The Musician's Guide to Copyright | Jason Allen | Skillshare

Playback Speed


  • 0.5x
  • 1x (Normal)
  • 1.25x
  • 1.5x
  • 2x

The Musician's Guide to Copyright

teacher avatar Jason Allen, PhD, Ableton Certified Trainer

Watch this class and thousands more

Get unlimited access to every class
Taught by industry leaders & working professionals
Topics include illustration, design, photography, and more

Watch this class and thousands more

Get unlimited access to every class
Taught by industry leaders & working professionals
Topics include illustration, design, photography, and more

Lessons in This Class

65 Lessons (4h 21m)
    • 1. Introduction

      2:28
    • 2. What We are Covering Here

      2:11
    • 3. Tools You Will Need for This Class

      1:16
    • 4. Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer

      2:04
    • 5. Defining Music

      9:06
    • 6. Melody and Uniqueness

      5:26
    • 7. Originality

      3:19
    • 8. Independent Creation

      3:02
    • 9. Music is Intangible

      5:42
    • 10. Definitions of Music

      2:50
    • 11. The Legal Definition of Music

      2:26
    • 12. Copyright in the Constitution

      5:56
    • 13. Rights We Get

      5:38
    • 14. Intellectual Property

      3:53
    • 15. Copyright Does Not Protect

      3:16
    • 16. Term

      5:14
    • 17. Public Domain

      6:40
    • 18. Why Put Something In The Public Domain?

      5:11
    • 19. How to Get a Copyright

      4:06
    • 20. What is Work For Hire?

      3:55
    • 21. Work For Hire Copyright Term

      3:59
    • 22. What These Are

      3:42
    • 23. First Sale Doctrine

      2:49
    • 24. Licensing

      4:04
    • 25. Film and TV Licensing

      6:18
    • 26. Licensing "Houses"

      3:35
    • 27. Collaboration and Copyright

      6:04
    • 28. Presumption of Equal Ownership

      4:07
    • 29. How a Band Divides Copyright

      5:06
    • 30. The Fair Use Doctrine

      3:27
    • 31. Types of Fair Use

      3:34
    • 32. The 4 Factors

      5:20
    • 33. Example - Class Video

      4:29
    • 34. What a Lawyer Will Tell You About Fair Use

      1:23
    • 35. Misconceptions about Parody

      4:00
    • 36. Weird Al Yankovic

      3:33
    • 37. What is a Mark?

      5:53
    • 38. What is a Trade?

      5:31
    • 39. How to get a Trademark

      6:50
    • 40. Trademark Symbols

      3:58
    • 41. Uniqueness

      6:02
    • 42. Filing

      2:31
    • 43. What About My Own Name?

      2:24
    • 44. Does Fair Use Still Apply?

      2:25
    • 45. Example of Fair Use and Trademarks

      1:54
    • 46. Trademark and Titles of Works (Song Titles)

      1:34
    • 47. What is Right of Publicity

      6:07
    • 48. Tom Waits Example

      4:39
    • 49. Bette Midler Example

      4:08
    • 50. Frank Zappa Example

      3:31
    • 51. Protections

      4:02
    • 52. Your Contractual Rights

      1:06
    • 53. Selling a Beat

      5:51
    • 54. Territory

      5:01
    • 55. Product Or Service

      3:40
    • 56. Duration

      6:00
    • 57. Right of First Refusal

      5:42
    • 58. Moral Rights

      3:32
    • 59. What is CopyLeft?

      3:49
    • 60. Core Principals

      2:58
    • 61. The C and CC

      3:42
    • 62. The Creative Commons Licenses

      4:40
    • 63. Databases of Works

      2:42
    • 64. What Comes Next?

      1:17
    • 65. Bonus Lecture

      0:36
  • --
  • Beginner level
  • Intermediate level
  • Advanced level
  • All levels
  • Beg/Int level
  • Int/Adv level

Community Generated

The level is determined by a majority opinion of students who have reviewed this class. The teacher's recommendation is shown until at least 5 student responses are collected.

54

Students

--

Projects

About This Class

Welcome to the "Musician's Guide" Series!

This series is pulled directly from the courses I've created for my university position in Music Business. All of these courses are designed for the everyday musician - amateur or professional - who has little or no knowledge on the topic, but wants to master it.

This class is all about Copyright.

100% Answer Rate! Every single question posted to this class is answered within 24 hours by the instructor.

It is ideal for anyone who has had an interest in copyright, or a need to understand copyright. Especially:

  • Creators: If you are making music, you need to understand your rights.

  • Consumers: If you are working with music, and want to know if you can copy a song, delete a song, or make a mashup of a song, this course is for you!

  • Musicians: If you are going to be recorded, you should understand how things will work when the recording is released, and what rights you have to your performance.

  • Producers: If you are using samples in your tracks, you need to understand copyright!

  • Curious Minds: Anyone interested in how copyright law works, where it comes from, and where it might be going is invited to be a part of this class.

In this class, we start with the most basic question: How do we define music? Once we have a definition, we start to look at how music is protected with copyright, ways that it isn't, and how to work with it for fun and profit. I'll walk you through every step of the issue and explain the logic behind every concept.

The goal of this class is for you to understand how to make copyright protection work for you.


Software:
This course is NOT specific to any DAW program.

Genre:
The recording studio has no genre - so all are welcome here.

Topics Covered: 

  • Defining Music

  • Melody and Uniqueness

  • Originality

  • "Independent Creation"

  • Tangibility

  • Copyright at the Constitution

  • Rights We Get

  • Intellectual Property

  • Copyright Term

  • Public Domain

  • History of Copyright

  • Work For Hire

  • Assignments

  • Licensing

  • First Sale Doctrine

  • Film, TV, and Game Licensing

  • Collaboration

  • Fair Use

  • Parody

  • Trademarks

  • Performing Group Names (Band Names)

  • Titles (Song Titles)

  • Right of Publicity

  • Contractual Rights

  • Exclusivity

  • Right of Refusal

  • Moral Rights

  • Creative Commons

  • CopyLeft

  • And much, much more!

If you are ready to start making money from your music, and making sure it is protected, this class will start you on that journey. Get started today.

Dr. Allen is a university music professor and is a top-rated instructor - with nearly 100 courses and over 200,000 students.

In 2017 Star Tribune Business featured him as a "Mover and a Shaker," and he is recognized by the Grammy Foundation for his music education classes. 

Meet Your Teacher

Teacher Profile Image

Jason Allen

PhD, Ableton Certified Trainer

Teacher

J. Anthony Allen has worn the hats of composer, producer, songwriter, engineer, sound designer, DJ, remix artist, multi-media artist, performer, inventor, and entrepreneur. Allen is a versatile creator whose diverse project experience ranges from works written for the Minnesota Orchestra to pieces developed for film, TV, and radio. An innovator in the field of electronic performance, Allen performs on a set of “glove” controllers, which he has designed, built, and programmed by himself. When he’s not working as a solo artist, Allen is a serial collaborator. His primary collaborative vehicle is the group Ballet Mech, for which Allen is one of three producers.

In 2014, Allen was a semi-finalist for the Grammy Foundation’s Music Educator of the Year.

... See full profile

Class Ratings

Expectations Met?
  • Exceeded!
    0%
  • Yes
    0%
  • Somewhat
    0%
  • Not really
    0%
Reviews Archive

In October 2018, we updated our review system to improve the way we collect feedback. Below are the reviews written before that update.

Why Join Skillshare?

Take award-winning Skillshare Original Classes

Each class has short lessons, hands-on projects

Your membership supports Skillshare teachers

Learn From Anywhere

Take classes on the go with the Skillshare app. Stream or download to watch on the plane, the subway, or wherever you learn best.

