4 ms·
> Try releasing a cover song without clearing it first etc. Even using a recognizable sample will bite you So… it’s complicated. This is one of the weird area
by moregrist 1y ago
> Try releasing a cover song without clearing it first etc. Even using a recognizable sample will bite you
So… it’s complicated. This is one of the weird areas where music copyright and other copyright seem to differ in the US.
In the US the situation is complex and there are a lot of weird special interests [0], but generally a composer/author of a song has the right to decide who first records and releases the song, but after the first recording covers require a mechanical license, which is compulsory (ie: the author cannot object).
In music there are _a lot_ of special cases and different rights are decided with different kinds of licenses, some of which are compulsory. I think it’s an area that doesn’t make for good analogies with copyright in other media.
0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_license https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_license
- throwaway290 1y ago> covers require a mechanical license, which is compulsory Which is compulsory for the performer too. A derivative work like cover is sort of acceptable when it's performed by a person live for some audience (grey area but twitch sort of allows it. with a bunch of rules). As soon as you want to publish it you MUST have a license. And chatbot is a derivative work totally not performed live by a person for some audience I saw great tracks that got taken down from all legal channels because they featured a sample from another song. Sometimes they remained up but mostly they were taken down. It is fully original publisher's discretion...