tammerrin@yahoo.com

Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.

If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
music published before 1923, correct?

Lee Hollaar

In article <3VbWa.402$kl5.20432@news.uswest.net> "=> Vox Populi ©" <-> writes:
>
>
><tammerrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:34e48ef0.0307310847.73095f26@posting.google. com...
>> If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
>> subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
>> without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
>> music published before 1923, correct?
>
>If the copyright has expired, and not been renewed, you
>can then do as you wish with the material.

Works copyrighted before 1950 whose copyright was renewed at the end
of their first 28-year term now have a term of 95 years. Copyright
terms end at the end of the calendar year following the 95th anniversary
of its first publication.

See http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf

But keep in mind that there is a copyright on the song itself (or
perhaps separate copyrights on the lyrics and music) and another
copyright on the particular arrangement of the performance and on
the performance itself. So just because a song has entered the
public domain, it might be an infringement to make a compilation
including a performance of that song.

See http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ56.html

Somebody

tammerrin@yahoo.com wrote:
> Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
> as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.

In a word, no.

> If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
> subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
> without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
> music published before 1923, correct?

There is copyright in the CDs from when they were recorded that is
separate to any publishing copyright. So even if the "songs" are out
of (publishing) copyright, the recordings on the CDs won't be.

Lee Hollaar

In article <3VbWa.402$kl5.20432@news.uswest.net> "=> Vox Populi ©" <-> writes:
>
>
><tammerrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:34e48ef0.0307310847.73095f26@posting.google. com...
>> If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
>> subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
>> without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
>> music published before 1923, correct?
>
>If the copyright has expired, and not been renewed, you
>can then do as you wish with the material.

Works copyrighted before 1950 whose copyright was renewed at the end
of their first 28-year term now have a term of 95 years. Copyright
terms end at the end of the calendar year following the 95th anniversary
of its first publication.

See http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf

But keep in mind that there is a copyright on the song itself (or
perhaps separate copyrights on the lyrics and music) and another
copyright on the particular arrangement of the performance and on
the performance itself. So just because a song has entered the
public domain, it might be an infringement to make a compilation
including a performance of that song.

See http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ56.html

Somebody

tammerrin@yahoo.com wrote:
> Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
> as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.

In a word, no.

> If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
> subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
> without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
> music published before 1923, correct?

There is copyright in the CDs from when they were recorded that is
separate to any publishing copyright. So even if the "songs" are out
of (publishing) copyright, the recordings on the CDs won't be.

Dan Evans

On 31 Jul 2003 09:47:25 -0700, tammerrin@yahoo.com wrote:

>If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
>subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
>without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
>music published before 1923, correct?

You've got a CD that was published before 1923?

The only safe course is to (a) find a song in the public domain (there
are some lovely madrigals that qualify) and (b) sing it and record it
yourself.

Then, you can do whatever you want with the recording.


**Dan Evans
**I post information, not advice.

Dan Evans

On 31 Jul 2003 09:47:25 -0700, tammerrin@yahoo.com wrote:

>If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
>subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
>without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
>music published before 1923, correct?

You've got a CD that was published before 1923?

The only safe course is to (a) find a song in the public domain (there
are some lovely madrigals that qualify) and (b) sing it and record it
yourself.

Then, you can do whatever you want with the recording.


**Dan Evans
**I post information, not advice.

Lee Hollaar

In article <q1mWa.128028$Io.10861417@newsread2.prod.itd.earth link.net> "dt king" <usenet@leztoys.com> writes:
><tammerrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:34e48ef0.0307310847.73095f26@posting.google. com...
>> Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
>> as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.
>
>It is perfectly legal to make copies of CDs you own and give them to your
>friends. Casette recorder manufacturers fought and died for this right --
>the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act, Title 17, Chapter 10, Subchapter D,
>Section 1008:
>
>"No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of
>copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a
>digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog
>recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the
>noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making
>digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings "

Before pinning your hopes to that particular section, be sure to
understand the special definitions of "digital audio recording medium"
and "digital audio recording device" in 17 USC 1001.


>The argument didn't work for Napster because of the scale of their
>operation.

No, it didn't work for Napster because it didn't meet the requirements
of the section you quoted.

We agree with the district court that the Audio Home Recording Act
does not cover the downloading of MP3 files to computer hard drives.
First "[u]nder the plain meaning of the Act's definition of digital
audio recording devices, computers (and their hard drives) are not
digital audio recording devices because their 'primary purpose' is
not to make digital audio copied recordings." Recording Indus.
Ass'n of Am. v. Diamond Multimedia Sys., Inc., 180 F.3d 1072, 1078
[51 USPQ2d 1115] (9th Cir. 1999). Second, notwithstanding Napster's
claim that computers are "digital audio recording devices," computers
do not make "digital music recordings" as defined by the Audio Home
Recording Act. Id. at 1077 (citing S. Rep. 102-294)("There are
simply no grounds in either the plain language of the definition
or in the legislative history for interpreting the term 'digital
music recording to include songs fixed on computer hard drives").
A&M Records Inc. v. Napster Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit, 2001
57 USPQ2d 1729, 239 F3d 1004

David Martel

Tammerrin,

As others have written already, what you wish to do is illegal. On the
other hand it is highly unlikely that anyone will sue you or even be aware
that you have done this. Just don't include "Muskrat Love" on the CD.

