# Ethical considerations and plagiarism



## Resoded (Mar 15, 2014)

So a producer asked me to make something that sounds like something else. They like both the harmony and the rhythm/timing. The reason why they want to hire a composer is because I can do it cheaper than it is for them to license the full track from an online library, especially since they only want 10 seconds or so of a full 2-3 minute song.

I suppose the problem is that there's a very fine and blurry line between blatant plagiarism and mere similarities in style. I'd love to hear some of your thoughts on this. Do you turn down gigs purely based on ethical reasons?


----------



## Stephen Rees (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Do you turn down gigs purely based on ethical reasons?



Yes.

But we are bound to all have different views and experiences on where ethical boundaries are drawn.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 15, 2014)

Stephen Rees @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Do you turn down gigs purely based on ethical reasons?
> ...


Agreed, but it's easy to the ethical when one is successful.

TBH everything in life has a shifting boundary of ethics, and even something as simple as buying a packet of coffee can end up supporting a regime that practises human rights abuses, so it's not always as simple as the OPs question.

D


----------



## Stephen Rees (Mar 15, 2014)

Daryl @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Stephen Rees @ Sat Mar 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:
> ...



Yes agreed.

I didn't word my reply above very well. What I meant to say was that I don't think anyone else can tell Resoded what he should or shouldn't do in a particular case. It is a personal choice.


----------



## Resoded (Mar 15, 2014)

Sure, but I don't want you to tell me what to do. I want to know what you have done in similar situations and the reasoning behind it.


----------



## MichaelL (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> The reason why they want to hire a composer is because I can do it cheaper than it is for them to license the full track from an online library, especially since they only want 10 seconds or so of a full 2-3 minute song.





1) You must be very inexpensive.
2) Do you really want to work for someone that cheap?

But Daryl is correct. Lots of gray areas. Plus, chord changes and do not a copyright make.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Sure, but I don't want you to tell me what to do. I want to know what you have done in similar situations and the reasoning behind it.



Well speaking only for myself.....

What did I do in a similar situation? I turned it down.
What was my reasoning? I don't like ripping people off.



But then if I had a hungry child to feed, or if we were about to be thrown out of our house for non payment of bills or......etc.....etc.... I might have made a different choice.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Sure, but I don't want you to tell me what to do. I want to know what you have done in similar situations and the reasoning behind it.


OK, well I wouldn't do it because basically it is stealing someone elses work to make money for myself.

Someone offers me a gig and gives me a temp score, I find out what they like about it. If they tell me they can't afford the "original" and want me to get as close as possible, I walk. If they are open to a piece in the same style, and with a bit of originality, I give it a go. If I once hear the phrase "get closer to the original", I walk.

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 15, 2014)

I have written things "sideways" a lot for hire. My ears tell me when I am crossing a line between "sounds a lot like" and a rip off.


----------



## vlad (Mar 15, 2014)

I know some people who do this on daily basis. Thing is, you are not only sell yourself cheap but also create "bad karma" that will boomerang back at you, often more that once.
Besides.. they can't be serious if they can't afford licence for single track from production library...


----------



## rgames (Mar 15, 2014)

The rational thought process comes down to two questions:

1. How much do you really need the money?
2. How comfortable are you doing the work?

These two questions are basically at odds - if you really need the money, then #2 matters less. Likewise, if you're really uncomfortable with what you're being asked to do, then #1 matters less. Odds are you're somewhere in between.

If it's a low-paying gig and there's a chance you'll be ridiculed for copying someone else's work, then it's clearly not worth it if you think your reputation is important and/or future clients will care about the ridicule.

For some people, #2 is weighted 99% and #1 is 1%. For others, #1 is 99% and #2 is 1%. The two questions are pretty much the same for everyone but the relative weights depend on your situation.

rgames


----------



## chillbot (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> They like both the harmony and the rhythm/timing.


Copying the exact tempo is no problem, mimicking a similar harmony, fine. There's plenty of leeway there to make it your own and not feel like you are ripping anyone off. Obviously there's a line that is different to everyone but in this specific example I would probably have no issues. Of course the catch-22 is that unless you plagiarize it the producers are never going to be happy. Good luck.

If I turned down every gig where they wanted me to get similar to the temp I would never work.


----------



## Resoded (Mar 15, 2014)

Many thanks to everyone for being frank and pitching in with your thoughts.

