JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Songwriter Message Forum Is this stealing?

If I take someone’s lyrics at JPF and create music and melody for it, then only use the track created from the lyrics as an instrumental for licensing, would that be stealing? Or would you consider it in the realm of being inspired by a film or photo? I mean, the lyricist would never know that this music was derived from their lyrics. But then... it was guided by their lyrics (at least melodically). Ethical or not, hmm...

John

Can't see this as stealing.

It's like being inspired to write a lyric by a story.

Maybe little more than that. The lyrics would form the melody (duration of notes, phrasing, rhythm, etc.).

I wonder how the lyricist would feel if I were making money by using their lyrics as a guide. Doesn't quite sound ethical. But then another part of me says it is.

John

No. It can't be stealing if you don't use what isn't yours. If that were the case any other music or lyrics that inspired us may constitute stealing ehh? We all can be impulsive and influenced by what's in our immediate environment or our past. You're fine "Johnny!"

steady-eddie.

It is a interesting question and both sides/answers would be correct. I've written quite a few lyrics to other folks' backing tracks and I listed them as co-writers. ... and once a song is brought together, then can't be broken apart.

However if I read a poem and constructed a musical track to that, I wouldn't consider it a co-write unless I performed/recorded the piece with the lyrics (and then you have to get permission first).

If I created to lyrics to someone else's tune (Like a ghost write) and then went and added my own different music I would not consider it a co-write.

So basically, you have to decide on a case by case basis. Whatever decision you make will probably be the right one!

I wouldn't say it's stealing. You can create probably a million different musical arrangements with those lyrics, but you could probably do the exact same musical arrangement with another set of lyrics that has the same flow and word count as well.

No, it's not even remotely stealing. Is it wrong? Nah

Alot of songwriters write new lyrics to old songs, write a new chord structure and melody to and old lyric. They can even write a new track to an old melody and lyric, like a new arrangement of an old song.

Now, if you had worked with the lyricist and they wrote a lyric, and you wrote a track, but later decided that you didnt like their lyric, but liked the track you came up with, you still wouldnt be stealing, but I can see why they might get upset.

That would be akin to me watching a movie, getting an idea from it and writing a song. I didnt steal the movie, I was inspired by the movie.

People write songs inspired by books, poems, short stories, other songs.

but, it might be interesting to see if you could make it into a song and see how well the music and lyric fit together

Stealing?........... If you saw something happen and when asked you give a fully detailed account, intentionally leaving out a portion of what you saw. Is that a partial truth or lying?

Reading your comments I see the lyrics being used less as inspiration and more as an out right tool assisting in the creation of a piece of music.

Question:
If that person were sitting next to you at the piano and you played as they came up with the melody (duration of notes, phrasing, rhythm etc. Would you consider that a collaboration or were you just inspired by their suggestions?

No not stealing, just creating something from an inspiration. However if your moral compass is pointing to stealing, then let it go. Better to sleep at night.

I'm with Kevin on this one, John. Definitely a case-by-case situation. Various factors can come into play.

If the lyrics were written by someone on this forum (or any other one you might be on), for instance, I guess it would be a courtesy to mention that their text had inspired the music. It's quite a compliment, after all. (Mind you…if that music began hauling in the loot, the lyricist might feel a little miffed. )

But no, I don't consider it stealing. However, you should follow your own sense of personal ethics.

I know that on at least two or three occasions, I've been inspired to write a lyric after hearing a particular piece of music (e.g. during a FAWM or 50-90 Challenge). When I posted the lyric, I always mentioned the music/composer that had inspired it. And the inspiration was always one of mood; I never attempted to match the lyrical cadence to that of the music.

Later, I had a different composer put a melody and music to my lyrics.

Donna

I would think the difference would be determined by whether the music and the lyrics had been put together as a finished product, agreed upon and released, or if you just read the lyrics and were inspired to write the music. In the latter case, it is just an inspiration piece, but in the former, you owe the lyricist a discussion as to whether you could use the music independently.

All art is derivative - nobody produces music, lyrics, paintings, photography, etc. in a vacuum.

I could write a new lyric, using the same exact meter, rhythm, line length and structure, as a hit song, and so long as the words are mine, nothing anybody could say about it, none of that is copyrightable, just like a chord progression is not.

it's actually a good idea for a lyricist to do that, it ensures that their lyric will be singable and have a current structure, it would be the music writers jobs to make sure the song is not the same thing.

In this case, i dont even think the question is valid, music and lyrics are different things.

Stealing titles, hooks, ideas, actual lines and phrases, is stealing, although it would hard to prove.

Ive heard some many melodies that are identical to other songs, and nothing is ever done about it.

