i currently have a case with similar facts. My view is that a sound
recording producer is an author of the sound recording, as long as he
can show that he contributed creatively to the process -- e.g.,
supervising the recording, instructing the musicians on how to play
(attack the notes), -- acting, in short, as a director. If the producer did
not assign his rights (by signing a work for hire agreement, or a transfer
document) the producer co-owns the sound recording.
>===== Original Message From "Phil Leonard" <leonardp[_at_]xtn.net>
>Interesting question from Mr. Phillips. I suggest that no single person
owns the guitar lick in the proposed hypo. The lick was not singularly
published by itself. One cannot purchase sheet music of this lick. As
with all other players on the recording, I believe their contributions are
works for hire. The effort is a collaboration. I suspect the guitarist
decided upon the lick he contributed based, in part, upon what was
being played by the bassist and drummer. His performance is partly a
"reaction" to all the other components. Not similar to scored music
>(though there may be a "lead chart" involved). Now the entire
recording can be a "sound recording" copyright totally seperate from the
song. There is currently discussion amongst professional recording
engineer and producer organizations about seeking seperate copyrights
for their efforts. The concern coming from new "surround sound"
technology. If a person takes the multi-track master tapes he or she can
make a new 5.1 mix. If the multi-track master is not available (whick is
often the case) there is a method for simulating a new 5.1 (surround
sound) mix
>from the original two-track mixed down master (whick was a different
producer/engineer's final effort). There are currently more questions
than answers. And, unless the producer or engineer has very special
clout in the industry their work will be likely owned by the record label
and not themselves.
>I'd love to see other people's read on this and associated subjects.
>
>Phil Leonard
>Montclair Studios
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Phillips
> To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 11:00 AM
> Subject: [CNI-(C)] Who owns signature guitar licks?
>
>
> Hypo: Dobie Gray records "Drift Away", which was written by Mentor
R. Williams. Assume for the sake of discussion (I have no idea what the
truth is) that Gray never signed an assignment document for the master
recording. The signature guitar lick in the recording was created
(written) by Reggie Young. Assume that there was no writing between
Gray and Young and that Young was not an employee for copyright
purposes. Who, for copyright purposes, owns the copyright in the lick?
Not the he would want to, but what would stop Young from playing the
same riff on
>someone else's recording?
>
> My analysis, under this fact pattern, is that Reggie Young owns the
copyright to his creation, and that Dobie Gray has an unlimited license
to use the work, since Reggie was hired as a session musician.
>
> Mike Phillips
Received on Fri Aug 29 2003 - 00:35:14 GMT