# Is There A Tool To Check Your Melody For Possible Infringement?



## tsk (Sep 8, 2021)

Sometimes I finish a track and then when listening back to it I start to worry, "what if it's too similar to something else?". I think almost always I'm just being paranoid, but I would love to be able to check against something to be more certain.

I thought about using Shazam and will probably give that a go, but don't the libraries have some kind of service for searching for similar tracks?

Any suggestions welcome.


----------



## Haakond (Sep 9, 2021)

There is an app called SoundHorn, and I think you can hum a melody and it will search for similar melodies. Never tried it though.

On the other hand, please don't worry about things being to similar to existing music. This will only limit your creativity. No matter how great your melody is, there will most likely be someone that did the same or almost the same melody before you. And that is fine. We don't have that many notes to choose from anyway. 

I like to think of it as painting. There are billions of paintings of fruit baskets or bridges. But I am fine seeing a new one. And I am fine hearing a similar melody to something I have already heard before. As long as it works in the context.


----------



## Crowe (Sep 9, 2021)

My take: If you live in America, stop making music because you'll get sued for retarded reasons. Anywhere else: who cares, this is how music works.


----------



## Gaffable (Sep 9, 2021)

Haakond said:


> There is an app called SoundHorn, and I think you can hum a melody and it will search for similar melodies. Never tried it though.



Perhaps you mean SoundHound?

I find SoundHound and its competitor Shazam to be reasonably accurate at identifying the names of pop songs that I don't know, but they are less successful when it comes to classical music.




tsk said:


> Sometimes I finish a track and then when listening back to it I start to worry, "what if it's too similar to something else?" I would love to be able to check against something to be more certain.
> 
> Any suggestions welcome.



I just did a quick Google search and it seems that, apart from Shazam and SoundHound, there are no software tools available to musicians at the present time that can assess a new composition for plagiarism. [Edit: Google's mobile phone app has a music recognition tool]

There is some good news, though. Last December, Spotify applied for a patent for an AI plagiarism detection tool. It seems that Spotify is planning to make this tool available to its customers. In its patent filing, Spotify wrote that its detection tool, "would allow artists to generate lead sheets more quickly and confidently by detecting and providing visual feedback as to whether any aspect of the work has a probability of being deemed plagiaristic."


----------



## Haakond (Sep 9, 2021)

Gaffable said:


> Perhaps you mean SoundHound?


Yes, that is the one!


----------



## Daryl (Sep 9, 2021)

Don't worry about it. Just get insurance.


----------



## chillbot (Sep 9, 2021)

There is parson's code, which might not help in this case because we often rip off things very closely but not exactly. But if you're focused solely on a certain melody it may be useful.

You can google parson's code, but essentially it breaks a melody down into whether the notes go Up Down or Repeat. Some fake books include an entire index of parson's code. "Happy Birthday" would be written as *RUDUDDRUDUD. Here's one site to search:



by Melodic Contour: Musipedia Melody Search Engine


----------



## tsk (Sep 9, 2021)

Daryl said:


> Don't worry about it. Just get insurance.


Which insurance do you have? I researched this and it seemed extremely expensive with almost no providers offering it. I was told by a fairly well known film composer that usually it's just the companies that get it, not the composers.


----------



## tsk (Sep 9, 2021)

Gaffable said:


> Perhaps you mean SoundHound?
> 
> I find SoundHound and its competitor Shazam to be reasonably accurate at identifying the names of pop songs that I don't know, but they are less successful when it comes to classical music.
> 
> ...


Wow, that sounds quite interesting but also frightening.. In the meantime I guess it's Shazam and SoundHound to see what they're like.

I think classical music from pre 1900 might not be such a worry, as isn't that all out of copyright? Unless you copy the new arragement of course. Is that right?


----------



## tsk (Sep 9, 2021)

I have been trying out Shazam and SoundHound a bit.

I am very impressed with SoundHound's ability to identify melodies which I hum, out of key, but in tune relatively. Shazam hasn't been able to do this yet for me.

