# Another song royalty question
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [December 26, 2005, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219 "2005-12-26T04:03:54Z")
**Posts on this page:** 8
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)
#### Post date: [December 26, 2005, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/1 "2005-12-26T04:03:54Z")
I’ve seen this gag on Letterman and other places:
A character or person would start to sing a well-known song. Another person will stop them after 3-4 seconds saying, “If you sing any more, we’ll have to pay royalties.”
Is there any truth to this?
---
### Author:  [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)
#### Post date: [December 26, 2005, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/2 "2005-12-26T13:27:12Z")
If you wrote it, you’re suppose to get royalties everytime ia song is performed in public. If you write the score to a successful musical, you will receive “grand rights” and can get very, very, very, very wealthy.
---
### Author:  [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)
#### Post date: [December 26, 2005, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/3 "2005-12-26T13:47:28Z")
But I think the question is… is there a limit below which singing only a _part_ of a song is royalty-free??
😃
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [December 26, 2005, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/4 "2005-12-26T13:47:54Z")
> [@](#):
>
> I can use eight bars of music without having to obtain permission from the copyright holder of the musical composition. In addition, I can use a sample from a recording without getting authorization from the sound recording copyright owner and owner of the musical composition.
> FALSE. The reproduction and/or distribution of even a short excerpt of a song may constitute an infringement. Some courts have held that if the portion of the music used is recognizable or considered the “heart” or “essence” of the original work, the use is an infringement, with certain exceptions, such as with regard to parody. Short excerpts for educational purposes or for the purpose of criticism or comment may be considered “fair uses”; however, there is no set formula for determining at the outset whether your use will qualify for this defense.
[http://www.csusa.org/face/music/myths.htm](http://www.csusa.org/face/music/myths.htm)
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [December 26, 2005, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/5 "2005-12-26T14:02:13Z")
> [@](#):
>
> But how much can you quote? Because most recorded songs are short, it is probably difficult to offer a short enough excerpt to qualify. But a case can be made for very brief selections. . . . These issues have been litigated in some of the lawsuits over “sampling.” For example, a court ruled in 2003 that a six-second flute sample used by the Beastie Boys was permissible. Stan Soocher, “Song Sampling Is Found De Minimis,” Entertainment Law & Finance (8 December 2003).
[http://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/copyright/6.php](http://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/copyright/6.php)
- Myth #2: “I don’t need a license because I’m using only a small
amount of the copyrighted work.”
[http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Academic\_edu/CAF/law/ip-primer](http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Academic_edu/CAF/law/ip-primer)
To establish that the infringement of a copyright is de minimis , and therefore not actionable, the alleged infringer must demonstrate that the copying of the protected material is so trivial “as to fall below the quantitative threshold of substantial similarity, which is always a required element of actionable copying.” Ringgold , 126 F.3d at 74 (citing 4 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright § 13.03[A] at 13- 27). In determining whether or not the allegedly infringing work falls below the quantitative threshold of substantial similarity to the copyrighted work, courts often look to the amount of the copyrighted work that was copied, as well as, (in cases involving visual works), the observability of the copyrighted work in the allegedly infringing work. Ringgold , 126 F.3d at 75. Observability is determined by the length of time the copyrighted work appears in the allegedly infringing work, and its prominence in that work as revealed by the lighting and positioning of the copyrighted work. Ringgold , 126 F.3d at 75. Like the analysis of a fair use claim, an inquiry into the substantial similarity between a copyrighted work and the allegedly infringing work must be made on a case-by-case basis, as there are no bright-line rules for what constitutes substantial similarity. See Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. , 510 U.S. 569, 577 (1994) (analysis of fair use claim must be made on case-by-case basis); Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp. , 274 F.2d 487, 489 (2d Cir. 1960)(test for infringement of a copyright is necessarily “vague” and determinations must be made " ad hoc ").
> **[FindLaw's United States Second Circuit case and opinions.](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1455045.html)**
>
> FindLaw's searchable database of United States Second Circuit decisions since
_And see_, Matthew C. Lucas, [The De Minimis Dilemma:A Bedeviling Problem of Definitions and a New Proposal for a Notice Rule](http://grove.ufl.edu/~techlaw/vol4/issue3/lucas.html), Journal of Technolology Law & Policy (Fall 1999).
So the answer is yes. There is a _de minimis_ defense. But the line is blurry; you still copy at your own risk.
---
### Author:  [@First\_Amongst\_Daves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/First_Amongst_Daves)
#### Post date: [December 28, 2005, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/6 "2005-12-28T02:59:11Z")
In Anglo-Australian jurisprudence, there is a case where a short excerpt from a well-known song appeared in a movie news reel (this is in the 40s or 50s), and copyright infringement was found because the essence of the copyright-protected material was reproduced.
---
### Author:  [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)
#### Post date: [December 28, 2005, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/7 "2005-12-28T03:06:19Z")
I have noticed something in a lot of TV shows. It’s common knowledge that the “Happy Birthday to You” song is copyrighted and one must pay royalties if they use it. Quite often they will cut to a birthday scene and it will be right before the candles are blown out. They will be singing only the last two words (notes) of song. The scene will start with everyone singing “tooo you” and then the b-day boy or girl with blow. I always thought that this was to avoid the royalty thing.
---
### Author:  [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)
#### Post date: [December 28, 2005, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-song-royalty-question/337219/8 "2005-12-28T03:44:34Z")
The music for “Happy Birthday” is not copyrighted – just the lyrics. So the music can be played in the background as someone brings out a cake, which is enough to indicate what is going on.