Transcripts

1. Introduction: Hello everyone and welcome to the musicians guide to copyright. The goal of this class is to get all of your questions answered. When it comes to copyright, what you can do, what you can't do when you have one and when you don't. This is stuff that I teach every day at my university job. And I've decided to make all of this content available here on line because I just think that everyone should know this stuff, especially if you're making music. So in this class we're going to start off talking about how we define music, which might seem like an obvious thing, right? Like music is music. But we have to think about the legal setting here, right? So how does the law defined music? Then we're going to move in and talk about the basics of copyright, everything we need to know about the dates and all that good stuff. Then we'll move on to the more complicated issues, which is work for hire, assignments, collaboration, fair use. And we're even going to move into talking about trademarks because it's related to copyright. So trademarks would be things like your band name, possibly your own name, possibly your image, although that falls under something that we'll also talk about it in this class called right of publicity. We'll talk about contractual rights, moral rights, and then we'll also spend a good amount of time talking about Creative Commons and the copyleft idea, which generally covers how a lot of people deal with sampling, not exclusively, but it has a lot to do with sampling. So it's a really big class as lot of material to cover. So let's dive in. Hi. 2. What We are Covering Here: Hey everyone, welcome to the musicians guide to copyright. So what are we covering here? It will be easy to say that we're just going to explain what copyright is. And that I can do in two sentences. You know, it's like the right to protect your intellectual property. However, it's a lot more complicated than that and there are some intricacies to it that as a musician, you should really understand whether it's because you are wanting to use someone else's copyright in your music. Or it's because you want to make sure that your music is properly protected. So a lot of the time when I talk about copyright, what I'm talking about is, yes, it's easy to explain what is copywritten. The exceptions are the things that require a lot of explanation. The times when you can use copywritten work, the times when your copyright might expire, the, there's just a lot of different things that are kind of the exception to the rule that you should really understand, especially when it comes to the big topics that are complicated, like fair use, work for hire, parody. These are all things that have very murky lines to them. They're not strictly defined. You can kind of argue whether or not something falls under fair use or not. And if you find yourself in court arguing for fair use, you're not in a great place to be, but you can make that argument. We'll talk more about that in just a minute. So we're going to be talking about what copyright is, but we're also going to be talking about what copyright is it. That's the main thing to understand. Okay, let's move on and get a couple little things out of the way. And then we're going to dive into our first big discussion. 3. Tools You Will Need for This Class: Okay, you know, I always like to include this video in my classes. That's tools, the tools you're going to need to get through this class. And I usually have to say something like, You're going to need some audio software, you're going to need some staff paper, you're going to need this or that because I mostly teach music classes. But in this class there's really nothing you're going to need. Gotta wanna take notes, okay, so there's going to be dates you're going to need to keep track of. There's going to be terms. So make a text file with your notes in them or a notebook if you like writing things down. Um, but as much as you can just keep some notes, you can always re-watch these classes to get more out of it. But taking notes for yourself for key points that you need to remember will be really useful, okay, So I cannot stress that enough. Take notes. No one remembers all of this stuff the first time. I don't even remember all of this stuff. Every time I teach this, like every year in college. So I'm actually working off my notes that are right there. So I think that's it for tools, just take notes. 4. Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer: Okay, The last thing I want to mention really quick before we dive into the real meat of the content, is a little disclaimer that I am not a lawyer. I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV. Which is funny because I'm wearing my I'm not a doctor. Shirts are not a real doctor. Sure. I am a doctor. I'm a music PhD. So it's like not really a doctor anyway. Long tangent. But I'm not a lawyer. So I am a musician who's dealt with copyright a whole bunch. I teach copyright and university. I, I'm thoroughly entrenched in copyright, but not a lawyer. So if you are in a copyright battle, if you are in a legal case with someone against copyright and you are working with a lawyer, which you should do. And your lawyer tells you to do something different than what I've told you to do. Listen to your lawyer, do what they say. Don't do what I do. However, everything I'm going to tell you here in this class, totally legit, everything's right. But there are intricacies to every situation. So if you ever find yourself in need of a lawyer, please get a lawyer. Please listen to that lawyer. Cool, because I'm not a lawyer on music, dark music dorks don't do all that well in court. Lawyers do better. Okay? That all being said, the whole goal of this class is, is it keeps you out of court. If you understand how copyright works, you're never going to find yourself in court as long as you obey the rules and you make it clear that your work is protected. There should never be an issue. Okay, let's move on and let's talk about our first big topic, which is what is music anyway? 5. Defining Music: Okay, so if copyright is all about protecting and our case music, we really need to define what music is because it could be a whole bunch of different things. And we all have different definition of what actually make something music. And after a little bit of discussion, we're gonna kinda get down to the parts of music that copyright actually protects. Spoiler alert. It's not all of music necessarily. Okay? So we're thinking about what is music? So let's strip it down to the kind of main elements a lot of the time when we talk about what music is, we go down to a few different principles. One, IB pitch. We might say rhythm. We might say tempo. What else? We might say contour like the shape of a melody. Might say timbre. Timbre is a term that's going to come up a whole bunch for us. And what timber means its color. It means like that. The color of something. And in a literal sense it means like, imagine a violin and a clarinet are playing the same notes. What makes them sound different? They're playing the exact same notes, the exact same rhythm, exact same tempo, exact same contour, but they do sound different because one's violin and one the clarinet. It's timber that makes them sound different. It's the color of the instrument. Timbre can be applied a few different ways, but it'll come up again and again. Okay, we might say loudness or volume is something, we might say kind of reverberation. The kind of physical space that the music is in, affects the sound of it. So it's fairly common to use these seven things as our definition of music, but it's really not a very good definition of music. So sometimes we might go to a different way of thinking about it. They might say, how about harmony? Rhythm? Why can't I swallow them? Are h y, t, h m, rhythm and melody. So if I say music is made up of harmony, rhythm and melody, does that encapsulate everything that is in music? It's close. Neither of these have taken into account lyrics yet. So lyrics is definitely a part of music. If we think about a song, the lyrics are included in the song. So lyrics are definitely something. What does copyright law say about what music actually is? Pitch? Does copyright protect pitch in a musical composition or a song? No. Pitch by itself is not protected. Rhythm by itself is not protected. Tempo by itself is not protected. If it was, you could claim ownership of quarter note equals 90. That's not protected. It's not specific to any single piece of music. Contour, the shape of a melody that is not a protectable element of music. Timber, the sound of an instrument that's not protected. Loudness, how loud it is or, or the shape of the volume of a song. That's not protectable. Reverberation the way it sounds in a room. That's not a protectable element either. None of these elements by themselves are protectable under copyright. So these don't work all that well. If we go to this one, harmony, rhythm and melody, and lyrics. Okay, let's start with lyrics. Are lyrics protectable under copyright? Yes. There are a few different ways and we'll get into that later. But lyrics can be protected under copyright. Can melody be protected under copyright? Yes, actually, the melody can. Melody is a protectable thing under copyright. What about the rhythm of a song? The pulse, the groove, the feel, all that stuff. No. The rhythm of the song by itself is not a protectable copyright thing. However, there are a couple of cases where someone was sued for having assigned in the same feel. And there's a couple of cases in which that happened and they lost. So when it goes before a jury, who knows what's really going to happen. So rhythm by itself is not a protectable element of copyright, but people have successfully used it to sue someone and they want. So. Keep in mind, keep that in mind. Harmony. Is harmony a protectable element in a song? No, actually, the harmony would be like the chord progression, right? And the reason that the harmony isn't protected, the chord progression isn't a protectable thing, is because really there just simply aren't enough ways to make a harmony unique. Once we get into kind of the next big thing we need to talk about is uniqueness, right? Like what does uniqueness mean? But in a harmony, if we're talking about a pop song where it's maybe it's played on a guitar. You know, that you can play any chord on a guitar, but the most common chords on guitar, there's like eight of them, right? Most songs are based around like eight guitar chords. So how many different ways can you rearrange those versus how many billions of songs I've ever been written. They're going to share the same chord progression. So there will be a lot of songs that have the same chord progression. And if you write a song that is the same chord progression is somebody else, that's okay. You can't be sued for that. However, if it also uses the same rhythm, then you're on shaky ground. Neither of those are protectable by themselves, but they're going to start to sound pretty similar. And if you have a similar melody, then you're really in trouble. And if you have similar lyrics than you're really super in trouble. Okay, so these things kind of compound. So these are out. These are fine definitions of music in some cases, but not in the copyright sense. Harmony, rhythm, melody, and lyrics are the things that we focus on the most. And the only two of those that are protectable by themselves or melody and lyrics. Okay? So I wanna give you a good example of this idea of harmony that was kind of a famous YouTube video that came out a couple months ago by this group, Axis of Awesome. This is like a comedy troupe where they used four chords to play like 50 different songs. Okay, so I'm just going to link you to that video. I can't include it here for copyright reasons because I didn't make it. But I'm going to give you a link to that video. I want you to watch that and just think about what they're doing here is they're basically relying on just this element of copyright. So there's the same harmony in all of these songs, right? They're gonna do different rhythm and they're going to feel, and they're going to use different melodies. And they're going to use different lyrics. But all of these share the same harmony. And doing this does not. Well. Any of these composers are songwriters who have written all of these different songs that use the same harmony, are not creating a problem with copyright because harmony, it's not a protected element. So that's why this happens. Okay, so pop over and watch that video. And then we'll come back. And then we're gonna talk about uniqueness. 6. Melody and Uniqueness: Okay, So next let's talk about melody. Melody is something that's protected. However, we do have to think about what it means to be unique. The law requires that a melody be unique. So we can say that every original idea a songwriter can think of has appeared somewhere before. It's just a matter of probability. And every day, the probability of the composer coming up with the same melody as somebody else gets more likely, right? There's more melodies being created every day. It would be statistically impossible to do something completely unique at this point. So we do have some ways around that and some ways that we can kind of clarify whether something's been stolen or not. We'll get to those later. But for now, let's just talk about what something means to be unique. So let's look at this little melody. Now if you don't read music, it doesn't matter. I just want to play this for you. Okay, so here we have three different notes, a, E, and F. That's all that's here. Three different notes. Okay. I'm going to play for the, for you these two bars, and I want you to see if you recognize it. Okay, here we go. Oops, playful beginning. One more time. Okay. This is perhaps you recognize that, maybe you didn't. But this is the main kind of melodic riff from Lady Gaga's Bad Romance. K. The lyrics here are dada, dada, dada or non nana, nana. So it isn't a lyric issue because there aren't really words here. So we can kinda leave lyrics out of this conversation for the moment. So is this copyrightable? Is this unique enough by itself, right, without any other elements? It's actually somewhat debatable. It's only three notes, there's no lyrics. We could probably dig through all of recorded music and find a hundreds of other songs that use this same thing. But if I was just to throw this in a piece of music in a similar way that Lady Gaga has. It would be, it would get me in trouble. It would break copyright. Okay, So we can't do that. What we really need to find here is the issue here is that we can recognize this from another piece. So we have to think how little of this do we need to recognize it from something else, right? If I play the whole thing, most of you probably recognize it from that song if you've heard that song before. Okay, so what if I cut it in half and just play this much? Is that alone? Just those notes recognizable from that. If you heard this by itself, would you think of that piece? You still kinda would. Most people would say yes, so kinda work. Okay, let's shorten it a little bit more. What if I just did this much? A lot of people would say, Yeah, that's still reminds me of that piece. As long as it triggers the memory to the other piece, you've got a problem, right? That's all it really takes. Let's go down to just these four notes. Maybe it might do it. Three notes. Maybe, Maybe that's all it takes. To notes. It's possible. It's a matter of opinion whether or not this is unique to that song or something else. So how do we know, How do we know that we've made something that is unique? Let's go to a new video and we're going to focus in on uniqueness and originality. 7. Originality: Okay, so how do we know we've made something that's unique? The the interesting thing is that we don't, we don't need to worry about uniqueness. This is actually one of the kind of big misunderstood things about copyright. So let's get into the weeds on some of the legal terminology a little bit here. So I'm going to flip my lingo instead of uniqueness, I'm gonna talk about originality because that's the way it's talked about in the legal documents. So originality means that our work is created through fruits of intellectual labor. Okay. Let's label this as our original lefty, yeah, Origen. Now, let's eat something created through fruits of intellectual labor. Okay, So what does that mean? That means we worked on it. We, we used our intellect to create it, okay? So originality requires not only that the author has not copied the work from someone else, but that also there is at least some minimal degree of creativity. Okay, so minimal degree of create e-tivity. Okay? So if you think about that, that's a pretty low bar, right? It has to show a minimal degree of creativity. Not only is that a low bar, it's also very opinionated. If I just use those two notes of the Lady Gaga melody. I could argue that that's some degree of creativity on my part, right? Creativity is very nebulous thing. So I could say, yeah, that shows a minimal degree of creativity from me. So when it comes to originality and uniqueness, same thing. What we're looking for is that it has to show a minimal degree of creativity. It has to not be an overt copy of something, but if it's similar and shows some creative thought, then usually it can pass as being our original. Okay? Now, the problem comes in when someone debates it, right? That's the big problem when someone says No, that's too similar to my thing. And then it goes up for a jury to decide and we'll look at some cases of that later. But for now, what we have to remember about melody and this applies to a whole song, is that it needs to show fruit of intellectual labor, which includes a minimal degree of creativity. 8. Independent Creation: Now a work also needs to hit one other bar and that is independent creation. Okay? So it needs to be proven that the work is an independent creation. I'm going to read to you a little bit of legal jargon here for just a second. I'll work satisfies the independent creation element so long as it was not literally copied from another, even if it is fortuitously identical to an existing work. The creativity element sets and extremely low bar that is clearly that is cleared quite easily. It requires only that are worked possess some creative spark, no matter how crude, humble, or obvious, it might be k. So we can prove that something is an independent creation as long as it is not, not overtly copied and possesses some creative spark. Num n, as this tax said, no matter how crude, humble, or obvious it might be. Okay, so the work can be classified as an independent creation, which is something that needs to be in order to be copywritten. If it is not overtly copied and contains come some creative spark. So if we have a song, we haven't knowingly copyright, copied anything. It's our song originally, it's our original song. It has similarities to other things that exist elsewhere. Can we copyright it? Yes. We didn't overtly copy it. We believe that it has some creative spark. It is copyrightable. Can someone come along and say, that's too similar to mine and then sue us. Also. Yes. They can. That's kind of just the way things work. Now we can, there are things we can do to defend our work and prove that its original, that it's different enough. And that's kind of the large part of the rest of this class is how do we prove that our work is original? How do I prove that our work was that copied? And how do we make sure we're protected if it does? So, we do have one other thing that we have to figure out in our definition of music, okay? And that is the tangibility factor. So let's go into that next. 9. Music is Intangible: Okay, so let's talk about what we know so far. About what something is in order to be copyrighted. Melody is copyrightable. Lyrics are copyrightable. We'll talk more about those soon. It needs to have some kind of independent creation element to it, which is a low bar. That really just mean that it's not overtly copied and has some kind of creative spark. But there's another thing, another big thing. And that's that it needs to be fixed. It needs to be tangible. Okay? So tangibility is something is a unique problem to music. There are a couple other art forms that have the tangibility problem, but I can't think of what they are right now. Maybe Dance. I'm sure there are more, but it's a big problem for music. Here's what that means. Let's take something that doesn't have a tangibility problem. Painting, okay? So if I'm a painter and I paint a picture, I worked really hard on it. I make this big canvas and I paint something on it. Okay. I walk away from it and I say it's done. It is copywritten. Okay. So I make this unique painting and I say it is done. It is unique. I'm going to copyright it. Can I do that? Yes. I can say this is my painting. It is copywritten, right? But in music, when you write a song and you say, Okay, I've written a song, what is the thing you're actually copyrighted? Is it? Because music is just technically, is just waves. Scooting through the air and hitting your ear drums and making you interpret sound. It's not a physical thing that you can hold onto you and say this is the thing I made. Music is just waves of air by themselves. So you can't copyright just patterns of waves floating through the air. That would be cool, but you can't do that. So in order for music to be copyrighted and it needs to be fixed, it needs to be put into some kind of medium that we can physically hold onto. Okay, So here's the really weird thing about this. When we talk about the copyright of music, what we're actually talking about is not the music itself, but the notation of the music. Okay, super weird because there's two ways that we can make music into a tangible thing. There are a few different ways, but the two most common ways is one is to record it and the other is to notate it, okay, to write it down somehow. You know, it can be written out in traditional notation. Could be just a lyric sheet, could be a lead sheet. There's a bunch of different ways to do it. But if you want a copyright music, you have to fix it in some tangible medium, which means has to be either written down or recorded. And it could just be, it doesn't mean you have to go into recording studio. It just means you need proof that it exists, is really what it means. So it could just be you sing it into your phone that can count. It doesn't need to be a good recording or anything like that. So music is entirely intangible, but the recording of it or the notation of it is not. So when we talk about copyright and nearly all legal issues around copyright with music, we're actually talking mostly about the documentation of music, not the music itself. It's kinda crazy. Let's kinda just a really weird aspect of copyright that we don't think about all that often. But it's true. So in order for something to be copyrightable, okay, that so we're zooming back out here. What does a piece of music need to be copyrightable? It needs two things. One is, it needs to be original. Hey, and that's all of this stuff that we talked about here. Needs to be an independent creation that needs to have a original melody. Some kind of, if it has lyrics it needs, they need to be original, needs to be not overly copy. That's the kinda first thing, the originality. So let me write this down here. Do things for copyright ability. One, originality, which we've talked about above, I don't know why that's so hard to spell. And to fixation. Ok. It needs to be fixed. It needs to be a tangible thing that anyone can reference and say, that is my song. Okay? It can't just be that you wrote a song one day and then copyright it. Your copywriting, what? You can't prove that that's your song. It all has to be fixed in time. So it has to be made tangible. And the way we make it tangible is we fix it, we notate it, or we record it. Okay. That's what fixation is. 10. Definitions of Music: Okay, So let's get back to this idea of what is music, because we've been talking for the last couple videos about what originality is and what are the requirements for copyright. But we haven't really defined yet what music is. We've looked at a couple of different ways of doing it. And that first way with the seven things, and the second way with melody, lyrics, harmony and rhythm. But we haven't got to the legal definition yet. I always think it's fun when I'm talking about this, to talk about kind of the ways that other people have defined music. So if we look outside of the legal elements and we think about other people, how have they defined music historically? To someone who's a, who's a physicist. You would define music as pressure waves of air, right? Air moving, hitting our eardrums. That's what music is. To a physicist, to a poet. Music is, here's my quote. Quote. Music makes me forget myself, my real position. It transports me to some other position, not my own, under the influence of music, it seems to me that I feel that I do not really feel that I understand what I do not understand, that I can do what I cannot do. That's, that's Leo Tolstoy. Definition of music. What about to someone who is a dictator? But dictators definition of music. Music is what tells us that the human race is greater than we realize. It's Napoleon Bonaparte. And about the theologian, a theologians