I just sent them an e-mail and asked them to either license the track they want, or hire me to do something in the same style but my thing. I'm really not comfortable with this and don't need the money.


----------



## G.E. (Mar 15, 2014)

There's a difference between making it sound a lot like something else and blatant plagiarism.I don't think that using the same harmony is plagiarism,otherwise every pop song ever made is a ripoff.

If I really needed the job, I would do it as long as they don't ask me to copy it note for note.That's impossible anyway without getting into legal trouble.The way I see it,is that you're just doing what was specifically asked of you to make your client happy.
Your client is the unethical one for asking you to do such a thing,not you.If you don't do it,someone else will, so it's not like you're saving the world from plagiarism.It might as well be you.Though I wouldn't want my name in the credits or anything like that :lol:

If you don't agree with that logic,then you obviously don't want to do it and you shouldn't.


----------



## Luke W (Mar 15, 2014)

For what it's worth, I used to work for a musicologist who evaluated temp tracks vs. the composer's work in TV commercials. He was an expert that could assess whether the composer had infringed on the temp track. Music houses were wary of law suits and ask him to compare the pieces and write a pre-emptive legal brief that explained why there was no infringement. (Sometimes he reported that it was too close to the original, and the music house would re-do the composition).

I transcribed the temp track and the new composition so he could include the actual music in the report for reference. It was a spectacular learning experience.

Pertaining to this discussion, here's what I learned:
1) Stock idioms cannot be protected by copyright. This includes chord progressions, harmonic devices, instrumentation, melodic ideas, etc. Like the I-vi-IV-V chord progression in doo-wap, idioms that have become commonplace in a genre cannot be claimed in a copyright dispute.
2) However, if a composer can show that his music was used as a temp track, and the new work is clearly making use of all the same idioms (even if they're individually generic), a case can be made that there was a blatant attempt to avoid paying the first composer. (If the client knows the temp music is too expensive, that means the original composer may know the client asked for permission and declined the price. They'll be listening to the new track with particular interest

If you're being asked to copy a temp track that's pretty generic, with idioms that are common to other pieces in the same genre, you may feel some freedom in reassembling something that makes use of similar stock ideas. BUT I would still insist on a written contract that states your client assumes ALL legal responsibility should anyone sue. Even if you can point to plenty of examples of each idiom you used (which was an important part of those musicologist reports), the expense of defending yourself will be huge, even if you win.

I know this is a bit off track of the ethical discussion, but I thought the legal workings maybe interesting.


----------



## gsilbers (Mar 15, 2014)

isnt this what has happened in movies since the history of movie making? 
i believe some call it temp track. :mrgreen:


----------



## AlexandreSafi (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Many thanks to everyone for being frank and pitching in with your thoughts.
> 
> I just sent them an e-mail and asked them to either license the track they want, or hire me to do something in the same style but my thing. I'm really not comfortable with this and don't need the money.



I was about to say that copying a rhythm is less risks than copying harmony, but actually G.E. is right, every pop songs would be a ripoff... So it can be riskier when the instrumentation and timbres are too similar...Well i think, in general the better craft, the more subtle the stealing/inspiration part is...

The most important thing i would do is take time, absorbing the piece they like, then using my ears to create something new and perceiving whether what's inside of me can be new enough or not... Their attachment to this one piece of music can of course be a liability on their part, now can you or do you feel like you can create something that you know would surprise them in a good way! You be the judge! 


In any case, if you're not comfortable...
It does seem like you had the right reply!
Good call sir!

Alex


----------



## wst3 (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Many thanks to everyone for being frank and pitching in with your thoughts.
> 
> I just sent them an e-mail and asked them to either license the track they want, or hire me to do something in the same style but my thing. I'm really not comfortable with this and don't need the money.



FWIW I think you made the right choice, for all of the reasons folks shared.

If I am unable to create a track that sounds like the client's temp track, and sounds like me then either I'm not up to the task (which is always possible) or their expectations are a little bit out of kilter. OR, they are being cheap...

I prefer to think it is one of the first two.

But if I can't create a track that meets their needs without plagiarizing (and the definition of that is a personal thing - Jay's line is not going to be the same as mine, though they are probably close) then I turn down the project.

