write. Ask for 10% of artist's cut, plus songwriter credit. It's going to be a subjective thing. If this is a country western song, chances are there is nothing to quibble about. I mean, any decent player could sit there and play the song first time with no written chords. There are only about 4 or 5 C&W songs, really, at least of the type I'm referring to. If it's more progressive, and the guy doesn't know how to play what he hears with his melody, then you're actually creating the sound for him. That's worth at least a few points. On the other hand, if you're saving this cat from amateur hour by making something interesting out of a boring melody, then you're definitely on the team and deserve 10% minimum, if not 50%.

Whatever you agree to is what the deal will be. If they think the law is otherwise, they can go have a lawyer write their chords for free.

Shooshie

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:41 am

Shooshie wrote:I don't think chords themselves are copyrightable, but the fact that you had to write it makes you co-writer. I don't know the law on that, but I'd simply make them sign an agreement. If they don't want to sign, they can go somewhere else and get someone who will write it for free.

Just make them give you some points to co-write. Ask for 10% of artist's cut, plus songwriter credit. It's going to be a subjective thing. If this is a country western song, chances are there is nothing to quibble about. I mean, any decent player could sit there and play the song first time with no written chords. There are only about 4 or 5 C&W songs, really, at least of the type I'm referring to. If it's more progressive, and the guy doesn't know how to play what he hears with his melody, then you're actually creating the sound for him. That's worth at least a few points. On the other hand, if you're saving this cat from amateur hour by making something interesting out of a boring melody, then you're definitely on the team and deserve 10% minimum, if not 50%.

Whatever you agree to is what the deal will be. If they think the law is otherwise, they can go have a lawyer write their chords for free.

Shooshie

Well Shoosh...
This stuff comes up all the time for me. Ever heard of the song "One note Samba"? The melody is an F...But the chords are D-7, Db dom 7, C-7/11 etc...The chords make the F mean what it means...annd great writers do that as standard operating procedure in my opinion.

Well, when I do chords for a person, they can be minor, major, and they are never anything but, even if I must say so myself, pretty damn amazing..I grew up playing with Joe pass , Ted greene, heavy cats, heavy chord knowlege to where ANY chord can work if voice led properly... so its like, I can really, and DO really shape a person's song with chords when they have none to start with. And most are grateful But then comes the ego maniac A-holes...yikes! I end up in fights, and what am I fight? I think ignorance and ego.

It appears I am about to get into a lawsuit about this fact and it will be interesting to have my former client on the stand. If I can, I will have my lawyer put out a keyboard and ask him to play the song he says he worte.."Mr___ play your song for us all, we'd love to hear it". .And when the SOB cannot play his own effing song...move for a dismissal and attorney's fees. Oh, if only life worked like our fantasies..lol..wouldn't that be a pretty slam dunk?

The ignorance I have run into when it comes to chords and their impact has been unbelievable. Indeed, in country, maybe it could be argued the song is complete without chords. But really? I mean, any melody can usually be made minor or major...and once so made, changed again.

I am waiting for a call from my lawyer on all of this, and have thus far found the law a bit unclear, yet musically, I know how, at least when I do them .chords are no less important than any other part of a song.

I would find 10% too little. Perhaps 25%. I have offered 25 and am being told I had nothing to do with the writing..and that's UNACCEPTABLE unless I find out the law is "agin me"....thus...it appears court will be the outcome. More for principal.

I thank you for always chiming and and welcome others to continue to discuss this, especially from a technical law point of view as that's what will matter in the end. From a reality, right and wrong point of view, I am certain chords are part of the writing of a song. It may have something to do with the legal defition of "MUSIC", as a compostion is usually defined as "Words and MUSIC.

Anyone with a similar problem or legal insight welcome!

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 3:58 am

Good luck, 2dam, but I've got one beef with you. You didn't have contract beforehand. Without an agreement, it's your word against his. Sure, maybe he can't play it. And you MIGHT win. Power to you if you do. But it's an uphill battle without that piece of paper with your name and his signed at the bottom.

Is this going to be a hit? You looking at big bucks? If not, call it a learning experience and toss it out of your life. Get some contracts printed up and start using them! Make that lawyer work for his retainer for a change!