definition of music. Music is one of the fairest and most glorious gifts of God in which Satan is a bitter enemy. For it removes from the heart the weight of sorrow, and the fascination of evil thoughts. That's from Martin Luther. And my favorite quote of all time from the composer. The artist. Music is organized sound. It's sound. Any sound. But with organization to it. That's what makes music. That quote is from John Cage. So we've got a lot of different definitions of music. None of them are the legal definition of music. So what does the law, how does the law define music? Let's go to a new video and talk about that. 11. The Legal Definition of Music: Okay, So how does the law define music? Here's the answer. Kinda doesn't. It doesn't really give us your nowhere in the Copyright Act. Does it say music is x, y, and z. Just doesn't. You would actually be pretty hard pressed to find any legal definition of any art form. You know, the Copyright Act also doesn't say that, you know, painting. A painting is color, oil, and canvas. Because not all painting is that. And not all music is guitar, bass, and drums. And a singer write. Some music, is Orchestra. Some music is five people painted blue banging on plastic pipes. You know, it's a reference to the Blue Man Group. Some music is people thrown rocks off a bridge. I don't know. So there's no strict definition of music in the Copyright Act. What there is, is these references that we've talked about so far that tells us what can be copywritten. And it really comes down to these things. The originality, which is factored into melody and lyrics, and the fixation. Ok? So we are going to get into a point where the fixation comes into question. For example, the way someone wrote it down is going to be a matter for the courts to decide if it's too similar to something else. It's a complicated case, but it was a really important case and we'll look at that soon. So there's no strict definition of music. But all of these things that we've talked about in this first big chunk of the class of these videos so far, are the things that matter when it comes to figuring out what music is kept. So with that all being said, let's move on now and talk about what actually copyright is. And we'll get some of the fundamental is just out of the way. 12. Copyright in the Constitution: Okay, so we now know what parts of music can be copywritten, but what does it mean to be copyright? What is copyright? Well, so copyright itself comes to us from Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution. And it gives the power to, to promote this directly from the Constitution. By the way, the progress of science and useful arts. By securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings. And this worries, Cool. So let's fix my fast typing. In mentors. The exclusive, okay, to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. Cool. So what does that mean? The intent of copyright is to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Now this term useful is a little strange to us at this point in time. But for the time being, let's kind of bypass it. So let's just call it arts. So to promote the progress of science and arts, which is an interesting statement by itself, right? The idea of copyright is to promote things, not limit them. A lot of the times we think of copyright now is a way to limit access to things. But for example, my work is copywritten, so you can't use it. That's how copyright is generally thought of, especially when you get into like sampling and things like that. But the intention behind it was to promote the progress of science and arts. Okay, moving on by securing for limited times. So there is a limit to copyright, Okay? There is a length of time associated with copyright. You do not, if you copyright something, you do not own that copyright forever. There is a length of time that you get it, and we'll get into what that length of time is. Truly. To authors and inventors. The exclusive rights. So exclusive means that it is the creator of that work and the creator alone. So if you created something, you have the copyright to that thing and only you, okay, Let's see, exclusive right. There's only one to their respective writings and discoveries. Okay, so that's the actual constitutional definition of copyright. Now, it leaves some things to be explained further, of course, as every statement from the constitution generally does. So we have a Copyright Act from the government, actually several of them. That gives us a little more detail. In fact, let's go into the second one now. So the legal definition is, this is another quote. The exclusive right of a creator to exploit a literary, musical, or other artistic work. Whether it be recorded in the form of print, audio, video, or otherwise, this is from the current Copyright Act, I believe. So the exclusive right, there's that term again, right? So that means there's only one. And it goes to the owner of the work. The exclusive right of a creator to exploit a literary, musical, or otherwise artistic work. So exploit, that is an interesting term that's used here because what that means is it's a little different than to promote the progress of science and useful arts. But it's also kind of the same. So it means that if we own the copyright to a work, we can exploit that work. We can sell that work. We can license that work. We can allow people to do things with it. We can deny people to do things with it. We have the right to exploit that work. Whether it be recorded in the form of print, audio, video or otherwise. So this recorded goes back to the tangibility element. Okay, So it has to be fixed in tangible in the form of print, audio, video, or otherwise. So when you have a copyright, when you own something that is copywritten, which I would venture to say, all of you do. Everyone watching this probably owns copyright, whether you know it or not. More on that shortly. When you own a copyright, you have certain rights. That's why we call it copyright. There's DR, there are rights associated with this. So what rights do you have? Let's say, what rights do you get? What you get with copyright. When you copyright something, the rights that you get. Let's go to Window video and go through the rights that you get. 13. Rights We Get: All right. So you created something and it's been copywritten. Now I'm kind of bouncing over the topic of how do we actually copyright something. We'll get to that shortly, Don't worry. But let's say we've created something and now it's copywritten. What do we get? What do we have? We have a whole bunch of rights and we can make money from those rights. So specifically, the rights we have are the exclusive right to and there are several distribute, copy, display, perform, make a derivative work. And that's it. Those are the main things and those are all very big categories. So distribute. Let's go back to the painting because it's a little bit easier to talk about. Now Let's stick to a song. So I've made a Sung, I've recorded it, and it's copywritten. So I have the exclusive right to distribute that song. I can make copies of that song. I can put that on the internet. I can share it with people. I can do whatever I want because I own it, right? This is also why I can't just take a song by Taylor Swift and share it all over the internet because I don't own it. I don't have the right to distribute it. Only she does. However, that gets a lot more complicated ones, record labels get involved. She owns the copyright, but she probably lets her label deal with copyright. That's a whole other can of worms. Let's just keep it simple for now. I, for my own song, I also have the right to copy it. So if I wanna make duplicates of it, if I want to make a cover version of it. If I want to take the sheet music and take it down to my Print Center and just photocopy it all day long. I can do that because it's mine. I can display it. That means that I can put the sheet music up in a museum. I can projected on the side of my house. The display thing is a little weird for music. It doesn't always apply, but it can especially with the score or the sheet music for something performance. I can perform the work, right? And I'm the only one that can perform the work. Now that we'll get to be a little complicated later once we get into licensing. But for now, I own the copyright. I have the ability to perform the work. I can grant permission to other people to perform the work. However, that's totally allowed because it's my right. I can do whatever I want with it. And if I want to let people perform the work, I can totally do that. If I can say you can perform the work, but you have to pay me, I can do that too. And make derivative work. This derivative work thing is going to come up a few times, especially when we get to talking about fair use. Derivative work means something based on the copywritten thing, right? So let's say I wrote a song and I'm going to write another song that uses the same melody. Okay? That is not going to be that in that case, I'm going to be using the copyright of an existing work, okay. But I own the copyright. So I can do that because it would be considered a derivative work. It's derived from the other work. So I can create a different work based on another piece of copywritten work because I own the copyright. But I can't take that Taylor Swift song and make my own song based on the Taylor Swift song, right? Because I don't have the right to create a derivative work. Hey, derivative works get actually quite complicated. Another good example of derivative work is changing the language of the song. If I took Taylor Swift song and I decided to sing it in French. Okay, that is a derivative work. So it's based on a copyright and thing. I can't do that. I can't just put out a French version of her song because she is the only person or the, whoever the copyright owner is of that sun is the one that has the right to do that. Okay. So I don't get to do it. However, she can grant permission for someone else to do it. And she could call me up like she does all the time. And just say, Hey Jay, please make a French version of that song. And I'd be like, Cool, I will totally do that. Even though my French is pretty crappy at this point. But i'll, I'll give it a shot and confuse all French speakers with it. So that's what a derivative work is more and derivative works later. So those are the essential rights that we get when we copyright something. 14. Intellectual Property: So next, let's talk about this term, intellectual property, okay? Also abbreviated IP. If you see IP anywhere we're talking about intellectual property. So intellectual property is kind of a broad term for what copyright covers. Intellectual property would be any kind of music, visual art, literature, theatre, anything that is intellectually created. Okay, you can think of this as an alternative to real property. Okay, so let's tease this apart a little bit. If you've ever dealt with buying a house or looking at a house or selling a house or anything to do with the house. You know that the world of buying and selling houses is called a real estate, okay? Because it's real property. Okay. It's real physical, tangible property, okay. On the other side of that coin is intellectual property, right. It's not quite real property. It's not property in that we can live there and move there and deal with it. But it is intellectual property. It is thoughts that we have created an organized in some kind of way that make them copyrightable. So there are really two kinds of property in our world. There's real property and intellectual property. Okay? The cool thing about intellectual property, and this blows my mind every day is that we are all constantly creating intellectual property. And every time you create intellectual property, there are these list of rights that you get along with it. If someone could actually documented all the intellectual property that you have, that you, each individual person here has, it would be insanely low, right? Just by making this video, this one video that you're watching right now. The video itself is intellectual property that I own. This Word document that I'm making is intellectual property that I own. The notes that I have scribbled down in front of me are intellectual property that I know. The text document that I have up here that has other notes on it is intellectual property that I own, right? It's not just when I sit down to make music. It is everything that you make using your brain noodle that makes intellectual property. Your brain is an intellectual property machine. It makes tons of it. But in both cases, both in intellectual property and real property. These are both things that you own, that you have, that you that you own, just like you own a car, or a textbook or a guitar, these are things you own them. And if they're any good, you can make money with them. So the goal here is to create intellectual property, copyright it, and then exploit it, or make money with it. Okay, So whenever you see this term, intellectual property or the letters IP, That's what we're talking about. We're talking about things we've made. The opposite of, opposite of real property. And intellectual property can all be copyrightable. 15. Copyright Does Not Protect: Okay, so we know that copyright protects intellectual property, but what is copyright not protect? There are things that do not fall into copyrightable things. And they are things that generally can't be owned k. So if you, if you think about like a piece of music I wrote, that's something I wrote. I can own that. But if you think about something like the color of the sky, that's not something I made. That's not something I can own. That's not something anybody can own. So it's not copyrightable. That's kind of a metaphysical example. But let's give you some more concrete details here. Ideas. Ideas can't be copyrighted, okay? They can be turned into something that's copyrightable, but an idea itself can't be copyrighted. Facts and Figures can't be copywritten. If they're publicly available. Logos and slogans are not copyrightable. However, most of them are, are protected by trademark, which we'll talk about later. Trademark is a different kind of thing. So the logo for McDonald's is not really copywritten until it's used in some way that requires it to be copywritten, which is probably happened by this point for McDonald's. But they are trademarked, which is a separate kind of thing. Another category would be news. So if, well, right now the coronavirus is happening and the existence of the coronavirus is news. It, It's not copyrightable. It's not like I can say, Hey, I am telling people about the coronavirus, therefore, nobody else can. It's my exclusive right. That doesn't happen. If the president does something weird, we can't, nobody can claim ownership of the hat that, that they would want to. All of that is news sweet, can't be copywritten. There are other things that can't be copywritten because they are too old. And we'll talk about that shortly. There are other things that can't be copywritten because they're just not in a copyrightable because they weren't made by a person. That's a whole thing. There are a couple of other examples of that, but we'll get more into that later when we talk about the time. So next, let's talk about some of the basics around copyright. 16. Term: Okay, so let's get some of the basics out of the way about copyright first. First let's talk about the copyright term. So when you have something copywritten, how long do you have it for? K says, not as simple as it may sound. There are a few different ways of looking at this, but the simplest one is the current law, which is life plus 70 years. Okay? So let's talk about that for a minute. When you create something that means you have it for your entire life. Plus 70 years after you die. And that's what the current law is for music. For some other thing that's a little bit different, but for most art forms, it's some life plus 70. For music, it's life plus 70 in the United States. Now, why is it life plus 70? It's an interesting idea. The reason is that copyright is inheritable. Okay? That means that if you own a copyright, you can leave that to your children. The idea is that if somebody creates something and it's valuable and they can make money from it, it should be theirs for at least two generations. After two generations, it goes back into the world of public domain, which we'll talk about in a minute. So the current law is life plus 70. So now let's split hairs on that a little bit. So all works created after January 1, 1970, 8 It's life plus 70. So the current law changed in 1978. It's changed. The law has changed a couple of times since then, but the, nothing affecting the duration of copyright has changed since 1978. So assuming something that was created on or after January 1st, 1970, eight, then it gets the rules of life plus 70. So anything new created, it's a life plus 70. If something was created before January 1st, 1970, eight, then the rule is 95 years from date of the copyright. Okay, So when the copyright was created, they got 95 years. The fool, the rule is 95 years from date of copyright. So these have 95 years, no life plus anything, just 95 years, black. Now, the next thing to figure out is, and a lot of people always ask this because of sampling. You say if something was created on a certain date, it is now no longer copywritten, right? There is a date in time where anything created before that is in the public domain. And that's true, but it's a little tricky to calculate because we have these two different rules going here. But the safest date, if you want to figure something out, is January 1st, 1923. So anything created before that date is public domain. Okay? So every year new things will start going into the public domain. In theory, if there's maybe true, maybe not true, but the way the laws created now that is true. So if you find a work and you want to use it for your own thing, then you can look at the date and if it was created before January 1st, 1923, you can use it. It doesn't have any restrictions on it. In most cases. If it was created after January 1st, 1923, you probably can't. It probably is still under copyright with somebody. So this leads us to public domain, which is the thing that is not copyright. So something is either copywritten or in the public domain, two sides of the same coin. So let's talk about what public domain is really quick. 17. Public Domain: Okay. So you're going to hear me talk about kind of three different things throughout this course. There's going to be copyright. And in opposition to copyright, there's going to be public domain. Okay? So there's kind of two big buckets. Bucket one is things are copywritten, they are protected. Bucket two is there in the public domain, they are not protected. Those are the two big buckets, but there's a third there's a third bucket that kind of sits right in between those two buckets. And that has a couple of different names. But we're going to call it creative commons for now. We'll talk more about that third middle thing later. For now. Let's just talk about the two big buckets, copyright and public domain. So if something is public domain, that means it is not copyrighted. Something can't be in both buckets at once, okay? It can't be copywritten and in the public domain. So public domain means that it's owned by the public. Okay. So if something was copywritten, but the term expired. Okay, So it has been life plus 70, and now it has fallen into the public domain. That means it is now owned by the public and it is for the greater good of the society that, that idea will happen, which is by design. Remember, at the initial point of copyright was to promote science and useful arts, right? That's what the Constitution gave us. The idea is that it will promote things. So if I make some cool discovery and then I copyright it, it is mine for roughly two generations. And then it goes into the public and the public has it and can use it and do whatever they want with it, right? So there are four ways that something can become public domain. The first is the copyright expires, okay, So we get to the end of the length of time depending on when it was created. So let's say something was created on January 1st, 1922, okay, a year before this date than it is in the public domain. The copyright has expired on it. Another way is that the copyright owner fails to renew it. And this is only for stuff before 1978. So this rule works created before January 1st, 1970, eight, the rule is 95 years from date of copyright. They did get an option to renew their copyright for another X number of years. I can't remember exactly what it was. But if somebody decided not to renew the copyright, which was some paperwork that had to be done. And then it would fall into the public domain. In our current law, life plus 70, there's no renewal process. You cannot renew it after it expires. Another way something would be in the public domain if copyright does not protect it. A good example of this is government documents. Okay? Any government document. And that would be anything created by the government is not protected by copyright because the government supposedly works for us. Okay? So the idea is that all government documents are already owned by the people, okay? And so therefore there in the public domain. So the actual text of the US Constitution, you can use that. You could set that to music and use that as lyrics for your song if you wanted. It's in the public domain for two reasons. One is because it's a government document. Two is because it's pretty old. It's definitely older than 1923, so it's doubly in the public domain. Um, what's something a little more recent? If you wanted to set to music? The text of a US president, State of the Union address. And the last couple of years. You actually could do that. You, you, the text of those speeches is in the public domain because it's created by the government. The president works for the government. So you can do that if you want to do that using audio clips of those is a little different because those, the copyright to those audio clips might be owned by the person who made that recording or the TV station that made that recording. So that's a little trickier, but the actual text would be public domain. So the third way something can fall into the public domain is that it is not protected by copyright, like government works. And then the fourth way is that the copyright owner explicitly places it in the public domain. And this is known as a dedication. Okay, so the idea here is that someone would say, I don't want copyright. I don't want to protect this. I want it to be in the public domain. And they would have to issue something called a dedication that would say this work is in the public domain. And this is kind of where that third little bucket comes in, but I don't want to deal with that quite yet. So let's go to a new video and let's talk about why someone might want to do this. 18. Why Put Something In The Public Domain?: Okay, so someone says, I have created this brilliant thing and I want it to be in the public domain. Why would they do that? Because by doing that, you're basically giving away all of your rights. Because you're giving away your copyright. So you don't have any of those rights that we talked about before. Those are all gone now. And that includes primarily your ability to make money off the thing that you made. There's a few reasons why people would do it, and a few reasons why people do do it. One would be sampling. So let's talk about the case of sampling. Sampling is a terribly difficult thing to deal with. And copyright. And I'm talking about a case where like I really like this drum break from the 70's funk tune and I want to record it and use it in my dance music track. Okay. That's sampling. That's totally not okay. You can't do that without special permissions and a whole bunch of complicated legal stuff. But if I'm someone who makes a lot of music and I want to say, You know what, I'm going to make this whole album just so that people can sample it. I can do that, and this is how I would do it. I would make a, make an album and then explicitly put it in the public domain. That means anybody can share it, anybody can play it. Anybody can create derivative works from it. Because in the public domain, anything goes, anybody can do anything. So if I really wanted to allow people to sample it, that's the best way to do it. What would be another reason? Medical research? So let's say you publish a paper on a cure for cancer. You find a cure for cancer and you write it out in a paper and say, here's how you cure cancer. You might not want to say, this is mine, I own it. No one can use my cure for cancer. You might say, this is public. I don't need to make money from this. This is for the greater good of the world. That's unlikely. There are ways to make money from it and license it so that in many people can use it, that would be the more common way for that to happen. But somebody could do that. In fact, there was a good example of something similar to this, where the kind of inventor and egocentric guy, Elon Musk, who owns the Tesla car company that makes electric cars. They put all of their patents for electric vehicles, electric cars into the public domain. So they're gonna continue to make electric cars. But their idea was at least on