Music License

@Art-of-Sound

Yes, it’s not that complicated but you need to understand that in those situations artists are member of an organization and that organization allows such usage. You cannot generalize it and claim that ANY existing music can be used without prior permission.

If the artist is not affiliated with an organization managing their rights, nobody can use their work without having prior consent. If they do, they’ll face the consequences…

After following with interest I will admit that I don’t know much about any of this… I should, but don’t. All I do know is, that if I were wanting to use someone else’s music to pass off as my own, after slapping on a hurdy gurdy, then I’d feel like a total twatting fraud!

I realise that there are people who just don’t care (I am not suggesting the person that started this post is in anyway a twatting fraud, although it does appear to have stirred a few emotions…. perhaps intentionally so ((where are you now))), but without hindsight there is very little we can do if someone wants to pretend they have talent by nicking our stuff. We can only cross that bridge when we find ourselves there.

Although please allow me to add my two cents… pennies… I don’t believe the licence should be allowing people to take a track, add lyrics, as originally suggested… This was probably covered…... Cheers!

soundengine said
If the artist is not affiliated with an organization managing their rights, nobody can use their work without having prior consent. If they do, they’ll face the consequences…

I think that an artist who is not affiliated with any organization that got his back is the one who falls between the cracks. Let’s say you have discovered that someone used your work without having prior consent. Besides threatening him via email (in case you got one) that you’re gonna sue him, what can you do? What consequences can he face? No disrespect intended, I just really want to know what can be done in such cases.

I dont know how many of you are aware of this: Take a look at any of your item pages, right under the tags. What do you see there? You see an “All rights reserved YOUR USERNAME ”

As authors we agree that Envato/audiojungle licences our creations for commercial use. We certainly don’t give away/sell our author rights.

It’s just a standard line. On the page 4 of this thread I mentioned a stock audio site that makes you to sign a talent release saying that “I agree that I have no rights to the Audio Content and all rights to the Audio Content belong to the Member and Assigns.”. Yet, “All rights reserved YOUR USERNAME ” is present there too.

Okay, I think I see where the confusion is.

Art-of-Sound, you keep referring to a “Talent Release” from another site. The “talent” refers to the musicians and singers on the recorded track and ensures that they do not expect mechanical residuals from the track. A “Talent Release” is not a “Copyright Release”. It has nothing to do with the music copyright, which belongs to the composer.

Notice that the line states “all rights to the Audio Content belong to the Member.” The “Member” is the composer and contributor of the work. The composer does not sign his rights away. That would be the worst deal ever.

@Art-of-Sound

Let’s not turn this into a fight. I respectfully said that i don’t agree with you and explained my point. Now although you get it, you’re still insisting on your claims. Sometimes you need to accept that you were wrong

Since you asked, if someone uses my work without my permission I can sue them besides threatening them via email that i’m going to sue them.

When someone shows me that i was wrong on something, i just say “oh well thanks for pointing that out”. It shouldn’t be that hard..

pinkzebra said
Okay, I think I see where the confusion is.

Yeah, I see it too now, thanks

soundengine said
Sometimes you need to accept that you were wrong

Couldn’t agree with you more. But besides the talent release thing, where was I wrong?

Art-of-Sound said

pinkzebra said
Okay, I think I see where the confusion is.

Yeah, I see it too now, thanks

soundengine said
Sometimes you need to accept that you were wrong

Couldn’t agree with you more. But besides the talent release thing, where was I wrong?

You were wrong on that ANY and ALL artists can use, manipulate, tribute, cover and re-make ANY existing song without prior permission.

Well, it’s not me who invented it. Read the copyright law and see for yourself. There’s no separate laws for independent artists and affiliated ones. The law is generic.

Here’s an excerpt:

Copyright law also allows for a “compulsory mechanical license”. Under the law, anybody can obtain compulsory mechanical license without express permission from the copyright holder.
A mechanical license is a license that grants certain limited permissions to work with, study, improve upon, reinterpret, re-record (etc.) something that is neither a free/open source item nor in the public domain.
Within the music industry, a mechanical license gives the holder permission to create copies of a recorded song which they did not write and/or do not have copyright over.