# The importance of Copyright Registration



## tiago (Feb 4, 2016)

Hi guys! I've been recently having some conversations regarding music copyright and I must say that I'm a bit perplexed with some of the stuff that I've heard / read. Some people told me that if you didn't use the eCO Registration System (or a similar system in european countries) for a particular track, you pretty much have no copyright protection at all. This means that anyone is free to use and sell that track, claim it has his own creation, release it on an album, license it... This sounds completely crazy to me! If you just want to share a library demo, a work in progress, etc, the fact that you've uploaded the track to a site like YouTube or SoundCloud (and that you also have the project / multitracks) is completely meaningless? I would truly appreciate some feedback on this, as I would like to know a bit more on how music law works. Do some of you guys really register every single track that you share publicly?


----------



## KEnK (Feb 4, 2016)

tiago said:


> the fact that you've uploaded the track to a site like YouTube or SoundCloud (and that you also have the project / multitracks) is completely meaningless?


Correct.
In age of Piracy there is no Law.
Upload anything and kiss it goodbye.


----------



## RiffWraith (Feb 4, 2016)

tiago said:


> This means that anyone is free to use and sell that track, claim it has his own creation, release it on an album, license it...



Maybe someone from one of the european countries can chime in here, as I am not familiar with european copyright law. However, for those countries who are members of the Berne Convention, the laws should be similar there, as they are here, in the USA.

Here, you automatically obtain copyright on an original work as soon as it is created and fixed in a tangible medium of expression. You do not need to register the work with the copyright office to obtain copyright. However, without registering that work, it will be impossible to file suit against anyone who may have plagiarized your work, and it may also be nearly impossible to defend yourself in such a suit.

Regardless of whether or not you have registered the work, _nobody_ is free to use and sell that work, claim it has his own creation, release it on an album, license it, etc. That's here. I find it hard to imagine that this would not hold true in other civilized countries.

Is there a reason you do not want to register your work? True, if you go track by track, it can get expensive after a while. Here, you can register many works at the same time for one fee, as a collection. Can you not do the same in Europe, using the eCO Registration System?


----------



## Carles (Feb 4, 2016)

RiffWraith said:


> Here, you automatically obtain copyright on an original work as soon as it is created and fixed in a tangible medium of expression. You do not need to register the work with the copyright office to obtain copyright. However, without registering that work, it will be impossible to file suit against anyone who may have plagiarized your work, and it may also be nearly impossible to defend yourself in such a suit.


I hope someone like Daryl will chime in, but meanwhile, as I do understand it's the same in Europe. As soon as you produce music on a medium you are the systematically the copyright owner, and that's the theory but... equally than USA, in case of dispute it would be hard to demonstrate your ownership if someone will register the material sooner than yourself.
I did read (at PRS site if I recall well) that a cheap and effective way to ensure your ownership before registering material officially (because of work in progress, or a idea/theme still not developed or whatever) is recording it on CD and mail it to yourself (provided that you keep the envelope sealed until it needs to be hypothetically open in court).
In case of need, you'll always have (legally valid) physical proof that you did create that music in a given date (even if never registered officially).

Carles


----------



## JohnG (Feb 4, 2016)

Carles said:


> I did read (at PRS site if I recall well) that a cheap and effective way to ensure your ownership before registering material officially (because of work in progress, or a idea/theme still not developed or whatever) is recording it on CD and mail it to yourself (provided that you keep the envelope sealed until it needs to be hypothetically open in court).



A lot of people repeat that advice, Carles; I've heard it too. However, lawyers say that if your Big Hit Song is stolen that method will not prevail.

I used to register my material but stopped. Almost all my material ends up in a game, a show, a library, or a film right away, so that's my proof of creation. Most of the stuff that doesn't end up there is unlikely to get stolen.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 5, 2016)

I don't know much about it except for the situation in the UK, so here is my view:

The rules are the same as Jeff stated for the USA. Sending a copy to yourself does nothing, except add to your proof, if you go to court. It is not definitive.

Registering for PRS does nothing. They don't listen to your music. So, any other materials that can show when something was created should be stored safely. This is where sketches and other things that show the thought process can help.

Note that this is totally separate from the copyright contained within a recording. They are two different things, even though for sample based musicians they may seem somewhat connected.

One further thing. Please read the Soundcloud conditions of use before you upload anything. Not saying you should or shouldn't. Just that you should know what you're giving away before you do it.