paper, is that they said, we are going to, we want the world to be a better place that uses less fossil fuels. And we want people to be making electric cars. So here's how you do it. And they gave away all the research. That would be a way they put it into the public domain. So there are reasons that people might want to do it. You could say publicity. You know, there's a publicity stunt and just saying, here's everything for free. You might say activism. A lot of people who make activists, flyers or posters or anything like that, put it into the public domain. So there's a lot of reasons why people would do this and people do do it fairly often. Now, like I said, there's that middle bucket. And that middle bucket is really designed for doing this kind of thing. It's saying it says, it's a way to say, I want to retain some of my copyrights, but give people permission to do things with it. It's not an all or nothing. Right now what we're talking about, copyright, public domain, and it is all or nothing. You either have the copyright or it's in the public domain. Okay, at this point, I think it would be really fun to watch. This video has been floating around online on the history of copyright. This talks a lot about kind of wars being fought over books and kind of how the idea of copyright came to be. I'm all the way from kinda of ancient society up to modern law in the United States. So I'm going to give you a link to this video and the next thing, please go and watch that video and then come back and we'll continue on. 19. How to Get a Copyright: Okay, One more thing on this topic of copyright basics, and that is how do you actually get a copyright? What do you have to do? What paperwork do you have to file with the government? The answer is, the law changed back some time ago to where you don't have to do anything. The way you get a copyright is just to make something and you already have it. Copyright is compulsory. That's right word. Compulsory. The moment you make something and the moment you fix it in a tangible medium, it is copyright. So this video, this video that I'm filming right now, as soon as I hit stop and it's saved as a file, it is copyright. I don't need to file anything. I don't need to do anything. Just the act of making the thing generates the copyright. That's why I said earlier. If you imagine all of the copyrights that you own, it would be an insane list. Every doodle you made on a napkin is yours. That is copyright and you have all of these rights associated with that doodle on the napkin, right? Every time you hummed a melody, well, no. Every time you home to melody because you have to write it down and fix it so that one wouldn't quite caught. But every poem you wrote, every e-mail you ever written is copyright, right? Just by making it, because copyright is compulsory, You don't need to file with the Library of Congress or any of that anymore. You used to have to, you don't have to do that anymore. However, there is a matter of proof. So if I write the exact same song as Taylor Swift at the exact same moment, how are we going to prove who had it first? Who wrote it first? Well, it's going to be whoever has this has documentation of the song being created. And when. And the best way to get documentation is actually to file a copyright with the Library of Congress. So you can submit a recording, submit a score, whatever your tangible thing is, to the Library of Congress, and get issued a formal copyright. That doesn't make your copyright any better or worse than someone who doesn't do that, because you don't have to do that. You both have a copyright. What it does is it makes proof easier. So if you go to court and Taylor Swift says, yeah, I wrote that song and Sunday night, and I say, I wrote that song on Sunday night. But I can say I have a certificate from the government that proves I wrote it on Sunday night. Really what would happen? But kind of then I'm probably going to win. So it's complicated that way. So there is still kind of a reason to file a copyright things if you really want to know the way a lot of musicians actually work, they don't go through this process of filing a copyright and every song they have a right. But once you release an album, you might copyright that album and the songs on that album. If it's going to be released and you're going to try to promote it and get it to go big. But every individual song that you write as you make them is copywritten. So you don't need to do anything extra. But for the things that you release publicly and really promote, maybe you want that extra level of protection behind it. So most important thing to remember, copyright is compulsory. You get it automatically just by creating stuff. 20. What is Work For Hire?: Okay, So one thing that was mentioned in that video that we watched a minute ago that we haven't talked about yet is the work for hire doctrine. So first let's define what a work for hire is, and then we'll talk about how it's different for copyright and the y. So a work for hire is when you are hired to make something that results in a copyright. In other words, when you're hired to make intellectual property. For example, let's say that I worked for an advertising agency and they came to me and said, We need you to read some music for this commercial. And so I wrote some music for the commercial. That would be a work for hire. The I was paid to write music for the commercial. So I was working for the agency when I did it. That means they probably own the copyright unless I had something really detailed in my contract with them that says that anything I make, I own, very unlikely. And most cases like that, the agency will own the copyright because they paid you to make it the same way I could. I could find a really good singer-songwriter who's down on their luck. And I can say, I'll pay a $100, right, new song. And then they write a song, I pay them, it's mine. I own that copyright because I paid them to do it. It's a weird system, but it's called a work for hire. A really good example of this is and this is, this might be rumor. I think this is true. Whether it's true or not, it makes for a good example. You know that little jingle that McDonald's uses, that data, dot, dot, dot, that thing. Supposedly that was made during the shooting of a commercial with Justin Timberlake. And he said, or he was asked by the director, okay, say this line and then like single little thing does do something. And so just on the spot he said dot, dot, dot, dot, dot, and did that little melody. And they said cool and the cap it. And then they turned it into a thing and started using it over and over and over and over. Now, Justin Timberlake was hired to be there and was paid as an actor to be there. So writing that ILA melody could be considered a work for hire. Even though they used it over and over and over and over and over. So he might not have got paid for writing that little melody. But in reality, he probably or his legal team probably fought and said, Actually if you're going to use that a whole bunch, it has a lot of value. It has a lot of intellectual property. And if you want to own it, you need to buy it from Justin Timberlake because his work for hire document did not specify him as a songwriter, specified him as an actor. There's probably there. In the end, he made $6 million off it, off that little dot, dot, dot, dot, dot. So don't feel too bad for him. But that's what a work for hire is. Someone's hired to make something that results in intellectual property. In almost all cases, the intellectual property is owned by the person paying the artist to make the work, okay, work for hire. 21. Work For Hire Copyright Term: Okay, so why do we care about work for hire when it comes to copyright? There's very good reason because remember that copyright is, the current law for copyright is that the term is life plus 70, right. Life plus 70 years. So in a work for hire, that means that the intellectual property might be owned by a company. Okay? So if a company owns the IP and therefore the copyright, what is the life part of the term? So if McDonald's owns the copyright, how does life plus 70 work? Does that mean that life is going to be when the company folds and then 70 years after that. Not really. The term life doesn't really apply when a company owns a copyright. And the only way a company can own a copyright is through work for hire. Because a company is not a sentient being that can create intellectual property by itself. So the copyright rules change. They change to this, they change to a flat 95 years from publication or 125 years from date of creation if on published. So what that means is that for a work for hire, McDonald's owns this melody. They're going to own it for 95 years, period. No life plus, because there are company, they don't have a life. They're going to own it from 95 years from publication. Okay. So in this case, publications going to mean the first time they use it in public. It's going to mean the first commercial that it gets put into. Okay. If they don't use it, if they just sit on it and say, we have this melody, we own it. Justin Timberlake wrote it. Someday. Let's do something with it. But they never actually use it. Then it's going to expire after a 125 years. So if it's unpublished, that means they're not actually using it. But in 200 years, Justin Timberlake can't come back as a zombie and say, that melody is mine, I want it back, right? Because it will have fallen in the public domain by that point. It has to fall in the public domain sometime. So the rules are 95 years from publication. Or if it's not going to be published, which means not used. It's going to be just a 125 years and then it goes into the public domain. Cool. So the work for hire rules are slightly different. Mostly having to do with companies owning copyrights and companies not having life. As we think of it. It's really death. It's really, the death is what the company really doesn't have. A company can exist for a fixed period of time. But the thing that triggers the plus 70 is death. Death plus 70. And it doesn't have that, nor does it have errors to send it to for the plus 70 years. So that's Problem 2. Okay? So that's the work for hire doctrine. 22. What These Are: Okay, Let's talk about assignments. So assignments are how? Well assignments are a contract between the owner of intellectual property and someone who wants to use it, okay? They have to be documented. And if you ever are faced with one of these, they tend to be fairly long and tedious contracts. Because what you're basically going to do is you're going to say, I own a piece of intellectual property. You would like to use it for some purpose. But I'm going to I'm going to let you use it, but I'm going to limit the ways that you can use it. Okay? For example, let's say I, it's a good example. Let's say I get a hammer and I buy this hammer as intellectual property. And this is not how you buy a hammer, but let's just assume it is. So I buy this hammer as intellectual property and the person who owns the hammer and owns the rights to the Hammer says, you can use this hammer to build a dog house. And I say cool. So I take the hammer and I build a doghouse. And then I give them back the hammer. That's all fine. It's all by the contract. But let's say I build a doghouse and then I build a house that I live in, a whole house using this hammer. It's a lot of work. But let's just roll with it. This analogy is getting kinda weird, but let's try it. So I build a whole house with his hammer. That breaks the contract. The person who gave me the hammer says, No, no, no. You don't have a right to do that with my hammer because they are limited. They restricted my use of that hammer. Now that's why we don't buy hammers in this way. We buy hammers outright, right? We pay for the hammer, and then we own the hammer and we can do whatever we want with the hammer, right? With intellectual property, you don't just pay for something, then you can do whatever you want with it. What you do with intellectual property is you create a license and assignment that someone can use it for certain purposes, okay? Now this is different than someone who just buys the thing to use. For example, let's say I buy an album, get neuronal. Let's say I buy a book. Here's a book. Um, I bought this book. And do I have the right to do a lot of things with this book? Yes, because it is intellectual property, but I legally bought it. This is called the first sale doctrine. So let's talk about that a little bit now. The first sale doctrine says, I bought this piece of intellectual property. I bought it and I have certain rights as someone who owns a copy of this, but I don't own the actual copyright. I own a copy of it, right? So I own a copy of this book. Doesn't give me the right to duplicate it, okay? If I wanted the right to duplicate it, I would need permission from the copyright holder, and that is an assignment. Okay, so let's go a little bit deeper into the first sale doctrine real quick, and then we'll come back to assignments. 23. First Sale Doctrine: Okay, the first sale doctrine. So here's what copyright law says about this doctrine. Here's the words of the actual doctrine. Quote, an individual who knowingly purchases a copy of a copy written work from the copyright holder, receives the right cell, display or otherwise dispose of that particular copy, notwithstanding the interests of the copyright owner. Okay. So let's pick that apart. As someone who is legally purchased a copy of a copy written work, we have the right to three main things. We have the right to sell, Display for dispose, okay, now this is a much smaller list. Then. The list of rights that someone who owns a copyright has, right, because we don't own the copyright. We own a copy of the thing. So we've bought the thing. So the first sale doctrine applies. So when we're talking about this book, for example, I legally purchased this copy of this book. So that means I have these three rights for it. I can sell it, I can sell my copy of this book. That's totally fine. I can display it. I can put it out on a, in a museum. I can hold it up and say, here's my book. But I can't hold it up in such a way that you could read it because that would be essentially making a copy. And then the third thing is I can dispose of it. I can throw it away, I can burn it. I can do it, everyone. It's mine. It's my copy. But I can't duplicate it. I can't make derivatives of it. I can't do any of those other things that a copyright holder can do with their copyright because I don't own the copyright. I own a copy. I know that's a lot of uses of the word copy. It's kinda strange, but that's what the first sale doctrine says. Okay, so back to assignments. Why, if I own a copyright, Why would I assign it to someone else? Why would I make one of these assignments that would let somebody use my copywritten work? The answer is pretty simple, and we're gonna go to a new video and talk about it. But spoiler alert, money. 24. Licensing: Okay, Why would we grant someone permission to use our work, the copyright of our work? The answer is, that's how we make money. And it comes down to something called licensing. So licensing is kind of another word for assignments. It's really that when you do a licensing deal and assignment is created, that's kind of how the terminology works. But if you are a maker of music, right now, licensing is where it's at. It used to be that we made records and we sold records and that's how we made money. That's not really true anymore. Because of streaming. The amount of money we make from making records is relatively small. Touring is still a big thing. You can make a good amount of money from touring, but even better than that is licensed. So in licensing, what we're gonna do is we're going to grant permission for somebody to use our copyright for a specific purpose, okay? And there might even be more restrictions on it. We might say you can use it for this purpose. In this area, right? For example, I could say, let's say Focus, ford Motor Company comes to me and they say, we want to use the song of yours in a commercial for our new truck. And I say, cool, you can do that. You're going to pay me this much money. And it might be that it's a set amount of money that they pay me to use that song and a commercial. It might be that it's a set amount of money plus a couple bucks every time it runs or something like that. Less likely and advertising and more likely in film and television and somewhat in games. But either way, I'm going to get paid a big chunk of money for them to use this piece of copyrighted material, to use my intellectual property in their commercial. Now I could limit it more, I could attach more assignments to it and I could say, okay, you have the right to use this song in this commercial, this one specific commercial. You don't have the right to use it in any commercial you want, anything like that, this one commercial. You can use this son. And this commercial can only air in North America. That would be kind of part of the negotiation that would happen with the person buying it. But a lot of the time, licenses are limited in that way. You can see examples of that all the time. If you look at like TV shows that have different theme songs for North America or Europe, you know, that happens more than you would think. Because someone agreed to let their trach be used for that theme song in one territory but not the other. We'll get more into territory's later. For now. The thing to remember is that when we license something, when we have a license, that means we have a right to use a piece of copywritten work for a specific purpose. And in that license, there will be assignments. The assignment says I can do this with it, and maybe two or three things, but I can't do X, Y, and Z. So advertising is a big reason for that. Another big reason for that is another big reason for that is film, television, games. So let's talk about how those work real quick. In the next video. 25. Film and TV Licensing: Okay, the film industry. So films are constantly licensing music. Now there's really two different ways that music gets into a film. It can be through a license like we're talking about now. It can also be through a work for hire. Write. A film studio could just employ like a composer or something to write the orchestral music of the film. And then that composer basically will get paid for the job. And then that's it, right? Because it's a work for hire and they will not own the intellectual property. Oops. So that's usually not the kind of gig you want. I've actually done it both ways. I've worked on films where I was just paid essentially as an employee to write the music. And then once the film was done in the music was done, I walked away and wash my hands of it. I never saw another penny from that project because I didn't own anything. So I didn't get any royalties. And there was no license or assignment at play because it was a work for hire. More commonly, film world, it would be a licensing deals. So in licensing, what that would mean is that I might write some music. That people making the film might hear that music and say that piece of music is going to work. Great. Let's buy that and then put it into our film. And by, by that, I mean, create a license so that we can put it into our film. So they would then reach out to me as the creator of that, as the owner of the copyright. And they'd say, we want to use that, Let's talk. And they offered me a contract. That contract typically would have a royalty in it, meaning I would get paid a certain percentage of something depending on how it's done. In television. It can be a percentage of the budget for the show. It can also be different when the show airs in different contexts. For example, if it's a rerun, you might get paid differently, things like that. But one of the really interesting things about television right now is that there's just an insane amount of licensing happening in television. And the whole kind of licensing revolution, the thing that made a bunch of artists say, holy smokes, I need to get in on this licensing game. All of that was created primarily because of so much as I hate to say it. Cause of reality TV. Reality TV. When reality TV came along, it was this boom in licensing because what is reality TV? It's filming a whole bunch of stuff. And then then just like throwing music over the top of it, constantly, constantly throwing music over the top of it. And they don't want just generic orchestral stuff. They won't pop tunes, Right? They want dance music jams. They want things that are fun and interesting over top of that. So they are just constantly licensing, licensing, licensing stuff over and over and over and over and over to create the overall episode, right? Tons of music goes into that. And when I say reality TV, you might think of the carnassial or whatever reality TV show was unknown. But there's more than that. Reality TV is also every nature show on National Geographic, every phishing show, every, I don't know, you know, the History Channel have shows about whatever. There's so much of that stuff happening. Nature shows are a big one because they always need music playing in the shows because they're just so boring. You have to have music to live and it up. Sorry, if that offended anyone. So so it's important to, if you're interested in this, to get on the radar of those people, right? Because you want them using your music, because that generates a good amount of money. And another thing I should point out here is that most of the time, these are non-exclusive licenses. That means that they can go to multiple people. So I might create a piece of music inside a non-exclusive license to this fishing show to use it in there in some episode, right. But it's non-exclusive. That means I can then turn around and licensed that same song to the cart osteons episode if I want to, same piece of music, right? So it's taking one piece of music and just finding whole bunch of different ways to make money with it. That's why we like licensing so much we being artists, people who make music. Because it's basically take something we've made, caching, caching, caching, caching. So licensing is a big deal. So your next question might be, that sounds cool. How do I get in on that? Let's go to a new video and I'll talk about licensing houses and how those work, and how to get your foot in the door. 27. Collaboration and Copyright: Okay, So not, not all works are created by a single person. Sometimes works are created by multiple people. And in that case, multiple people have the right to the copyright. Right. That was, I used the word right like five times in that sentence. Let me try that again. When a work is created by multiple people working together, the copyright is shared. And this can get fantastically complicated. So we're gonna get more into this later in this course. When we get down to talking about band partnerships, especially that, but we'll touch on that right now. And the next couple of videos. So if a work is co-authored, co-authored, that means that copyright is coal owned. I coauthored is co-owned. Now, who owns what is where things get sticky and many bands have broken up because of this problem. But before we get to that, there's even an issue in Co, let's say two people wrote a song together and then they get offered a licensing deal. Okay? And let's say the licensing deal is from the Democratic National Party. Okay? So let's make this a little more tangible. Let's say Tim and jade wrote the song. They each have 50 percent ownership of the copyright. Cool, right. So they equally own the song. The copyright to the song. The Democratic National Committee or convention, let's say Convention wants to license song for a B, for a commercial. Tim is a Democrat and wants to do it. Jade as a publican and doesn't what happens now? Okay. So Jade is a strict Republican and she doesn't want her music being used in a Democrat. Add. And Tim is a Democrat and he is, He's over the moon that they want to use. One of his songs in a commercial. So will the license go through? The answer is probably not. Their best option here is just a pass on it. Because if they both own 50 percent, they're going to have to agree. They're going to have to agree to do it. Now. There's probably a certain amount of money coming into play here. So maybe B, D, and C can increase the money and that will get Jade over her concern maybe or otherwise. Well, yeah. Otherwise they would have to pass on it because they have to agree. You can't license half of a song. It's kind of all or nothing. In this way. I mean, you can't, Tim can't say yes, you can use the first half of the song because that's what I own, that it doesn't work that way. So so these kinds of things get tricky. And cases like this have happened where people refuse licensing deals on ethical grounds. We'll talk about this soon. When it gets to. Like Moby had some kind of famous ones where he's a very strict vegan and he wouldn't license to some steak sauce company or something like that. So CO owned copyrights are tricky. Now another thing that could happen here is Tim could say, look, I really want to do this. I know you're not gonna do it. So how about I buy your 50 percent of the copyright from you? And Jade can name a price and say, okay, for a million dollars, I'll sell you half of my copyright, then you would have all of the copyright to this on. If then Tim can do it. The danger here is that jade can really name whatever price you want because she owns it. And if Tim wants it, He's not really much of a place and negotiate. So let's talk first about when a work is created. The legal presumption, if there's nothing written down, who owns what in a sum. 28. Presumption of Equal Ownership: Okay, Let's say there's four people, and there's four people in a band. And let's do it this way. Let's do this hypothetical again. So there's Steve kill, they'd be a cool name. Jill, Ryan and Sue are in a band, okay. They write a new song. And Jill rights all the lyrics. Steve writes all the music. And then let's say Ryan contributes a baseline. Sue contributes a drum part. Okay. So we'll say Steve writes all the music except bass and drums. Okay, So what we have here is not uncommon how a band works. One person wrote all the lyrics. One person wrote the majority of the music. Another person adds a bass part, which is really just based on the guitar part in this case, let's just assume. And Sue writes a drum part and her drum part, you know, just kinda fits in with the song. It's nothing that contributes to the overall ethos of the song. It's just kind of, you know, a pretty plain drum part. So who owns what? So the presumption that means unless otherwise documented. So if they don't write something down, if they just say, Cool, We did this song, we're done with the song. Let's move on to another song. And they don't document anything and they don't write down who owns what, which we'll talk about in the next video. But if they don't do that, then they all equally on it. Each person owns 25 percent of the copyright. So Jill wrote all the lyrics to the song. She owns 25 percent of the song. Steve wrote all of the music. He owns 25 percent. Ryan, that bomb just through a baseline on there. That was just a copy of the guitar part down an octave. But he owns 25 percent because he did contribute to the Sun. Su added a drum part, she gets 25 percent. The presumption is that everybody who contributes to the song gets an equal share of the sign, no matter how small or large their contribution was. K, period, end of story. So whoever was in the room contributing to that gets a slice of the pie and equal slice of the pie. Equal slides slice of the pie. Everybody gets an equal slice of the pie, okay, now doesn't have to be that way. That's just the default, the presumption. There is another thing that they could do. They could sit down and say, okay, you know, Jill sits down and says, Okay, I wrote all the lyrics to the song. I want 50 percent. And then they can read up a document that says who owns what. So let's talk through that process in the next video. 