Serwin Media Group

BMG AGREES TO STOP "STEALING" 25% (OR IS IT 50%) FROM SONGWRITERS. Is that a clickbait-y headline for a wonky discussion? Probably. The Controlled Composition Clause is, or now seemingly was, ubiquitous in US record deals. BMG announced that it is getting rid of it, starting NOW.... So what is it? A CCC is related to the money which the record label pays an artist for the use of the copyright in that artist's songs. Remember (or, leanr for the first time), there are two (2) copyrights at issue in every recording. The recording AND the underlying musical composition (the song, words and music) which has been recorded. Copyright law requires that the label pay the songwriters a royalty (called a mechanical) to use the copyright in the songs that are embodied in the recordings they release. When the artist is also a songwriter, the CCC requires that the artist agree to give the label a discount on the mechanical. The CCC contained the terms of that discount. The CCC calls for a 25% reduction in the mechanical royalty rate set by Congress (OK, really a special copyright court judge, authorized by Congress), which is currently (and has been for decades) 9.1 cents, per unit. On top of that the CCC limits the number of songs the artist gets paid for. Regardless of how many songs are on a record, they will only get paid for a maximum number, which is usually between 10-12. This is why all those albums from the 70s and 80s only had 10 songs - that was all the artist was getting paid for! So, while my headline said the labels were stealing 25% from the artist, it was actually more. Under the CCC an artist can get paid a maximum of $.6825 per unit (68 and one-quarter pennies). If the artist had a record with 15 songs, the true mechanical earned should be literally double that amount, $1.3650. So, if you consider that the typical CD contains about 15 songs, the labels are/were stealing 50% from the artist. This sounds fantastic, and, it is a good thing. However, in reality because the CCC typically only applies to physical units (changes to copyright law over a decade ago made it a challenge to apply a CCC rate to digital sales), and does not apply at all to streaming, it is really already somewhat of a vestige from times-gone-by when people actually bought records. Still, it is a good thing and it is progress. In the meantime, if you want to support artists AND songwriters ... Keep Listening!

LED ZEP WINS STAIRWAY COPYRIGHT FIGHT What's that you ask, what fight? You mean that thing from way back when about Stairway to Heaven? Yes, that is the one. The 9th Circuit had held back in 2018 that Stairway to Heaven did not infringe Spirit's Taurus.... Randy California's estate appealed to the Supreme Court, and, today, the SCOTUS refused to hear that appeal, ending the litigation. Very interesting case, which I have written about before: it is probably a technically correct, but morally bad decision. Why? Pre-1972, the only thing you deposited with the Copyright Office to evidence what you were securing a copyright for was the sheet music (now you submit a copy of the song). The court held that it is therefore only what is actually on the sheet music which is protected by the copyright. Because the solo which was the subject of the litigation was not actually transcribed onto the sheet music, there was no showing of the two works being virtually identical (although if you listen, they are). As I have discussed in my other post, this decision can and may lead to lots of problems since some of the most famous solos in Rock history will now, possibly, not be covered by copyright. how does this affect you? All we can do is... Keep Listening!

Federal Court Rules that Actor’s Use of Film Footage for Promo Reel is Not Infringement This goes a little outside my normal posts, but is an important decision. In 2017 actress Jennifer Haid hired a company to create a new promotional reel to use in seeking film work. in doing so she gave that company footage from her work in the film Nowhereland. That company removed a watermark from the footage to create the edited promo reel.... The filmmaker, Bain, discovered the reel online and sued for infringement. Last month the federal district court for the Central District of California held on a summary judgement motion, in favor of the actress. In doing so, the court agreed that her use of the footage constituted a so-called fair use and she did not require permission to do so, and such use was not infringing. While the fair use doctrine is a complicated thing and hard to pin down, the court here agreed that the actresses’ use did not harm the film company, and would not make it such that someone would not see the film, merely because they had seen Haid’s edited clip. This case could be cited in the future to hold that other reel uses of projects someone had worked on will also be fair. As with anything else, each case will be decided upon its own merits. What you can do in the meantime is to Keep watching (and Listening!).

