Category Acquisition of music rights

Plagiarism: Must Knows

Plagiarism: are cover and remixes plagiarisms? Do you need a special license to publish your cover?

If a musician wants to publish the work of another in his own interpretation or in edited form, he usually has to acquire the necessary rights first:

Cover version

A cover is a new edition of a piece of music. If lyrics and melody remain the same, musicians have to pay royalties. It does not matter if other instruments are used or if the melody is sung in a different voice pitch than in the original.

Editing

In the case of extensive changes to the melody and/or lyrics of the piece of music and if the original work is still clearly recognizable, the consent of the composer is required and a license agreement must be signed.

Remix

In a remix, the song is remixed or given new instrumentation.  Here, too, the following applies: If the original work is still recognizable, usage rights must be acquired.

Free use

If a piece of music is changed in such a way that it is hardly recognizable, it may be used without the consent of the author. This is called “free use”. In practice, however, there is hardly any free use of musical works.

Are you an artist looking for your professional music-law specialized legal team? 

Fill out our contact form. We will get back to you soon.

    Your Contact Data

    Requested Appointment

    With whom of our attorneys would you like to have your legal consultation ?

    Michael Horak LL.M.Julia ZiegelerAnna Umberg, LL.M., M.A.Andree EckhardtKatharina Gitmann-KopilevichKaroline BehrendJohanna K. Müller-KühneAndreas FriedleinJohn BühlerStefan Karfusehr
     

    I would like to have an appointment between the and the
     

    Type of consultation in personby phone
     

    Please describe the matter you would like to discuss with us.

    Are you already a client of our law firm? yesno

    Easy Explained: YouTube and “Unfortunately, this video is not available in Germany”

    “Unfortunately, this video is not available in Germany.”

    For German internet users, many a visit to YouTube ends in frustration. But why?

    For years, German YouTube users have often been presented with a terse notice that the desired video is not available.Google, as the owner and operator of YouTube, on the one hand, and GEMA, as the collecting society, on the other, simply could not agree on how much to pay per song played on the Internet.

    Records explain that Google wants to pay much less than GEMA would recognize as fair. On Friday the 20th April 2012, the Hamburg Regional Court ruled that the Internet portal YouTube may no longer put videos online for which GEMA, as the collecting society, claims copyright. In seven out of twelve cases, the court followed GEMA’s request.

    Specifically, the GEMA demands from YouTube that the platform operator check before publishing a video whether the clip contains music subject to licensing. YouTube categorically rejects this – it is not technically feasible. Every minute, YouTube users upload over 60 hours of videos. Users like to ignore the fact that there is a copyright law that cannot simply be undermined and that many artists do not want to do without remuneration.

    The GEMA or YouTube Disputes are no news to us. Do you have any queries about this topic? Make sure to contact us. 

    Horak. Attorneys-at-law : Your supporters in all copyright, media and music law matters.

     

    Musicians Copyrights

    Musicians Copyrights : Infos from your German Legal Team

    If you are a musician and you are willing to know a bit more about European and German Musicians Rights, the following information are for you.

    Copyright can be divided into three components: Exploitation rights, Right of use and Moral Rights.

    The exploitation/utilization rights are regulated in §§ 15 to 24 UrhG. These include the: reproduction right, distribution right, right of exhibition, and the right of communication to the public.
    These rights belong solely to the author, i.e. the composer, and cannot be transferred to other persons. Only upon the composer’s death do the exploitation rights pass to his or her heirs. However, it is possible to grant a right of use to others.

    Sections 31 to 44 UrhG regulate the rights of use of the authors. The composers may decide to grant their musical works to third parties for exploitation – e.g. record companies, publishers or musicians.

    The moral rights of an author are found in §§ 12 to 14 UrhG. A composer always has the right to be named as the author of his or her work. The author is also protected by law against distortion of the work; this means that the author’s personal interests in his/her work are endangered – e.g. in the case of deterioration or distorted representation of the work.

    Is the copyright of musicians transferable?
    A composer cannot transfer the copyright in a musical work as such. This is also not possible by means of a contract. However, it is possible to grant others a right to use the work. To do this, a licence agreement is concluded which contains the most important information about the scope of use and the remuneration.

    Are you a musician or an artist and you would like to be supported by a competent international music law firm? Contact us. We are the team you are looking for. 

    Sampling: definition and legal position

    Is sampling music legal?

    When a musician samples, he takes fragments from other people’s songs. Does he thereby violate copyright or is that freedom of art? The BGH has decided. Here an overview of the legal dispute from an article of the German https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/bgh-urheberrecht-101.html). In music, sampling refers to the process of using a part of an – already finished – sound or music recording in a new, often musical context. Nowadays, this is usually done with a hardware or software sampler, i.e., the selected sound sample is usually digitized and stored so that it can be further processed with audio programs.

    Why have they been arguing about this in court for years? A german rapper, singer and music producer thinks to this day that he was allowed to simply take the “music snippet” into his song. Legally, the issue is the conflict between artistic freedom and the rights one has as a producer of a sound carrier. These are the so-called copyrights and ancillary copyrights: “The author of a sound record has the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute and make the sound carrier available to the public,” the Copyright Act states.