29. How a Band Divides Copyright: Okay, a lot of bands leave things that way. I should point out. A lot of bands very intentionally say, we are in a band, we are all in this together. We all split the copyright equally. I think I remember reading that Aerosmith does that and has always done that. I might be remembering that wrong. I just tried to look it up and couldn't find it. But a lot of bands do do it that way where they say, no matter what, we all split everything equally. Even if the bass player wasn't there that day that they wrote the song, they're a part of a band. They all split it equally. That's a good way to make everybody happy in the band and keep the band together for a long time. However, if you want to create a little bit of animosity, you can make a split sheet. So basically what you're gonna do is you're going to basically write out a little contract that says who owns what for each song, okay? And these are called splits. In other words, how we split up the song. Okay, So in this way, if we did this for our example here, we might say Jill owns 20, 50% because she wrote the lyrics. And that's actually fairly common. It's common for if you have a situation where one person writes the music and one person writes the lyrics, that's a 5050 split. So if you have for people who write the music and one person who writes the lyrics, it's quite common that, that one person who wrote the lyrics gets 50 percent and everybody else splits the other 50 percent. It doesn't have to be this way. This can be split. How ever you want. Jill could take 1% if they wanted. It's just however the band can agree to it, but everybody has to agree to this. So in this case, let's say Jill takes 50 percent. Let's see, Steve wrote the majority of the music. So Steve can't take 50 percent because that leaves nothing for Ryan and sue unless they agree to that. If they say, you know, I didn't really contribute anything to the sun. So I'm going to take 0, kinda crazy till it's probably not going to be the case. Let's say Steve takes 30 percent and Ryan takes 10, and Sue takes 10. That adds up, right? Yep. It's got equal up to a 100 percent obviously. So in this case, gel gets 50 percent, Steve as 30, Ryan as 10, and Sue has 10. It can be whatever you want. But a lot of the times and bands should always do this. They should sit down and say, who contributed what and what percentage of the overall does that account for? Because this is going to matter a lot once licensing deals start happening, right? If Ford Motor Company comes and says, I'm going to give you a $100 thousand to use this Sung. That means Jill is going to get $50 thousand and Sue is only going to get $10 thousand, right? That's a lot of money. So it's really going to matter if we did it this way where each person gets 25 percent. And Ford Motor Company says, I'm going to give you a $100 thousand for the sun, then Jill is only going to get 25000, right? Yeah, 25000. So that's going to be a lot less than they would get if it was split where jail got 50 percent. But Sue, who didn't contribute that much, is going to get the same amount that can create a lot of animosity as well. So it's a complicated thing. Now this also gets into a band agreement and how a lot of bands kind of devised this into their band partnership agreement, which we'll talk about later when we get into band partnership agreements. For now, just know that anyone who co writes a song, If it's, if you don't write out a split sheet and you just leave it as it is. Each person owns an equal amount. If you do write out a split sheet, you're basically just creating a contract that says who owns what percent of the sun. And that will get documented once you set up yourself as a publisher, which we'll talk about publishing soon. Make sense. Cool. Let's move on. 30. The Fair Use Doctrine: Okay, so now we know a lot about copyright. We know a lot about what we can do and what we can't do with copyright. But we need to get into this murky water known as fair use. Fair use is a fairly dangerous term. A lot of people, when they're, when they get in trouble for copyright say, well, no, it's fair use. That makes it okay. So it can be like a catch-all for like, oh no, I'm in trouble. And it doesn't usually work. The best way to think about fair use is that a lot of you might think, you know, at some point in your life you heard that, yes, copyright is copyright and I can't copy something, but if it's for educational purposes, I can't. All right. So that might be something you heard somewhere. That is kind of true. And it's because of fair use. Fair use means that there are certain uses of copywritten work that we can get away with. If it fits into some very specific purpose. What we're really looking at here is actually we're balancing the rights that I have as a copyright owner and the rights that you have as a copyright user, Right. There are times when those are actually in conflict, and that's where fair use comes from. But putting that aside, what it really means is, yeah, I could photocopy page of this book and say, Well, it's for educational uses. And I can hand that out to my class. And I can say, you know, fair use educational purposes. I'm going to photocopy a page of this book. Now. Is that true? That it actually is fair use? Well, it kind of comes down to a couple of things. And even at that, even if we can say yes, it hits this benchmark, yes, it hits this, yes, it hits this. There are four things. Then. Even then, it might not be considered fair use because fair use is really at the end of the day, kinda of a matter of an opinion. And whose opinion is it? It's the judge for whoever's suing or the jury. So it's dangerous waters to be in, but it can't be important. So there are a handful of things that can be considered fair use. A handful of uses of copyrighted material that can be considered fair use. Education is one of them. Let's go to a new video and let's kinda go through the list of each of them and what they mean. 31. Types of Fair Use: Okay, there are really five things that we use to use, fair use to kinda justify. Let's start with education. Education is definitely one of them. If we're using something for educational purposes, sometimes we can't get away with copying it. And a good case for that would be like, I can photocopy a page of a textbook. I can maybe do that. Maybe that's legal, maybe that's not. Can I photocopy a piece of sheet music for someone to use in a class and a music class. And maybe it might be fair use, it might not. The main reason, the main thing we use to determine whether or not that generally is going to fly as there's this four factor list. And we're gonna go through those four factors in the next video. So just file that away for just a second. Okay, so education is one. Commentary is another. Okay. So example of commentary would be like, I am on the news talking about a new book by somebody and I might quote that book, okay. You know, that's copying a chunk of that book, but I am doing it so that I can talk about it. So there are I can go too far with that and then it won't be considered fair use. But generally speaking, that can be okay. Another one on that same topic is news reporting. Right? If I am reporting on a the theft of a painting, I might need to show the painting in the, in the piece I'm talking about that b can be considered fair use scholarly research against both scholarly, right? That's funny. Scholarly research. If I am doing research on something, if I'm exploring a, if I'm writing a paper about a cure for cancer, I may need to put in a formula for a drug that is copywritten so that I can explain how mine works, that can be allowed. And the last and probably stickiest is parody. If I'm making fun of something, I can, it can be considered fair use. Now, there's a right way and a wrong way to think about that. That's quite complicated. This parody idea, because a lot of people have used parody, two, little success. It doesn't mean perhaps what you think it means. And so we're going to devote a whole section to talking about parody shortly after this one. So file parody away for a minute. We're going to focus deep into that in a minute. But next, Let's go on and talk about these four factors to determine if something is fair use or not. 32. The 4 Factors: And so the US Copyright Act lists for kind of things that were, we can use as a barometer to tell us if something passes for fair use. So the idea is that if something is fair use, it ought to apply to all four of these things. In other words, you should be able to answer yes to all four. All right, so let's say the four factors. Okay? So the first one, the purpose and character of the use. What we're thinking about here is how is it used and what specifically is used. So the purpose and character of the, let's say, is the purpose of the use to make money. If so, it's probably not going to count as fair use. If the use is to demonstrate something. If it's even if it's for a non-profit thing or something like that, it can count. But generally, if you're using a work to make money, it's not going to pass the nature of the copywritten work. So when we think about the nature of the work, is it something that is purely factual, like a report? Or is it something more like a creative work, like a work of art? If it's something more creative like a work of art, generally the answer to this one is going to be no, it doesn't pass this factor. So we look at the nature of the work as well. The nature of the work being used, the amount and substantiality of the work. How much of the work was used? Could the US be smaller? In other words, if I decide to photocopy a page from this book, maybe that works. Maybe that works under fair use. It's it's one page. It's not big. But what if I decided photocopy a whole chapter, then B, then it's probably not going to pass through this factor. It was a significant amount. And also in substantiality, what we're thinking of is kinda what was it? Was it like the main thesis of the whole book is that what I've photocopied. If so, then that's probably not going to pass either. But if it's something relatively trivial and the grand scheme of the whole book, then it can work out, okay? Okay, Then the fourth one, the effect on the market. So if I photocopy a page of this book, what we're asking here is by you having that page that I photocopied for you. And I said I can do that under fair use because you are a student of mine. Does that count as fair use? Here, the effect on the market, the question would be, were you going to buy the book? If you were going to buy the book, but you decided not to buy the book because I gave you a page, then that has a negative effect on the market. And we're not going to pass the fourth factor here. If you weren't going to buy the book anyway. And I photocopied this one page just to get my point through to you. And you still have no desire to buy the book, then it has no effect on the market, right? But if I photocopy a whole chapter, then maybe that's going to make it so you don't have to buy the book. If I photocopy the whole bloody book, then of course, it has an effect on the market because now you don't have to buy the book. So we have to think about the effect on the market, what it's going to. If someone, if it's going to, the copyright owner, lose money, right? Because that's going to create problems. So those are the four factor. So we want to kinda get through all four of them. If something's really going to count as fair use. 33. Example - Class Video: Okay, let's come up with an example here. So let's say there's a video, it's on YouTube, and I want to play it for my class. Okay. Will that count as fair use? Now let's say this is specifically for an in-person class, okay, So we are in a room or talking. This isn't an online class. And I just want to play this video from YouTube. Okay? Now, that is copywritten work. And I'm using it effectively to make money because I get paid to teach you all. So, so it's a little complicated, right? So let's go through here first, does it qualify as one of these? Yes, it qualifies as education because I'm using it in a class. Okay? So we're gonna say this is fair use because I'm using it for educational purposes. Now, the next thing I need to do is go through these four factors. What is the purpose and character of the use? So the video that I'm going to play for you is actually the, Let's just say hypothetically, it's the one that was just above that we've looked at not that long ago, the history of copyright. Okay, So the purpose and character of the use, it's kind of a documentary video to talk about the history of copyright. So it's more news reporting than anything in the actual video. It is a creative work because there was a good amount of artistic choice that went into making that. But it's mostly reciting facts, right? So that makes it a little bit better. So I'm going to say we pass this first category. K, the nature of the copywritten work. Again, it's something that's purely if it's something that's purely factual, then it's more likely to pass. So it is factual. So for this one we should say, for the purpose here, what we want to say is, what was my purpose? So my purpose was making money, yes. But before that, I would say in my purpose was to convey an idea to the class. So I still think we pass this one. I kinda misspoke earlier. The purpose should be my purpose for using it. So that's still okay. I think it's a little shady, but it's I think it would it would pass. The nature of the work Is it was mostly factual. That's that one. The amount and substantiality of the work, I played the whole bloody thing for you. So it was the whole thing. So that's less good. So we might not pass that one because I did play the whole thing or give you the whole thing to watch. If we were in a class in person, which I would ask you to watch the whole thing. And I would play the whole thing for you, which I do. And the in-person version of this class, the effect on the market. Now that's an interesting one, right? Because by playing that, did I take money out of the pocket of the creator? No. Not in any way I can think of. Then I do the opposite, that I make money for the creator. And if you see any ads, when you loaded that up, if you saw any ads, we actually made money for that creator. So we definitely past this one. It didn't cost. We didn't economically impact negatively the creator of that work. So this is the most shady one. We may or may not pass it. And you'll notice that when I went through all of these, all of these were really kinda my interpretation of each of these. So It's a really dicey thing, right? Like what I said earlier, that fair use is really hard to pin down. So let's go to one more video and let me tell you kind of the lawyer's advice about fair use. 34. What a Lawyer Will Tell You About Fair Use: Okay, Last thing about fair use. For now, we'll deal with fair use a little bit more later, especially when we start talking about trademarks. If you're ever in front of a lawyer and remember, I'm not a lawyer. But if you're ever in front of a lawyer and you say, yeah, I want to do this because a Fair Use, a lawyer is going to say, no. Do not use fair use as justification for doing something. Because it's going to be entirely up to a judge or jury to interpret these four factors, right? So even something as simple as me photocopying a page from this book and giving it to the class. If the author of this book knocks on our door and says, you photocopied a page of my book. I'm going to sue you. I could very easily lose, and I would probably lose a lot of money. So it's fairly bad. So relying on fair use is a dangerous thing. No lawyer is going to tell you to do that intentionally. So just keep that with a grain of salt, but it is a difficult thing to navigate. 35. Misconceptions about Parody: Okay, Let's talk about parody. So parody basically means you're making fun of something, right? There is kind of a very common misconception about parody. Parody needs to be a parody of the thing being parodied, which is a terrible sentence. But I think it was actually grammatically true what I just said. So when Saturday Night Live takes us popular song and puts different lyrics to it, is that a parody? It's not it's not a parody because in order for it to be a parody, they need to be using the song to parody the song, right? Let's think of another example. That's not music because it's a little easier sometimes. Let's say this book. So I have this book and let's say I wanted to write a parody of this book. I could write another book that kind of makes fun of this book. And in so doing, I could use some copywritten material from it. That would be a parody. But let's say I wanted to write a book that was a parody of this book. It was designed to look like this book and sound like this book, but it was actually making fun of additions everywhere. That would not be a parody because it's not parodying the book. It's using the Booked parody, something else that's not parody in this case, in this example. So if I write a song that uses different lyrics, if I change the lyrics to a song, the song is copywritten. Can I call that fair use under the parody provision? I cannot, unless the lyrics, I've changed them to our parodying the actual song, right? So how would that work? Let's say, let's say there's a sun, let's say 1999 by prints. So let's say I wrote a song called 2020 about all the crazy things that have happened in this year of 2020. And it was about that it was about the crazy things that happen this year in 2020. Could I be sued by prints for doing that or the estate of prints? For doing that for copyright infringement. Yes, I could, because I used his music and his copyright illegally. But what if I used the music to 1999 and I wrote lyrics that made fun of the song, 1999. Could I be sued? Well, would that fall under parody? Yes, it would. Could I still be sued by prince's estate for copyright? Yes, I totally could. What I win or lose. 5050. I have a good shot at making it under the parody provision, but it's fair use. So I think I'd make it I think I'd probably get past. But again, judge and a jury who knows. So that brings us to the big thing that always comes up when we talk about parody. And that is the king of all parody, Weird Al Yankovic. Let's go to a new video talking about Weird Al Yankovic. 36. Weird Al Yankovic: Okay, Let's talk about Weird Al Yankovic go, which I think is how you spell it. So if you don't know who really Yankovic is, Google him. He's the one who's made a career, a very long and very sustained and impressive career by doing these songs where he changes the lyrics, maybe changes the feel, makes a poker version of the song. He does a lot of pocus stuff. And you know, He's parodied everybody. Just tons and tons of artist he's been around since the early eighties and he's still making music, I think. So. How does he do it? Does he use fair use parody? No, he does not for two reasons. Actually. One is for the thing we were just talking about, right? One is because that's not actually a parody. Most of the time, what he's doing is taking a song and changing the lyrics to make it be about some, a third thing, right? There's three things in there. But the other reason is that if he did, if he did rely on parody to do that, what he would actually be doing is, is putting out albums on really shaky ground, right? Because even if the parody thing applied to what he was doing, parody is shaky, all fair use is really shaky. So it wouldn't be a home run and he could get sued and probably wouldn't be sued for everything he puts out. So that's just not a very good reason. Are not very good business plan. Kind of fern artists like him. So how did they do it? And it gets permission. That's it. He gets permission from the copyright owner, which is not always the artist. So you might see, if you do some research, you might find some cases where Weird Al Yankovic says something like so and so didn't want him to do something. You know, some artists didn't want them to use his work, but that artist doesn't own the copyright anymore. So he had to get permission from the person who owns the copyright, which is usually the artist. Not always. There are cases where artists have sold their copyrights entirely, not licensed but sold. So in order for him to release that music, he needs to get permission from the artist. And he might even strike up a licensing deal where the artist gets a cut. I don't know. I don't know if he does that or not. But there's no way to do what he does without some kind of permission from the artist. Otherwise, he would be sued very quickly. And you can find interviews with him where artists have where he talks about artists who just said no and he just couldn't do it. He had a good idea for something and he couldn't do it because the artist said no. So that's how we're done. Yankovic works. It's not this parody provision. Everybody thinks about Weird Al Yankovic when you say parody, fair use, but it doesn't actually really apply. So there you go. 37. What is a Mark?: All right, We're going to shift gears and start talking about trademarks for a little bit. So trademarks work differently than copyright. Copyright is for work that was created in a trademark is more for a brand identity. So in order to kind of dive into what a trademark is, we need to first kind of dissect this word, trademark. Ok, and let's start with the second half. Okay, so what is a mark? And that's put that in quotes. So a mark is something we use to identify a brand or something like that. You can kind of imagine. And I don't know if this is where the term actually comes from. But the way I think of it is if you remember, like, if you've ever seen like an old pirate movie, they like to, you know, put o like seal and envelope by putting a little ball of wax and then stamping they're like symbol, their logo into that wax over the CLV envelope. So you know, if it was opened because of that, wax seal would be broken. But the thing that a stamp into it is unique to them. It's their mark. It's the thing that identifies them more than anything else. So it's their mark. A mark, technically speaking, is this a recognizable sign design or expression which identifies products or services of a particular service from those of others. So let's look at a few. So here's a whole bunch of marks. These are trademarks, but we'll deal with the word trade in a minute. So let's just pick one Burger King, okay, So this is the logo for Burger King. Now you'll notice that there's really kind of two things happening here in most of these marks. There's two things. There's some kind of graphic and there's text. Okay? Both of those are the mark. So here the, the text says Burger King. Now, if I was to make this same logo but change the text, could I get away with that? No, because both the symbol and the text is protected. Here's one that doesn't have tax, right? So they don't have to have text. It is it can be a symbol or text. And actually it can be more than that. It can be just a color. It can be a smell. You can trademark a smell. It can be a sound. A sound can be trademarked. Um, I heard once that volvo had trademarked, the sound of the doors closing on their cars. So when you swing the door shut, it makes a nice sound. And that's trademarked supposedly. I don't know if that's true or not. So it can actually be really anything that identifies the brand, color, sound, smell, an image. Most of the time, it's an image, but we do have these other cases where it can be just a color. Okay, So let's look at the Target logo. So target is this actually, let's look at a different version of it. Let's look at that one. Okay. So the target trademark is the word target in the specific font in this color red, and this circle with a dot in it, right? To kind of emulate a target, target practice. Which by the way, funny story. When I was a kid, I grew up in Michigan and there were not Target stores when I was little and I was really little. And I remember the first time one went up, they were building this big building and they had this big thing that said Target next to it. And I didn't know what it was. And I thought it was like a like a bomb testing site. And then we're going to build this building and then blow it up. So I was always really nervous to go over there because I thought that this building could get hit by a bomb at any point. Anyway. So Target has trademarked this red color. Okay. Target red. Now, does that mean you're not allowed to use red? No. It doesn't mean that at all. Actually you can use read all you want and target can't sue you. What it means is that the mark is protected, but only as it's associated with the trade that to happen together, the trade and the mark. So the mark can be color, smell, a sound, a graphic, image, text. But it has to be associated with the trade. They don't exist independently. So let's go to a new video and talking about the trade. And then everything will kind of make sense. 