I played my finished piece into Shazam 3 times. Each time it came up with a different match but when I went to listen to each match they were not similar in my opinion at all (and I tend to be over anxious). It seemed to me that it was more a case of a fast moving element in my track resembling some fast moving element in the match. But the overall feel and melody were totally different. Some of the matches didn't even have a discernible melody.

I tried SoundHound with my finished piece and there were no results found.

I then tried isolating my melody in my DAW and played that into both apps - no results found. I tried humming my melody into SoundHound - no results found. I even tried isolating the melody and underlying chords, again no results found in Shazam or SoundHound.

So, overall.. hmm, you can't be 100% confident, but I guess this is a good sign for my track..


----------



## Gaffable (Sep 9, 2021)

tsk said:


> I think classical music from pre 1900 might not be such a worry, as isn't that all out of copyright? Unless you copy the new arragement of course. Is that right?


Yes, as a general rule of thumb, anything created before 1900 is almost certainly out of copyright.

The length of copyright varies from country to country. In the United States, the UK and the European Union, copyright protection extends for 70 years after the creator’s death. In Canada it's 50 years and in Mexico it's 100 years.

The United States also has separate rules for works that are categorised as work for hire (copyright material that is created by an employee as part of their job). For these works, copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first.


----------



## d.healey (Sep 9, 2021)




----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 9, 2021)

A melody tester would be cool if a good one existed (I don't think one does), but bear in mind that most copyright infringement lawsuits in music for media situations occur when the copy was semi-intentional and there's a trail leading to it. One of many examples: The producers of Ghostbusters tried to license Huey Lewis's _"I Want a New Drug,"_ but were turned down, so they hired Ray Parker Jr, who wrote a similar sounding song ... and they got sued.

Almost every Film or TV infringement example I can think of (including one where I was a defendant) is like that. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any TV/Film examples where there was a lawsuit based simply on an _unintentional_ melody similarity. I'm sure they exist, but they're probably rare, because without a smoking gun (where we _know_ the defendant was influenced by the first song), an infringement lawsuit would be much more difficult.

That's not to say that you shouldn't worry at all ... but I wouldn't worry much. Commercials can be scary, because of the endorsement implications, so "damages" can go through the roof and long shot cases are more worthwhile. (When people get insurance, it's usually for commercials.) But for normal Film/TV scoring, as long as you're not lifting something intentionally, I wouldn't worry about it.

In a semi-related vein, I've written a number of songs (back in my songwriting days) where I realized later that this part or that part of a melody was similar to some section of an existing song. In fact, the first song I ever placed on a major label was like that, where my B-section melody was (unintentionally) a close match to part of a Michael Jackson song. But the songs didn't *sound* the same, so although a lawyer might want to argue a numerical similarity to certain sections of melody, it's clear that the songs are different, so I rolled with it. (The song was a flop, so this wasn't a real test, but still, I'd be surprised if it would have even raised an eyebrow.)

A lot of times when I hear a bad melody from an amateur songwriter, I wonder if they tried really hard to make sure their melody was totally unique and infringement-proof, so they wound up with the contorted mess that their melody became. In songwriting, "simple" is our friend. We can take comfort that _for everyone_, it's near impossible to write a simple melody that has literally _never_ been done before. In fact, rock and roll is filled with partial melodies (in the verses especially) that appear near identically in dozens of hit songs. Yet the songs are clearly different.


----------



## d.healey (Sep 9, 2021)

Mike Greene said:


> The producers of Ghostbusters tried to license Huey Lewis's _"I Want a New Drug,"_ but were turned down, so they hired Ray Parker Jr, who wrote a similar sounding song ... and they got sued.


And why didn't these guys sue!


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 9, 2021)

d.healey said:


> And why didn't these guys sue!



If Columbia had approached them before the film's release, then they would have sued, too. 

To that end, I don't know which song came first, "Pop Music" or "I Want a New Drug," but I'll bet neither sued the other over that riff. Very similar, but without the smoking gun, it's just rock and roll songwriting, where similar riffs abound.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 9, 2021)

Crowe said:


> My take: If you live in America, stop making music because you'll get sued for retarded reasons. Anywhere else: who cares, this is how music works.


QFT. I couldn't agree more.


