Search options (Page 84 of 117)

Cheers TIG unfortunately my singing and piano playing is K wrap but here is a short burst recorded on my cell phone of me trying to do your excellent song.I will keep it up for you to hear and make it downloadable  just incase you want a copy.
,. https://soundcloud.com/eatleville/jim-canyon

Neo Crazy Love the way you do it has a country rock  feel to it . You do good covers.

EB loved the smooth singing and playing style you got going there, Good lyrics also.

Hi Bill
Here is a video  of Mavis Staples & Johnny Lang-"Gotta Serve Somebody" ..a great combination on stage.
Once again all the best for 2018.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QJcypTivZo

Cheers Joeyjoeyjoey

Gracias Daniel and Unclejoesband  feliz año nuevo.       May  all Chordies have a prosperous New Year  with many blessings.

Happy New Year Bad Eye from 2018 here in New Zealand. May all Chordies have a good year.
Attached is a short video I took while out on New Years Eve here in Welllington.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxyfsigqBmE

Even listening to your song Phill I couldn't give you a safe answer.  The New Zealand  Enimen case took along time because of all the differant expert opnions. One thing for sure is I am not an expert in this area. It is a bit like taking a bet on a racehorse. My sister is an expert on race horses even she can't pick the winner of a horse race.
The New Zealand defenition of an expert is a Ex Spurt is a drip under pressure

Good advice Classical Guitar.

Even though it could be considered not  legal, what you want to do, most  artist will not sue someone for doing a parody if they can see your not going to make a fortune out of it. After the Eminem case in New Zealand it could mean if the club use your Parody they could be sued. It is a minefield. Legally people are expected to pay for songs even if they use them in a church or charity unless they have permission of the composer and publisher.
It is usually pretty safe and the artist will in most cases only sue if they think that your a person who has the ability to payout big money in a court case. The main thing is to state it is parody of and your doing it for  fun not money. Soundcloud will take it down if the artist complains. The way things are today if the artist thinks your making serious money then they will sue you. I heard Paul McCartney been interviewed about people doing his songs on youtube without consents. He said something along the lines as long as they are having fun with it he didnt mind but if they were selling it and making  big money,or for big personal  financial gain he didn't like it. He even admitted that sometimes he checks out people doing some of his songs on youtube and has enjoyed some of their efforts. Apparently his agent will ask him when songs covered by other's  on the net take of in numbers by those who havent paid for them what he wants them to do.  I had one of my songs taken down by soundcloud as they thought it was too much like anotherr artists song.  They emailed me and gave me the opportunity to oppose their action. I didn't as I could see that my song was very similar to a song writen by some person in Israel who I  never had heard of or listened to before. Having said that it is most probably impossible to write a song that is completly original. Someone somewhere has most probably done something simililar.

Bill an interesting subject Advertising and music. It is a minefield full of legal traps.
A New Zealand political party has been ordered to pay more than $400,000 to US rapper Eminem for using music similar to his 2002 hit "Lose Yourself" in a television commercial to help win a national election.   The National Party used the song 186 times during the campaign before taking the ad off the air, the court said,
The National Party purchased the track, titled ‘Eminem Esque’ from a company called Beatbox, who had obtained the licence from a music library called Labrador. The National Party believed that they had gone through the right process.
The National Party purchased the song  which was licensed with one of New Zealand’s main industry copyright bodies, the Australasian Mechanical Copyright Owners Society
Legally they had got it wrong but looking at it I can see how you could be caught out through not knowing. 
Copyright and royalties is very  complex it is a minefield to walk through.
According to the Court, there is an infringement due to the fact that the composer of  “Eminem Esque” was aware of the original track including bearing in mind the name of the latter song. In this case the purchaser got punished not the composer who copied Enimem
The Court order $412,896 considering the fact that the infringement happened for a limited period of time.

What can we take from this case?
The hard thing is  a company or person  paying for an advertisement can become liable for music content which they  are unaware  of.  Lawyers and legal situations benifit who???? This prominent intellectual property case is likely to have implications in many jurisdictions.
. Copyright protection automatically exists from when the work is created, and does not require registration.
In answer to your question Bill, How is it in the UK? New Zealand? Australia? Canada?  Do they also get paid for a  time-limit "contract" and what's the royalty system like?
Here in New Zealand   the right payments,  for the broadcast, of  music in an advertisement vary..  Types of licensing contracts can include: a flat fee for a defined period of usage,  or for each time the advertisement  is broadcasted.