Case in point....

This was a mega hit this year https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB-5XG-DbAA

The first time I heard the melody for "stay with me" cue to 1:00
Wont you "Stay with me...

I heard Tom Petty's "Wont back Down, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlTJrNJ5lA cue to 0.10

Same exact melody, the former being more soulish, petty being more blues, but style might be the only slight difference, and it's a huge part of both songs.

So, if you cant prove this, you certainly cant prove somebody writing a music track because they read a lyric. LOL

John, I'm with Colin here as well. If the piece consisted initially of lyrics & music, the lyricist definitely needs to be taken into account if only the instrumental version of the song is used for a paying project.

As to my collaborators and myself, everything we do is split right down the middle: 50/50.

In fact, for every song we complete, we make a point of having a separate instrumental version (which is enhanced, so that it is not just the song's backing track but has its own unique structure & integrity). This doubles our chances for when we want to submit to listings.

Donna

But in Johns case, there was nothing, he wrote a track of music, after reading a lyric, not even a melody to the lyric

We'd be afraid of ever talking to somebody, or listening to someone else, or watching TV or reading a book, or even plagerizing a lesson given to us by an English teacher in 6th grade, if we had to credit all those sources as co-writers.

If you speak Mandarin, you cant write a song in English, so it all comes from what we learn from other sources, of course, we could buy a course in another language, so when we write a song in that language, do we then have to credit the maker of the course in language?

I don't think it's stealing and would wonder about a person who would begrudge you any success of your instrumental music inspired by their lyrics. I, personally, would be honored to have inspired anyone to do anything with their music.

Lyrics have a rhythm to them, if they're any good. However, the rhythm you get from them may not be the same as the lyricist felt when writing them. That's coming from you.

I agree, it's an inspiration, like any other and I don't think you should feel guilt. Gratitude, as we should all feel for our inspirations, from wherever they come, but never guilt.

Just my 6 cents worth.

Ricki

I know, Bugsey. I just wanted to expand the scenario, in case anyone wondered how things might be handled in a collaboration situation.

Donna

Thanks for winking, you know, I am single

Not stealing unless you're using mine John.No,i'm kidding,i dont think it's stealing at all in the way you mentioned you were going to do it.A lot of songs have inspired me and i've taken bits and pieces in one way or another from them.I've also used instrumentals and wrote lyrics for them but of course i could never use them but i guess it would be something like a parody,or not.But it would be cool to have a version with the lyrics you used also.Mike

Very interesting replies!

Yes, I agree, in a collab situation a 50/50 split including any instrumental versions is ethically sound. However I’m referring to using lyrics as a composing tool. Even so, I think Donna hit the nail on the head when stating the lyricist “might feel a little miffed” when money comes rolling in. Though the lyricist would never make the connection between melody and lyrics without being told. So in essence, the only person being harmed by this is the creator of the instrumental track (if he/she has a conscience).

Here’s an example of what I’m talking about. Lisa’s lyric used with permission.



Piano track created from Lisa's lyric blueprint: http://schicksville.com/Lisa%20Lyrics.mp3

Each word of Lisa's lyric determined the melody (both in duration and structure). And also the inspiration of her lyrics determing the mood of music. Stealing or an exceptable composing tool?

Best, John

It would look more like stealing if you say the lyric used, and then credit the lyric writer lol, in which case why ask? Lol

No it's not stealing, you could open a book and do the same thing.

But, you might as well credit the lyric writer now, since you already did...LOL

I guess the concluding answer on this unsettling issue is to do what your conscience tells you. Unless one doesn’t have one.

Thanks for all the interesting viewpoints.

John

I still think the answer is no

Simple exercise


Take the line

You got me thinking, I could be drinking, Fritter the night away


Lots and lots of possibilities for a melody in either 4\4 or 3\4 time, with lots of different melodic shapes, depending on where\how you start.

Now I get that a well written completed lyric can beg for specific structures and a cadence in a particular spot etc, but unless the lyric writer specifically asked you to set their work to music, and there is a "meeting of the minds", .....well feel free to be inspired.

Well, we/I were just presenting the facts.

The conscience thing is a gut call. if it bothered you enough to mention it, then for you, do what your conscience says.

We were just trying to figure out what is the rights of both the musicians and the lyric, I dont think the lyricst has any rights in that one.

if you like the lyric, call it a collab. I see nothing wrong with either approach.

Hi John:

I saw this and did a double-take when I saw you were the author of this post. If you did a 50/50 split deal with a lyricist, then both of you agree that it is "on" as a joint work, then I would think you have an obligation to clear the use of your musical creation with your co-writer. Assuming you have a really good working relationship, most lyricists would release you from obligation or sharing proceeds if you want to use it for licensing, etc. (There are those who would demand their portion of the deal, regardless... and they would be correct, IMHO.)