----------



## tiago (Feb 5, 2016)

RiffWraith said:


> Here, you automatically obtain copyright on an original work as soon as it is created and fixed in a tangible medium of expression. You do not need to register the work with the copyright office to obtain copyright. However, without registering that work, it will be impossible to file suit against anyone who may have plagiarized your work, and it may also be nearly impossible to defend yourself in such a suit.
> 
> Regardless of whether or not you have registered the work, _nobody_ is free to use and sell that work, claim it has his own creation, release it on an album, license it, etc. That's here. I find it hard to imagine that this would not hold true in other civilized countries.



Hi Jeff! Thanks for commenting. What you've just wrote is exactly what I think it's so weird and that it makes no sense at all. Yes, you should obtain a copyright right after creating your work but, if you can't take action on someone that's stealing or misusing your work without registering, what is the point of obtaining that "copyright"? From my point of view (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's completely meaningless.



RiffWraith said:


> Is there a reason you do not want to register your work? True, if you go track by track, it can get expensive after a while. Here, you can register many works at the same time for one fee, as a collection. Can you not do the same in Europe, using the eCO Registration System?



I heard that there was the option of registering several works at the same time, but there was some rule that I didn't understand quite well about the date in which the works were or would be published. Also not very sure on what they accept as a work being "published". Are you aware of what I'm talking about and, if so, could you share some of your personal experience with eCO? I would really appreciate it.


----------



## tiago (Feb 5, 2016)

Carles said:


> I hope someone like Daryl will chime in, but meanwhile, as I do understand it's the same in Europe. As soon as you produce music on a medium you are the systematically the copyright owner, and that's the theory but... equally than USA, in case of dispute it would be hard to demonstrate your ownership if someone will register the material sooner than yourself.



Hi Carles! Thanks for commenting. That's also what I answered to Jeff... it seems to me that the idea that you obtain a copyright right after producing a creative work is just an illusion, since anyone can do whatever they want with it if you didn't register that work.



Carles said:


> I did read (at PRS site if I recall well) that a cheap and effective way to ensure your ownership before registering material officially (because of work in progress, or a idea/theme still not developed or whatever) is recording it on CD and mail it to yourself (provided that you keep the envelope sealed until it needs to be hypothetically open in court).
> In case of need, you'll always have (legally valid) physical proof that you did create that music in a given date (even if never registered officially).



I've heard of that technique and that it was used very oftenly for a long time, before the internet age. I've also heard that nowadays it is just as effective as uploading your work to a website (since both are ways of showing that you've made it before a particular date), and that the law will also most likely dismiss it as proof...


----------



## tiago (Feb 5, 2016)

JohnG said:


> A lot of people repeat that advice, Carles; I've heard it too. However, lawyers say that if your Big Hit Song is stolen that method will not prevail.
> 
> I used to register my material but stopped. Almost all my material ends up in a game, a show, a library, or a film right away, so that's my proof of creation. Most of the stuff that doesn't end up there is unlikely to get stolen.



Hi John! Thanks for commenting. I suppose that your music gets licensed through high-end exclusive libraries. If so, it makes sense because, if I'm thinking correctly, those libraries will also act as your publisher and take care of the copyright registration for you. If you're talking about non-exclusive libraries (and if you didn't gave your publishing rights away), I don't really see how having a track in one of those libraries (or even getting placements for your music) will serve as copyright protection for your work... I would appreciate if you could give a bit more info on this.


----------



## tiago (Feb 5, 2016)

Daryl said:


> One further thing. Please read the Soundcloud conditions of use before you upload anything. Not saying you should or shouldn't. Just that you should know what you're giving away before you do it.



Hi Daryl! Thanks for stopping by. I didn't understand very well what you meant when you mentioned SoundCloud. Could you please give a quick explanation on that? Thanks.


----------



## WorksAndExperiments (Feb 5, 2016)

In Europe is quite common the use of cryptographic timestamps. 
Have a look at this site for more information: https://www.patamu.com/index.php/en


----------



## Daryl (Feb 5, 2016)

tiago said:


> Hi Daryl! Thanks for stopping by. I didn't understand very well what you meant when you mentioned SoundCloud. Could you please give a quick explanation on that? Thanks.


Well for a start, this.



> By uploading Your Content to the Platform, you also grant a limited, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully paid up, licence to other users of the Platform, and to operators and users of any other websites, apps and/or platforms to which Your Content has been shared or embedded using the Services (“Linked Services”), to use, copy, repost, transmit or otherwise distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, adapt, prepare derivative works of, compile, make available and otherwise communicate to the public.



