General Music Chat

It seems to be the same in any government office. Even the local courthouse. They act like your bothering them or like it's their money and your being selfish thinking they should be there to help you. They seem to act like their job is secure and they needn't rush because the Gov is behind them and your just a simple citizen.

www.myspace.com/blunderingeye
http://c1.ezfolk.com/bands/6039/index.php
www.myspace.com/445175001
twitter.com@HaydenKing
Facebook group/Hayden King

"It is what it is"

Another excellent reason we should have universal healthcare.

But I am a simple citizen.

Tis why I call myself. "The Minnow"

Ah ok Rat thanks.
Now then this bit confuses me sorry....

but you can't exchange it anymore.

I'm just saying you can't exchange the new and improved song for the old one without having to copyright it again.

Gee, I dont think I play a song the same way twice.

Ah that's what I thought, thanks Rat.
Have to be careful then innit.

Ah ok Rat thanks.
Now then this bit confuses me sorry....

but you can't exchange it anymore.

I'm just saying you can't exchange the new and improved song for the old one without having to copyright it again.

Chippy, you said, . . . "Suppose I apply for a copyright and then change a small part of the tune/saga/vocal whatever...
"
Here's the poop:
If it's a minor change - don't bother re-copyrighting it.
It probably won't make any bit of difference.
The idea is to see if another song sounds the same. If your changes in the song don't really affect how it sounds, overall - you don't need to re-copyright it.
.
Now, before someone chimes in with "Yes, but . . . !"
. . . please go to the Library of Congress and read it for yourself, ok?
This info is not my opinion - this is from the government . . . they talk about it in considerablr detail . . .
.
If you want to add a couple verses, or add another chorus, or something - - it doesn't make any difference.
Make all the minor changes you want; you are still covered, so long as the song sounds the same, overall . . .
.
But - if you write a brand-new bridge for it, or a completely different chorus or something - then, obviously, the new part of the song is not covered by the previous copyright.
.
When I wrote "From Earth to Station," it was 3 long verses . . .
And I copyrighted it.
Then I made several changes. I added 2 more verses, added a little intro . . . no biggee - the intro wan't covered, but it was 4 slow chords - I didn't care . . .
No big deal - at first . . .
But I finally DID re-copyright it, because I made major changes in it.
> I changed the title from "From Earth to Station," to "Out Here."
> I wrote lyrics for it.
> I recorded it with vocals singing those new lyrics.
.
That constituted major changes, which were not on the previous song.
The chords and bass-line of the music were still protected, but the melody, harmonies, and lyrics were not.
I paid $35 for a new copyright, and I'm glad I did.
And I'd gladly do it again for whatever song requires major updates.

ANYONE want to steal one of my songs.... I would consider it an honor.

I know I will never get a reply from anyone so concerned with protecting their music ,so this thread is dead.

Even worse there is a car commercial that is using clips of music that sounds suspiciouslly like Alans over in France. 50 bucks a pop,100 times a day, thats big money. Just thought you might like to know.

I could be wrong .... I could be right.

Your best friend.
Glen

Thanks RM.

You see if I'm going to bother to do anything it has to be by the numbers, (No pun intended). You could easily be fooled into thinking that your one off really good song will not be liked or used compared to the other 500 you wrote and were plain Jane in comparison. (Speaking personally) so if you going to build a wall make sure the foundations are in place.

What the heck? It's just 35 bucks right? I intend to place 4 on a disc and get those done just as soon as I've written all the bits and pieces. (Pun intended).

Very good and wise info Rm. thanks very much for sharing once more.
Best.
Chippy.

Chippy, you said, . . . "Suppose I apply for a copyright and then change a small part of the tune/saga/vocal whatever...
"
Here's the poop:
If it's a minor change - don't bother re-copyrighting it.
It probably won't make any bit of difference.
The idea is to see if another song sounds the same. If your changes in the song don't really affect how it sounds, overall - you don't need to re-copyright it.
.
Now, before someone chimes in with "Yes, but . . . !"
. . . please go to the Library of Congress and read it for yourself, ok?
This info is not my opinion - this is from the government . . . they talk about it in considerablr detail . . .
.
If you want to add a couple verses, or add another chorus, or something - - it doesn't make any difference.
Make all the minor changes you want; you are still covered, so long as the song sounds the same, overall . . .
.
But - if you write a brand-new bridge for it, or a completely different chorus or something - then, obviously, the new part of the song is not covered by the previous copyright.
.
When I wrote "From Earth to Station," it was 3 long verses . . .
And I copyrighted it.
Then I made several changes. I added 2 more verses, added a little intro . . . no biggee - the intro wan't covered, but it was 4 slow chords - I didn't care . . .
No big deal - at first . . .
But I finally DID re-copyright it, because I made major changes in it.
> I changed the title from "From Earth to Station," to "Out Here."
> I wrote lyrics for it.
> I recorded it with vocals singing those new lyrics.
.
That constituted major changes, which were not on the previous song.
The chords and bass-line of the music were still protected, but the melody, harmonies, and lyrics were not.
I paid $35 for a new copyright, and I'm glad I did.
And I'd gladly do it again for whatever song requires major updates.