As always, I'm not a Music Attorney or Barrister but, if the jointly created song became a mega-hit, then the melody would be associated with your joint creation... and the lyricist would be correct in his/her assumption that it belongs to both of you.
If neither of you have agreed on joining both efforts into a song... then you have the right to refuse to complete the effort and keep your melody in your own catalog.

I began as a lyricist and began creating melodies later but I have always believed the melody is the strongest part of the song equation... but, there are exceptions. (None of this particular sidebar figures into your question, though.)

Regards,

Dave

Dave,

In this case (correct me if I am wrong, John), it wasn't a co-write. John saw some lyrics that he liked and wrote a melody/composition to it. Since the lyric writer was never aware of it and the song was never released/heard as a song -- then it is still not a co-write and John can do whatever he likes with his music.

If the song was released as a music/lyric, then it can not be "undone". It is all sort of simple really.

Agree with Kevin 100%! As I already said and others also mentioned, that piece of lyrics could be put to 1000 different melodies. And your melody probably fits to 1000 different lyrics that have been written. So, it's in no way stealing if it's not a collaboration where you agree to have the song as one piece at the end.

Actually it was a hypothetical question. I've never composed music to lyrics without the consent of the lyricist. And it’s always been in the creation of an actual song (not instrumental). Though I’d always include an instrumental as an addition to the song. However, I’ve been thinking by using this lyric blueprint technique for instrumentals could lead to some interesting results.

John

Not to hijack your thread John, but I have a related question. What about a co-written song, where one writer does the lyrics, the other writes music for them. Down the road, the lyricist writes totally different music for it. Since the lyrics came first, and they now have the lyricist's music, is the first music co-writer entitled to anything, should the song find publishing or any other recognition? Just curious.

Ricki

Hey Kevin:

Admittedly, I did not read each post in John's thread. I decided it would be best if I replied without undue influence. Your point is well taken and I did provide a caveat in a statement just prior to the closing sentence in my post above... explaining just the point you made so well.

If the two potential co-writers have not finalized the work in process... either party can walk away without fear of retribution at any time. This leads to the situation where either a formal agreement has been made between parties or not.

I believe the working relationship between parties weighs heavily on whether or not a verbal agreement is sufficient. In the end, it becomes a matter of trust without a verbal agreement... and I believe a person's word should be his/her bond.

Regards,

Dave

Ricki, in this case I think it's important - in fact essential - that the original composer be informed about the change. In fact, there should already have been an official agreement to separate the lyrics & the music.

This way, any confusion and hard feelings can be avoided, especially if the composer - not knowing the music had been changed - decided to post the original song to a listing, and it was accepted for licensing. That could really become a can of worms.

Donna

I think this phrase fits here: "What two songwriters have joined together let no man put asunder" In other words, you can't un-write a co-written song (break it back up) unless you get prior permission.

I think I get it. Best to take the high road, regardless. It's safer, especially when dealing with another person. You never know how they'll react. Plus there's that burning of bridges thing... Thanks,

Ricki

The copyright is a bit strange, for sure. Technically, the song is copyrighted the minute it is put into tangible form. I always wondered what the law was if the person, or persons write their song live, and don't write anything down, or record it, then what? It's not copyrighted? Not that being copyrighted amounts to a hill of beans but...

In regards to Ricki's question, I don't believe the lyricist or musician has to ask any permission or owes anything to the cowriter, if they want to keep their own part, and get rid of the other part. You wouldn't be stealing anything, you are using your part, this has happened with me many times.

A lot of times you write music to somebodys lyric, because you can, and the lyric is there, and make something really cool out of the music, but realize the lyric is not really that good.

You should not have to get permission from the lyricist to write new lyrics, it's your music.

If the two of you had gone through the paperwork and sent it to Washington, then there might be something in that. But I still believe if the guy who wrote the music, fills out a revision form of the copyright, and re submits the song with a new lyric, then he is covered.

How could the lyricist claim any money from a song that contains nothing he created.

Of course, there is the question of who wrote what etc.

But, 99.999% you wont have to worry about any scenario at all.

Bugsey, this is the crux of the matter. As I mentioned above in my response to Ricki, both parties need to agree officially that the lyric and the music will be separated. Once that's done, the lyricist and the composer are of course free to do what they like with their own pieces.

Donna

Yeah, but even though I don't do many co-writes (I never see the lyric the way they see it) when I have done it, nothing like that is ever discussed.

