Tribute Bands and Copyright Issues

The Vit

METALLY ILL
Dec 12, 2004
16
0
1
San Fernando Valley, CA
Just curious how tribute bands, especially very successful ones that tour and record CDs like the Maidens, deal with copyright issues. I'm gonna guess that the bands being paid tribute to generally just appreciate the props and simply choose to ignore pursuing any legal actions (that wouldn't be very rock n roll now would it?).

Just curious if there are any insights or stories to share on this topic.

Keep on rockin' Maidens!

The Vit
 
It comes down to practicality and common sense.

The Tribute bands like The Maidens naturally pay publishing rights for the songs prior to a cd release.
As for the live shows , in a sense it could be compared to my art field. Copying a photo as a single painting , or in their case a single show , would be considered a one-off and not mass-replicating like in print , which wouldnt be treading on any trademarks or copyrights. If it was illegal , the thieving bald immigrant , aka Gene $immon$ would sue every tribute band from here to Bangladesh.

Plus , remember the old saying " Mimickery is the sincerest form of flattery".
 
I think that the niteclubs pay annual fees to ASCAP, BMI etc., in order to hire bands that play covers. This makes it legal for cover bands to perform in public for money.
 
yeah my local pub got busted for illegal karaoke - woooohoooo! they'd charge extra for drinks during the slaughter, and i believe the city inforced the tax.
 
i bring my guitar and pod and hook up to their p.a. - hahahha but i do have the backing tracks of both those songs and jam to them at my house ;) if i sing i'll do paranoid w/some cookie :headbang:
 
nlukes said:
I think that the niteclubs pay annual fees to ASCAP, BMI etc., in order to hire bands that play covers. This makes it legal for cover bands to perform in public for money.

I always thought the idea of ASCAP and BMI et al, charging clubs for live music was just stupid and unfair. As I understand it, it's not like they give the money to the individual artists for the actual songs being played.

Sometimes music is just meant to be heard......
 
Air Raid Siren said:
I always thought the idea of ASCAP and BMI et al, charging clubs for live music was just stupid and unfair. As I understand it, it's not like they give the money to the individual artists for the actual songs being played.

Sometimes music is just meant to be heard......
That's news to me, too and quite absurd. It reminds me of the stupidity of Garth Brooks suing The Wherehouse for royalties on the sales of used cds.
 
That's news to me, too and quite absurd.

If John Fogerty could get sued for plagarizing himself anything is possible. :yuk:

The older I get the less amazed I am at stupid stuff.

Jim
 
spideyjg said:
If John Fogerty could get sued for plagarizing himself anything is possible. :yuk:

The older I get the less amazed I am at stupid stuff.

Jim
What was the story on JF , Jim? My memory banks say it was name usage wars between JF and the band members over who was allowed to use the name CCR. Somebody ended up being Creedance Clearwater Revisited, that much I know - I remember seeing them advertised at some of the Indian Casinos I play with Bruce Conte.
 
Air Raid Siren said:
What was the story on JF , Jim? My memory banks say it was name usage wars between JF and the band members over who was allowed to use the name CCR. Somebody ended up being Creedance Clearwater Revisited, that much I know - I remember seeing them advertised at some of the Indian Casinos I play with Bruce Conte.

I think it was more along the lines that John plagarized either himself or an old CCR song, and a record company attourney caught wind of it, promting a lawsuit. I think the jist of it was John Fogerty vs. the Intelectual Property of John Fogerty. Either way, I believe it was thrown out.
 
I don't recall exactly, anyone knows for sure please correct me, but he wrote a new song that was slightly similar in progression to a CCR song which he also wrote. Run to the Jungle or Old man is down the road I think.

Anyway on both songs he was the sole writer and the folks owning the rights to the CCR track sued as if John stole what he wrote 20 years earlier. Stupid crap. Bottom line he was taken to court for "plagarizing" himself. :OMG:

I know per legal whatchamofloochie stuff it is valid since he did not have the rights anymore but still so stupid as a judge I would have tossed them out on their ear.

Jim

PS found this...
An even more bizarre case was when John Fogerty was sued for plagarising himself! Since Mr Fogerty signed away ownership of his songs early in his career with Creedence Clearwater Revival, but was savvy enough to retain ownership of his later solo material, a suit was brought by the owner of his earlier stuff accusing Mr Fogerty of "rewriting" the Creedence song "Run Through The Jungle" and releasing it as a solo tune titled "The Old Man Is Down The Road" essentially asserting that he had copied from himself! In comparing these two songs, there are some vague similarities, but the court found in Mr Fogerty's favor, ruling that there was not enough substantial similarity to warrant an award of damages to the plaintiff.
 
Kinda off topic, but similar.

I hear RIAA is going to sue people for getting songs stuck in their head and hearing them over and over! :D

Jayhawk