July 21, 2004
legal expression
As many of you know, I have been excited about my words and voices project for the past few months and have churned out a few songs in this vein. I have been having a fun time searching around for things to record. Sometimes I have a specific plan and ask people to read certain words or answer certain questions, but other times I just leave it up to chance and see what happens. Both methods are fun. I have learned that you need a lot of raw material in order to get those special little snippets that are good enough to use in songs. So I figure I'll just make it a part of my daily life to record stuff and then when it comes time to start a new song (like right now) I'll have a library of ideas and examples to choose from.
However, recently I've been getting annoyed by the legal aspects of this 'daily recording'. Obviously I can't just go around recording anybody saying anything and assume that I am free and clear to use the recordings for artistic expression. But that's what I'd like to do! It is such a gray area of the law so it usually seems to become a game of risk assessment more than anything else. Of course, none of this matters at all until something I have done becomes widely enough known (or profitable enough) to create an issue. Unlikely as this may be, I still have hopes(!) and don't want to shoot myself in the foot before I get off the ground. I am extremely lucky to have a personal lawyer who is on retainer for nothing more than a consistent flow of new music and blog posts, so my decisions are at least partially founded in the vagaries of US copyright law.
I am excited about a new song right now, but am struggling to figure out whether or not I want to take the risk. This song would contain recordings of words that are not mine and are published and copyrighted by someone else. They aren't terribly unique or interesting on their own, but collectively they would likely be identifiable by someone very familiar with the source. But it's a good idea! And it's unlikely anyone will ever know where the words came from. But I'd hate to put in lots of effort and end up getting sued or prevented from including the song on a record. Argh!! The law sucks! Though I guess it protects me as much as it hinders me by protecting others.
Can't live with laws, can't live without 'em.
Posted by halsey at July 21, 2004 02:50 PMSo, I've connected with Johnnie Cochran (who I assume is the personal lawyer you have on retainer), and he has the following proposed defense for you:
If the song's not a top-40 hit,
you must acquit.
But I reminded him that copyright infringement is not yet a *criminal* act. I understand that he's now trying to come up with a catchy *civil* defense slogan but is having a hard time rhyming anything with "not guilty"...
Seriously, though, it's distressing to hear that your creative lens may even occasionally be clouded by a risk assessment filter. What are those darn lawyers (and big bucks corporate entertainment conglomerate lobbyists) doing to the world?? Let's hope that the proliferation of Creative Commons-style licenses, which allow so much greater latitude in creatively "borrowing" from others and generating novel material derived (at least in part) from existing works, are the front line of a paradigm shift in copyright law...
Posted by: T at July 22, 2004 10:41 AMDepending on how you're using the sample, you could almost certainly claim fair use. BUT, anyone can create a lawsuit at a whim, and if they have more money than you, they can keep pushing the issue until you run out of cash.
So, if you're willing to fight to the very end, you could be vindicated, but there's a reason why most cases settle out of court. So frustrating ...
NO ONE has more money than me!!!!
and yes, I couldn't agree more with the whole Creative Commons licensing stuff. good topic for a future post.
Posted by: halsey at July 22, 2004 11:09 AMhow about:
if the song's not filthy
you must be not guilty.
Nice, but it doesn't *quite* ring right...
And I don't think you can substitute "silty" for "filthy"...
Maybe this works, though:
if the song's well buildt
you must find no guilt
How about:
A catchy lilt
Will banish guilt?
I didn't know my readership was so poetic!
Personally, I like clammy's best (with Mr. Frost a close second), but that's just me...
Sorry FRP, spelling counts in this competition(!)