I think Richard's two questions approach is interesting. But I wonder if the dollar value doesn't also come into play? Would I take a job if it paid $10 for one minute of music that I might turn down if it paid $200? Wish I knew the answer, but kinda glad I've never been tested on that one<G>!


----------



## Resoded (Mar 15, 2014)

Ha, I got a snide remark in response. Convinces me I made the right choice.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 15, 2014)

Resoded @ Sun Mar 16 said:


> Ha, I got a snide remark in response. Convinces me I made the right choice.


Well, if they are cheaper than an online library, it's not really any loss to you. The last thing anyone needs is to think that all we can do is rip off other people.

D


----------



## danielcartisano (Mar 15, 2014)

I've had two different experiences with directors/producers:

a) Can you write a track that's similar to this? We love the style, vibe and energy so here's a good starting point. Do something on your own in this style.

I send them the track and they love it.

OR

b) Can you write a track similar to this? etc etc etc.

I send them the track but they keep edging me closer and closer to the original because they can't seem to unwrap their head around that initial reference track.


Now yesterday I got offered a job with a quick turnaround (15 hours) and it's well paid for 0:30 of music. (Yes, I need the money. Last year of being a poor full-time student!)

They wanted it as close to the original without being the original. They wanted similar tone, similar feeling, same key, same rhythm. Fuck me, right?

It really is a hard task to try and capture that exact track without it being a blatant rip off, but I think I made it work.

I worked a lot with phrasing. I experimented with the phrasing of the patterns and also changed the harmonic structure. The melody has some extra notes and also different phrasing and interaction with the chords compared to the original track.
(Instead of it being exactly like the track which was I-III-I-III, I made mine I-III-I-II, with the II being a sus4 resolving)

It's still so similar to me, having worked with the original so closely for 15 hours straight... but I'm confident there is enough of my own work there that I'd be able to share it without feeling like the scum of the earth.

This type of job isn't the ideal but sometimes you need to do whats best for you at the time. People gotta eat...

Not all of us have the luxury of turning down these jobs yet.


----------



## pkm (Mar 15, 2014)

The director just has to be clear that there's a line I won't cross for the financial safety of _both_ of us (yes, and ethical reasons above all, but that's not as effective of a point). So far, everyone has been receptive.


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 16, 2014)

Resoded @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> Sure, but I don't want you to tell me what to do. I want to know what you have done in similar situations and the reasoning behind it.



I did it 1000 times in radio spot productions, but this is another story... .


----------



## rgames (Mar 16, 2014)

I don't think the legal piece is that much of a factor - unless you're a major artist, what are the odds that you'll be sued? You might get nastygrams and cease-and-desist requests but other than that, I doubt they'll mess with you. Go look at all the stock music sites that have "sound-alikes". Many of them clearly cross the line but they've been selling them for decades and nobody goes after them because it's not worth it.

Think about it this way: say someone rips off your music - what are you going to do? Are you really going to waste time and money to bring a suit against the offender when there's basically no way for you to recoup those costs? If it's a major motion picture, then sure - it's worth it. Otherwise, not really.

It's mostly an ethics issue and a reputation issue.

rgames


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 16, 2014)

G.E. @ Sat Mar 15 said:


> There's a difference between making it sound a lot like something else and blatant plagiarism.



Not sure that I agree with this, and since I don't do this for a living, I suppose I can afford to look it from more of a "purity" standpoint.

There have been lots of cases in pop/rock music whereby an artist or group has recorded an original song only to be sued later because "it sounded a lot like something else" and this was the case without the artist/group even consciously trying to do so. If an innocent, happy accident, or subconscious plagiarism can be deemed plagiarism, then help me understand how intentionally writing something that sounds a lot like something else would be exempt from being considered plagiarism? Is it because this hits a bit too close to home and to the wallets of many who do this for a living?


----------



## Luke W (Mar 16, 2014)

@rgames

In my experience with a musicologist who specializes in copyright infringement, the fact that the person who created the "sound-alike" isn't a big fish isn't the issue: the artist/composer who's piece has been copied is often a bigger fish, and they are the ones you have to worry about. And they can sue everyone involved, not just the lowly composer asked to copy their work.

Case in point: I transcribed the temp track and the "new" track for a car commercial. It was a clear rip-off of OutKast's "Hey Ya." The musicologist told the music house their composition was way too close to the original. But the client loved it and overruled the expert's advice.

