JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Song definition?

Well, there are always con artists out there. If you pay somebody to write music to your lyrics or lyrics to your music, your asking to be ripped off.

Not sure what kind of losses you accrued, did your song make money? or did you lose money by paying somebody to collaborate with?

me, I rarely collab, I think melody and lyric should be done at the same time if possible, if not possible it cant be, but I have done it, im particuarly good at writing a melody and lyric to an existing track, but usually people who have tracks can write for themselves.

Ronald, what Jody mentioned here is the best sort of WRITTEN agreement...but before doing that, it is important to learn whether you agree with each other in the first place. A conversation is necessary BEFORE you do any work together.

If you both feel differently about anything regarding song ownership, DO NOT CREATE MUSIC TOGETHER. A lot of trouble is prevented if you do not collaborate with people who disagree with you.

Hello Mark, sorry for the late reply.

I always make written agreement, but only with people in my place. It's kind of hard to sign (not effective) a written agreement if we collab with someone in another country. So I think it would be a written statement from both parties via email for now, and this time I will make my points clearer and better to them.

--

Bugsey, I didn't make money with the songs, I spent much money for demos, musicians, studio and engineers. I've done 90% of the whole process and they stole my rights.

According to WHO?

song·writ·er (sôngrtr, sng-)
n.
One who writes lyrics or tunes, or both, for songs. Also called songsmith, songster.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
songwriter [ˈsɒŋˌraɪtə]
n
(Music / Pop Music) a person who composes the words or music for songs in a popular idiom

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

please check you information before posting.

I know there are folk who think both Harper Collins and the American Heritage Dictionary (and all other respected dictionaries) are wrong but if you are doing a university test and put down an answer different to the above no matter what reference you quote.... they will make you as wrong...

A song is anything by The Beatles or The Rolling Stones.

LOL Michael....

As for the rest of this thread, we probably fall into different definitions based on our own perceptions, beliefs, desires and experiences, and fall into the semantics trap...and then spend far too much time and energy defending our position.

Personally, I'm with what Vic said far above...but when it comes down to the legals, that is why terms and roles are defined in contracts...so both\all parties agree on definitions.

@Michael -- I agree, Michael! and by Bee Gees too!!

@John -- It all make sense to me after what Mark said. The point is the agreement; when all parties in a collaboration agree about their role, rights and obligations, then there shouldn't be a problem.

Noel,

I got the definitions from "The FACTS ON FILE - Dictionary of Music
by Christine Ammer.

I interested to discuss the dictionaries and its definitions. It's a 'pedagogy' thing I guess =) --

Before we determine "Songwriter" definition, we should determine the "Song" definition first. That's the key of my first questions.

There are an understanding which said: Lyric without notation (melody/lead) is not a song yet, it's a lyric. So in a music collaboration, when someone provide lyric only, then s/he will be consider as Lyricist. The one who composed music for the lyric will be consider as Composer.

Based on the dictionaries, the composer is a songwriter because even without a Lyric, his/her melody tunes is a song.

But the lyricist became a songwriter After his/her lyric has melody/music accompaniment. How can we sing a song without melody and/or rhythm?

When the related song finished, and become a full song contains lyric and music, then both lyricist and composer is a songwriter of that piece.

The importance of this issue is to let all parties in a music collaboration understand their role, right and obligation. You can't own the finished song by yourself!

--

I hope the universities will do the test of this argument (or they have), that lyric without melody or music accompaniment is not a song yet. Lyricist need to write the melody or involve a composer to achieve a full song so they can consider as a songwriter of a piece. If it's true.. then we need to change the definitions in the dictionaries..

--

lol. It's just a thought guys, I'm not a pedagogue.

I dont think the defintion matters at all.

Nobody can use the lyrics you write without your permission. That pretty much settles it, if they do you are due compensation for your role in the song, but as in most cases it wont make a dime and not to worry.

Focus on writing this is a silly argument.

Language is a useful tool to communicate thoughts and ideas. Use it appropriately. Here is an idea: use the word that best describes the person you are defining, even if it is yourself. If you write lyrics, call yourself a lyricist and nobody will have any confusion about it. If you write lyrics and melodies call yourself a songwriter. Everyone will know what you do. If you compose melodies, call yourself a composer and the world will know what you do.

