Does the law recognize a difference between a MIDI file and an MP3? Can I legally write an MP3 of a copyrighted song and distribute it?
I presume you mean can you leagally write a midi file of a song . . if so:
As a midi file that you write would be your own performance, you would not be abusing the copyright of the performer. You would however need to ask permission of the songwriter (or the copyright holder to the actual music)
So unless the song is copyright free (whereas a pre-recorded performance wouldn’t be) or you have the permission of the copyright holder, or you are the copyright holder, then yes you would be breaking the law.
- Gartog (Not a Lawyer)
There is no difference. In order to make copies and distribute it, you need the permission of the copyright holder.
If you record a MIDI file, you’d need to pay ASCAP fees to the songwriter. You do not, however, need to pay the record company.
If the song is public domain (e.g., a Beethoven piano piece), you don’t have to pay anything – but people would have to pay you to copy it (unless you declare it’s PD).
If your midi version has the chord changes i.e. the harmony and doesn’t contain the melody of the song or an entirely different melody with the harmony, you don’t need the permission of the copyright holder.
The difference in legal repurcussions between a MIDI and an MP3 (speaking from a purely technical standpoint), is that an MP3 is a (nearly) perfect digital copy of an original (and possibly copyrighted) work. A MIDI file is sort of like… well, if you took some sheet music, played it and mixed it yourself, and then started distributing it. I presume that some record companies would probably still take you to court if they felt like it, but you’d have considerable wiggle-room since it would be next to impossible to create an exact replica of the original song. To do anything close, you’d have to actually steal samples from the original work, and that’s the point that they would probably take you to court over.
-
-
- I have heard that many personal MIDI sites have removed their songs after pressure from record companies on them/their ISP’s. The argument is that a MIDI file contains the notes to the song, and since (the people posting these songs) don’t have publishing rights to the song, they can’t legally post a MIDI for public download.
~
- I have heard that many personal MIDI sites have removed their songs after pressure from record companies on them/their ISP’s. The argument is that a MIDI file contains the notes to the song, and since (the people posting these songs) don’t have publishing rights to the song, they can’t legally post a MIDI for public download.
-
A certain Cecil column which I’ve never fully understood seems (to me anyway) to say that you can, in theory, get a compulsory license on stuff you record yourself, which would apply to MIDIs but not MP3s. Maybe someone can explain it better.
Thank god, may the Plague of Embedded MIDI finally be brought to a close… its freaking 2003, you’d think people would have moved on by now.
(Please note that I am only commenting on one aspect of MIDI use, not on people using MIDI as actual songwriting and distribution - just as f*ing stupid god damn low quality cheap knockoff embedded files in web pages)
As TeleTronOne says: MP3 is a digital recording format that stores the actual sound. MIDI is a code for driving electronic musical instruments by specifying the actual notes they play.