I saw the commercial on tv only one time - it was pulled almost immediately. I don't know the details of the fallout, but it didn't matter that the music house who made the sound-alike was small potatoes. The advertising agency and the car company were definitely worth suing.

So if you're only copying music library tracks, there may be little chance of blowback. But copying the work of a major artist/composer is asking for trouble.


----------



## Creston (Mar 16, 2014)

The longer i've been doing this, the more I've heard the whole 'use this as a reference but don't get too close to it' the more I realise they basically want it as close to the reference track as you're willing to go.

Every gig I lose out to another composer when pitching (film/commercial/trailer) is because the other composer got closer to the original than I did. I've experienced this with big libraries as well.

We should draw up a list of what clients SAY and what they actually MEAN.


----------



## rgames (Mar 16, 2014)

Luke W @ Sun Mar 16 said:


> I saw the commercial on tv only one time - it was pulled almost immediately. I don't know the details of the fallout, but it didn't matter that the music house who made the sound-alike was small potatoes. The advertising agency and the car company were definitely worth suing.


The question is whether there was ever actually a lawsuit or just the cease-and-desist request I mentioned above. If it's a small operation, I'd be willing to bet it's the latter.

Folks do rip-offs and even blatant stealing because they almost never get caught and even when they do, all they get is the nastygram because they don't have enough to make them a worthwhile target for legal action (same problem with pirated software). I bet the nastygram usually works - I've seen it a few times in the music business but I've never seen it escalate into an actual lawsuit unless there's a major player involved, and even then I bet it's extremely rare.

rgames


----------



## Daryl (Mar 16, 2014)

Creston @ Sun Mar 16 said:


> Every gig I lose out to another composer when pitching (film/commercial/trailer) is because the other composer got closer to the original than I did. I've experienced this with big libraries as well.


Well you didn't lose the gig to a composer, you lost it to a thief...!

In any case, I would have thought that if you needed to rip people off in order to earn a living, that would be so detrimental to your composing and general well being that you would be better off doing something else for a living.

D


----------



## Daryl (Mar 16, 2014)

rgames @ Sun Mar 16 said:


> Luke W @ Sun Mar 16 said:
> 
> 
> > I saw the commercial on tv only one time - it was pulled almost immediately. I don't know the details of the fallout, but it didn't matter that the music house who made the sound-alike was small potatoes. The advertising agency and the car company were definitely worth suing.
> ...


That's always been the case in my experience as well. in fact I know a "composer" who this often happens to. Doesn't seem to worry him much though, as he never gets sued. It's a shame really, because all it would take would be a few high profile cases, and the world would be a lot better for it. Having said that, I do know that music houses try to palm off all of the responsibility onto the composer, by making them sign a document that takes sole responsibility for the originality of the music.

D


----------



## Creston (Mar 16, 2014)

Daryl @ Sun Mar 16 said:


> rgames @ Sun Mar 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Luke W @ Sun Mar 16 said:
> ...



It's more to do with me wasting my time. If they were more transparent with what they wanted, I could work out if something is worth my time or not.


----------



## JJP (Mar 17, 2014)

rgames @ Sun Mar 16 said:


> Folks do rip-offs and even blatant stealing because they almost never get caught and even when they do, all they get is the nastygram because they don't have enough to make them a worthwhile target for legal action (same problem with pirated software). I bet the nastygram usually works - I've seen it a few times in the music business but I've never seen it escalate into an actual lawsuit unless there's a major player involved, and even then I bet it's extremely rare.
> 
> rgames


I've been in the Madison Ave law offices where this stuff happens in the advertising biz. Cases do go to court or rack up legal fees without going to court. It's not always the big dogs. Often it can be the smaller dogs fighting among themselves: i.e. a music library vs. a jingle house, composer vs composer. It's not always about how much money you have but the potential royalties and residuals from an ad.

I can think of one case where a composer submitted a demo, didn't win, then heard the final version that was a rip off of his own demo. A lawsuit was promptly filed.

Many contracts have a clause where the composer or jingle house warrants that the work is original and then indemnifies the client for plagiarism. That means the composer can be on the hook when these issues come to a head. That's also why some clients require composers to have an errors and omissions insurance policy. Then they turn around and ask the composer to rip off someone else. Shameful.


----------