Of course, you can call yourself a frankfurter if you want to, but don't expect people to know what you mean.

Bugsey, you have said:



and now you say the concept: "lyric without melody or music accompaniment is not a song yet" is silly?

But that's okay, bugsey. I know some writers who doesn't respect definitions too; and they copyrighted my music just because they wrote the lyric.

Im saying this now because you continue to focus on the meaning of the word lyricist/songwriter, when, in fact it doesnt matter.

Where is this song that they stole? is it on itunes? Can I buy it? is it making money?

I dont even know how you know that they stole your song? Did they say "haha we stole your song" or did you wake up one day and hear it on the radio?

if the song is not making money, it doesn't matter if the stole it or not, you cant sue for your feelings being hurt, you can only sue for money.

It was an intermezzo to Noel. I got the definitions and my problem with the agreements stuff are solved.

It is fine if it doesn't concern you, it does matter to me.



It's NOT about money! You keep saying that. I want my name in every piece I composed, selling or not. I'm not Santa Claus, I don't compose music and give it to other composers/writers for free so they can do anything with it, including make money without mention me as the original composer.

I know they stole my music because they copyrighted them! they published the song without my permission and they didn't even put my name on the songwriter name tab! now how I supposed to sue them if I don't have the copyright.. and you want me to say who stole my songs here? come on bugsey, they own the copyright!

I don't mean to be rude, but you don't have to believe the case, just stay out of it, it's my problem, okay. I only need feedback for the definitions and the collaboration process.

As many have already told you, if the song’s not making money, being played, etc. etc., you’re really wasting energy worrying about it. You can’t sue because you have no loss. That being said I do have a few questions:
1. Why didn’t you copyright it first? I would think somebody as concerned with having their name protected would have.
2. When you say they’re published, what do you mean?

Again, I’m no lawyer but why not copyright the song, now, under your name. Believe me the copyright office is not going to follow up on songs with the same title. Go find a publisher or publish it yourself. Join a PRO and list the song. Now your name is out there. If the bad people who “stole” your song have a problem, let them sue you!

You said “I only need feedback for the definitions and the collaboration process”. I think you got your answer. What else do you need?

Hello Iggy,

yes, I got answers and solutions, thanks to everyone. but looks like someone want to start a new debate and I'm not interested on that one.

I want to make this clear, About my stolen songs, it's a mistake that I don't want to happen again. I'm not chasing them again, I never say that on this thread. All I want to do is fix the way I collaborate with people, that's why I asked about definitions and collaboration procedure, agreement, etc.

I didnt want to start any debate, im trying to figure out why you are beating the subject over the head.

I know some pretty damn good lyricists who have never had any lyric stolen from them. And they post them online for all to see, without ever copyrighting them. on this ite alone there are dozens of good lyricists who might enjoy if somebody stole their lyrics!

it just doesnt happen very often, in line with Haley's Comet.

Wish you luck, but i do wish you would start posting songs, and stop worrying.

I'll start you off.. heck, ill finish it!

It Aint About The Money

You say you wrote the words I wrote
claimed them as your own
now I'm stuck at JPF
they think i'm overblown

but i'll be darned to let it go
dont care if it makes a dime
cause right is right
wrong is wrong
I wont be fooled next time

It aint about the money
never cared for that
it's all about the art
my pen against the pad
I write for every person
who ever roamed this earth
give hope and inspiration
now ask me what it's worth

Oh...(pause),

You might have pulled one over
I admit I was naive
I'm a minstrel, not a banker
got letters on my sleeve

Guess you'd say i'm destined
to write a million songs
I mean... to write the lyrics
that meaning might be wrong

It aint about the money
never cared for that
it's all about the art
my pen against the pad
I write for every person
who ever roamed this earth
give hope and inspiration
now ask me what it's worth

Can't you see what you have done?
You took my god given gift
and didn't credit none
None but yourself
and your team of infidels
if I was a cursin' man
Id tell you go to...

It aint about the money
never cared for that
it's all about the art
my pen against the pad
I write for every person
who ever roamed this earth
give hope and inspiration
now ask me what it's worth

C) Ronald

You can steal it if you want it!

Post some tunes dude, it aint that bad!

