| re: Cover versions | |
|
Posted by: |
sturse 08:29 pm UTC 09/17/07 |
| In reply to: | re: Cover versions - AndrewG 03:39 pm UTC 09/16/07 |
| It varies on country as well as other stuff but basically rigths for songs are usually handled by publishing compay's such as ASCAP or BMI - they (sometimes along with the songwriter) set royalties and other fees for publishing/selling the music. Most bars pay an anual fee to these compnaies to be allowed to play jukeboxes and have live musicians (who usually play copywghted/royalty music). So basically cover bands can play whatever they want - even if they are making money playng it, but wouldn't just be allowed to record another person's song. Just because a song has been recorded, doesn't make it easier or cheaper to cover, mainly because these companies usually want to protect their recording artists as weel. But if you wanted holding out for a hero, for example for a TV show, it would be cheaprer to get the rights to record a cover than to get Bonnie Tyler's version. > Think I read your question wrong. As far as I know you > don't need permission if the song published, but I have > heard of court cases so perhaps the composer can file a > complaint or so. > > > Not unless you want to make money out of it. If you want > > to make money it gets complex and you need to pay property > > royalties and it depends on units sold etc. > > > > > Just out of interest: > > > Does everybody who is recording a crappy cover version of > > > one of Jims songs (and we know there are MANY) need his > > > permission to do so? | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Cover versions - AndrewG 03:39 pm UTC 09/16/07 |
| Next: | re: Cover versions - Scarecrow's_Brain 09:47 pm UTC 09/17/07 |
| Thread: |
|