----------



## tsk (Sep 9, 2021)

d.healey said:


>



Lots of very interesting points and ideas in this. Overall I was left feeling like he should have titled the video: "The Origin of Fear". Terrifying.

At various times I've used his technique of starting a tune with a reference piece that is out of copyright. With a trail leading back to it. Etc. But I can't realistically do that every time.

The idea of self-plagiarizing is also something which has haunted my waking (and probably sleeping) hours. With a lot of published material across different publishers you really start to sweat sometimes when you hear your own piece somewhere and wonder if it's similar to another one of your own pieces at another publisher. I try so hard to track all this with spreadsheets and listening back over my previous tracks.


----------



## tsk (Sep 9, 2021)

Mike Greene said:


> A melody tester would be cool if a good one existed (I don't think one does), but bear in mind that most copyright infringement lawsuits in music for media situations occur when the copy was semi-intentional and there's a trail leading to it. One of many examples: The producers of Ghostbusters tried to license Huey Lewis's _"I Want a New Drug,"_ but were turned down, so they hired Ray Parker Jr, who wrote a similar sounding song ... and they got sued.
> 
> Almost every Film or TV infringement example I can think of (including one where I was a defendant) is like that. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any TV/Film examples where there was a lawsuit based simply on an _unintentional_ melody similarity. I'm sure they exist, but they're probably rare, because without a smoking gun (where we _know_ the defendant was influenced by the first song), an infringement lawsuit would be much more difficult.
> 
> ...


I suppose this is reassuring to hear. From listening to other writers' works at production music houses, every now and then I come across one that (to me) is so blatantly a copy of a pop melody I'm stunned. And yet they don't seem to get taken down. And they got through the publisher's review I imagine. Strange.

The commercials is something I wonder about. Some of my production music has been on many different commercials. I'm not sure that's the same though since the commercial didn't get an exclusive license to that track (i.e. no other commercial can use it). That would be different right?


----------



## tsk (Sep 10, 2021)

I ended up deleting the track completely. Even though nothing came up as a hit on SoundHound etc, and my friend didn't recognize anything in it, there was something about the track's melody that made me uncomfortable. It just wasn't worth it in this case, so it's gone.


----------



## NekujaK (Sep 10, 2021)

You can always upload your music to YouTube to see if YT's Content ID checker flags it for infringement. You don't need to make the video public - just upload it, see if YouTube flags it or not, then delete it.

As I described in great detail in another thread, the Content ID checker has some serious flaws and can render false positives, but still, it's a quick and free way to check if your composition might have an obvious infringement.

But as has already been pointed out in this thread, nowadays it seems that almost any piece of music can be called out for infringement for seemingly any reason, so composing "defensively" is no guarantee that someone won't come after you. Just do your art.


----------



## Jotto (Sep 10, 2021)

I know the feeling. But i no longer care. Neither does anyone else. If sounding similar was a crime, most film composers are guilty big time


----------



## TomislavEP (Sep 10, 2021)

As a musician and composer and also a lawyer by formal education, I was always scared of unintentional and accidental plagiarism. We live in a time of mass media and are constantly bombarded by information. Also, having a lot of experience working in various cover bands, I have a lot of music stuck in my head. On the other hand, I have quite a focused musical taste and there are only about 50 or so composers whose work I listen to on a regular basis, and that inspire me.

As someone has already mentioned before, it is virtually impossible to come up with something that is completely unique. Also, from the aesthetic standpoint, I agree that is always nice to hear a simple and singable melody despite its potential similarity with already written music. For many years, I've primarily composed in experimental and improvisational styles, but in the past five years, I've recorded and registered more than a hundred works, most of which revolve around a simple and recognizable melody.

My guess - if you don't intentionally copy something note to note, you shouldn't have any problems (or at least, I hope so). The similarity will always be debatable but also quite unavoidable. This is especially true nowadays but was actually always present in music and other arts.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 10, 2021)

tsk said:


> Which insurance do you have? I researched this and it seemed extremely expensive with almost no providers offering it. I was told by a fairly well known film composer that usually it's just the companies that get it, not the composers.


I'll look it up, as I can't remember. Yes, most composers don't bother. They usually regret that, after their first $250K demand for infringement


----------



## osterdamus (Sep 10, 2021)

Daryl said:


> Don't worry about it. Just get insurance.