My response to somebody who wants to go all legal on me, even though we haven't tried to writing anything would be. "oh really Bernie Taupin", well let me see about this?

And im sure they would react the same way.

Id be afraid to start any co write with somebody like that.

If a songs is released with a certain melody and someone else sees it can be done with a different arrangement, he/she must get the permission of the copyright holder before they can do it. Then they can get a copyright for the new arrangement but still must pay royalties to the original owner. The original owner can deny any new arrangements if they see fit.

Arrangements meaning a completely new lyric?

And in the cases we're talking about, you ARE the copyright holder.

i'm guessing that unless the song was filed in Washington, with two authors responsible for ONE song, not in pieces, then you are free to do whatever you want with your end.

Of which reminds me,
When Marco Polo traveled from Venice to China he did a lot of it by water because of Thieves, Robbers, Highwaymen, Bandits and other all around nice guys. SO, it is only stealing if you get caught! Uh no, I don't believe it is stealing. So write, compose away! Didn't Beethoven borrow Ode to Joy in his 9Th from somebody?

They say stealing from one is plagerism, stealing from many is research!

Bruce Springsteen stole from Bob Dylan, Van Morrison and, the wall of sound recording techniques in his first three albums, until he started sounding like himself.

there isn't a rock artist alive who doesn't steal from Chuck Berry or from the Stones or Beatles

Dylan could live like a king off the royalties of other peoples songs, if he could take them all to court and sue.

Proving a copyright infringement is one of the hardest things to do, I hear evidence of stolen pieces every day.

Everybody influences everybody, and everybody is influenced by everybody.

Different folks/different strokes. I'd be afraid to start a co-write with anyone who wasn't prepared to have an agreed understanding.

Bugsey, I think it depends on the intention with regard to the finished song, and this needs to be clarified at the outset. If there's a commercial intention, or a serious gigging intention, it's important for both parties to be wholly on board. If one party is not completely happy with the song, then each should go his/her separate way.

Donna

I completely agree with Donna on this. A trusting relationship with your co-write is everything. And make sure each person understands the terms of their agreement. Personally, when I finish a co-write with someone, it's final. No changes unless both parties agree.

John

Generally you two are talking about writing with people you already know well, or have written with.

if I see a lyric I can relate to or like, I might try writing music for it, but im not going to grill them about who owns what.

it's easy to talk extremes when the extremes have no chance of ever happening. In the real world, somebody is doing you a favor collabing with you.

My opinion of course.

I agree Jim. whos the chick in your avatar..or is that you and i hit on a touchy subject?

For example, here bruce steals the riff from this animals song:

Same riff different tempo, to which he openly admits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfwN0X8YnWo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFYMl_OhiEs

If one wants to take the business of music seriously, one should conduct the business side seriously. If it's just a hobby where you're only doing this for your own pleasure. Then it makes no matter. I choose to take every move seriously. Googie googie kotchie koo koo!

John

To an extent, that's true of course, Bugsey. And the reason they're people I already know well and have written with is because from the beginning we've been up front about our intentions. No one is doing anyone a favour; we simply want to give the song our best shot, using whatever skills/talent we possess.

(On a side note - it's kind of a pity that relationships aren't conducted this way. )

Donna

Ok John...then this is the serious answer

IF you simply use some lyric as inspiration for your own melody, and you have no other relationship with that lyricist, you have no duty to them, there is no co write, and go where you will with your melody with no notice to that lyricist


IF you have some kind of oral or written agreement with that lyricist to put one or more of their lyrics to music, and you do, then you each own the resulting song according to the agreement you entered into.

C'est tout. Full stop. Niks meer.

I take the creation of music seriously, the business is laughable so I dont. I take the study of songwriting seriously, that is the only reward I get.

I disagree Donna, When a lyric writer writes their lyric, they will write 4 lines for a verse, two for a pre-chorus, four for a chorus, and so on, so that it will fit a structure, they dont know how to do anything else.

They ask somebody to "add music to this" the person that is doing it has to write a melody to sing, has to write a chord structure to fit that melody and mood, they have to find a rhythm and a tempo, they have to record it, and the recording and producing of it is where the real work is.

Considering this same musician could choose any lyric on the forum, or write their own, and still have a great track as a result, i would call that a major favor for the lyrcist, they get a recording of their song when others have to pay for it.

Big favor. I actually have seen some collabs where the lyrics were atrociously lame and trite. it;s doubtful that the musicians thought, wow< I could never write anything like this myself.

There are some really good lyricists on the forum, but there are thousands of lyricists too, if I do do this for somebody, im certainly not going to like the legal talk.

"I take the creation of music seriously, the business is laughable so I don't" - Bugsey

I take the business of music as a challenge.

John