Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Anders Bergdahl<anders_e_bergdahl@hotmail.com> wrote: > I understand what you say, But, what Lougi argues for is that if someone > creates a peice of music, anyone can take it remixit, or rerecord it >with a > well known artist and the composer would not get anything at all. (sort >of > like Big Mama Thornton wrote "hound Dog" with out getting a cent from >Elvis' > HUGE succes...) I can't see how that scenario could even happen... unless the original composer doesn't tell any one that he/she has penned the work. Then it will be up for proof who created it. > Of course this discussion is somewhat obsolete in the modern world. I would agree if it concerned record sales royalty, but as for the immaterial rights department I think this discussion is highly accurate and also very important. > THe software music creators get payd for thier wiotk just as the >classical > composers often wrote on commision. A good model... I agree, as for the working hour cost of the composer. But it can't replace a licensing deal, not unless most countries rewrite their law. So I don't think it is a good general model (see below) > but is is it OK for an > other Game company to lift the music and use it in thier game for >free??? Of course not! That's an obvious "theft". The first game producer has bought the license form the composer and thus owns the rights to the music. > What about the first company who payed someona a good salary to get the > music in the first place... This question confuses the music license and salary, which are two different things. The first company actually paid for not only the "work for hire" as carried out by the composer but also for the legal right to use the music in the game. This is not possible in all countries though, because of differences in the law. For example, Swedish composers are beginning to have problems working in the game scoring business because many players know that Scandinavian composers might be members of STIM (the PRO here) and STIM has until just recently only written exclusive member contracts. This means that you as a member of STIM are giving STIM the right to represent your exclusive rights to the music you compose. With such a member contract the composer can not offer a specific license deal with a player in order to give up legal rights for a specific project or to just a certain extent. And since his member contract with the PRO usually dates back earlier than the business deal with the game production player the player will lose an eventual court case. This is a real issue that has to change or otherwise the traditional PRO's will not get much new members. Media music is not a small niche as it used to be any more and every week more composing musicians need to sell music "as is" to a music user. Greetings from Sweden Per Boysen www.boysen.se www.perboysen.com