What insurance are you referring to?


----------



## Daryl (Sep 10, 2021)

osterdamus said:


> What insurance are you referring to?


Professional liability and indemnity insurance (often known as errors and omissions). There are various options, and you would have to check that the policy you chose covered the ones that are likely to affect you.

The problem is that even if someone's claims are groundless, you could easily spend a lot of money defending them. If you have to go to court, even if you win, you may still have huge costs.

Usually Publishers have this insurance, but there is also often something in the small print with the composer that means the composers would have to pay if there was any infringement, given that the composers were supposed to have delivered original material. With so many people relying on temp scores, you are more and more risk, the closer you get to the temp.


----------



## Jotto (Sep 10, 2021)

Americans get rich by suing each other. The rest of us can relax.


----------



## tsk (Sep 10, 2021)

Daryl said:


> I'll look it up, as I can't remember. Yes, most composers don't bother. They usually regret that, after their first $250K demand for infringement


Which one do you have then? I wonder what the annual premium is.

Are you suggesting that a large amount of composers receive infringement notices? It almost sounds like a threat from a salesman. "You'll regret not purchasing my insurance"


----------



## Daryl (Sep 11, 2021)

I never bothered until I was involved in a case. The amount it cost would have paid for 20 years' insurance. Nobody is making threats. I'm giving my advice. Nobody says you have to take it. If you're a successful composer, it's a small price to pay for peace of mind. If you're an amateur, it is unlikely you'll get anything other than a cease and desist.

In terms of cost, it's around £700 a year, I think.


----------



## tsk (Sep 11, 2021)

Daryl said:


> I never bothered until I was involved in a case. The amount it cost would have paid for 20 years' insurance. Nobody is making threats. I'm giving my advice. Nobody says you have to take it. If you're a successful composer, it's a small price to pay for peace of mind. If you're an amateur, it is unlikely you'll get anything other than a cease and desist.
> 
> In terms of cost, it's around £700 a year, I think.


Right, but you said you'd look up which one you have and let us know, but you never did. It's pretty hard to find these things so that would have been helpful.

You also wrote:

"Yes, most composers don't bother. They usually regret that, after their first $250K demand for infringement".

Which implies that most composers don't bother and that most composers receive notice of an infringement. Is that true?


----------



## Daryl (Sep 12, 2021)

tsk said:


> Right, but you said you'd look up which one you have and let us know, but you never did. It's pretty hard to find these things so that would have been helpful.
> 
> You also wrote:
> 
> ...


There is no reason to be so snippy. I do have other things to do, than try to help you. However, I suggest you look at Hiscox, if you want to know where to start.

In the case of "how many composers", I suspect very few get challenged. However, in my opinion, and it is only an opinion, the small yearly cost of insurance is nothing, in the scheme of things.


----------



## tsk (Sep 13, 2021)

Daryl said:


> There is no reason to be so snippy. I do have other things to do, than try to help you. However, I suggest you look at Hiscox, if you want to know where to start.
> 
> In the case of "how many composers", I suspect very few get challenged. However, in my opinion, and it is only an opinion, the small yearly cost of insurance is nothing, in the scheme of things.


I'm sorry. I don't know, it's just that sometimes you come across arrogantly in your posts.

I looked up Hiscox. The reviews when it comes to claims are so bad. Do you know anyone who's successfully made an E&O claim and had a good experience with them? It's one thing to have a pleasant sales experience but obviously the only thing that matters is if they back you up if the time comes.

The annual premium on the quotes I'm getting are about $8k, with a deductible of $30k. That seems very unfavorable.


----------



## rgames (Sep 13, 2021)

Jotto said:


> Americans* get rich by suing each other.


*American lawyers


----------



## colony nofi (Sep 13, 2021)

These suits happen in US, Canada, UK, increasingly other parts of Europe, Aust, NZ... 
If you are a composer who works on commercials that is played in any of those regions, the risk unfortunately higher than you might imagine. There is not a larger music house I know that has not been involved in litigation over infringement. 