38. What is a Trade?: Okay, so here I have a list of all of Apple's trademarks. Okay, these are all the trademarks that Apple owns. And there's a lot of them, right? So let's just pick one cocoa. Perfect example. Okay? So Apple has a trademark on the word cocoa. Not a symbol, although they probably have a symbol for it. I can't think of what it is, but they own this trademark. Now they own the mark cocoa. That's great. However, only do they own it when it's attached to the particular trade, which in this case is a software technology. So that means if I started a software company and I called my software cocoa, right? I am in violation of their trademark because it is the same mark and it's the same trade. But if I started a hot chocolate company and I called my hot chocolate cocoa, I am not in violation of their trademark because it's the same mark, but it's a different trade. So there's the trade and the mark. And, and what you get protection on when you get a trademark is the two together. Okay, so let's go back to target red. Here we go. So target owns red, but they don't really own red. They own the use of this particular shade of red when advertising some kind of circular logo for a whatever you want to call them for a grocery store or a I don't know what kind of store Target is. It's a Megastore, right? So let's just call it a grocery store to keep things simple. So let's say I started a grocery store and I made a logo that was some kind of circular shape. And I made it this shade of red. Target might come after me and say, You're violating our trademark because you're using this red circular logo to advertise a grocery store, which we are. So in that case, I could be going against their trademark and I could get in trouble for that. Now let's say I started a grocery store called targets with an S at the end. Tar GET S. And it uses a totally different logo. And it was a different word. Technically, didn't use red, didn't use anything else. Could they come after me? They could if it was a grocery store because it's similar It's two similar probably is what they would argue. And the kind of Barometer that we're looking for here with trademarks is called likelihood of confusion. Let's write that down. Likely hood of confusion. Good at spelling, likelihood of confusion. So the question would be if I have a grocery store that's called Targets, even if it has a different logo. The question that a judge or a jury would be faced with if there was a lawsuit? Is Could someone come to my store thinking that they're going to a Target store, the consumer be confused. And if so, I'm going to lose. If I started a metal band called targets. Okay, with an S? Well, let's simplify that more. If I started a metal band called target, right? Could target sue me for trademark infringement? Well, the answer is if the question is, could they sue me? The answer is always yes. Anybody can sue anybody for anything. But would they when? Probably it would be tough. Probably not because I am using part of their mark, the name, um, but not the logo. And probably not the color red. For my metal band called target. I'm in a totally different trade. I'm not selling groceries, I'm making metal music. So therefore, I'd probably be able to do that. It's a different trade, similar mark. But is someone likely to be confused? Is someone going to go to my show for my metal band called target and thinking that they're actually going to buy groceries, that's very unlikely. So I'm there. I'm probably safe in doing that. Trade and Mark separate things. 39. How to get a Trademark: Okay, If you remember, when we talked about getting a copyright, we talked about copyright is compulsory. You just make stuff and then you have a copyright right. You don't need to submit it to the Library of Congress. The law says, as soon as something is made and it's fixed in some kind of tangible medium, you have a protection to that thing, right? Trademarks, on the other hand, do not work that way. Trademarks are bit more complicated. The short explanation of how to get a trademark as you have to apply for a trademark. And it's not actually very easy to do. It's fairly complicated. If you're going to get a trademark, you should really have a lawyer apply for one for you. You can do it yourself. But it's a pain and I'll walk you. I'll tell you about an experience of mine in just a minute. But if you do want to get one, you would go to this site, USPTO.gov. This is the United States Patent and Trademark Office. And you would say apply for a trademark. And it's going to walk you through how to apply for a trademark. It's there's a lot of documentation you need. There's a lot of steps to it. As you can see, there's 11 steps and each step has seven or eight sub-steps. So it's fairly tricky to do. The things that will get you through this is to show that you've already using the mark. That's kind of the first thing that you need to do is you're going to need to be able to say this is my mark and I'm already using it. That will actually kind of establish the date that your mark was created before your application goes through. So let's say you started using a mark two years ago and now you're going to apply for it. You can actually get protection back two years if you apply for it correctly. Another thing you can do at this website that I'm just gonna kinda point out here really quick, is you can search for trademarks to see if yours is likely to get through. So we can go to I'm still on USPTO, but now I'm at TM search dot USPTO.gov. We can do a basic word search and we can say, let's say Target and submit. Okay? So here's everything that has target in the word, the word target in the mark. Now your C, This is a lot of stuff. There are 2628 of these in the United States. And not all of them are the Target Corporation that we know, right? Hammer targets, target buffer, ETF S, aim bought target, BNY Mellon custom target date builder. There's a lot of different stuff. So not all of these are actually none of these. Interfere with the Target brand. So let's look at one of these fish targets. That sounds fun. Okay, so here's the brand or the mark, fish targets. So this is a categorization number of the trade. Okay, and then this is an explanation of it. Artificial fish caught with a specialized hook for the purpose of teaching kids to fish and facts about fish. Okay. First use. So when it was first used by this company and it's a weird format of a date. That's how they do it. First using commerce. Okay. And there it is. Okay, So it's a standard character mark, that means just text. It's got a serial number when they filed for it. Oh, January 30th, 2020. It's it's very very recent. Who owns it? Wildlife management Limited, Nebraska. The attorney for them That's generally who applied for the trademark for them. Type of park, trademark registered principle and it's live, which means it's active. Okay, so you can look up anything here. Sooner or later. If we go down this list, we will find the Target Corporation. And you know, we're only seeing the first 50 entries here. There's a lot more. I'm curious about this. One I just moused over. I got it at Target. That's interesting because that's probably related to the grocery store, Target or the store, whatever we want to call it. So my guess is that this is probably owned, this is a mark probably owned by the Target Corporation. Let's look. Let's see, short sleeve or a long sleeve t-shirts. It has Smiley face is 0, this is the actual thing. So it's got an at symbol with a Smiley face in it. So this is a design trademark. And it's owned by the IMO Jake brand. Pennsylvania. Interesting. So it's not using the Target logo, it's clearly referencing target, but it's not using Target logo, it's not using the target red. It's ugly. So but someone felt the need to trademark that, you know, a trademark can cost up to a 1000 and possibly up to even do like $5 thousand to get. So someone felt really good about that little design and they wanted to trademark it. But you can dig through here and find trademarks. All you want. 40. Trademark Symbols: One other important thing to point out about trademarks are these little symbols. Okay, so let's go back to the list of Apple trademarks. Okay, I'm going to zoom in here. You'll notice that some of them DVD access have a TM and some of them DVD Studio Pro have an R. Virtually all of these I would expect have either a TM or in R. And most of them, because this is Apple, are probably, are. Here's the difference. If somebody, if something has a TM after it, it means trademark. That means that it's a mark that they're using. And they're telling you by that little symbol that we are claiming this as a trademark. This is our trademark. That's what TM means. It doesn't mean that if you go to the USPTO website, you will find it. It is not a registered, fully legal trademark. It says they may register it later, but they have not yet registered it. But that still counts because using a mark, using a name, using a logo does kind of put a flag in the sand. Is that the phrase put a flag and whatever, you know what I mean? For your mark, it says this is Mn. And the longer you do that, the stronger your mark is when you go to register it. So just using a mark does get you some protection. It's not as good as registering it, but it does get you some protection, just having used it. So this logo is not registered with the USPTO, but they are telling you it is a mark that they will protect. That's what the TM means. This symbol means it is registered. The R means registered. This FireWire symbol, registered means this is a registered trademark. They have not only put a flag in the sand, whatever the phrases, but it is registered with the USPTO and they will protect it at all costs. So registered means its width. Uspto has it on file. Tm means they don't, at least not yet, but it is still something that they are considering protected because they are using it. Side-note, if you're a tech nerd and you want to keep up with what Apple is working on. This is one way that people find rumors of stuff that they're working on. So you can search the USPTO for any new trademarks that they apply for. So you might see hyper talk come up and you're like, whew. That's interesting. What's hypertonic? And then you can find it. You wouldn't see hypertonic, however, because that's a trademark, That's a TM, not a registered. So you can say I add workbench. You can find that in the USPTO and figure out what it is. And that might tell you about some interesting new feature that Apple is working on. Perhaps. That's why people find out about Apple rumors is when they find new trademarks filed, one way that they find things. Okay? So remember those symbols, That's important. Our means it's registered, TM means it's not or at least not yet. Okay, let's move on to a new section and let's talk about how trademarks applied to things like band names and your name. 41. Uniqueness: Okay, Let's talk about trademark in terms of performing group names, otherwise known as band names. So you're in a band and should you trademark your name? Yes, you should. You should do it as soon as you can. Keeping in mind that getting a trademark is not entirely cheap. So that might mean that you can't do it right away. And that's okay. You are still making certain protections by just using the band name. So it's good. I would be sure and keep any old flyers or anything like that that shows as far back as you possibly can the first time that you used that name because that'll be important. That's when your flag in the sand went down, right? That's when you said this is our name, the first time you publicly used it. So any flyers you have that show your name and especially if it's with a logo, then that'll be good to have because you're going to submit those with your application, even if it's a super scribbled out punk rock flyer, that's okay. You can submit that as evidence that you were using that name. The USPTO doesn't care. They just want to see that it was used. So what I would do if you haven't chosen a band name yet or even if you have and you're using a band name, it wouldn't be smart to look on the USPTO database and see how hard it's going to be to trademark your name. You can go here and put in the name of your band. Let's say my name of my band is the need to create a band name really fast. The keyboard typers. Okay, that's the name of my band. Let's say the exact search phrase. The keyboard typers. Nothing came up. That's good. That means it's going to be fairly easy to trademark this name. And that's what you want to see. If you don't see that which you probably won't. Let's do something like The Beatles. Okay? Here are things that have come up as exact matches. And these are things that could get in my way if I wanted to start something called the Beatles. Keeping it relatively simple. Looking at this list, what do we have to worry about? There's actually only one on this list that we need to worry about. Because you can see all of these are dead. This is the only one that really matters to us. So let's look at it. Is this a band name? Motorized land vehicles? Nope. So we're probably safe in terms of this this list of things. Now, like I said, don't call your band The Beatles. That'll be bad. Let's try spelling it right, and see what we come up with. Okay, The Beatles.com. These are all dead. Let's see live. The Beatles. Gramophone records featuring music. Okay, So yes, there you go. That's the beetles. So, yeah, we can't call our band the Beatles because here is a band called The Beatles. So I encourage you to search this website. And that'll give you a clue of how hard it's going to be to get the trademark when you apply for it. You do want to make your band name as unique as possible. You can. If there is another band using the exact same name, then it kinda comes down to who was using it first and can prove it. And the second thing would be who gets the trademark first? But the first one of those can negate the second one. So if there's two bands that have the exact same name, and let's say this band was using the name first, but this band gets the trademark first. And they both go to court. This band, as long as they can prove they were using it first, might probably, when getting the formal trademark definitely helps, but if you can show that you are using it first, you can get that trademark kind of taken away and get granted the trademark. So using it first matters a lot and proof that you were using it first. So keep those old fliers no matter how trashy they are for your man. And that will help. 42. Filing: Okay, what are you going to need when you go to file as a band or really as anything. When you go to file you're going to need them mark, Okay. So that's going to include any variations of the mark. So the text, any logos that you have. And then you're going to need to know the category. So you can look up these kind of IC categories. They each have like unique numbers. Let's try looking him up quick. Here's a very kind of ugly list of the classes. Note that when you apply for a trademark, you're going to pay more for more classes. You can't apply for a single trademark that is in multiple classes. Let's say here class 15 musical instruments. Cool. So let's say you wanted to apply as a musical instrument and also as a medical apparatus. You've made this unique company that does both medical apparatus and musical instrument making, whatever. So you're going to apply a class 15 and 10. You're gonna pay a lot more. Your bills are going to be a lot higher because you're applying or two classes at once. You can apply for I believe you can apply for as many classes as you want at the same time. But it goes up both in terms of the application fee to USPTO and what you're going to pay a lawyer to set that up for you. So generally speaking, it's better just to find the thing that fits the best. So like class 41, education and entertainment, that's pretty broad. So that's probably what the Slam Academy trademark is in if we went back and looked at it. So have this figured out what class you want to apply for. And if you want to go for multiple classes, you can do that, but just know that it's going to cost you more money and that's really kind of all you need in order to apply. Other than I can't stress this enough a lawyer to figure it out for you. Don't try to do this on your own. Get a lawyer. 43. What About My Own Name?: Okay, so let's say that you don't have a band, but you are a performing artist. And the, the mark that you use to perform under is your own actual name. So let's say you are. I don't know. Tina Turner. Okay. Should you get a trademark on the on your name, your actual legal name? Do you need a trademark on your actual legal name? The answer is, it probably wouldn't hurt if you're going to use it as a mark to identify your brand, you can get a trademark on your name to protect it in the certain trade, right? The class. You don't need to, because your name is probably protected under something called the right of publicity. I've mentioned right of publicity, but earlier in this class already. And it's something that we're going to talk about shortly. It's coming up soon. So right of publicity should protect you and your name a good bit. But getting a trademark for just your name, if that is your brand, wouldn't hurt a lot of performers do it. A lot of artists do it. Definitely if you're using an alias, if you're using a name that is not your legal name, but still sounds like it could be your normal name, then definitely you should get a trademark on it. But if it's your legal actual name, you don't need to because of right of publicity, but you probably I don't know if I'd say should, it wouldn't hurt. Most celebrities. Like Tina Turner probably has a trademark on Tina Turner so that she can protect things like people buying Tina Turner.com. And if somebody does that, she can probably get that website shut down. If it's not her that owns it because she has the trademark. I'm just assuming she has a trademark. Trademark. So you don't have to get it, but it's generally probably a good idea if that is your brand. 44. Does Fair Use Still Apply?: Okay, What about fair use and trademarks? We know about fair use in copyright, but it's fair you're still apply to trademarks? The answer is more or less yes. There are a lot of cases where we need to use, we need to take advantage of fair use in order to use trademarks. For example, I just showed you the Target logo right into video. But that could be in a case of a class. So I'm using it in my class. I'm using it for something. I'm using it for me to illustrate a point. The point being, I'm using it, I'm using the Target logo. This is educational and blah, blah, blah. That's pretty straight up. Okay. You can find a lot of cases where we take advantage of fair use with trademarks, possibly even more so than copyrights. There's a lot of times where we just have to put the logo or the mark of a company, someone's trademarked thing into something, right? And if you stick to the rules of fair use, you can do it. Education, news reporting. Obviously, if you're reporting a story on McDonald's, you're going to show them McDonald's logo. If you show a McDonald's building, you're going to see the logo. So it's going to be in the news report, so you're using it a lot of the time. Frankly, businesses like it. They want their mark to be out into the world. With my company Slam Academy. If somebody took our logo and put it on the side of a building, which violates my trademark. I'm not going to complain. It's going to be great for me. Unless It's, you know, the side of a building for something really terrible. I don't know what that would be, but more or less, I'm going to be pretty okay with that. But basically, we need to rely on the protections of fair use to use a mark. 45. Example of Fair Use and Trademarks: Okay, Here's an example. We have a band called, Let's come up with a name of a band, the sticky pickles. Okay, So we have a band called sticky pickles. I am, Let's play with reality here. I have this company called Slam Academy, and I'm going to host a contest that says submit a track that's better than the sticky pickles. Okay. All right. And let's say I have no affiliation with sticky pickles. I'm just saying submitted track, that's better than them. Can I do that? If I save it or name, I'm using their mark. If I use their logo in the ad, that's even more that I'm taking advantage of. I think that would be okay Actually. Because because partially my company's Slam Academy as an educational institution could lean on that. I could also make a claim that I needed to use the mark in order to convey my message. That's a little bit of a stickier one and that's not really fair use. That's kind of something different. The key to doing something like that though, would be to be very, very careful about the way it's worded to not imply that there's any kind of sponsorship or relationship with the sticky pickles. If I did, then I could really get in trouble. But if I'm just saying their name, that's generally okay. Under fair use for trademarks. 46. Trademark and Titles of Works (Song Titles): Okay, What about titles of works? So I wrote a song called the sticky pickle Symphony. And I want to register that a trademark for the title of that song. Okay. Would create Mark work for that? No, actually, trademark doesn't protect titles. Titles are seen as a descriptor of a thing. Okay? So the title is the description of the thing. The thing itself can be protected. And in that case, that thing is protected with copyright. Now with a trademark because it's the song itself. So you can't trademark a title, nor really is the title copywritten. You'll find that if you look up a list of all songs ever written, there's probably a few thousand songs called yesterday or whatever. You know. There's a lot of songs that have the same title, and that's perfectly okay. It can be problematic for you if you are really into search results in making sure you come up. But it's allowed. It's okay because the title is a descriptor. Can't be copywritten and it can't be trademarked. 