Posts
Recently I posted some recordings of my band doing other people's songs. A friend told me he thought that might be breaking the law. "What?" I thought. "Thousands of people have posted songs on YouTube, and I can't post a recording on my blog?" Anyway, I wrote the proper contacts about it, and found out that each song was owned partially by so and so, and partially by someone else; that I needed to pay one company $30 annually for posting it on the web, and another company another sum for the "mechanical rights" to record the song in the first place. One song company (Hillsong) outright denied me the right to place it on my blog because they said they can't be held responsible for what goes on my blog, and that having their song here would seem to suggest that they promote whatever material I post here. The letter implied that they've been burned in the past by this.
Anyway, I've put out a challenge to my bandmates to write a worship song that meets two criteria. The song has to be 1) congregational (i.e., singable, melodically accessible), and 2) the text must be a passage of Scripture.
Some have already stepped up to the challenge. We'll see the results in the New Year. The goal is to record the songs, place them on the church's web and here, and sing the songs regularly in worship.
We'll let you know how it goes!
Recent Posts
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Obviously you don't understand the intent of Copyright laws: to protect writers of all kinds from those who would steal from them.
So, pay the royalties or don't use their music. The moral choice is clear.
Dear "copyright holders everywhere",
You're right. It is a moral choice, which is why I removed the songs I had recorded. However, I would resist accusing people of stealing when they aren't aware of the intellectual property laws in the first place. I talked to a number of music labels (EMI, Hillsong, Integrity) and found the process vague and exasperating. In my opinion, if 1) the copyright laws were clear and better enforced, and 2) the licensing process was simplified - a flat rate to one company - artists would reap the benefits in terms of royalties. Thanks again.
Post a Comment