If you are hoping that your music will be Published this would, in some cases be a problem. If you are a PRS member, it is a slightly strange situation anyway, because theoretically you couldn't use Soundcloud at all. However, now that they've come to some sort of agreement, you can, so the above section of the T & C is now partly invalid. But partly not.


----------



## Cowtothesky (Feb 5, 2016)

I agree with others that if the law isn't enforced, what good is copyrighting? 

However, I have a responsibility as a composer to deliver music that is "protected" to the best of my ability. So, I register everything I do at copyright.gov for that reason.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 5, 2016)

Daryl said:


> One further thing. Please read the Soundcloud conditions of use before you upload anything. Not saying you should or shouldn't. Just that you should know what you're giving away before you do it.



That is good advice. I canceled my account and took down everything.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 5, 2016)

tiago said:


> I don't really see how having a track in one of those libraries (or even getting placements for your music) will serve as copyright protection for your work...



Any commercial transaction, including a library agreement, that establishes the creation date with a third party helps to prove that you created it on such and such a date. There is a written, dated agreement with the library / studio / network / production company. Plus, very often that entity owns the copyright and publishing anyway, so it's really on them to defend it.

The big issue here has been discussed elsewhere -- it costs probably $200k minimum to bring a "real" lawsuit, so there has to be a lot at stake. If someone uses your jingle for a major advert campaign, ok. If someone uses your song and it's actually charting, ok. But if it's on some made-for-internet series, there's not much money lost so the damages are trivial and it's not worth hiring the lawyer.

That said, proper production companies are dreadfully afraid of using unlicensed music because it's possible to obtain an injunction if they start to distribute (broadcast) your music without a license. Given the costs of tv or movie production it is not worth it to them to steal music (since we're actually so cheap) because of the risk they could be barred from airing / selling / distributing their magnum opus.


----------



## mc_deli (Feb 5, 2016)

I have a couple of questions/points:

- Where can I find a full explanation of the rights and copyright process for media compositions (like Bemuso but for media composing)?

- Production companies avoid unlicensed music - but in my experience what they do now is underpay and misuse when buying cheap stock music online. I.e. they will wilfully ignore the correct button for global/YouTube use, even though they know perfectly well that is where the client will put it tomorrow.

- As a relatively newcomer, but someone who has been reading about music licensing and rights management for twenty years, attended courses, bought (real) books... that I am still effectively scrabbling in the dark, shames me, but also points to what a total mess this is.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 5, 2016)

mc_deli said:


> - Where can I find a full explanation of the rights and copyright process for media compositions (like Bemuso but for media composing)?


The rights for media composers are exactly the same as for other composers. The rights for the recordings are exactly the same as all other recordings. In some places there is a Copyright process. In others there isn't. If you can ask a specific question, you can get a specific answer. Sorry to be so vague, but it really is dependent on what territory you are talking about.



mc_deli said:


> - Production companies avoid unlicensed music - but in my experience what they do now is underpay and misuse when buying cheap stock music online. I.e. they will wilfully ignore the correct button for global/YouTube use, even though they know perfectly well that is where the client will put it tomorrow.


That may be the case at the lower end of the industry; I don't know. However I've never head of that happening with any reputable company, probably because they don't use cheap stock music, partly because there are often potential issues and risks with it, and partly because it is all pretty dreadful, compared with any of the big companies' oeuvre.



mc_deli said:


> - As a relatively newcomer, but someone who has been reading about music licensing and rights management for twenty years, attended courses, bought (real) books... that I am still effectively scrabbling in the dark, shames me, but also points to what a total mess this is.


Feel free to ask specific questions. There are enough of us on this forum to have a large portion of the world covered, that we ought to be able to answer most standard questions.


----------



## RiffWraith (Feb 5, 2016)

Daryl said:


> Sending a copy to yourself does nothing, except add to your proof, if you go to court. It is not definitive.



Right. I remember being told back in the early 80's - when I was still a teen - by other musicians who were older and more knowledgeable than I, to take a copy (cassette!) of the song(s) and mail it to myself, return receipt requested. But, this would only help you in case the copyright reg form got lost in the mail.



Daryl said:


> Registering for PRS does nothing.



Right. Registering your work with your PRO does not equal registering your work with the copyright office.


----------



## RiffWraith (Feb 5, 2016)

tiago said:


> Yes, you should obtain a copyright right after creating your work but, if you can't take action on someone that's stealing or misusing your work without registering, what is the point of obtaining that "copyright"? From my point of view (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's completely meaningless.