47. What is Right of Publicity: Okay, up next, let's talk finally about right of publicity. This is one that most people don't know about. And it's a right that you have, that everyone has. And it's similar to copyright. It's, you could kind of think of it as a form of copyright. It's a copyright of you. And your personality. And things that identify you, like your face and your voice, your sound, perhaps even your clothes. I guess. Technically what it is is it's your right to control the exploitation of your identity. It is the right to control exploitation of your eye identity. So what does that actually mean? Let's use someone's face as an example because that's probably the easiest thing. Let's say you random a student on the Internet, you who wanted to make a t-shirt of my face and it said, I'm a dork on it, whatever. Do I have the ability to stop you from doing that? Well, let's think about it. My face is not copywritten. I never copy wrote my face. It is not really a copyrightable thing. Pictures of me, our copy written by the person who took the picture. So if you use someone else's picture, they could stop you a picture that someone else took. But let's assume you took the picture yourself. So you own the copyright to the picture. And you're going to put it on a t-shirt that says I'm a dork. So I can't stop you for any copyright reason. What about trademark? I can't really stop you for any trademark reason either. Maybe if you put my name on it and I have trademarked by name, I could stop you for a trademark reason. But that's kind of it. Right? But the real answer is yes. I can't stop you because of this right of publicity. Okay, so you're going to use my identity and that's something that I own. Okay? It's something that is kind of common sense. But, you know, we need all kinds of fancy things to justify a common sense thing sometimes. So I can stop you and say that's my identity. You are using it to make money. That's a commercial exploitation of my identity. You are putting it on a shirt and then you're selling that shirt. I can stop you. Now. Could I stop you if you weren't selling it, if you were just giving them away? I still think so because you're still exploiting my identity. Okay? So I can stop you from making a shirt. Now let's take that up into a more real-world type of example. Let's say you want to make t-shirts of your favorite band. You want to go on tour, following around Taylor Swift. And you're gonna make Taylor Taylor Swift t-shirts and sell them in the parking lot. Can you do that? If you're really crafty about it? Maybe you can, but probably not. Not just anybody can make a Taylor Swift t-shirt if you use her name, that's trademarked problem. If you use cover art from any of her albums, that's a, the arts would be a copyright problem. If you use titles of songs, that can be okay. However, if those titles show up in the lyrics, then you've got a copyright problem. Can't use lyrics, can't, but can you use just the picture of her face? What if you drew a picture of her face and put it on t-shirts, this stops you from that. So you can't knew that. Now what if you made a t-shirt and wanted to sell it and get around all of these things. Copyright, trademark, and right of publicity. Maybe could do it, but you would have to avoid all of those things. You couldn't use her face, any lyrics, titles if they ever show up in lyrics, her name, logos, anything like that. So you can maybe make a TCR that just says like the bass player's name is Dave. I guess that's not very interesting. T-shirt, I buy that shirt. I think that's pretty great shirt. I'm going to make a shirt that just says the bass player's name is Dave, and I'm going to wear it to every concert I go to, regardless of the bass players actual name. Anyway, I'm off on a tangent. So right of publicity as the right to exploit your identity. Now, we've been using this idea of the face as an example so far. But identity goes much deeper than the face. Let's talk about a few different examples of where this has been used. In real examples, not weird ones. Like the bass player's name is Dave. Where this has actually been used. 48. Tom Waits Example: Okay, I want to go through three quick cases where right of publicity you played an important role. First, let's talk about Tom Waits. Now if you're familiar with the music of Tom Waits, She's a singer songwriter who wrote music. He wrote, I guess I'd call them folk songs. Kind of in the, the Dylan, bob Dylan kind of vein. Great songwriter, a great musician, great artist, is very distinctive voice. He kind of sounds like someone who has been and smoking and drinking whiskey sense birth. Basically. It's his signature sound. It's very gravelly, very raspy, very free with rhythms kind of all over the place. So let me play you just a little bit of his voice just to get it in your head. Okay. So you can kind of hear that kind of gradually sound that he has. Now, what happened in this case was that the Frito Lay company that makes potato chips. And they came to him and said, we want to use one of your songs in our commercial. So they wanted to take an already existing song of Tom Waits and put it into their commercial. And he is not a, not a very kind of corporate person. So he refused. He said thanks but no thanks. Not interested. So they're Frito Lay people said, Okay, thanks. And then he went back to their drawing room. And what they decided to do instead was come up with a new song and have it sung by someone in a way that sounded like Tom Waits. Okay, so it's not a Tom Waits song. It's not lyrics and never says his name, never says anything about Tom Waits. But it's using that kind of raspy sound that he's known for. That's his trademark. So here is the actual commercial. It's Buffalo. Okay, That's the audio from the commercial, not the actual video from the commercial. So Tom Waits sued. He sued and said, You are using my identity. The thing that I'm known for, my voice to sell potato chips, and I'm not okay with that. Essentially what he's saying is you are tricking your customers into thinking that I'm supporting this by using my voice. When I'm not. So he sued and he won. The court said, you have that, that is definitely your sound. Now, here's the question. Tom Waits was, Tom Waits as people were definitely on to this because they went to him and ask them for permission if they wouldn't have gone to him and asked for permission if they just would have done it. And then had the sound that was similar to Tom Waits, but couldn't be connected to him in any way. Would they have been sued? Maybe, maybe not. Would Tom Waits have even noticed it? Maybe not, but because they went to him burst, they were onto it right. And they were looking out for it. And they found that it was definitely too Tom Waits ish, so sued and they lost. 49. Bette Midler Example: Okay, Here's another example also involving the voice that medullary, very famous singer, one of her on her first album, I believe it was her very first album. So this is quite old song. She recorded a version of a song called do you want to dance now she did not write this sun, it's not her song. So it's a cover. That means she got the permission and the license is to record a cover version of the sun. We'll talk all about how licensing works to make covers and all that stuff in the section on publishing. But she got all the permission she needed to record the sub. And she recorded a very distinctive version of the song. It was slower than it had ever been done. It was very sultry, which it hadn't really been done as before. And it sounded like this. Okay. Keep that in mind. So she would she was approached by the Ford Motor Company who I don't really have a thing against forward. I'm from Michigan, I should like forward, but for some reason they keep coming up in my examples. She was approached by the Ford Motor Company who had a new car coming out. And they wanted to use that song and that recording in the commercial for the new car. Middle refused, which is her right to do. She said she didn't want that used in a car commercial. And so what Ford did is they made the arrangements to get a cover version of the same song done. Remember Miller doesn't own the song, someone else owns the sun. So if the song is here and better peddlers here, she went to this person to record the song. That's fine. That means Ford Motor Company can also go to that person and record the song, right? There's nothing stopping that from happening. That's totally legal. But what Ford did is they got a license to record the song. And then they had a singer essentially record it in the same way that Miller did, right? They did that same sound, that same feel, that same kind of airy voice that she used in this that recording that we just heard. Two, basically rerecord the medullary burden of the song. So let's hear that one. Curie is bringing a sophisticated, Okay, so clearly that's just using the bet Miller version, right? It sounds almost identical. But there's no copyright issue here. There's not a copyright problem because they didn't use, but Miller's recording. They didn't use her name, they didn't use anything. They use the same song she recorded, but she didn't write it. She had a license to do it, and they got a license to do it. They got a different singer. No copyright issue, no trademark issue. But there is a right of publicity issue because they made a version that sounded so similar to bet Fiddler that Ben Adler was able to sue in what? 50. Frank Zappa Example: Okay, third example on this. For example. This is one that does not involve voice. It actually involves a mustache. So this one, I can't actually find all the details on it right now. So I can't link to the actual case, but as I remember it, what's happening, what happened was The Frank Zappa estate, for example, a passed away in the early nineties, lady, early nineties. And so his image, his copyrights, trademarks, and his right of publicity is handled by the estate of, for example, the offerings apple trust or something like that. And they are quite litigious. And if you want to look that up, it's, there's there's a lot going on there. We'll talk more about them in future classes. So one thing that happened was there was a festival in Europe, if I remember right, that was putting on the music of Frank Zappa. It was a festival dedicated to the music of Frank Zappa. Now that in and of itself doesn't really pose any problems, as long as all the licensing issues were there and everything was was done correctly, that's all fun. But what they were sued over was their logo and perhaps some t-shirts, if I remember right. So their logo, which I can't find it the moment, but their logo looks something like this. Okay. It used the kind of famous Frank Zappa mustache and goatee combo. And if you don't know what Frank Zappa looks like, he looks like this. Looked like this. Okay, he had this very distinctive mustache and goatee thing, mustache sole patch kinda thing. So using this as a symbol for Frank Zappa kind of makes sense, right? Like this is kind of like a lot of people would look at this. And if you're a fan of Frank Zappa, a fan enough to go to entire festival devoted to his music. This image alone says to you, for example. So people know this. People know, people who are fans of Zappa know this. It's not a picture of Frank Zappa. It's not anyone's copywritten material. Um, and I think the idea was that just having this as the logo would be enough to get them around right of right of publicity. But it didn't. The family estate said this was too similar to him. This was a symbol of Frank Zappa. His mustache is part of his identity. And they were exploiting that for their own use. I believe they sued. I believe if I remember right, they actually lost. The court decided that that was not strong enough. But it was still a legitimate lawsuit to go after because of that symbol being so connected to Frank Zappa. So it's a good example of right, of publicity. Regardless. 51. Protections: Okay, so let's get down and do a little bit of details on this. So the right of publicity protects the exploitation of your identity. We've talked about that. But specifically, likeness, your name, your biography, by graphy, your voice, your mustache. So it protects your likeness, right? Images of you, things like that, Your name. It can protect your name. That's why earlier when we were talking about do you need to trademark your name? We were saying if it's your actual legal name, probably not. You don't have to because right of publicity covers it. But it doesn't hurt. Your biography. You could be telling some part of your history, could be an important story to you that identifies you and someone else could use that. And you could, that could be a breach of right of publicity, a violation of your rights of publicity. The voice we saw examples of that. That kinda goes in with someone's likeness. All of this really kind of can be connected to this term likeness. But someone's voice, someone's mustache, it's part of their likeness. So another example that's not a concrete example, but just kind of an anecdotal example is there were a whole bunch of lawsuits here in Minnesota after Prince dot because prints, it's from here. He's kind of our hometown person. After Prince died, there was one of the sports teams here wanted to change their logo, not to have anything to do with prints per se, but to be purple. And purple was like princes thing, like everything was purple. So there was a lawsuit that was filed to stop this sports team from changing their logo to purple because that was seen as a direct connection to the death of prints and exploiting prints, his brand and his identity and his likeness. So I don't remember whatever happened with that lawsuit. There was a whole bunch of stuff involving right of publicity after Prince died, including an act that went before the house to formally protect prince and his assets. We'll talk more about that in the future. But you cannot make a shirt that has prints on it, at least not in Minnesota and some states within the US, you could. And it has to do with whether or not the right of publicity is inheritable. Does it go down to the family? In Minnesota? It's been decided that yes, it does. But in some states, it doesn't. So let's not go too far down that rabbit hole. You can look that up. And actually we'll talk about that later in this class. If we get to it, I don't know there's a section of this class that I usually do that's called what happens to your intellectual property after you die? It's all dark and morbid. We might not get to it this semester because there's enough dark and morbid stuff happening, but mostly we'll see if we get there. Okay. That's enough on writer publicity for now, but that'll come up again. As we learn more about copyrights. 52. Your Contractual Rights: Okay, In this next section, we're going to talk about contractual rights. These are rights that you have. And really what we're talking about in this section, we're gonna talk about terms that come up when negotiating a copyright contract. Things that you might find it a contract that have like that are a little hard to understand. So we're going to spend a little bit of time kinda picking some of those things apart. Specifically, exclusivity, right of refusal, and moral rights. Now there are a lot other things. There's a lot more than that in a copyright contract. But I just wanted to spend some time pointing out these key things that are really important to understanding. The contractual rights that you have as an owner of a copyright. 53. Selling a Beat: Okay, Let's start with talking about exclusivity. So we've talked about exclusivity a little bit earlier. The thing that there's kind of two important things to remember about exclusivity. The first is, it goes both ways. We'll come back and explain that in just a second. Second is more inclusive equals more valuable. Okay, So what that means? Well, let's talk a little bit about both of these first, so it goes both ways. Let's say you an example of we're going to, well, you know, a really good example of exclusivity is selling beats. A lot of people ask me questions about this, about selling and beat. So we can, when it comes to exclusivity, there are two different sides of the coin. There's exclusive or non-exclusive, right? So if we wanted to sell a beat, we can do it in two ways. We can sell it as exclusive, or we can sell it as non-exclusive. So if we were to sell it as exclusive, what that means is that we're going to sell the beat to a person and no one else. So I'm gonna make this be, and I'm going to tell the world the speed is for sale. So people are going to come to me and say, I want to buy that beat. And I'm going to say, do you want an exclusive license to this meat? Or do you want a non-exclusive license to the beat? Keeping in mind that I'm using the word license, right? I'm not selling the copyright. I'm selling them a license to it. So if I sell it as exclusive, that means I will sell it to that person who wants it, and then it's off the market, nobody else can buy it. Okay? That person will have the exclusive right to use that beat for as long as I grant in the license agreement. Okay. So I can specify the amount of time. So I said would be to the person and it's totally exclusive. Or I can sell it. Sell the beat to a to a person and anyone else who wants it. Okay, So if I sell it as non-exclusive, that means I'm going to sell it to that person that wants it. But it's still on the market. And I'm going to sell it to a whole bunch of people right? Now let's say I'm selling this beat to like a wrapper. Write. That wrapper, probably wants it as Exclusive, right? They don't want everybody wrapping over the same tune, right? They want that to be their track that there are wrapping on. So they're going to want to buy it as exclusive. And your, well, you might want to sell it as exclusive and you might want to sell it as non-exclusive. So it goes both ways. That means that if you sell this as exclusive, that person has the exclusive right to use it and you have to treat it as exclusive means you can't sell it anymore, right? So if it's exclusive to the person buying it, it's gotta be exclusive to the person selling it. And then second thing, more exclusive, more valuable. Depending on your notoriety and experience level selling beats, you might sell an exclusive license to a beat 4, $5 thousand. You might sell the Non-exclusive right to the beat for $50, right? So the exclusive one is going to be a lot more expensive because you're going to take it off the market. You know, imagine someone's selling something and saying I'm going to sell this thing to you and then I'm never going to sell it again. It's done. No business would do that. The only time in business would do that is if they're going to make a lot of money by doing that. So whenever we have an exclusive provision, it's going to be worth a lot more, okay? In this way, the reason this is so much cheaper is because I can make this $50 from this beat all day long, right? I can sell it to everybody that comes up to me and I can be like 50 bucks, 50 bucks, 50 bucks. But so in the end I might make more than $5 thousand. If I can sell it, you know, a 100 times, I'm going to make $500.5 thousand dollars. If I can sell it more than that, I'm going to make more money. So it might be smarter for me to do it as non-exclusive, right? It all depends on how you want to do it, but that's what those two terms mean, right? This means I'm going to sell at once and then never yourselves, anyone ever again, even though I'm still going to own the copyright, that's an important distinction. If it's non-exclusive, I'm going to sell it to you, but I'm gonna sell to everyone else that wants it as well. We'll look at more examples of that in just a minute. So when it comes to exclusivity, those are our two biggest things to remember. Okay, So let's talk about other exclusive provisions, like territory. 54. Territory: Okay. When you're negotiating or looking at a contract having to do with copyright, territory might be something that comes up and territory can be exclusive or non-exclusive. So generally, when we talk about territory, we're talking about continent. So North America, South America, Asia, Europe, Antarctica, whatever. So how does exclusive apply here? I could say I, let's say I. Well, let's go back to that selling and beat example. Okay, So I could sell a beat as exclusive to somebody in North America. Okay. What would that look like? Let's say I sold a beat as exclusive in North America. That means that I'm going to sell it to somebody. And the rappers going to come to me and say, I want to buy that be, I want that an exclusive deal on that. I might say, Okay, how about this? I'll give you that beat. In an exclusive deal. You're gonna pay me $5 thousand. But it's only going to be exclusive in North America. That means it's non-exclusive and every other content. Okay, I can still go to Asia and sell that be okay. Or I could and it's probably more likely is I could sell it to this person as an exclusive deal in North America, and then I could sell it to another person, single person as exclusive to Asia. I can sell it to another person as exclusive to Europe. I could find that one rapper in Antarctica and sell it to them as well. Australia. What am I forgetting? Whatever you get the point. So you can divvy up the exclusivity by territory, and you can divvy up the exclusivity by smaller territory, that continent. It's just harder to police, right? I'm even a continent is hard to police when you get into internet stuff, right? If someone's publicising their track on the Internet, you can't say only publicize it to North American audiences. But there are ways to do that, but it's increasingly difficult because people are going to share it and it's going to go all over the place. So holding it to a certain continent is already difficult. Saying something like holding it to a certain state. Like saying you can only use this in his only exclusive to you in Minnesota is just crazy difficult, right? And it generally works and things like television still, because television is very continent specific. And you can specify what gets played in certain continents and even certain countries. Which by the way, if you've ever been traveling outside of the country and tried to load up Netflix and it didn't work. This is why, right? Because there's some content that Netflix has a right to play, but they have an exclusive license to use that content only in a certain territory. It was a long time where you could watch Star Wars on Netflix only in Europe, and you can do in the US. And now it's different because if Disney Plus, but for a long time that was true. If you were in Europe and loaded up Netflix, you can watch Star Wars. But if you were here in the US, you couldn't, because Netflix didn't have a license to provide to play basically Star Wars in North America or possibly in the United States by itself. Question would be, could you have gotten it in Canada? I don't know the answer to that, but it could have been specific to country because it is easy to know what territory, what country a computer is in when it accesses certain websites. So That's easy to know. So certain content can be blocked based on that. So that's all territory stuff. Okay, so continent is the most common country is another way to do it. That works in some cases, even any smaller than that is just really, really hard to police. 55. Product Or Service: Okay, let's talk about product or service. That's another type of thing that can be exclusive or non-exclusive and can be all bundled together. So this would be, an example of this would be, I will give someone an exclusive use of my copyright in for such a product category, but not outside of that category. For example, let's say that I have a track and it's a hit track, everyone loves it. And Apple computer comes to me and says, We want to use this in a commercial, an apple and a commercial for the new iPad, whatever. So I could sign an agreement with them that says you have the exclusive right to use this song in computer commercials. Commercials for computers. That means I could still license that song to other people that are making commercials. It's still license it. As long as they're not making commercials for computers, right? Because Apple doesn't want me to license that song to somebody in to name another computer company, HP or whatever. So because they don't want to end up putting out a commercial the same time that uses the same side. They're both going to look stupid. So they're not gonna let that happen. So they're going to, in this case, insist that they have exclusive right to use that song in a particular product category. Okay. Another example would be, well, let's go back to Ford even because I'm picking on them a lot. For some reason. Ford Motor Company puts out a new car and they want to use my song in their commercial for it. I licensed them the use of the song in context of commercials for cars, right? Could be even broader than that. Could be. Cars and trucks. Could be even broader than that. It could be all vehicles. So if a bike company comes to me and says We want to use that song, I'd probably have to say no because I have an exclusive agreement for all vehicles with Ford. So a byte company can use it. But if a company that sells carrots, if a carrot farm, such a thing exists for carat farm called me and said, we want to use that song. That and we know you used it in the foreign commercial, but we want to use it to. Then I can say, actually that's okay. I can let you do that and we can negotiate because my deal with Ford is only for vehicles. You make carrots. I don't have any deal with carrot people. So the carrot people could say, Okay, we want this song, but we want an exclusive to food. Okay? So you cannot license assigned to any other food products. And I'd say, Okay, well, it's going to be a little more expensive, right? Because the more exclusive, the more valuable. So that's how exclusivity works in terms of a product or service. We can get exclusive deals based on kind of big bubbles of products. 