Hey gang. A novel I’ve written quotes the chorus of a song in the public domain. I’d like to credit the composer and lyricist. My publisher agrees but isn’t sure where to do this in the book*, or exactly how to word it, since the usual “Copyright 1989, Joe Smith and Jane Doe” wouldn’t quite apply – there is no copyright here.
The song in question is “Loves Old Sweet Song” (1884); Words by G. C. Bingham, music by J. L. Molloy.
I assume it goes on the verso page with the rest of the copyright/printing information, but am not sure a) how to word it, or b) where precisely it should go (above the publisher’s copyright/printing info or below).
Li’l help please? Thanks!
You may be asking: why the heck doesn’t the publisher know this? And I will answer: God only knows. Mine’s not to reason why, mine’s but to do and die and collect my fee.
T-t-t-t-that’s all, folks.
P.S. You don’t have a publisher. You have a moron. Watch this idiot every second because everything else will also be wrong.
I often have to remind this guy about crediting and legal music usage for promo videos and things like that. The ironic thing is that he’s a fierce protector of his own trademarks.
Would this credit go above the book’s copyright info, I presume? Of course I’ve seen such credits dozens of times in novels, but now I can’t find an example, natch.
I would go along with what’s said above, withe the phrase “In the public domain” appended to the citation, just in case there is any question. (“Things that go without saying go even better when said.”)
I honestly don’t think this is necessary. I’ve never seen a notation like that, I mean. Credit where credit is due should be enough; I can’t imagine a reason for noting that it’s in the public domain.
It at least hints that a proper copyright search was done.
BTW, how do you know this version of the lyrics is no longer subject to copyright?
Maybe all you really know is “it is an old song”. Do you even know that the lyrics you have match the original lyrics as published? Then you can’t possibly say that your version is in the public domain…
Not that your publisher should know this, but s/he should have an attorney on call at least that specializes in such matters.
And if s/he doesn’t , then I would review your contract you have with the publisher with your attorney who reviewed it for you earlier, in light of this now that the text is complete.
I don’t see an attorney mentioned in the OP. I’d be surprised if the OP had an attorney to look over the contract. Approximately 99.9% of all novelists don’t. The others are bestsellers. (Not that all bestsellers use attorneys either. Just that they’re usually the only ones who ever do.) And publishers normally don’t bother to check this with an attorney either. They trust the author to have done the heavy lifting.
I frequently call the publishing world insane. Here’s another example.
You can’t prove that something is NOT copyrighted, as you can’t prove a negative. You can make a reasonable inference with due diligence. Sometimes noting the date is diligence enough. Otherwise, a reasonable copyright search is all that’s necessary. IANACL, but from a public-domain movie project I worked on last year, if someone ever does claim copyright, your due diligence will help you if it goes to court, and you shouldn’t expect much more in the way of consequences than a cease and desist letter. Again, largely anecdotal from a single project I worked on, but if you can confirm that the song was indeed written in 1884, and you can’t find a more recent copyright to altered lyrics with a reasonable search, AFAIK you’re covered.
Conversely, if you can find those lyrics in print from 1884, or indeed from any date prior to 1923, you’re done. That’s prima facie evidence of public domain.
Thanks again y’all. Usually in these books we steer clear of anything iffy, copyrightwise, but since the song is kind of vital to an element of the plot, I knew I’d need to quote it and thus wanted something free and clear. Of course, just 'cause it’s free and clear doesn’t mean one shouldn’t give credit where it’s due, hence my question.
Ouch, you’re assuming I’m an awfully sloppy researcher. If all I’d been thinking was “hey, it’s an old song, I can use it haw haw” I would likely be too dumb to even ask such a question!
(I just remembered that it’s old enough that even Laura Ingalls Wilder sings it to Almanzo the year they get married, 1885, in These Happy Golden Years.)
BTW, in case anyone’s curious about the song, here’s Deanna Durbin singing it. It’s practically mandatory to play this song in every documentary about the Victorians/Edwardians.
Not assuming anything. This comes up al the time in scriptwriting and filmmaking too. Have no proof and the filmmaker can kiss distribution goodbye because there will be no E and O insurance.
I get a lot of scriptwriters wondering why they can’t seel their scripts or even get anyone to look at them. This is one solid reason among many - no proof of clearances, so why bother.
Something to keep in mind if you ever dreamed your piece would become a film or somesuch …
Or, if this one turns out OK, then at sometime in the future in another piece…
Do you honestly think being raked over the coals for quoting 19th century song lyric is a “reasonable” fear?
If the lyric is by Madonna, a “reasonable” amount of due diligence would on a totally different scale from a “reasonable” amount of due diligence in verifying the status of a 19th century lyric.
Now do you see why a word like “reasonable” is used? A word that acknowledges there will be different standards in different situations?
(Just a word of advice, not_alice, from someone who is often taken to task for the same thing: you’re coming off in this thread like you’re the only person here who isn’t retarded.)
It’s also so integral to Joyce’s Ulysses that if I ever ran across it quoted in a prose work I would assume that the author was intentionally trying to remind me of Ulysses.
But unless there was some documentation forthcoming, this writing will never be converted into other media. That’s the way that works.
Maybe it never would be anyway, but it is still a good lesson for others to learn.
Sure, but if it is so easy, why not simply do it, or at least incorporate properly so as to separate the risk that the publisher is probably leaving to the author to the corporation instead of risking personal assets?
I dunno - people talk about this routinely in the film world. Don’t they do it in the fiction writing world too? I am surprised that maybe not, but I too have ignorance to be fought.
Unless you are referring to a legal “term of art” as I was, I guess we might have to agree to disagree. The courts already have standards for “reasonableness”, it is up to us to know and follow them, not to persuade the court anew of what “reasonable” means.
I don’t recall anyone suggesting any reasonable steps have been taking to assure the legal "t"s are crossed. Quite the opposite, the question in the OP was about crossing legal "t"s.
If the OP and others wish to roll the dice, well, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. There are ways to improve your chances though
Junior modding or not, this could be a compliment or an insult I suppose.
Personally, I don’t think anyone here is retarded, I think everyone has an IQ well over 160
