Situation Similar To 21 Miles

[Edward]

Hi - first post.

I didn't want to jack 21 mile's thread so I started a new topic although it's fairly similar.

I have a basement studio. I have been asked by a person to help him write a few songs. He hands me a chord progression and I write lyrics and melody and play all the instruments as well as the vocals. This person does not write lyrics or vocal melody nor does he play or sing. He has the impression that when he comes up with a chord progression he has basically written the "melody" of the song because he feels "the melody is in the progression". I tell him that someone still has to derive the melody while listening to the chord progression but he maintains that the melody notes are in the progression so he should get a portion of the melody credit. I feel a clever chord progression is worth something but I also feel that he is incorrect about his understanding of melody. I have decided not to work with him but am looking for ways to convince him that he isn't accurate regarding melody in a song since he is upset with my take on it. Again, I know this sounds silly.

Edward

[Edward]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your input. The situation is made a little more complex by the fact that we attend the same church. I'm inclined to think that he wants to hold fast to his side of it because he is unable to write melody or lyrics effectively and yet wants to "own" a song. I've mentioned the chord progression pattern of La Bamba for instance and how Beatle songs and songs by the Rolling Stones and others have the same progression and yet different melodies hoping that it would convince him that a chord progression doesn't have a melody inherent in it. He keeps referring to "the way" a chord is strummed which can accentuate certain "melody" notes and I can see where that might be possible - a bit. He also refers to the melody in the "music" as distinct from the melody the vocalist sings. It's this "melody in the music" that he says he writes when he gives someone a chord progression. He claims it should be worth up to 1/3 of the melody credit on a song. I was just wondering if I am missing a wonderfully simple explanation that he might accept. I've told him I can't work with him as long as he refuses to accept Socan's (Canada) rules for song ownership. He says the rules are unfair. Someone once told me to just give him a piece of the ownership but I feel that would be a violation of the principle of the argument and wouldn't educate him in the least. This is purely a philosophical discussion since I refuse to work with him. This is not earth shattering but it would be good to know how to deal with someone like this other than pointing to the door. There are more important things in life for sure.

Thanks again.

Edward

[Edward]

Make that "a" certain Beatle song and "a" certain Rolling stone song- not ALL of their songs obviously. I forget which specific songs they talked about. It was in an article that gave the chord pattern of La Bamba and found identical chord progressions in a song by the Beatles and another song by the Stones as well as songs by other groups. That should prove the point that there are many potential melodies in any given chord progression when you think about it - to a reasonable person anyway.

Had to correct myself.

Edward

[john]

Hey Edward,

you are bang on regarding the vocal melody versus chords. Where it does become more complex is regarding arpeggio or specific picking patterns, the fact is they are still not "a melody". Were they all individual notes then that becomes harder to discern, however I don't think he would be awarded credit for writing the melody unless it were a prominent and distinct melody such as an instrument lead that was a major song hook.

That said it does come down to how much you want him to be a friend after this, plus his urge to pursue this through court. I mean, why do you not want to give him some credit if he genuinely contributed to the song creation? You might consider discussing percentages rather than no credit at all.

Did he record the chord progression or write down the exact notes?

This is precisely why, although a little awkward feeling, it is far better to get the legal stuff out the road first in a written agreement. Not particularly helpful i know.

[Lazz]

Hello Edward.

If the established and accepted way you guys have been working together is for him to give you a chord progression and for you to do the rest, then it is self-evident that he has made some kind of contribution. The issue then is apportioning credit in a manner which is a reasonable and realistic reflection of that proportionality.

Your choices are two:

1. Find a formula which satisfies both of you. Remember that the rule of thumb for measuring the fairness of a vexatious agreement is that both parties end up being equally pissed-off.

2. Give him back his chord progressions and say ‘bye-bye’.

If you take his chord progressions and turn them into an enormous world-wide hit which generates oodles of dollars, there would be lawyers available to take his case on a contingency basis. The court in this case might likely agree that your friend indeed made a contribution. And it would then fall upon them to decide exactly how much you owed him.

But you say you are reluctant to give him a piece of ownership in recognition of any value in his contribution because you “feel that would be a violation of the principle of the argument and wouldn't educate him”. We’ll ignore questions about your qualifications to educate him. But what exactly is this principle at the heart of your dispute? What is it that’s being ‘violated’?

This pseudo-philosophical dispute over the semantics of music/melody is a distracting irrelevance.

However you may choose to argue and justify a position, the picture I am getting is that your friend has taken some limited but active part in a joint creation and that your concern is now to devalue that contribution and reduce his share to zero.

My question is this:

If you believe his contribution has no value or merit, why are you messing with it ?

It is possible to view this sad tale as a high-handed school-boy spat built on principles of ignorance, in which one party just wants to out-muscle the other.

****

Tom says that it is not possible to copyright a chord progression. Many people would agree, but that take is a little too simplistic. The arguments and judgements in disputes between the estates of Billy Strayhorn and Duke Ellington, for example, show that a court can be hip and discerning enough to recognise that even certain voicings and articulations of chords can be significant enough in their contribution to warrant shares in a copyright. Probably very far from your situation, admittedly, but close enough to show that a court will call ‘em as they see ‘em. Remember too, that in your jurisdiction we now have something called ‘neighbouring rights’ which is built on that very acceptance of value in different contributions to pop hits.

.

[Edward]

Honestly there is no problem with me sharing or giving credit. A good chord progression would indeed be worth something but these were just basic and common chords and rather boring really.

I did dig my heals in when he stated that the "melody" was in the chord progression. He just strummed the chord progression so there was no finger picking to indicate a melody. When I asked him to sing the melody, he said he doesn't sing; his voice ranks very highly as one of the most out-of-tune vocals I've ever heard. When I made up a melody, he was happy to take credit for it saying I'd heard it from his chord progression. I'm way too old to accept this kind of stuff. I merely wanted him to understand that he was not really writing a melody. Sometimes, on a matter of principle, you have to stand up for what is truth or you end up lying to yourself and the other guy. That's what this comes down to as far as I am concerned.

When you have a basement studio and work with people, you hear a lot of versions of the truth. I have decided to decline the offer to work with him. We attend the same church and I could have accepted his version of what melody is if I thought that there would be hard feelings but it seems to be okay. I will just concentrate on his many good qualities. I used to teach school and I've become sensitive to weirdness and people who refuse to listen. Thanks for all the contributions.

"Remember that the rule of thumb for measuring the fairness of a vexatious agreement is that both parties end up being equally pissed-off." ha-ha; got to remember that!

Edward

[Lazz]

I could have accepted his version of what melody is if I thought that there would be hard feelings but it seems to be okay. I will just concentrate on his many good qualities. I used to teach school and I've become sensitive to weirdness and people who refuse to listen.

That's a relief - I'm glad it worked out ok.

.