This is why you register the work.

Cheers.


----------



## tiago (Feb 5, 2016)

WorksAndExperiments said:


> In Europe is quite common the use of cryptographic timestamps.
> Have a look at this site for more information: https://www.patamu.com/index.php/en



Hi there! I appreciate the suggestion, but I don't really see the benefit in using a service like that. From what I understand it basically provides the same protection as you would supposedly get from uploading a track to a site like YouTube, whose uploads are also time-stamped.


----------



## tiago (Feb 5, 2016)

JohnG said:


> Any commercial transaction, including a library agreement, that establishes the creation date with a third party helps to prove that you created it on such and such a date. There is a written, dated agreement with the library / studio / network / production company. Plus, very often that entity owns the copyright and publishing anyway, so it's really on them to defend it.



I knew that exclusive libraries dealt with the registration of a track because they also need proof that you gave them the rights to your work but didn't know that agreements with non-exclusive libraries could be used to protect your copyrights as well. Thanks for the info.



JohnG said:


> The big issue here has been discussed elsewhere -- it costs probably $200k minimum to bring a "real" lawsuit, so there has to be a lot at stake. If someone uses your jingle for a major advert campaign, ok. If someone uses your song and it's actually charting, ok. But if it's on some made-for-internet series, there's not much money lost so the damages are trivial and it's not worth hiring the lawyer.
> That said, proper production companies are dreadfully afraid of using unlicensed music because it's possible to obtain an injunction if they start to distribute (broadcast) your music without a license. Given the costs of tv or movie production it is not worth it to them to steal music (since we're actually so cheap) because of the risk they could be barred from airing / selling / distributing their magnum opus.



I'm aware that big studios would never use a track without a license, especially considering how much money they have to spend and how cheap it is to get music these days. My main question was more about someone just getting your track and start selling or licensing it. I remember when Daniel James posted about some thief that was stealing tracks from a lot of composers and selling them on royalty free sites. How would a composer deal with a situation like that and easily prove to the moderators of those sites that the track was stolen?


----------



## mc_deli (Feb 6, 2016)

Daryl said:


> That may be the case at the lower end of the industry; I don't know. However I've never head of that happening with any reputable company, probably because they don't use cheap stock music, partly because there are often potential issues and risks with it, and partly because it is all pretty dreadful, compared with any of the big companies' oeuvre.


Sorry but that seems naive. I have a lot of experience with agencies. A lot of major agencies make a lot of content for a lot of major brands. A lot. And there is a lot of video/audio content made using cheap stock music. A lot. Think YouTube corporate. The issues I agree with you. Music quality, suitability is patchy. But there is massive demand for content and huge amounts of lower budget corporate/B2B/B2C video content being made. Yes, nearly all of it (possible all of it) is dreadful.

And there are so many agencies in the outsource pyramid that there is a lot wilful neglect when it comes to paying for the proper multi-use and online digital rights.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 6, 2016)

mc_deli said:


> Sorry but that seems naive. I have a lot of experience with agencies. A lot of major agencies make a lot of content for a lot of major brands. A lot.


I have no experience with cheap stock music and the sort of agencies that use it, so I have no opinion. Besides I said "reputable" not major. In my view if an agency is not paying what they should, they are not really reputable.


----------



## mc_deli (Feb 6, 2016)

Daryl said:


> The rights for media composers are exactly the same as for other composers. The rights for the recordings are exactly the same as all other recordings. In some places there is a Copyright process. In others there isn't. If you can ask a specific question, you can get a specific answer. Sorry to be so vague, but it really is dependent on what territory you are talking about.
> 
> Feel free to ask specific questions. There are enough of us on this forum to have a large portion of the world covered, that we ought to be able to answer most standard questions.



My question is about the whole thing. I want to understand how rights management works for media composing in the US, UK and EU. That includes library contracts and registrations, rf library contracts and registrations, ordered rf music, ordered registered music, contracts for performers for rf and non rf, process for corporate vs TV vs radio vs film, international collaboration and invoicing and handling multiple PROs, direct to client licensing, contracts and how they deal with exclusivity/no-exc/remixes/reworking, how/when/where to register with perf/mech societies for different job types, metadata and role in licensing, Content ID-how it works/where to register/what to register... and probably more... 

I have not been able to find a resource for this. Any links to resources, further reading, books etc would really be appreciated.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 6, 2016)

mc_deli said:


> My question is about the whole thing.


