Duplicate Songs

[gduns - with the Lord]

SORRY GUYS,
I didn't mean to start something about the whole legit issues. My only contention was that I have seen some of the tracks from karaokefreedom, and a lot of them are sound choice.

Sound choice has the tightest policy of any mfg. they don't even want us to use them on a karaoke computer. and cavs doesn't even offer their brand.

So I doubt very much that they have paid sound choice for the rights to redistribute their tracks.

I have been wrong before, and I'm sure it will be so again.

If I am wrong, then so be it.

Have a great day!

[John Baumgartne]

Jimbo,

Here's the way I understand it. There is a fair use law. You cannot be denied the right to use the song.

Just like any song, you have to pay royalties. You can get a mechanical license for the song and pay eight cents per copy per song, or $80.00 for 1,000 discs (I actually thought it was less than that but may be wrong)with only one song on it. These licenses can be obtained from or through the Harry Fox agency.

As I said above you cannot be denied the right to use a song. A publisher can refuse to grant a Sync Licenses but cannot keep you from using the Lyric's or Music from a song. If they don't respond quick enough or say that they are not granting you the licenses because..... then you can file for what is called a Compulsory Licenses through the Copywrite Office. Once you have applied for that and have paid what ever is required you can go to press. It is really in the publishers best interest to provide you with the mechanical because it is my understanding that the Compulsory Licenses may pay less (sorry no figures for you) and the publisher can grant a licenses and make certain requirements like they may grant the licenses providing you list their names in a certain way ect, ect.... I may be wrong but to get the compulsory licenses you may need to show that you made an attempt to obtain a licenses and was not able to for whatever reason.

Wow that was long, sorry. Remember to record music the licenses typically comes from Harry Fox, to perform it's ASCAP or BMI and I think there are another couple of possibilities.

Hope this answers you question.
John

[Garry A. Leslie]

Hello gduns,
As you all know I have bought tracks from karaoke freedom and everything is Sound Choice, which is what led me to believe they are legit.
If I was a seller of illegal CDG's I wouldn't be too bothered about from where the songs where ripped and who I ripped off.
I wouldn't suppose I'd be in business long.
On Ebay UK the latest trend is selling Backing Tracks, that as you know is the music with no graphics.
I haven't bought anything to check them out, but I have checked the listings of songs and they are always identical to the CDG's we all know and love (hate).
My guess is they are made by people without the facility to copy graphics. I may be wrong but...(Isn't that a song?)
Whose responsibility is it to check them?
Ebay I would have thought
I don't know whether you guys have car boot sales in the US but a friend of mine recently bought some karaoke software at one.
It had lots of programmes including Microstudio.
Of course it didn't have a key.
I certainly wasn't going to help him to run it.
I paid for mine.
Regards from across the pond.
Garry

[jimbo]

John,
You are right that you can't be denied to use a song because of compulsary licenses. However, you can be denied the rights to print the lyrics. You can sing them and record them, but you can't print them. As you said in an earlier post, the writers are the ones that lose out because of companies not paying for the use to "print" or "display" the lyrics. I can't figure our why some writers (like Eagles and Don Henley) wouldn't want to receive the extra income. Maybe it is because there are companies out there that don't pay anyway. It is their intellectual rights that are being used. CDG is considered printed lyrics, so how come some companies have songs that other companies have been denied the right to print the lyrics.

Jimbo

[John Baumgartne]

Jimbo,

I have never heard of a writer or publisher being able to deny the right to print. The way the Copywriting works is like this, if I write lyrics to a song and Jimbo writes the music we both own 100% of the Song. In other words I wouldn't be able to use the the song on one of my recordings without paying you 50% of the total royalties and vice versa. The more people who have collaborated on a song the smaller everyones piece of the pie gets. Still if 10 People collaborated on it then 10 people have the right to use the song and get paid. What may be the snag is getting licenses or approval from everyone on the song. Typically this is where the publishing company comes into play and acts as a rep for the Writers however there can also be more than one publising company involved when songs are collaborated and there may be a power struggle or monitary negotiations going on between all parties involved.

Like I said I have never heard that printing the lyrics can be denied on a licenses. You could be right though.

Perhaps the reason some companies have songs that others don't is because they are either not licensing the music or they are better connected in the music industry. One thing that I am fairly sure of is that almost all publishers and writers would want credit for their work and would require their names to be displayed either before or after a song. Many songs that I have in my Karaoke Library have these credits and most are from Chartbusters, however allot of my stuff is from Sweet Georgia Brown. Most of the time they don't say who wrote the songs, who the publisher and usually don't even say who the original Artist that performed the song was. If I were a betting man then I would bet that they have no licenses for their songs whereas Chartbusters probably does.

Garry,
As you see above when the music for a song is written and is identifiable as that song (lets say Sweet Home Alabama from My Hometown Hero's Lynyrd Skynyrd) then Yes it is always going to be that song even without the words. You can change the notes around but if in listening you can tell that it's Sweet Home Alabama then someone is loosing Royalty Money.

There is the case that some songs are in the public domain and the music can be used, recorded and performed till the cows come home and no one looses any money. For Example, the melody for The House Of the Rising Sun by the Animals is was originally an old Irish Song written I believe in the 1600 and the original lyrics was written in the 1700's here in the US by a couple of folks but with a little different version of the lYrics than what the Animals Recorded. They had to pay nobody to use the song but anytime someone uses their version of the Lyrich they collect royalty money. But you can still play the Music at no charge because it's in the public domain. I doubt seriously that that is the case of the folks you are speaking of and they are surely Pirates!