![]() I could be wrong but that is how I understand it. Should you cover a song without permission and without it applying under the parody law or qualify as a different song by changing the lyrics you could be sued for over $10,000. NOW Some will require you to pay the copyright in this case I believe it is $100 to cover a song SHOULD THE BAND/COPYRIGHT OWNER desire you to do so. you HAVE to get permission from the band/copyright owners to do a cover. In my book, if you intend to cover a song, then you should pay the owner for the rights of this song, am I right?The way I understand it is this. What if you intend to cover the song as it is, does it need permission from the song writers? I'm learning a lot about copyright, and what licenses allow you to do in covering a song.Ī "mechanical license" allows you to record a cover of the song-the style can change-but the melody and lyrics remain the property of the song writer/publishers and those cannot be changed without express permission. Pastorbrad wrote:Okay-I'm calling on the great minds here at the CMR to help me with this one.Īs I work in my project, "Covers". When he did "Perform This Way" he had Ga-Ga's blessing then she changed her mind after he released the video. The only real issue Al had was with "Amish Paradise" when he did get the record company's permission but not Coolio's. Al did have issues with Prince when he approached him about doing "Acid Rain" and Prince said no. I'm pretty sure Al got permission to do it and I know Michael loved the song. ![]() Apologetix has learned that you can change the lyrics without asking if you credit the original music composers. Weird Al began getting permission from the artists after that, but it is not necessary to do so. This went all the way to the Supreme Court where it was ruled that you could change the lyrics and consider this a new song as long as the writers of the music was properly credited. The parody "law" didn't really come into play until the 80's when Michael Jackson sued Weird Al over "Eat It". KaramKaram wrote:They could have worked the song under the parody "law" which granted them permission to modify lyrics
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |