DonnaMarilyn

John, I'm glad you chimed in here and responded to Tina's post, especially involving that mention of another forum. In fact, a friend of mine - to whom I'd recommended Songstuff - was also chastised for having mentioned the FAWM songwriting challenge in one of his posts. That made me feel badly, because I've often recommended Songstuff on both the FAWM and the 50-90 site, plus during Pat Pattison's songwriting course last year. Anyway, I'm delighted it was simply a case of the moderator having misjudged. I also understand about the time needed to streamline the site. I agree with Tina that there's perhaps too much happening, and too quickly. It must be confusing for newcomers. I've been a member for years, and still get frustrated trying to navigate the site. So much 'drilling down' is necessary. Sometimes less is more. it's a tremendous site, and it would be a shame to lose potential keen participants. But to the original topic: Tom, just thinking back to the songwriting challenge forums, it seems to me there's always a topic on what kinds of guitars folks have, along with a suggestion to post pics of their 'music rooms'. Some are quite amusing, and always interesting. That might be an idea. Maybe favourite guitars, and favourite artists who play them (or played them). Maybe a topic about building one's own guitar (e.g. a cigar box guitar). Hope some of the above is useful. I'm a lyricist, not a musician. Donna

Yes, posting online constitutes publishing, John. I remember going through this a few years ago when one of my co-writers in Ireland was having a problem joining a PRO. One criteria was that he had to have been 'published'. He didn't realise that 'published' meant his songs that had been posted to online sites fit that criterion. So all he had to do was say 'yes', and he was in. Donna

Thank you for commenting, Bernd, and for that additional information. The matter though has moved on from copyright infringement. The person's song (with my unauthorised lyric) was removed from the website several days ago. The situation now involves the person's new lyric, which he has based very obviously on mine, thus making it - in my opinion, and apparently that of my PRO - an unauthorised derivative work. It's now up to Kompoz to determine which side of the fence to fall on. Donna

Further to the saga: My PRO has responded, and states that I would be justified in requesting websites to remove Gary's new thread - with his new lyric (but which closely resembles mine in several ways) - under the principle of Notice and Take Down. (This deals with, among other things, unauthorised derivative works.) I've just sent this request to Kompoz. I await their response with great interest. Donna

DarrenH, I love that story. The image of you using the doctor's pen to write the lines on your arm is hilarious. My own tale isn't so much about what I wrote the lyric on but where I was when I 'wrote' the lyric (in my head). A few years ago I had an appointment at the local acupuncture clinic. I'd just got out of the shower and was painting my toenails when two chorus lines popped into my head. I quickly jotted them down so as not to forget them, then rushed out, hopped on my bike, and headed into town. A few minutes later I was at the clinic, flat on my back on the acupuncture table, in a darkened room, stuck full of needles. By the end of the 45-minute treatment, I'd composed in my head a Celtic folk ballad consisting of eight 6-line verses, and three 4-line refrains. All I needed to do when I got home was type it up on the computer. I wonder whether that burst of focused creativity was a result of all the good 'chi' rushing along my meridians. (Now that I'm reminded of it, I really must set about getting music for that ballad. ) Donna

I think you're right, John. There's simply too much overlap in the intent, the structure, and the similarity (even sameness) of certain lines. I've just written again to the PRO, providing both lyrics for comparison. I've asked if there might be official justification to request that the lyric be removed from any website. So, stay tuned once again. Donna

Alan, if this is the guy's usual modus operandi, he'll definitely hang himself with his own rope one day. Meanwhile, I've just heard from my PRO. Interestingly, they also brought up the topic of a creator's 'moral rights' to her/his song. That right was definitely being infringed as well. Anyway, here's what Buma-Stemra (my PRO) has confirmed. ---------------------- Based on the Dutch Copyright Act, a work is public domain seventy years after the death of the author. In this case your lyrics are not public domain. Copyright is the exclusive right of the creator (or those to whom the right is transferred) of a work. Therefore, the right to adapt a work is reserved by the creator of the musical work in question. If someone wants to adapt a work they must first have the permission of the creator (composer and/or lyricist) or those to whom the right is transferred, such as a publisher. The creators (or those to whom the right is transferred) can place conditions at any time on the granting of permission, for example prior perusal and the payment of a fee. The creator is at liberty to refuse consent – for whatever reason – for the adaptation of his or her original work at any time. Alongside commercial exploitation rights, there are also moral rights. Moral rights protect the personal bond between the creator and his or her work. For example, an author may object to his or her work being made available to the public under another name, to the work being modified, or to anything affecting the work that could damage his or her good name or reputation. The creator of the work retains the moral rights and these cannot be transferred to Buma/Stemra. I trust to have informed you sufficiently. If you have further questions you can contact me via my contact details below. Kind regards, xxxxxxx ------------------------ The paragraph regarding 'moral rights' is spot on. No way I'd have transferred those to Gary. I hope this thread has been useful to others here. I'm going to ask if there's action I can take regarding the many similarities between my original lyric and the one that Gary is now using - with the same title 'Gimme Your Love' - on the Kompoz site. There probably isn't, but one can hope. Did anyone check out the link I posted above about the photographer and the band??? Here it is again. http://petapixel.com...ographers-work/

Absolutely right, tunesmithth and HoboSage. Mary, your PRO is STIM.

I do that, James. I presume it's the same with other PROs.

Absolutely, Mike. You've spelled things out very clearly. Which is why I had done all of those things: - had a copyright sign © - registered the song - registered it with my PRO as well - stated on my thread that the lyric was no longer available for collaboration And when the guy asked if he could do a second version: - I said 'No', that I did not want a second version However, he went ahead, even after being told by the site's owner that all material on the site was under copyright to the author, and could not be used without the author's permission. Even after his thread was removed from two sites, he insisted it wasn't because I owned the copyright. Unfortunately, there'll always be idiots like this around. Once I've heard from my PRO, I'm going to ask if there's action I can take regarding the similarities between my original lyric and the one the guy is now using. There probably isn't, but I'd love to drive the lesson home. I was intrigued to read this story recently, involving a photogapher and a band that had used one of his copyrighted images. http://petapixel.com/2014/04/21/band-responds-worst-way-possible-stealing-photographers-work/ Never a dull moment. Donna

To me that seems a reasonable suggestion, symphonious7. Meanwhile, my PRO informs me the matter is with their legal department, and they'll get back to me next week. Though I think I've achieved about as much as they could tell me, it will be nice to have - I hope - some fixed clarification regarding this type of situation. Also in the meantime, I've checked the Agreement policy of the original website (I should have done this first thing ), and indeed it states there that all material (including text - which I interpret to include lyrics, since it's a songwriting collaboration site) submitted to the site is copyrighted to the author. All reference to my lyric has been removed on Kompoz, and Gary also now has a new lyric in place. Of course, he's kept the structure identical to mine, and the chorus uses three of the original lines (though admittedly they're pretty generic). And the pre-chorus melody is essentially the same as my co-writer's. Ah well. I've made and won my point. I'll close the book on the matter. It's been an excellent learning experience, and a good opportunity to stand up for my (copy)rights. Donna

Gorgeous, for sure. I saw A Beautiful Mind, but didn't remember the music. Great video.

Pat, if you're thinking of submitting an instrumental, make sure it's a true one (the themes, melodies, variations should stand on their own as a musical composition), and that the piece isn't just the backing track from a song with vocals. The latter won’t make it through the first round, because it’s not considered an “instrumental†in the true sense of the word. Donna

Thanks, Tom. Indeed, I'm a lyricist, though I also create melodies. As regards instrumentals, my co-writers and I share equally in anything we create, irrespective of whether it's in song or instrumental form. When a song is completed, they adjust the backing track where necessary to make it a stand-alone instrumental composition. And I do all the submitting, paperwork, etc. involving our co-writes. Donna

I've entered a handful of songs, Pat. I also intend to submit a couple of instrumentals this afternoon. Good luck with your song. Which category did you select? Donna

I've sent the letter to Kompoz. I'm sure you're right about him having uploaded the song elsewhere, John. He'll keep doing it out of spite. You'd think having the song removed by two sites because of copyright infringement would be enough to indicate that indeed the lyric is under copyright, and not in the public domain, as he insisted. I agree about a cease and desist letter. Still awaiting word from my PRO. UPDATE: Meanwhile, the track has been removed.

Yes he was, John. So, as you say, his copyright was infringed upon as well. Meanwhile, I've checked the original terms of Agreement of the original site (where Gary found the lyric). It states that all material (including 'text') submitted is copyrighted to the owner. Clearly Gary had never read the Agreement. So my lyric - and everyone else's there - is covered not only by copyright as indicated by the symbol, but is covered by the site's acknowledgement of copyright. In fact, I should have checked that earlier myself. What I've done just now is suggest (in red) to the site owner that he add a bit to the statement to make it even stronger, with something like: ----------------------------------------- Any text message, image, audio file, or other media/data posted to MusiciansCollaboration.com is copyright the submitter. Lyrics submitted to the site are protected by copyright, and remain the sole possession of the author. Though publicly available on this site for collaboration purposes, they are not in the public domain. They may not be used without the author's proven consent. ------------------------------------------- I feel this would make things clearer, and give lyricists an extra feeling of confidence when they post publicly to the site. Meanwhile, the track that should have been removed from Kompoz last night is still on Gary's collaboration thread. Time to send another letter. Gary is clearly disrespecting Kompoz's instructions to remove the track.

David, I didn't see your added note until after I'd sent the email. But I'll keep that information in mind. Meanwhile, NEWS FLASH! Kompoz has just responded as follows: "Hi Donna He was requested by myself to remove all reference to your lyric. I was unaware he sang the tune. I will request he only post the music sans any mention of your lyric. Please rest assured, Kompoz takes Copyright Infringement very seriously, though we cannot give legal advice, we do have our Terms & Conditions that we do enforce." ------------------------------------------------ The squeaky wheel gets the grease, eh? :) Thank you for prodding me. Something else interesting. Just after I'd emailed Kompoz I got a message from them to say Gary had deleted the song thread and the lyric because "he understood it was copyrighted". This too is a little victory, given that he was so adamant that it was NOT protected by copyright.

You're right, David. I was thinking earlier that this is an infringement of Tom's rights as well. I've just sent an email to Kompoz. And I agree fully. The music sucks. It's clear even to a non-musician like me. Donna

Thanks, John. More good input. Meanwhile, I've found that the song is back up on Kompoz…BUT…my lyric is not included. And Gary has stated that for the collaboration he needs bass, drums, etc. and …LYRICS. The implication is that he's asking for someone to write a new lyric for the music. He is, however, singing my lyric on the work tape melody guide. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt, and assuming it's just to indicate the melody. Anyway, I'll keep a quiet eye on things in the meantime, and hope my PRO can give more clarification. If the grounds are provably strong enough, I'll arrange to have a cease-and-desist letter sent. I won't rest until this guy has well and truly backed off.

Thank you, Mary, John, and James for chiming in here. And John, thank you for the links and comprehensive information. Meanwhile, the saga continues. The person is becoming increasingly aggressive, particularly after he was forced to remove the song from Kompoz last night. I'll post his recent messages to me below. James, the lyric was not posted in Kompoz. It was posted to musicianscollaboration.com, where I've had a lyrics/poems section for several years. None of my lyrics (or songs) has ever been listed as being 'public domain'. They all bear the copyright symbol, and are registered with a copyright organisation, as well as my PRO. The person, whose name is Gary (and it's not snabbu ), went to my forum, saw the lyric (which was already in completed song form), and wrote music & and a melody for it without consulting me. He then posted the music to the lyric thread for my perusal. He told me had not noticed that the lyric was no longer available because the song had been completed. He asked if I would mind having a second version of the song. I said I did not want a second version. I wanted to go only with the one I have, and had already registered it and placed it with a music licensing agency. Next thing I knew he had placed his version of the song on the collaboration site plus on Kompoz, where he was looking for collaborators to add instruments and vocals. I asked him pleasantly to remove the song, as I'd given no consent to use the lyrics. That's when he began to be nasty. Meanwhile, the song was removed from both sites after I sent notice of an infringement of copyright. He claims that because my lyrics are open to the public, they are in the public domain. He is badly confusing 'public domain' with 'publicly available' (e.g as on Songstuff or any other music site). Lyrics or works that are 'publicly available' are still protected by copyright. Anyway, here are the latest messages from Mr Nice Guy. Seems to me they display what should be an embarrassing lack of basic intelligence and logic, and no understanding of the terminology, or of how the music business works. (John, I'll send you the person's name in a PM. I doubt he's a member, but just in case.) 1. Donna This is what I'm going to do. I am pitching this version to artists, If you can't stand this version it doesn't matter, I am doing this anyway. I have the right to use your lyrics in ANY song I want as long as you are given credit for the lyrics. You cannot stop me from using your lyrics, that's the law. You can only come after me and sue me for any money I made from your lyrics without your permission. You cannot simply say, "sorry, these lyrics are not available". The fact is ALL your lyrics are public domain. I am going ahead and pitching this version of "Gimme Your Love". If recording artists want to record this then I will get back to you and ask you for permission. I think the lyrics are great and the music is great. Gary 2. Donna you can have the song removed from Kompoz too, it doesn't matter I will still pitch the song! have a nice day! Gary & 3. Kompoz asked me to remove the song because the rules state that I cannot exchange files or content that is copyrighted except by parties involved in Kompoz collaborations and since you are not involved in this collaboration, then it is a violation of the rules. OK I will remove it but, it's not because you own the copyright to the lyrics, it's because you are not involved in the collaboration on Kompoz. ----------------------------------- In the meantime, I'm not responding to any of his messages. Still waiting to hear from my PRO. The issue is now with the appropriate department. Donna

The weirdest thing has happened, and I’m totally flummoxed. A co-writer (musician/vocalist) and I collaborated on a nice little pop song in February, which I posted to a site I’m on. The lyric is in my personal forum on that site, and I’d written that the song had been completed. It's registered with my PRO, and with a music licensing agency, with a view to pitching. Two nights ago, one of the forum members posted his music version of the song to my thread. I told him the lyric wasn’t available, and I’d already collaborated on the song. (He hadn't read my note that the song was done.) When he asked, I said that I preferred not to have a second version of the same song. I asked him pleasantly not to continue working with the lyric. Yesterday I saw that he had posted his version and my lyric on the forum, looking for collaborators to add instruments and vocals. When I asked him politely to remove the song, explaining that I had an agreement with my co-writer, he flatly refused. He says he has every right to use my same lyric with music of his own. He claims that because my lyric is not for sale and was posted on a collaboration site, it is in the public domain, and free to be used by anyone, without permission. Surely this cannot be so? I use the copyright symbol with my lyrics, and register them with my PRO. Now I've begun to add 'All rights reserved'. He sent me a number of belligerent and sarcastic messages, one of which was quite ridiculous after the forum moderator removed his song thread at my request. He wrote: -------------------------- OK Donna, you made me do something I didn't think I would have to do. I will now go to the other music sites and I will post the song and I will NOT give you credit for the lyrics, I will claim that I wrote the lyrics. Yes, then I will wait for you to try to get legal advice try to force me to remove the song. Your legal people will simply laugh at you because my song is simply on a music collaboration site and is not published. This is what I have to go through to get people to listen to my music. Sorry. G. ------------------------- Now, it's clear this guy is a few straws short of a bale - and has no idea that relationships - not music - make up about 85% of what's important in the music industry. But can anyone tell me something definitive about how much - if any - protection a piece of work is given by being copyrighted, PRO-registered, and with the statement 'All rights reserved'? How can he claim that my - or any other such lyric - is in the public domain, free to be used without the author's consent? In the meantime, he has posted the song at Kompoz, looking for collaborators (musicians and a vocalist). Last night no lyric was posted. This morning it was there (with my name). Meanwhile, I've written to my PRO, asking for their take on this situation. Still waiting to hear from them. The guy is being obnoxious. He goes on about how good his music is, and that he's determined to make the song, even without my consent. For goodness sake, why can't he just write his own d*mn lyric? Or get someone else to write one. (The irony is that after I 'd told him I didn't want a second version of the song, and asked him not to keep working with the lyric, I was toying with the idea of offering to write a new lyric to fit his music. [He's an older guy, and not that good a composer, and I felt sorry for him.] But the idea flew out the window when he posted his version anyway, and then became aggressive.) I'm fighting really hard to maintain my 'Buddha nature'. I know it's pretty much all a storm in a teacup - and that I'll move on - but I find it disturbing that: 1) people like this guy feel they can simply take another's lyrics willy nilly, without consent, and 2) there's the remotest possibility that our works essentially have no protection at all in this kind of situation. Well, sorry about the ramble. Was just wondering what someone else's perspective might be. Donna

Tom, I'm absolutely with you regarding clarity. As indicated above, I submitted lyrics to the Lyricwriting section of WeAreListening. http://www.wearelistening.org To SongDoor, I submitted songs. They also have a section for Instrumentals. http://www.songdoor.com At both places, the fee (WAL@ $20; SD@ $10) is the same whether for songs or lyrics (or instrumentals). Also, both sites emphasise that production is not a focus. Note: At SongDoor, production is only taken into account for instrumentals. This is because during the process of assessing the submissions, the judging panel screens the pieces for possible submission to current film/tvopportunities, and the production must be top-notch. Donna

You're more than welcome, Pat and justsoulin. While it's true there are a few contests that should be avoided, I see no harm in taking a chance with an occasional one that has low fees and reputable panelists. Another one is SongDoor. The entry fee is only $10 (for me, the equivalent of $7.20), and just submitting makes you eligible for a couple of nice 'bonuses'. The bottom line is that you get to see what kinds of lyrics/songs are being selected by the pros. This can be useful. Donna

Pat, yes, I discovered the site a couple of months ago, and was impressed by the long list of well-qualified panelists, which includes Pat Pattison and Sara Light, both of whom I trust implicitly. I've had dealings with both (Pat via his songwriting course, and Sara over the past few years via SongU's excellent classes and workshops). Sara is herself a top-notch teacher, and very attentive and exacting. For the heck of it, I submitted a few pieces to the Lyricwriting section. The cost per lyric is low (and even lower when I convert dollars to euros), so the overall cost was about equal to an evening out to see a movie and have dinner in a nice restaurant. I can live with that. Mainly I'll be interested to see how my lyrics will fare in comparision with the eventual winning lyrics. Donna