View Single Post
  #6  
Old 01-23-2012, 08:58 AM
Emcha_audio's Avatar
Emcha_audio Emcha_audio is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Montréal, canada
Posts: 6,435
Default Re: Perhaps this time....

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitardom View Post
You just stated he was attempting to cover Burton's "style" of playing, not a Burton song......so you think a "style" can be copyrighted???

On top of that, every bar in the country is filled w bands doing ac/dc cover songs long before any Internet and getting paid for it. Should the bar be held responsible??? They are making money,the kid on the Internet is not.

Then ask yourself "how is YouTube supposed to do this?" the answer in reality is "no it cannot" it would be up to the publisher or other such entities to have it report and have it removed.

The other problem w your statement is that as yourself a musician, would you care if a kid is doing this???? it's not hurting your name, this kid obviously respects and looks up to you and is not making money off of you. Who is he taking money from period?? Is anyone losing money because of him??? Things like this are not about the artist or their art. Its about publishers and labels. I seriously think your argument in this situation is silly.

This is a far cry from posting songs straight from the album or movies and such.
Actually yes the bar is held responsible for it as they actually pay a licensing fee that (here in canada) is 4.40 * the maximum number of people that can fit the bar * the numbers of days the bar is open. So any band that performs covers are actually included in that licensing fee.

As for youtube, any publishing company or music group, can and do emit a dmca against videos that they see that uses their songs, wither or not the person actually have the right to use it see the fair use clauses. Then youtube puts the burden of proof on the user to prove that he wasn't against the law. If you redo a song (ie play a piece of guitar) part of it becomes your own interpretation (your copyright for the interpretation) but.. before that to be perfectly legal you would have had to receive the right or pay the license for the cover if you want to make it public. Free or not.

Yes, when someone does a cover for a remixing, a re-recording, or on a show (that is not in a of a bar since the bar already pays licensing for all the music that is played in the bar) that person needs to pay the rights.

If you're doing it only for you, and you do not place it anywhere public _free or not_ you have to cover the rights.
__________________
Manny.
Reply With Quote