Shooshie

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:05 am

Oh... wait a minute. You're saying HE's suing YOU? How did THAT happen? What's he suing you for? I guess if he's the one doing the suing, then you can't just drop it. Maybe your plan is the best one: have him play his own song. Well, I do wish you luck. When you contribute to a song, you're a partner in its writing. If you did the chords and played them in, that's a major portion of the pie. I don't know why he's suing you, but I think you've got a case.

Shooshie

musicarteca · Post by **musicarteca** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:07 am

toodamnhip wrote:This crap comes up all the time for me. Ever heard of the song "One note melody"? The melody is an F...But the chords are D-7, Db dom 7, C-7/11 etc...The chords make the F mean what it means...annd great writers do that as standard operating procedure in my opinion.

I agree with your thoughts, but you know what, at the end of the day people are going to be singing that little note only, and if someone else commes with a different chord progression still the people will identify the song by that little boring F note that repeats.

So the copyright law is based on melody an lyrics, simply because a song could be harmonized in a million ways. Can you imagine if I say: I will reharmonize all the Beatles songs so now I am a co-writer. On the other hand we have heard many times a catchy tune that uses one of two chords (or none) and is a hit!

So unfortunatelly harmony falls into the arrangement category (which can be copywrited by the way), a lot of producers do it all the time, I do it all the time for example, re-harmonize, change the form, re-touch the lyrics, change the instrumentation, etc. and still it will not necesarilly mean I am a co-writer. I even wrote a 7 minutes orchestra piece based on a brazilian melody, and that was considered (an paid as) an arrangement. This is of course the borderline, it could have been a composition inspired in the melody of ..., but they contracted me for an orchestral arrangement, as that is what I gave them.

The important point is that you can agree with the artist in advance that you can particitpate on the composition of the song by doing the harmonization, and that you want a share, and they can say yes or no, but the law and the advantaje is on their side, or you can do like many other people, charge a flat fee for the arrangement and compose your own songs.

Mr_Clifford · Post by **Mr_Clifford** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:20 am

Isn't the James Bond theme a famous example of this sort of connundrum?

It seems to be all about what you negotiate and agree to in the first place. It's like when those solo singers 'collaborate' with a songwriter and 'co-write' a song. We all know who was really doing the composing but they're happy to let the star have a co-write credit because it's the star that's going to make it a hit.

Good luck man, I hate to hear stories like this when people get greedy and won't give credit where it's due. The main legal sticking point I can see is if he can prove that he hired you to do an 'arrangement' of his song (regardless of whether your chords 'made' the song). If nothing was ever said upfront then you'll need to prove that it was a songwriting collaboration.

And the winner as always....... the @#$%@#$ lawyers.

mongoose · Post by **mongoose** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:27 am

I'm afraid that in your fantasy scenario, if they put the guy on the stand and he plunks out the single-line melody on the keyboard, the court will agree that he knows the song.

My understanding of it is the same as musicarteca's: the melody and lyrics are what make the song in terms of what you copyright as writer. Chords/harmonization are arrangement. Change the chords but keep the melody, most people will hear it as the same song. If you want a lot of obvious examples, either jazz or Irish trad music should convince you.

-m

newrigel · Post by **newrigel** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:55 am

toodamnhip wrote:Here is a question that I think many producers could benefit from.

I want to discuss this:
If a songwriter comes into my studio with words and a melody he sings, but does not know his chords, (usually hasn't even a clue as to the chords), and I have to write the chords, am I entitled to songwriter's for this?

In my opinion, the answer is yes and the share should be 33%, dividing the song into lyric, melody and chords.

Please chime in and voice your knowlege on this.Exact copyright law quotes to back up your point and a reference to where they may be found would be very helpful

Contracts, Contracts, Contracts!!!! Can't say it enough!
This EXACT reason is why I don't collaborate anymore...
I write the melody, chords and all... no problems. But, if you put ANY music to words then you are a co-writer IMO and are entitled to compensation... (unless it is in the musician for hire contract that you give up that right.)
But a chord doesn't count... a MELODY ( a predetermined number of notes or chords) does... but, in a court they have to show intent and if you intentionally took someone's riff or ideas then yes, it's a violation, but if it is clear in court it was a collaborative work then this guy is going to have a hard time suing you! It's all up to the Judge!

emulatorloo · Post by **emulatorloo** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:58 am

toodamnhip wrote:I am waiting for a call from my lawyer on all of this, and have thus far found the law a bit unclear, yet musically, I know how, at least when I do them .chords are no less important than any other part of a song.