"It just doesnt happen very often, in line with Haley's Comet" - Bugsey

Probably true, i.e., word for word. However I'm sure ideas and phrases are taken all the time. If you had a song title "Break Your Head" with a line: "You broke my Heart, now I'm going to break your head". Someone may get the idea for "Break Your Arm" with a line: "Your broke my heart, now I'm going to break your arm". Of course this example is an obvious steal. Less obvious creates a fine line between stealing and "being influenced".

John

Ideas are probably the most likely to be stolen or a hook. Which is to say if you have a great idea or hook, make sure you write better than nobody else can because they could take it.

It would probably need to be somebody really big in the business for the "steal" to even matter.

For 99% they can steal all they like, it's still going nowhere.

Just as hard to place somebody else's song as it is your own!

To a point, ideas and hooks are not legally protected. It gets fuzzy when there is a trademark or if someone is infringing on someone else's ability to profit from an idea. Now, is it a "steal?" Ethically? well...maybe...I'd say sometimes it is morally wrong. On the other hand, what if you wrote a hook called, "It Depends on What 'Is' Is" or, as a friend of mine wrote, "It's Not Over Until It's Over." Those are provable quotes by famous people. Is that unethical? Or how about using a figure of speech or a common joke for a hook like the song "If I Said You Had a Beautiful Body Would You Hold it Against Me?"

If governments made titles and hooks subject to copyright, there would only be one song titled "You Broke My Heart." Right now, BMI lists 59 of them, I'll bet there have been many thousand written. Or how about "Silly Love Song?" BMI lists six, and none are Paul McCartney's. No, it would be a mess, so titles and hooks are not protected. To a point. What is that point? As a lawyer friend once told me, the point is when a judge is convinced otherwise.

As far as the original post, it differs in different countries. In the U.S., lyrics and music are not necessarily inextricably linked. I'm not a lawyer so I can't give the exact parameters, but a lyricist may have several musical treatments to their lyrics in certain cases. In Indonesia? I don't know, you'd need to consult an attorney.

Yeah, the only difference is nobody would be interested in stealing a generic hook!

I guess you cant copyright a title because even a generic title can end up being about something totally different than another song with the same title.

There must be hundreds of songs called "Forever"

What makes them different(or not so different) is what the total song says.

I guess it's along the lines of not being able to copyright a chord progression, if you could the entire 50's catalogue would be wiped out! as would most blues progressions.

Is it fair? Those generic hooks and progressions werent always cliche and so common, they became that over time.

But if somebody comes up with a really unique chord progression, or even a rhythm they should have protection, but they dont seem to.

Great hooks like "the futures so bright, I have to wear shades"

I mean if somebody steals that, I feel bad for the guy who came up with it, it;s clearly his idea.

I think if somebody wanted to steal something, it would be a short catchy phrase, with a short catch melody attached, or even a catchy guitar riff.

It is still wrong. So not actually a fact but a fiction...

Wonder what else in the "Fact File" is incorrect?

If you want to be taken seriously when doing this kind of research ... you need to collate facts from many sources and reach a justifiable conclusion.... not just the one out of step idiot that supports your argument. Otherwise it makes it too easy for people like me who disagree with your conclusion to show how wrong you are.... If your base evidence is wrong no amount of manipulation and double speak, fancy words or poetic licence will make it right.

Really to consider your argument That a lyric writer writes lyrics and a composer writes melodies, of which neither are song writers.. it would follow that if songs are written by song writers that when a lyric writer (who only writes lyrics), and composer (who does not write words) collaborate to produce words and melody... it is not actually a song... because it was not written by a songwriter ... which really is an idiotic idea.

Cheers

I'm afraid you didn't read it well:

Sue her..

There is a difference between a composition and a song... This is recognised in calling composers - composers, and their work compositions... although there is some vagueness around the fringes where song and composition meet...

There is also difference between a lyric and a song.

a lyric becomes a song when it has a melody,

a melody becomes a song when it has either a lyrical or instrumental arrangement.


People far smarter than me came up with the definitions and what can be used where.

I'll trust their judgement and accept what they say cause nobody is about to die if some folk make the occasional mistake and call an individual lyric or melody a song when they aren't.... no war will be lost no shot missed, no love lost and God will still love his children.

cheers