Dave M.

Lee Hollaar

In article <q1mWa.128028$Io.10861417@newsread2.prod.itd.earth link.net> "dt king" <usenet@leztoys.com> writes:
><tammerrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:34e48ef0.0307310847.73095f26@posting.google. com...
>> Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
>> as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.
>
>It is perfectly legal to make copies of CDs you own and give them to your
>friends. Casette recorder manufacturers fought and died for this right --
>the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act, Title 17, Chapter 10, Subchapter D,
>Section 1008:
>
>"No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of
>copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a
>digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog
>recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the
>noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making
>digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings "

Before pinning your hopes to that particular section, be sure to
understand the special definitions of "digital audio recording medium"
and "digital audio recording device" in 17 USC 1001.


>The argument didn't work for Napster because of the scale of their
>operation.

No, it didn't work for Napster because it didn't meet the requirements
of the section you quoted.

We agree with the district court that the Audio Home Recording Act
does not cover the downloading of MP3 files to computer hard drives.
First "[u]nder the plain meaning of the Act's definition of digital
audio recording devices, computers (and their hard drives) are not
digital audio recording devices because their 'primary purpose' is
not to make digital audio copied recordings." Recording Indus.
Ass'n of Am. v. Diamond Multimedia Sys., Inc., 180 F.3d 1072, 1078
[51 USPQ2d 1115] (9th Cir. 1999). Second, notwithstanding Napster's
claim that computers are "digital audio recording devices," computers
do not make "digital music recordings" as defined by the Audio Home
Recording Act. Id. at 1077 (citing S. Rep. 102-294)("There are
simply no grounds in either the plain language of the definition
or in the legislative history for interpreting the term 'digital
music recording to include songs fixed on computer hard drives").
A&M Records Inc. v. Napster Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit, 2001
57 USPQ2d 1729, 239 F3d 1004

David Martel

Tammerrin,

As others have written already, what you wish to do is illegal. On the
other hand it is highly unlikely that anyone will sue you or even be aware
that you have done this. Just don't include "Muskrat Love" on the CD.

Dave M.

Merlin

"David Martel" <marte005@hostingstorm.net> wrote:

>Tammerrin,
>
> As others have written already, what you wish to do is illegal. On the
>other hand it is highly unlikely that anyone will sue you or even be aware
>that you have done this. Just don't include "Muskrat Love" on the CD.
>
>Dave M.
>
>
If he does, will they MASH him?

Merlin

"David Martel" <marte005@hostingstorm.net> wrote:

>Tammerrin,
>
> As others have written already, what you wish to do is illegal. On the
>other hand it is highly unlikely that anyone will sue you or even be aware
>that you have done this. Just don't include "Muskrat Love" on the CD.
>
>Dave M.
>
>
If he does, will they MASH him?

Paul Robinson

"=> Vox Populi ©" wrote:

> <tammerrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:34e48ef0.0307310847.73095f26@posting.google.c om...
> > Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
> > as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.
>
> No, not unless you have permission of the songs' copyright owners.
>
> >
> > If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
> > subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
> > without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
> > music published before 1923, correct?
>
> If the copyright has expired, and not been renewed, you
> can then do as you wish with the material.

Well, there was a point where renewals became optional, I'm not sure if it
was 1968 when congress started extending copyrights about to expire (in
second term) or in 1978 when the new copyright law was put into effect, in
1989 when the U.S. went on the Berne Convention, or later. Because after
whichever date that was, even works which were not renewed do not fall into
the public domain.

--
Paul Robinson "Above all else... We shall go on..."
"...And continue!"
"If the lessons of history teach us anything it is
that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us."

Paul Robinson

"=> Vox Populi ©" wrote:

> <tammerrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:34e48ef0.0307310847.73095f26@posting.google.c om...
> > Is it legal to make a compilation CD of modern love songs to give away
> > as wedding favors? BTW, we own the original CDs.
>
> No, not unless you have permission of the songs' copyright owners.
>
> >
> > If not, is it true that recordings published before 1923 are not
> > subject to copyright laws? So if we wanted to make a compilation CD
> > without the risk of copyright infringment we would have to choose
> > music published before 1923, correct?
>
> If the copyright has expired, and not been renewed, you
> can then do as you wish with the material.

Well, there was a point where renewals became optional, I'm not sure if it
was 1968 when congress started extending copyrights about to expire (in
second term) or in 1978 when the new copyright law was put into effect, in
1989 when the U.S. went on the Berne Convention, or later. Because after
whichever date that was, even works which were not renewed do not fall into
the public domain.

--
Paul Robinson "Above all else... We shall go on..."
"...And continue!"
"If the lessons of history teach us anything it is
that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us."