That is a huge raft of questions. Your best bet is to book a couple of hours with an entertainment lawyer and pepper him/her with questions. Be aware that there is no one answer for any of your categories, because most of the time It depends on circumstance and negotiation. it would really help to understand exactly your concerns. Are you about to become a Publisher? If so, what field?


----------



## mc_deli (Feb 6, 2016)

Daryl said:


> That is a huge raft of questions. Your best bet is to book a couple of hours with an entertainment lawyer and pepper him/her with questions. Be aware that there is no one answer for any of your categories, because most of the time It depends on circumstance and negotiation. it would really help to understand exactly your concerns. Are you about to become a Publisher? If so, what field?


I'll make a more specific Q and start a new thread. Thanks


----------



## madbulk (Feb 6, 2016)

tiago said:


> I knew that exclusive libraries dealt with the registration of a track because they also need proof that you gave them the rights to your work but didn't know that agreements with non-exclusive libraries could be used to protect your copyrights as well. Thanks for the info.
> 
> I'm aware that big studios would never use a track without a license, especially considering how much money they have to spend and how cheap it is to get music these days. My main question was more about someone just getting your track and start selling or licensing it. I remember when Daniel James posted about some thief that was stealing tracks from a lot of composers and selling them on royalty free sites. How would a composer deal with a situation like that and easily prove to the moderators of those sites that the track was stolen?



Different levels here. 
If you're infringed upon and the infringement is substantial enough to bring a suit, you'll want to have registered it. And unless a lot of time has passed, you probably still can. Good that we got that out here for posterity. People search VI for questions like this. All the other manner of protecting your de facto, instantaneous from moment of creation, etc. ownership rights -- they all flat out suck. 

But protecting your stuff from the example you're giving? You can't truly protect your stuff any better than you can protect your home from a burglar. If they want to steal, they'll steal. So prevention first. Don't throw high rez non-watermarked copies of your work all over the internet. Policing second. Maybe get a tunesat account or something like that to let you know about unauthorized usages. 

But your question about how to easily prove to a moderator of a site that the material is yours... that's not going to be difficult. They'll believe you. Or they'll assume your being truthful. Your standard of proof will be low. If you send them a few files with dates on them for example, that'll do the trick. They'll take down the tracks.


----------



## tiago (Feb 8, 2016)

madbulk said:


> Different levels here.
> If you're infringed upon and the infringement is substantial enough to bring a suit, you'll want to have registered it. And unless a lot of time has passed, you probably still can. Good that we got that out here for posterity. People search VI for questions like this. All the other manner of protecting your de facto, instantaneous from moment of creation, etc. ownership rights -- they all flat out suck.
> 
> But protecting your stuff from the example you're giving? You can't truly protect your stuff any better than you can protect your home from a burglar. If they want to steal, they'll steal. So prevention first. Don't throw high rez non-watermarked copies of your work all over the internet. Policing second. Maybe get a tunesat account or something like that to let you know about unauthorized usages.
> ...



Hi there! Thanks for the comment. I've done some research and, from what I understand, copyright law still works a bit different in every country, although respecting what was established in the Berne Convention. I suppose you're talking about copyright in the US, where registering copyright can bring some benefits and it's needed to file a lawsuit. I know that in other countries copyright registration doesn't have the same impact as it does in the US and, in Spain, just to name one example, you can file suit without ever using copyright registration. I've also found that (please someone correct me if I'm wrong on this) in some countries like Germany and the UK there isn't even an official copyright registration process available... About what you said on people stealing works, I'll have to agree that it really seems to be an inevitability. I'm happy that we have AdRev these days to help with theft on YouTube and I'm just now checking Tunesat (thanks for the suggestion), which also seems to be a very good service to monitor other platforms. What you've said about taking down stolen tracks from stock sites also makes sense to me, I always have time-stamped versions of all the stuff that I make (not just music) and I hope it'll be useful in case something like that happens in the future.

Regarding what I said above about the non-existence of copyright registration in Germany and the UK, I would truly appreciate if some composers from those countries (I know there are quite a lot of them around ) could share some of their experience on dealing with their music's copyrights.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 8, 2016)

tiago said:


> ...but didn't know that agreements with non-exclusive libraries could be used to protect your copyrights as well.



Yaaaa!

That's not what I wrote at all. Dude, I understand you are hoping for quick and dirty advice, but there is really no such thing when it comes to intellectual property rights. You are on an internet site asking for accurate legal advice from non-lawyers about a complex, internationally differentiated subject people get paid handsomely to master. 