SPOTIFY MAKES FINDING LIVESTREAMS BY YOUR FAVORITE ARTIST EASIER One of the many horrible results of the Covid-19 pandemic is the near death of the live music industry. True, some live, in-person shows have still been taking place, but very few, and I have no intention of going to any for the foreseeable future. What to do? Well, while not by any means replacing the experience of a room full of people experiencing live music together, livestreams are the next best thing.... I can only speak for myself, but remembering all the various places to go looking for who is doing what livestream, and when, made me sort of give up. Well, Spotify to the rescue. Instead of launching its own livestream function as many thought it was going to do, instead, Spotify is partnering with Warner’s Songkick app (which I use and have found great shows through), you can now find upcoming livestreams for your favorite (and/or newly discovered) artist simply by clicking on the Concerts tab on their Spotify artist page. At least that is how it is supposed to work. I just tried it and so far, have not found any listings, but I will keep looking. As more people get used to the idea of paying for livestreams, I am sure more and more artists will begin doing them. One nice thing about livestreams is that you can see any performance, no longer needing to be in the same town where it is happening. And, in addition to allowing us all to experience something closer to the live music experience, it will make it easier for us all to do my favorite thing Keep listening!

COVID-19 May Kill A Lot More Than People YouTube To The Rescue? Doe to the global pandemic we are all stuck at home. There has been a lot of discussion in the media about the plight this has caused to the economy. The thing is, that term is confusing. What does it mean, the economy? One aspect of the economy is the live music and other performance industries. I have one client that lost mid-6 figures in booked tour dates. That is horrible. What’s worse, is that th...e venues where those concerts were to happen are at risk. They have rent and insurance and other fixed costs and no revenue of any kind to offset them. Save Our Stages is a group organized to try to help. Senate Bill, S.4258, The Save Our Stages Act, introduced by John Cornyn, would authorize the SBA to make (1) an initial grant of up to $12 million dollars to an eligible operator, promoter, producer, or talent representative; and (2) a supplemental grant that is equal to 50% of the initial grant. The cold hard facts are that without support, many venues (and concert promoters) are going to go out of business. This will make it even more challenging and difficult for the live music industry to come back after the threat of Covid-19 has receded. I can only speak for myself, but I look forward to going out again to see live music, in-person. In the meantime, while we wait not so patiently for Congress to act (and we all know how quickly that is happening), YouTube has joined forces with the recently formed National Independent Venue Association to fund and provide awareness of grants from a separate, independently raised, Emergency Relief Fund. So, what can you do? Go to https://www.nivassoc.org/erf to learn more and check out #saveourstages to pressure Congress to act and soon. Oh, and Keep Listening!

Let’s All Sing Together and Alone Karaoke is a great way to spend an evening with friends. All tucked into a small room with fun lights and a giant book full of songs to choose from. If you have not tried this, you are certainly missing out. What could be better? Doing it by yourself? Who has not sung along with their favorite tunes, whether in the shower or while driving, or whenever. ... Music services, well some of them at least, think you want to do it without the vocals, making it virtual karaoke. Word dropped last week that Spotify may be working on a feature to do just that. A hacker (kindly called a reverse engineer) found new code hidden in Spotify to allow a user to adjust the vocal volume while listening. Tencent, the Chinese behemoth behind most of the Chinese streaming market (and a partner with Spotify) has its own WeSing App, which it claims generated 10 million tracks per day last year, accounting for more than 75% of Chinese karaoke. Oddly, Amazon’s Twitch is winding down its own, existing Twitch Sings karaoke App, which will close by the end of this year. Well, however you do it, you know my advice Keep Listening!

THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT IS LITERALLY AT STAKE [F-YOU NICKI] Copyright is simple. It means the right to copy. It does NOT mean the right to copy for a commercial purpose.... This is not an issue of judicial interpretation. The United States Constitution very specifically provides at Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 establishes a blanket monopoly on certain kinds of intellectual property, including copyrights: To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. True, there are some exclusions, most notably the mercurial, fair use established in the Copyright Act. Recently there have been some pretty crazy copyright cases which have modestly shaken the idea of what is and is not an infringement. For example, the rather complicated case of Stairway to Heaven which seems to directly copy from a prior song, Taurus by the band Spirit. Enter Nicki Minaj into the scene. In 2017 she and hip-hop legend Nas began working on a song called Sorry. It was a reworking of the song, Baby Can I Hold You by Tracy Chapman. That is not in any way in dispute. In fact, once the song was completed and selected for her album Queen, Minaj and her team tried to clear the sample. Chapman said no, as she does to all sample requests (it is very well known that she refuses everything). When Chapman refused, Minaj pulled the song from the album, but then intentionally gave it to a prominent NY DJ to play in specific promotion of Minaj and her new album. When Chapman sued to protect her exclusive rights she is granted by the US Constitution, Minaj’s defense is that allowing Chapman’s suit will stifle artistic experimentation in the privacy of the recording studio. What a load of self-serving BS. No one is stifled from experimenting in private by allowing a writer to defend her exclusive rights and to stop the PUBLICATION of infringing material. Yes, I intentionally capitalized that word. What Minaj did was to knowingly, willfully and intentionally cause the publication by a third party of the infringing work, for her own self-promotion and benefit. What makes this worse is that she did this after asking for permission and being emphatically told NO. I am not suggesting that there is anything wrong with experimentation and pushing the envelop between homage and copying. What I demanding is that, and Nicki as a strong woman should understand this, NO means no. It does not mean, go ahead and do it and apologize for it later. Thanks for reading. I found this horribly offensive and wanted to get that off my chest. What can you do? Keep Listening! (just maybe not to Nicki).

EU & UK Trademarks After Brexit The Answer to the question you never asked! I almost always write about music related issues here. The past month or so I have been doing a lot of all the Trademark work, so I thought I would share this with you all. Before I answer the unasked question, let me explain the question itself: Trademarks, like all Intellectual Property rights, are issued by country; there is no single worldwide trademark. The European Union does provide the abi...lity to secure a single registration covering each EU member country. Fun fact: Norway is not part of the EU. As part of the EU, the UK was covered by a EUTM. One of many questions related to Brexit was what would happen to the EUTM in the UK. And, the answer is, unsurprisingly, that as of January 1, 2021, owners of an EUTM will automatically receive (digitally, only, no hard certificates) an identical UKTM, dating to the EUTM filing date. Many TM owners receive their EUTM protection through WIPO. WIPO offers an International Registration. The IR TM rights still issue country-by-country, but through one central application service under the Madrid Protocols. While WIPO and the UK have not determined if rights-holders currently holding EUTM via IR through WIPO will receive an equivalent UKTM-IRTM, there is no reason to think that won’t be the result. OK, rights-protection wonky, abbreviation heavy post over: next time back to music stuff. In the meantime, Keep Listening!

.COM FIXES EVERYTHING! Not to put too much of a spin on this, but the SCOTUS today issued, to my mind, an extremely important trademark decision. The USPTO (Trademark Office) will not let you register a trademark for a term it views as merely generic. This is to avoid granting someone a monopoly over a terms that many will have a reasonable desire to use. This is sound policy.... However, today, the Supreme Court ruled that adding ".com" to the otherwise generic word "booking" magically transforms it into something that becomes protectable. The court ruled that people view "booking.com" as one specific reservation booking service, and not, "to signify online hotel-reservation services as a class." In other words, consumers recognize, booking.com, as a unique brand. The purpose of a trademark is to identify the source of specific goods or services, so, if people view it as the source of specific services, then it should be protected and protectable. Does this mean that anything ".com" is allowable? Possibly. Or, the USPTO could hold that if there is no perceived brand identity in the pool of potential consumers, then it is still a no-go. Time will tell. In the meantime, Keep Listening!

DON’T LIKE TRUMP USING YOUR SONG: BLAME BMI Ok, Ok, it is not just Trump, and not just BMI. There is a long history of complaints from musicians that politicians and/or other groups make use of their songs at rallies and events without permission....Continue reading

3M files Trademark suit to go after price gauging. This was so strange i had to write about it even though this is not music related. A company offered to sell New York millions of 3M brand N95 masks, but at nearly 6x the actual price.... N95 is not a 3M trademark, many companies use that technical designation. But 3M is clearly the most well known brand of the masks. So, 3M is arguing that the use of its brand name as part of this reprehensible price gauging deal harms its trademark. Interesting claim and i am interested to see what happens with it as it moves through the courts. In the meantime, stay safe, stay sane, and, of course... Keep Listening.

I really love Steely Dan. Nothing controversial to report about them. I was just listening to them and reminded how much I really love their music. Aja is always my test for any new speakers or headphones. definitely...... Keep Listening! See more