I know that the copyright protection offered to a song or melody is about four or five notes. So say I write a song based on The Rolling Stones “Satasfaction”, I can use the “da dam dam dam”, but the next note can’t be the “A” note of the word “Satasfaction” otherwise I’m open to bieng sued for copyright infringement.
But can the same be said for a beat?
I just saw a car commercial that uses a very similar (if not the exact) beat as the drums on Rush’s “Tom Sawyer”, but since theres no notes involved is it afforded the same protection as a melody?
I don’t know for sure, but I really doubt it. While the Tom Sawyer drum part may be somewhat unique, most drum beats(in rock, anyway) are common. If they sampled the actual recording of “Tom Sawyer” that would be a different matter.
and i’d almost bet that that sample is tom sawyer…it has the synth and not just the beat. it sounds looped. iirc, you can’t copyright chord progression either…
There have been cases where a song/beat has been deemed so similar to another that the former group has recieved royalties. For example, Queen recieved royalties from Vanilla Ice because of the similarities between “Under Pressure” and “Ice ice baby.” Specifically, the beginning bass lines.
Yeah, but that was a bass line. Specifically G Minor, major, major, major, minor, D, D minor, G minor. I’m talking about drum beats and rythms I suppose.
Yes it is. It’s not just the beat, but the low E of the bass and synth, too.
Geddy Lee, while promoting his solo album, mentioned that Rush was approached for permission a while ago, said “umm, sure” and then forgot about it until the commercial popped up this fall.
Umm, actually, percussion instruments do have notes. Granted, most drummers are too stupid to read music ;^) but that does not seem to stop composers from writing sheet music for drums. Musical notes are more than just tones.
I doubt you can copyright a beat. You’re may be in violation of a recording if you copy the drum track on tape and use that, but if you duplicate it yourself, I doubt you’d have much of a case. The other side would have to prove you took their written music and performed it, and it wouldn’t be an issue of copyright, but rather music licensing (in other words, you have to pay the artist to perform his work).
Now if the drummer felt there was theft, he could sue for a variety of reasons. A few years ago, Carlos Santana sued some company that used a guitar solo that sounded a lot like his “Black Magic Woman” riff. He was trying to get a judgment that the particular riff and sound was so identified with him that they were using him to sell products without his consent. I don’t know what the final ruling was.
Actually, there is no such standard. If your song is recognizably similar to the original, you can be sued. It depends on the situation – you may be able to crib 20 notes from someone and not get into any particular trouble, or use just one or two and get sued. Of course, it all depends on whether someone wants to sue you. The Door’s “Hello, I Love You” is almost a direct crib from the Kink’s “All the Day and All of the Night”; the Kinks thought of suing, but decided not to bother. Similarly, the opening riff from one of Steve Miller’s songs is a direct steal from Free’s “All Right Now”; AFAIK, no one sued. Whereas the similarities between “He’s So Fine” and “My Sweet Lord” are vague at best, but George Harrison lost the case.
The Verve had a hit out a few years ago called “Bittersweet Symphony.” It was a smash hit…but unfortunately it was built upon a looped sample of Rolling Stones’ “The Last Time” that they had failed to secure permission to use. RS sued and earned 100% of the legal production rights to the song.
So at least fragments of songs are protected by law.
honest to god samples have been seen as infringing, unless cleared, for a while.
the thing with the verve’s sample, it was what they described as a “subliminal sample”, meaning it wasn’t very prominent. AND it was from a symphonic tribute to the rolling stones. basically, jager, richards, et al, get half of the songwriting credits, AND almost 100% of the royalities for that song.
This is the way I understood it when I took some very basic classes on the subject:
Melody and lyrics are covered by copyright(life + 50 years). The actual recording is covered by copyright(50 years). Drum beats, bass lines, chord progressions are not covered by copyright.
The problem with samples is that they are recorded directly off the original recording which violates the second rule. If I record my dog barking and you sample it that violates my copyright even though the sound of a dog barking is not covered…that’s because you’re taking my recorded version of a dog barking. If you want to get your own dog to bark into a mic then there’s no problem. This is why Symphony recordings still have some form of copyright even though the material is in public domain…you can’t just start making copies of them.
So back to the OP…Beats would be covered under the P copyright or recording copyright but not under the C copyright unless there is a melody to it. So if the beat in question was lifted directly off of the Rush album then it is a violation…but if they got a studio drummer to just play a similar beat then they don’t have much to worry about.