On top of that, even though some of the rules appear at first to be "bright line" -- that is, clear delineations of what's on and what's not -- you need also to learn about the litigation / judicial renderings in various jurisdictions to really know what your outcome would be in a particular situation. From the little particle I know, this subject seems very fact- and circumstance-specific, and even then some court rulings from actual litigation seem loony to me.

What I did mean to write is that the commercial transaction helps to some extent to establish a date on which a work was created and that multiple parties would have a record of that. Is that definitive? Will that win the day? Can't hurt but by no means is that "enough" or in any way guaranteed to spare one the expense and worry of litigating to get a good outcome.

I'm not saying _you_ are wasting energy on this but I certainly did. I used to worry a lot about getting ripped off when I was starting out, a memory that brings a wry smile to my lips now. I'm not saying it can't or doesn't happen, but it's not like I'm writing "Unchained Melody" or "Walkin' After Midnight" or even the Girl Guides' song from Australia. 

Could someone infringe? Sure. But I'm not up at night worrying myself about it.

Besides, what are the damages? Would it be worth hiring a lawyer? Nobody here, I would guess, is qualified to answer your questions with any certainty, or even accuracy.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 8, 2016)

John raises a very important point. Everything is relative. Even if you were ripped off, most times a take down notice would be all that would be needed. Court cases are very expensive and are usually not worth it. If someone has stolen your music and put it in a music library, most libraries would rather remove the offending track immediately, than get into a protracted argument. Imagine that they had licensed it, only to find out that they didn't have the right to do so. Not only could they be sued, but the client could be sued as well. Little things like registrations and offer of supporting materials is likely to sway things in your direction, particularly as the offender can't offer either.


----------



## Mundano (Feb 8, 2016)

In Germany, GEMA is like the registry organization for music authors. https://www.gema.de/en/


----------



## tiago (Feb 9, 2016)

JohnG said:


> Yaaaa!
> 
> That's not what I wrote at all. Dude, I understand you are hoping for quick and dirty advice, but there is really no such thing when it comes to intellectual property rights. You are on an internet site asking for accurate legal advice from non-lawyers about a complex, internationally differentiated subject people get paid handsomely to master.
> 
> ...



Hi John. I don't know why you're saying that I'm looking for "quick and dirty" and "accurate legal advice"... I just started a thread about an issue that is common to all composers, because we all are creating copyrights when we create music. I thought that the "working in the industry" section existed for that exact same reason: so that people can share their experience, personal knowledge and opinions on how this (sometimes fairly complex) industry works. If VI served only to talk about production, composition techniques and samples, then this part of the forum would've never been created (I think...). And even when you ask about all these other topics, most of the time no one is expecting a short and clear answer. If you ask for a strings library some might say cinestrings, others might say symphobia, etc. The same thing applies here. I'm not looking for anyone to tell me something "as it is", to resume such a complex subject into a short sentence. I'm only looking for as much opinions as I can that might help me get a better vision of how things work. Nonetheless, I'm sorry that I misunderstood part of what you said in your previous post... It happens, nobody is perfect.


----------



## tiago (Feb 9, 2016)

Mundano said:


> In Germany, GEMA is like the registry organization for music authors. https://www.gema.de/en/



Hi there! Thanks for commenting. I was aware that GEMA was the german PRO, but I thought that it worked just like any other PRO. As some people have already mentioned before, registering works with PRS is far different from registering copyright and I can guarantee that the same thing happens with BMI. Were you saying that GEMA handles actual *copyright registration* or just the regular registration for performance royalties (like in other PROs)?


----------



## Mundano (Feb 9, 2016)

tiago said:


> Hi there! Thanks for commenting. I was aware that GEMA was the german PRO, but I thought that it worked just like any other PRO. As some people have already mentioned before, registering works with PRS is far different from registering copyright and I can guarantee that the same thing happens with my BMI. Were you saying that GEMA handles actual *copyright registration* or just the regular registration for performance royalties (like in other PROs)?


the second one, but i will throw a read and let you know...


----------



## Mundano (Feb 9, 2016)

the first thing you can make is to go and register your work in a notary's office. That only assures that your work belongs to you, but doesn't protect your work. Next step, IFPI, BMI, GEMA, SUISA, etc.

http://www.priormart.com/de/copyright/musiker
"Mit der notariellen Hinterlegung Ihrer Werke schaffen Sie einen unumstößlichen Beweis über den Schöpfungszeitpunkt. Damit verhindern Sie, dass sich ein anderer als Urheber ausgibt und schützen sich vor Plagiaten und Ideenklau."


----------

