Question about music.

[aifilmmaker]

. . .

 

[davefisk]

Eeesh. That gets into some tricky legal areas. It depends on the terms of the contract of the person that did the cover has with the original artist. If you really want the music, you need to get a "clearance person" to help you out. These people are responsible for getting clearances from artists (music, album covers, magazine covers, paintings...you name it) to be used in movies and tv. I knew a guy that did this for a living, and made a damn good living doing it, too. I have no idea what it costs to deal with that. You could also get an entertainment lawyer to help you out, but again, that costs money. To be safe, I'd avoid using it.

 

[Noiz2]

Short answer is
No
and
No


The music is copyrighted, not just the performance.

The rights you need are synchronization rights. It is extremely unlikely that a band doing a cover would get those and even if they did they are all (as far as I know) limited to a specific project. So the band might have gotten sync rights for a music video of the song but that would not transfer to your film.

The good news is that the Sync rights to the music might be fairly cheap.

I have a ridiculous question that I probably know the answer to, but you can never be too sure, so I'm just going to ask it here.

Now we all know it's illegal to use copyrighted music in a film without proper permission, but what about a cover of a song, if you've gotten direct permission from the person(s) doing the cover?

And if that's completly out of the question (Which I'm guessing it is) Is it legal to use a guitar solo from a covered version of a song? (Again, getting direct permission from the coveree).

 

[Steve House]

I have a ridiculous question that I probably know the answer to, but you can never be too sure, so I'm just going to ask it here.

Now we all know it's illegal to use copyrighted music in a film without proper permission, but what about a cover of a song, if you've gotten direct permission from the person(s) doing the cover?

And if that's completly out of the question (Which I'm guessing it is) Is it legal to use a guitar solo from a covered version of a song? (Again, getting direct permission from the coveree).

The permission necessary to use music in a film (Synchronization license) does NOT come from the performer that recorded it, it comes from the publisher of the music acting as agent for the songwriter - the person or persons who actually composed the music and wrote the lyrics. It doesn't matter if the song used is copied from an original release or from a cover, or is a recording that you performed and recorded yourself, although if you use existing recordings there are other additional licenses (Master Use licenses) you must also obtain from the record label owning the recording master. The permission of the artist who recorded the song, be it a first release or a cover, is essentially irrelevant to the licensing needed to use the music in a film or video.

 

[John Willett]

As has been said, the answer is no.

The person who does the cover version has to pay royalties to the writer of the song.

In the UK, much of this is covered by the MCPS (Musical Copyright Protection Society) and, if they handle the song fr the writers, you will pay the fee to them.

I don't do video - but for a CD release the maximum MCPS fee is 6.25% of the selling price of the CD and this is paid to the MCPS.

 

[timbook2]

you can cover songs of authors who have died more than 70 years ago. Its called public domain. but you have to be careful: sometimes editors think they can keep the lifespan longer than 70 years and try to ask for money.....a grey area in copyright laws and depending on the countries involved, illegal or a matter of agreement.

 

[John Willett]

you can cover songs of authors who have died more than 70 years ago. Its called public domain. but you have to be careful: sometimes editors think they can keep the lifespan longer than 70 years and try to ask for money.....a grey area in copyright laws and depending on the countries involved, illegal or a matter of agreement.

This is true - but be careful!

Copyright is also on the arrangement - so, although the original work may be over 70 years after the death of the composer and out of copyright, the arrangement you want to use may be newer and still in copyright.

So it's best to fully check it all out.

 

[Noiz2]

This is true - but be careful!

Copyright is also on the arrangement - so, although the original work may be over 70 years after the death of the composer and out of copyright, the arrangement you want to use may be newer and still in copyright.

So it's best to fully check it all out.

Also this is not the case in the US, it's quite a bit longer. Part of the problem with copyright law is that it varies around the world so you really need to check out what you want to use.

 

[Gregg Juke]

Also this is not the case in the US, it's quite a bit longer. Part of the problem with copyright law is that it varies around the world so you really need to check out what you want to use.

Yes, in the US, arrangement is not copyright protected, unfortunately. It is the loophole that has allowed many a producer/arranger to be ripped-off by a band or artist jumping ship on a production or development deal...It also allows for the creation of "sound-alike" recordings (the song falls under copyright, a _specific_ recorded master falls under copyright, but not necessarily the notes and their arrangement on said recording). Clear as mud? In the OP's example, if a cover artist paid Harry Fox Agency (or the publisher directly) for a license to record a particular song, _and also somehow magically secured sync rights to said song_, then the film-maker could license the cover version for their film from the cover artist. But in practice, rather than theory, that never happens, because sync rights are potentially worth a lot more than record rights.GJ