Keep us posted on this.

Morally I think you are entitled to a writing credit. I have no doubt that you made a contribution to the song.

Legally though I think it will be defined as words/melody.

Be sure to get things in writing (contract) for the next one -- then it will be clear, esp to a judge!

I am assuming from your questions that you are making a counterclaim against the ex-client. What the heck is he suing you for????????? I don't get his lawsuit.

--

Timeline · Post by **Timeline** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:10 am

Interesting thread although it belongs in the music biz bin.

Collaboration must be agreed to beforehand. you should of added the song to your publishing company list as an arrangement and sent a copywrite arrangment form to DC the day you did it which is publishable.
With that you would have had a strong case.

Usually the leads are what's used for legal determination of ownership, not chords although there is some precedence in the industry for the arrangement.

I co produced and engineered Robby Duprees Steal Away in the '80s which was a song written actually before Logins What a Fool Believes and Robby had to pay 5 grand to keep it out of court which they did. The song was only familiar in chord arrangements and sound.

You can create more problems for this guy than he knows so stay on it. You deserve a third or writers credit if he wrote lead lines and lyric only

musicarteca · Post by **musicarteca** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:34 am

Timeline wrote:You can create more problems for this guy than he knows so stay on it. You deserve a third or writers credit if he wrote lead lines and lyric only

I think it all comes down to the fact that there should be a previous written agreement for co-writting the song, if there is not, then ...

mckelly · Post by **mckelly** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:18 am

All of you are pretty much on the money. Co-ownership is usually a pre-agreed arrangement entered into by the co-writers. If there is no agreement (or co-writer application submitted to the US copyright office), then proof would have to come through submission of extraneous evidence - which is difficult to do.

Arrangements are considered "derivative works." They can be registered as well - licensing to be worked out with the original owner of the work.

There is a difference between "copyright" and registration. Copyright is automatic when any work is produced in a tangible form of expression - e.g. book, cd, painting, etc.

Resonant Alien · Post by **Resonant Alien** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:00 pm

I do know that from a legal standpoint, a drummer who comes up with a drum part to go with a song someone else wrote is not considered a co-writer. Same for a bass player who comes up with a bass line to go with a song someone else wrote. Same for a rhythm guitarist who comes up with a comp line for the song. Even someone who writes a guitar/piano/violin/etc solo for a for a song is not considered a songwriter.

Yours may be a bit more slippery though. If the guy just sang a melody and you built the instrumental part of the song underneath that melody, then you may have a case for being a co-writer. OTOH, if he chucked out even a crude version on a guitar using single notes under his vocal melody, and what you did was flesh out the single notes into full on chords, then it may be harder to claim writer credit.

DP Fan · Post by **DP Fan** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:01 pm

This better be a seriously profitable song... Is it really worth paying a lawyer and losing a client?

If we're talking about a "hit", I still doubt it's worth it. If you are working with a hit songwriter, isn't that the kind of client you want to KEEP? Especially if he can't actually write his own songs... Then he's a hit songwriter who NEEDS you!

If it's not a hit, you're paying a lawyer thousands to fight over pennies.

If it is a hit, what's a) your future cash flow from being on the team of a hit songwriter and b) [your future cash flow from a lawsuit settlement times the probability you will win the lawsuit] minus lawyer's fees and associated costs? I don't know the specifics, but I expect b < a.

Honestly, I don't see how this situation is beneficial to anyone involved except the lawyer and the court... All entertainment industries are primarily about relationships, and suing people makes for bad business.

Just my 2 cents...

MOTUnation.com

Copyright Law? Are chords entitled to a songwriter's %?

Copyright Law? Are chords entitled to a songwriter's %?

Re: Copyright Law? Are chords entitled to a songwriter's %?