    What can we now expect from the BGH’s ruling? With its decision, the BGH must implement the guidelines of the ECJ judges. After hearing the case in January, it does not look like the judges in Karlsruhe will simply “wave through” the rapper´s sampling. So the question remains whether the artistic sound sequence in the song is recognizable or not. To have this clarified, the BGH could refer the case back to the Hamburg Higher Regional Court. If Pelham loses, the case could even go back to the Federal Constitutional Court. After all, he won there in 2016. Either way, the principles laid down by the courts affect the hip-hop and music scene as a whole.

    Musician, artists, writers: you know who to call. Horak Attorneys at law: your international law firm for music law.

    True or False – Music Law

    True or False – Music Law:

    Quick Check on the most Frequent Asked Questions of the internet

    Are self-composed songs automatically protected by copyright?
    German copyright law automatically protects music or sheet music and song lyrics.

    What has copyright to do with music?
    The musical work is protected under copyright law as soon as it is created, i.e. when the song is played for the first time at rehearsals or when the lyrics and melody are written down.

    Has copyright on music a period of expiration?
    Copyright on music lasts for 70 years after the death of the author. After that, the statute of limitations expires and it is considered to be in the public domain.

    Strangers are using a self-composed song without my permission. What shall I do?
    In this case, there may be a copyright infringement. It is possible to take legal action against this. Do not waste time. Contact a lawyer immediately. 

    What about YouTube? Can I download music for free and sell it online? 
    The answer is definitely NO. Illegally downloading music from YouTube and eventually selling it or using it without permission is a crime and it can be punished legally. Anyone who uploads a self-composed song on Youtube is considered to be the author. This means that the copyright law for music applies. In addition, anyone who includes other people’s music in a video may be committing a copyright infringement. Therefore, it should be checked beforehand who the author is and whether permission is necessary. A lawyer could definitely help you clarify every question you have. 

    Copyright infringement only occurs if I commercially exploit the music, right?
    NO, that is not correct. If you use pieces of music protected by copyright law and offer them for free download on your website, this is also an infringement. If unauthorised distribution takes place, it is irrelevant whether it is of a commercial nature or not.

    So, let a legal check your conditions before making the wrong move. Copyright Infringements are

    legally punishable. 

    “Urheberrechtsreform” – When digitalizations means a copyright-law reform

    The New Music Copyright Reform enters into force on June 7, 2021

    The law concerning the new EU copyright directives was published in the Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt) on June 4, 2021 and the new so-called Copyright Service Providers Act (UrhDaG), i.e. the implementation of the controversial Article 17 of the EU Directive (formerly Article 13), will then come into force on August 1, 2021.

    Background of the reform:

    As a sign of our constantly changing society, social media platforms are also in an unremitting search for the best contents. Copyright law is constantly confronted with digital changes and without a constant adaptation of our legal system would be difficult to keep the media laws contained. For this reason, a copyright reform was passed this year to meet the requirements of an increasingly digitally active knowledge society.

    The Reform:

    According to the reform, digital platforms will be held liable for copyright infringements on their channels and have to acquire the necessary licenses. Representatives of the online community must accept that there is an enforceable copyright on the Internet and this must be accepted in the future of copyright law. Authors and rights exploiters, in turn, must come to terms with the fact that the German government has defined a “minor use” that is permitted without compensation for copyrights: fifteen seconds in image and sound, 160 characters of text, and image excerpts of up to 125 kilobytes are free.

    Criticisms:

    This does not sounds like “too much”, but  just the fifteen seconds is too much in the age of Instagram and TikTok for musicians, music publishers, filmmakers and film rights holders of the free. These fifteen seconds are enough to play out the decisive scene on TikTok for instance and this has been the reason for criticism and resistance form the side of musicians and music publishers. These letters will in particular not give up really soon, even once the new copyright law has come into force.

    If you wish to know more about it, go check out the official website of the German “Bundesregierung” and if you habe questions, do not hesitate to contact us at any time.

    Read More

    The district court of Düsseldorf has decided!

    (Landgericht Düsseldorf, Urteil vom 12.06.2019 – 12 O 263/18 – )

    Acquisition of rights of use from GEMA for musical works as stage representation is not possible!

    The District Court of Düsseldorf has decided that the Schauspielhaus Düsseldorf must refrain from performing the music composed and arranged by the sound artist Parviz Mir-Ali for the Schauspielhaus Dresden to “Der Idiot” by Fjodor Dostojewski.

    The case was based on the following facts: In 2015, the well-known sound artist Parviz Mir-Ali had composed the music for the stage play “Der Idiot” by Fjodor Dostojewski in the production of Matthias Hartmann for the Staatsschauspiel Dresden. In 2016 the Düsseldorfer Schauspielhaus took over the production from Dresden together with the music composed by Mir-Ali. For the 2016/2017 season, the Schauspielhaus Düsseldorf paid the sound artist an agreed lump sum. The Schauspielhaus refused payments for the further seasons 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 with reference to its payments to GEMA. The plaintiff sound artist saw his copyrights violated with the performances.

    The Düsseldorf Regional Court ruled in favour of the plaintiff. […]

    Source: © kostenlose-urteile.de (ra-online GmbH), Berlin 12.06.2019
    Quelle: Landgericht Düsseldorf/ra-online (pm/kg)