Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are laws pertaining to playing the entire song and playing the majority of the song, but not for a small byte of the song.
Not so. Any portion of the lyrics is covered by the copy right laws. The melody is also copy righted, and the same applies. A sound bite would have to be so short as to be unrecognizable as a song to escape this.
It is his business. It's the complete irony and hypocrisy of a guy worth $60 million , oh never mind. You don't care about anything like they. Partisan to the end.
Raising an issue with the corruption of the system, does not mean that someone is anti-capitalism. Stop being so myopic.
Wow, yet another band not happy about being used by the GOP. Just out of curiosity, has any band ever asked the Democratic party to cease and desist? I don't recall ever hearing that.
Probably. But the Democrats are smart enough to request permission first, so the refused song never gets played. This is ancient stuff; I keep wondering why the Republicans keep screwing it up time after time after time. They were the ones who toughened up the laws in the first place.
Meanwhile Tom Morello is a hypocritical moron. He's a 1%'er. He's worth 60 million. He got rich from Capitalism, and he hates it?
This makes no sense! Who said Morello hates capitalism? He just doesn't like Republicans. Are you so twisted that you believe only Republicans are capitalists? If so, you're in a whole new world of wrong.
Interesting. Many aren't that savvy.
For what it's worth, I like REM and RATM.
Sure they are. This is Professional Songwriting 101.
Night Garden Music is the name of REM's own publishing company.
By owning the publishing rights, the song rights and the performance rights, REM receives 3 separate royalties for the song. This has been common practice for at least 60 years now.
This song appears to be jointly owned by all members of REM. Michael Stipe wrote it, but included his mates most probably because they all arranged it. The songwriter does not have to do this- Robby Krieger of The Doors wrote Light My Fire, and reserved the song and publishing rights for himself. The rest of the band, including Krieger, received the performance rights, which were split evenly among them.
There isnt a dam thing I got wrong on my posting because REM nor Warner is required to give permission for use of their work under the Fair Use laws. There are MULTIPLE sections of the code and I'm not going to do your homework for you because you want to believe crap that isnt true.
In fact you are so far out of the park that I wonder where the hell you got your law degree.. In 1961, the General Revisions of the US Copyright laws specificially authorized Fair Use for
"in a news report"
Furthermore, most radio and tv statiions pay a flat rate license fee to the industry for permission to use what they want during the course of the year, and the artist has no dam say so whatsoever.
Learn what the hell you're talking about
Wrong. Fair use laws to not apply in single instance broadcasts. Flat fees only apply to regularly featured songs on TV. Radio must keep logs on their playlists, as royalties from radio airplay are based on frequency of play. The radio stations pay flat fees, but these fees vary according to the listenership, so a station in New York pays higher fees than one in Dubuque.
The songs that are most popular get the most air play. This is why some songs make millions and others do not.
Both REM and Warner-Tamerlane Music claim it was "unlicensed and unauthorized use of the song." It's a legal matter, and since the Warner-Tamerlane is also making the claim, that suggests they do not have an agreement with Fox for use or for royalties. So Fox made a decision that either wasn't verified by their lawyers (not sure how likely that is), or they made a decision that their use of the song fell under fair use. If Fox did not stop use of the song, they can face a possible lawsuit.
Still, if it fell under fair use, then Fox can still use it. REM can still bring a lawsuit if Fox continued, but Fox could also argue they are correct in their understanding of the law.
That's my interpretation. It is a legal issue.
Edit: Then why is Warner-Tamerlane Music also saying it was unauthorized use?
Deny, deny from Fox. All they had to do was stop playing the song, and they stopped. There's nothing in the law that says Fox has to be gracious or polite about it. Warner or Stipe could press the issue in court if they wanted and demand an on-air apology, but taking it to court would be expensive for both, and by then, the whole thing would be yesterday's news.
It has happened before, though, and the loser has to cough up the costs of the lawsuit incurred by the winner in most instances. The fair use issue would depend on the specifics of any agreement between Fox and Warner, if one exists. Most major music distributors have contracts with the networks, but each could be different.
How do I know all this stuff? I have an old friend who has made about $9 million writing songs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
