Licensing a music cover

awelgraven

awelgraven

Well-known member
Apologies if this in the wrong forum, not really sure where it fits.

I'm working on a documentary, and I'm interested in having a musician friend record an acoustic cover of a commercial song (originally written and performed by a somewhat well known band) for use in the end credits. This is a low/no budget short documentary that will hopefully end up in some festivals, but ultimately will probably end up on Vimeo.

Any idea how licensing works for a musical cover in a film?
 
You need to contact the person or persons who own the rights to the lyrics & music. You don't need to worry about the recording rights holder since you will be performing and recording this version yourself.
 
Musical cover in a film (because it's a visual medium) needs synchronization license (opposite to a mechanical license for performing rights) even you perform the composition yourself. I hate to tell this, but synchronization licenses are very tricky, and there many cases where copyright holders and composers refused to grant such licenses. You best bet is to contact one of the intermediaries representing songwriters or music rights organizations. You can try BMI: http://www.bmi.com/ or ASCAP http://www.ascap.com/licensing/termsdefined.aspx
 
DPStewart said:
Here is what you need if you're just going to release it as a recording by itself.

This at least helps you to understand the scenario of basic licensing for a cover version.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_license

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/music-copyright-compulsory-cover-license.html

http://easysonglicensing.com/?gclid=CJ2q-oHOkscCFQSUfgodzdsHcw
Click to expand...

The only way to use a copyrighted material in an audiovisual work is to obtain a synchronization license. Statutory or compulsory or mechanical license grants the rights to reproduce and distribute copyrighted musical compositions (songs) on phonorecords (i.e. CDs, records, tapes, and certain digital configurations). Key here is - phonorecords. Compulsory licenses are governed by the Copyright Law of the United States of America (Title 17, Ch1 Section 115: Scope of exclusive rights in nondramatic musical works: Compulsory license for making and distributing phonorecords) and are limited to phonorecords only (too long to quote - see http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#115 )

According to Copyright Law of the United States of America (Title 17, Ch1, Section 101) ' “Phonorecords” are material objects in which sounds, other than those accompanying a motion picture or other audiovisual work, are fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the sounds can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.'

It's a common misconception that mechanical licenses can be used for audiovisual work. Just saying...
 
A sync license is for previously recorded music being synchronized to your video. Which is different than recording the piece new specifically for the video in question. For example... Lyrics and music might be copyright property of Jim Bob, but the actual recording of the song is owned by MCA Records. If you are not going to use the previously recorded song, you do not need a sync license from MCA. What you need is approval from the copyright holder of the music and lyrics.
 
I think the US situation is similar to the UK and while giving the product away on a DVD or other physical medium isn't that expensive, worldwide distribution on line is the trigger for bigger payments.

one word of encouragement. Not all artistes are against this kind of thing and can if they like what you have done, give you the rights for a very modest amount. If you can get to them direct rather than through the record company it works better. A friend of a friend of a friend in one artistes's office worked great a few years ago for me. My official request needed up with a person who did the orchestration of the song, who wanted a fortune, the artiste was furious because he'd been payed for it as a buyout and the artiste had no idea he was claiming some kind of ownership. To spite him, we got our rights for ten dollars!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top