56. Duration: Okay, last thing on this topic is duration. So we can't have an exclusive deal in terms of duration. So that means they have whoever I'm licensing too, has an agreement to be the exclusive person for a set amount of time. Okay? So if we go back up to our beat example, we could say here, I'm going to sell it to this wrapper as an exclusive deal. So I can't sell it to anyone else for two years. Okay? So that means nobody else is going to be able to buy this beat for me. No one else is going to be able to use it except for this one wrapper for two years. After two years, I can sell it to anyone I want. That's not a great idea for that wrapper to do, right? Because if they invest a ton of money and promoting that track and a bunch of time in making that track. They don't want, you know, a a timeline that limits them to what they can do with it. So that's not a great use. That here is a good example that happen not all that long ago. I'm spokespeople often have duration exclusivity built into their contract. So a good example is the verizon. Can you hear me now person? Okay. So back, I don't know. A long time ago, probably the nineties or so. For Ryzen had this series of commercials for their cell phones. Where this guy would walk around with a cell phone and say, Can you hear me now? And I need say yep, you can. Good. And then he go somewhere out in the middle of the desert. You can say Can you hear me now? And then he'd go out somewhere farther and said, Can you hear me now? To prove that their phones worked everywhere. And that was the pitch, right? So eventually they stopped running that ad. They moved on to other things. And just recently, another cell phone company hired that same actor to kinda revive that role. But say, yeah, I was wrong back then. Now I'm with this company whose singular. I can't remember. So the same actor is basically doing the same character but for a competing company. Okay? So there was a long amount of time in between when that was possible. So my guess is that that actor had an exclusivity agreement within a certain product or service for a specific duration. Okay. So his contract with verizon probably said you cannot, as an actor, endorse any other work for any other phone company for 20 years. Okay, So that actor could not get another job with another company. Advertizing phones. You could not be in another phone commercial for any company other than Verizon for some set duration. So it was an exclusive duration. Now, unlike these other ones, the duration can actually make the exclusivity cheaper, right? It doesn't necessarily make it more expensive in a way. Because what can happen is you can say, you can pile all of these up. So you can say, I'm going to sell something as exclusive in a territory. So let's say it's exclusive to North America. Exclusive. So that makes it expensive. It's exclusive. It makes it more expensive that it's exclusive in a territory, makes it more expensive that it's exclusive in a product. But then we're going to say, but only for two years, right? That actually limits it. So now I can, it becomes non-exclusive everywhere I get completely out of this contract after two years. So that makes it a little more affordable, right? Like imagine Verizon went to that actor and said, We want to hire you to do this, but we're going to make you sign a contract that says you can never, ever, ever do another commercial for a phone company. That actor would have been like, no, I'm not gonna do that. That's that's like that could potentially kill my career. I don't know. No actor knows where their career is going to go. So they but that actor may have agreed to it. If they said We're going to give you $10 million to do that so you don't have to worry about your career anymore, then maybe you would've agreed to it. But that isn't what happened. He had some kind of duration on it that eventually he was expired and he was able to work for another phone company. So that's how it works. So duration. And I will also point out what I just kind of quickly went over, which is that these kinds of deals that we're talking about when we're, it isn't that it can have one of these most, That's not true. These all can be used together. So it can be exclusive to a territory and a product and for a set amount of time, right? And there are other exclusivity things that could be in a license deal depending on the thing that you're licensing. I don't know. I can't think of anything else right now, but there are unique situations all over the place. So an important factor that goes into licensing deals. 57. Right of First Refusal: Okay. Right of refusal. Here's what that means. This is actually more properly called a right of first refusal or right of first negotiation. Because that first is what's important here. So what this means is, in order to explain this, let's go back to our selling and beat narrative. Let's say that we did sell a beats to a rapper as an exclusive deal. And let's say there was a duration attached to it. Now I know I said that was not a good idea, but let's just roll with it. So let's say we make a deal with a rapper that's exclusive for two years. So what happens after two years? The smart thing to do if this deal was to happen that you have sold or you have licensed something in an exclusive way for a certain amount of time, you should have in there also that then the wrapper or whoever licensed the work has right, of first negotiation. So what that would mean is that after two years, then that rapper has the ability to buy it again. It doesn't mean that they're going to buy it with the same requirements. It means it's a whole new deal. But it means that you, as the content owner, are gonna go to that wrapper first and say your deal is up. Let's talk about a new deal. And if that rapper says, No thanks, I don't want it, the truck wasn't successful. I'm done with that. Then you can say, okay, cool. And then you can go onto other people. But if you give them right of first refusal or writer first negotiation, same thing. Then you have to go to them first and give them the opportunity to refuse. That's what right of first refusal means. So you have to go to that wrapper and say your things up. Do you want to continue it? Let's talk. And if they say yes, I do want to continue it, then you negotiate again. And if you can't get something worked out, then that's basically considered a refusal. And then you can open it up to the rest of the world, but you have to give them the opportunity. Another really good example of right of refusal is, let's say you have an apartment, and this is not artistic example. This is just a easy one. You haven't apartment. And you have a tiny, tiny little apartment in an apartment building. Department right next to yours, is currently occupied by somebody. But it's beautiful and it's big and it's beautiful, Okay, and it costs twice as much as yours. So what you could do if you are savvy, as you could go to your landlord and say, can I have right of refusal on that apartment right next to mine. And if they agree to it, then hopefully put it in some kind of contract for you, put it into your lease, then you will have read of refusal. And what that means. It doesn't mean you get that apartment. It doesn't mean that apartment is cheaper or it doesn't mean anything like that. All it means is that when that apartment becomes available okay. When that person that's in it now moves out. And now the apartment building is going to start advertising it as available. Before they start advertising it. They have to go to you first because you have right of first refusal. So they're gonna go to you first and they're gonna say, okay, that's available. Do you want it? If you want it, you're going to have to pay the going rate for rent, which is twice what yours is, and you're going to have to get out of your current lease. It doesn't get you any benefit, but it does give you the ability to hear their offer and accept it or refuse it before anyone else does. Okay. So if you want to get that apartment get right of refusal, then when it becomes available, they'll come to you and say, Do you want this apartment? And you can say yes. And then it's your apartment is great. So that's what right of refusal is. It's relatively simple, but it is something that happens in contracts a lot we'll hear more about this once we get into how record labels work. Possibly distribution deals, but especially record labels because there's a lot of right of refusal in record labels. For example, let me just give you one now. There's commonly a case where you might sign a deal with a record label that says the record label will release an album by you and they get right of refusal on your next album. That means they're gonna put out your first album. And then for your second album, they want to hear it first. And after they hear it, they will either offer you a deal for your second album or they will pass. But you can't take it to another record label until they pass. That's basically how it works with record labels. So we'll hear more about that when we get into how record labels work. 58. Moral Rights: Okay, last up in this category is moral rights. Now, moral rights are not probably what you think they are. You might think that they have to do with somebody doing an immoral thing and then getting out of a contract because of that. That is a thing. Those aren't called moral rights necessarily. And we'll hear about those more probably in the band partnership section, maybe even the record labels section, because record labels can have clauses built-in that says like if you do something really terrible, they can they can terminate the contract. That's different than what we're talking about. Moral rights here refer to the work in question and whether or not the creator has any moral right to protect the integrity of the work. So they really kinda keyword here is integrity. So let's say I was going to license a song to be used by Ford Motor Company. Gosh, I really knew him better as going to read us on to be used by Ford, Ford Motor Company. And they end up putting out this commercial that uses my son. But it also has some really troubling imagery in it. And it's, and I really don't like it, Do I have the right to pull my song out of that commercial? And the answer to that is, I don't know, Is it in your contract? So if you are the creator of a copyright and you are licensing it, yes, you want that in your contract, you want to have some kind of moral right to be able to say that your work will not, will maintain its integrity. And usually how that's applied is, if you see it and say This is against my moral beliefs, than then the contract can be negated or more likely altered. And so that is a really sticky one because it's really so wishy washy. And what makes it even more wishy-washy is that moral rights are, as far as I understand it, not really. They don't have to be upheld for music in the United States. Most of the time. I believe that that's true. It's a little Washington me. They do need to be upheld for, for visual rights. For whatever reason. A work of art has more moral rights attached to it then a work of music. But if you can negotiate something into this licensing contract, then it should hold up because it's in the contract. So with moral rights, remember, it's about the integrity of the work. That's the most important thing here. 59. What is CopyLeft?: Okay, let's move on to the kinda last big thing I want to talk about in this section, and that is copyleft. Now, there's a lot of different names for this. Earlier I think I called it creative commons. Copyleft is a name. There's other things that people have called it and none of them have become any official name because this is not really a part of copyright law necessarily. It's kind of more of an agreement, but it does become a very tangible agreement. More on that in a minute. So what this is, is earlier I mentioned the three buckets, right? There's copyright. And then over here, there's public domain. And there's this weird thing in the middle, right? That's kind of a little bit of both. And that's what we're talking about here with copyleft. It's the middle thing and it's the thing in the middle. It's the thing that lets you say, I created this thing, it's mine and it is protected under copyright. However, I want to allow certain uses of it, okay? The best example of this that's most relevant to us is sampling. You could make a trach, make a piece of music and say, this is my truck. I'm protecting it. I'm going to sell it. I'm going to maybe try to get some licensing deals with a commercial or something. But I am also going to allow people to sample from my track. And you can totally do that. And you would do it using this system, copyleft, Creative Commons, et cetera. Now Creative Commons is the name of the organization that has created the system and kind of manages the system for us. Copy left is kind of a tongue in cheek term for what this is. Meaning. It's, you know, we have copy, right? So it's not copyright. It's copy left. So it's kind of, it's kind of a campy term, but it sort of works. So what is it, the definition. And this is another one where there's not a hard and fast definition, but the best one I could come up with. And arrangement whereby software or artistic work may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that anything derived from it is bound by these same can edition. Okay? Now this is a pretty good term, pretty good definition of it. It's not perfect however, because you could have an arrangement where something is not bound by the same condition, will see that a little bit in just a minute when we look at the Creative Commons licenses. Okay, so let's go into a new video and let's talk about some core principles in this thing. And then we'll talk about how you do it. And then we'll look at some databases of work. 60. Core Principals: Okay, So here are the main things that I want to go over. And then we'll watch a short little video kind of explaining it a little bit more. So copyright is designed to restrict Reese direct. Copyleft is designed to tell users what they can do. Okay, zip up a little bit. Copyright is designed to restrict, prevent people from doing things. Copyleft says, here's what you can do. Again, it's kind of a tagline they use, but it makes sense. Copyleft licenses augment copyright. A lot of the criticism of this copyleft idea is that people are trying to use it to replace copyright, which is not exactly true. It actually works in connection with copyright. So the two kind of coexist as separate entities. Copyleft still poses demands. So it's not that if you put something into Creative Commons or the copyleft or whatever you wanna call it, that it is just free to anyone. You can still specify that you restrict certain uses of things. That you want to protect, certain uses of things. But you're willing to allow other things. So you have choice basically. And you know, kinda in that way. You often see with copyright, you often see like copyright. So and so baba blah, all rights reserved is like the PAG, right? But in copyleft, They like to use the phrase some rights reserved, right, so that kinda makes sense. Okay. So let's watch this little video. This is a video that was made by Creative Commons. Where they just kinda walk us through what the whole thing is about. It's funny, it's silly, it's short. But it kinda will really give us a good idea of what's going on and what this is all about. So let's go to a new video here. And then I'll stick that video in and then we'll continue. 61. The C and CC: Okay, fun little video Ha references are a little dated, but it's okay, everything is still accurate. So this raised a couple of interesting points and I want to bring this up. So when you look at a work, any kind of copywritten work, like let's look at, here's a book and music theory book. So if I look at it, somewhere in the first couple of pages, there's going to be the copyright symbol. It's going to say copyright baba blah, the author and the publisher, the year. And somewhere. I don't want a hunted down and it's going to be amongst a whole bunch of other texts. But it's basically any copyright material. And the format is going to be copyright symbol Control G, which is Control G on a Mac by the way, or Option G. Option G on a Mac by the way. Copyright year, person name. Right? So that's the official format. I think. However, do you need it? Do you need to put that on there? Remember that everything is copywritten when it's made. So no, you don't need to put that on things anymore. When you copyright something. You don't have to put that symbol. It's nice. A lot of people still do it. Technically, it's a putting that symbol on something is a notification that it is copywritten. And that's good, but it doesn't need to be there. And things are copywritten, whether or not they have that symbol on it or not. So what Creative Commons has done is make their own symbol, which I cannot do with Command G or Option G. And that is a circle with two season it. Creative Commons, right? This does really need to be on something if it is going to be Creative Commons. Because remember the default is that it's copywritten. If you want to say it's Creative Commons, you put that symbol on it. And then you put whatever license you want. Okay, so in the next video we're gonna talk about the licenses. So key thing to remember. Number one, we do not have to put the c in a circle logo on things anymore. That's kind of an old thing. Do most people still put it on stuff just out of habit? You'll see it on just about every website you go to. And that's all great. If nothing else that tells you the year it was made, which can be important for a few different reasons. But it doesn't have to be there. If you go to, if you pick up a book and you don't see that copyrights and level. It doesn't mean it's in the public domain or even Creative Commons. It doesn't mean that it's still copywritten whether the symbol is there or not. Cc, however, Creative Commons does need to be there if it's a Creative Commons work. Okay, so we put CC and then we put license that we want. Or multiple. Most cases it's multiple. Okay, so let's look at the different Creative Commons licenses. It's not as simple as copyright where there's just one, the copyright law. There are multiple licenses here that you can choose from. 62. The Creative Commons Licenses: Okay, so let's look at the different licenses. Now. I'm going to go through kinda how you get a license. Well, we can do that in the same video actually. So getting one of these licenses doesn't cost money. Like you don't have to pay to have a license. You really are just kind of saying this is what I these are the terms I agree too with this work. So the easiest way to do this is go to Creative Commons website. Slash choose. You can get there pretty fast on your, on your own. And they have this kinda cool little feature. It says, what are you willing to allow? Okay? So are you willing to allow adaptations of your work to be shared? So do you want people to share it? So we're going to say yes for now. And you want to allow commercial uses of your work, in other words, people to make money off your work. So we'll say yes, sure. So that's gonna get me what they call an attribution license. So the symbols I need to put on it are the SCC. And I can either write attribution or I can put this little symbol of this little person. That means attribution license. Okay, Creative Commons attribution. Now let's modify things. Do I want to allow adaptations that we work to be shared? Let's say No. Okay, that changes it. Now I have attributions, no derivatives. So that means Creative Commons Attribution. This symbol means no derivatives. That means you can't change the work. So this means Creative Commons Attribution means you have to keep my name on the work and, and no derivatives, which means you can't change the work. So I can go here, yes, as long as others share alike. Now I get a different license. Attribution share alike. So Creative Commons Attribution have to leave my name on it. And share alike. You have to agree to the same Creative Commons licenses that I give it to you under. And then commercial uses of your work, let's say No. Okay, and now you get this one added. So now we're on Attribution Non-commercial ShareAlike. So we've added another thing here, Creative Commons, Attribution, Non-commercial. You can't use this to make money, so you can't resell or just sell this thing and you have to share it alike. So those are the main ones I think if I go here, yeah, that's still going to do it. Those are the main ones. So with each of these, you can kinda click on him and read the whole deal. So this is all of the technical stuff about it. So you are free to share and adapt in this particular format. Here's a little more detail, little more detail. And then you can get into the kind of real legal stuff. If you look around here long enough, you'll find yeah, this is a human-readable summary and not a substitute for the license. So here's the actual legal document, which is going to be very long and and you know, difficult to read because it's made for lawyers to read. So if you want to use one of these, all you really have to do, you don't have to register it anywhere. All you have to do is just say, Creative Commons doesn't. It can be caps or lowercase. Share, alike, attribution, whatever. You can say that however you want, as long as it's clear, share like attribution or whatever restrictions you want. You can use a little symbols which you can download from that page and it'll be even easier. And if you've ever seen these little symbols around which you probably have their own, like Wikipedia, they're on. Tons of websites, have this little CC and then these little Share Alike attribution, non-commercial little circle buttons. You've probably seen those at other websites before. That's what they mean. Okay, let's go to one more video on this topic. And I want to point you to some databases of works that use Creative Commons, which means places you can go to find stuff that you can actually copy and use. 63. Databases of Works: Okay, So you can find databases of works all over the internet. There are websites that are databases of pictures that people who had taken and you can use them for whatever you like. As long as you obey the creative commons license attached to them. You can find songs, text, poems, tons of stuff, including like basically all of Wikipedia, I believe is under a Creative Commons license. My favorite website, however, is this one called Freesound. This is samples, audio samples, all done with Creative Commons licenses. So I can say the, I can search for anything you can think of. Including some whole songs. None of them, not all of them are as kinda corny as that one is. Let's search for like car horn. And I can find like something like that. That's pretty great. I can click on it, I can download it and I can use it. If I want to know more. I can look at the license info, which is right here. Creative Commons, licensed under Creative Commons license. That's a very specific creative Commons license. That means Creative Commons Zero means straight up public domain. No license. It's a, it's a public domain dedication, right? If I click on it, it says public domain dedication. So I can download this and use this. You can find tons of different work here. And it's just a really great website. You can upload stuff and say Here is my favorite samples and anyone can use them under certain restrictions. And it's great. I should point out that just because something is a Creative Commons licensed thing, doesn't necessarily mean that it's free. It usually does. But things could be, you know, you could make something and say, I'm selling this for $10, but once you buy it, it's a Creative Commons license. You could do that if you wanted. There's nothing that prevents you from doing that. But most things that are licensed and the creative commons are free. So look around if you want to find more stuff. If you go to the Creative Commons website, go to US and remix and say search the commons. There's a list of just tons of different stuff that you can use because it's in the creative comments. 64. What Comes Next?: All right, everybody, thanks for watching. This has certainly not been an exhaustive class on copyright. This could go on for very, very long time, and in fact it will. This kind of musicians guide class. I'm going to make a ton of them, including the very next one, which is called the musicians guide to music publishing. Now if you think that music publishing is just about sheet music, you are so wrong. Music publishing is how you make money. If you are a songwriter or composer or producer, you must understand how music publishing works, because if you don't, there's money just waiting for you. In fact, if you are someone who's written a lot of music and you don't understand music publishing. There's money sitting in a pot somewhere that you just don't have because you didn't file a couple of pieces of paper. Soon as you file those, that money might flow into your pocket. So I highly encourage you to check out the next section on music publishing. It should be out not too far behind this one actually. So please check that out. 65. Bonus Lecture: Hey everyone, want to learn more about what I'm up to you. You can sign up for my e-mail list here. And if you do that, I'll let you know about when new courses are released and when I make additions or changes to courses you're already enrolled in. Also, check out on this site. I post a lot of stuff there and I check into it every day. So please come hang out with me. And one of those two places are or both? And we'll see you there.