Sometimes agencies need to take the hit. Othertimes, production companies that have pushed for a particular vibe from a reference track. The music house might take the hit. Or it might end up resting on the shoulders of the composer. No matter where the final bill rests, the stress and anxiety that comes with the litigation has destroyed the lives of people I know and have known. Its no joke. Families ripped apart. Lives tragically lost.

Litigation often happens after an artist's record company has been approached for publishing costs to sync a track, and they've come back too expensive, so a music house is engaged to make something kinda like the track they wanted to publish. The publishers always will double check the spot once it is on air, and whether you like it or not, will try and protect the copyright of their artists. 

It is NOT as simple as just a melody kinda sounding like another. If you have ever seen the musicology reports submitted to such litigation, or heard the testimony from cases - the actual situation can be murky at best. Parties can sue not just for melody, but for harmony, for style... and in fact, if they can prove that you used a reference piece as the primary source for inspiration - or were asked to write a sound a like, there is fault that can be drawn there too (often by the people who asked for something to be written that is not allowed.). This of course changes from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Its worth knowing though that if your music is being written for one of the companies based in US, UK, Europe or Australasia, chances are your music maybe used in other juristictions with different laws to your own.... and litigation can pop up in places outside YOUR place of residence, and you can still be liable. 

If you are the composer in this situation (where there is love for a guide or the publishing has been sought on a track) make sure that there are at least two other reference tracks on the table that you can draw inspiration from. 

There's unfortunately parts of the bespoke commercial music composition industry that are quite broken. What is asked of composition houses is frightening these days. Frightening mostly for the composers, but also for the industry. It is changing extremely rapidly. For better and worse.

Composers RARELY are completely covered by the insurance of a music house. Paperwork in the industry identifying responsibility contractually is generally terrible, inadmissible in court or worse, non-existent. You need insurance to cover yourself. 

It is not the end game though. If you take on a project knowing that you might be doing something wrong (which in commercials world happens ALL the time due to pressures of just needing the work / extreme competition etc etc) then your insurance may not cover you either. It is no longer a case of errors and omissions, or simple mistakes. It can be a shit-show.

This is not an area of the composition world that will be improving any time soon. If you are in that world, go in with eyes WIDE open. And push back when you feel even a little queezy about being asked to do something which doesn't feel right. Even if you think it might put your relationship with the music house in doubt, its a better outcome than what can happen when things go sideways.

I sometimes wish there were more hours in the day. I would love to explore to see if there was some sort of industry push by media / sync / commercials composers which could be organised encompassing NY/LA/Lon/Amsterdam/Syd/Melb/Auckland.... where composers came together to push back against some of the things they were being asked to do. 

Hm - now there's a ramble I wasn't expecting to go on today. I really should get back to work.....


----------



## Jaymarvlis (Sep 13, 2021)

tsk said:


> I ended up deleting the track completely. Even though nothing came up as a hit on SoundHound etc, and my friend didn't recognize anything in it, there was something about the track's melody that made me uncomfortable. It just wasn't worth it in this case, so it's gone.


Why would you delete it? That couldve been a possible big record for future references dont overthink too much just make music from the heart even if it sounds similar to something else. Thats your expression your entitled to that


----------



## Daryl (Sep 14, 2021)

tsk said:


> I'm sorry. I don't know, it's just that sometimes you come across arrogantly in your posts.
> 
> I looked up Hiscox. The reviews when it comes to claims are so bad. Do you know anyone who's successfully made an E&O claim and had a good experience with them? It's one thing to have a pleasant sales experience but obviously the only thing that matters is if they back you up if the time comes.
> 
> The annual premium on the quotes I'm getting are about $8k, with a deductible of $30k. That seems very unfavorable.


I'm sorry that you think I'm arrogant. In future I just won't bother with you then.


----------



## tsk (Sep 14, 2021)

Daryl said:


> I'm sorry that you think I'm arrogant. In future I just won't bother with you then.


Seems kind of passive aggressive, but obviously it's your right to ignore me. The internet is a difficult place to have a good conversation. Honestly, I really am sorry for how this little side thread turned out.


----------



## PaulieDC (Sep 14, 2021)

tsk said:


> Sometimes I finish a track and then when listening back to it I start to worry, "what if it's too similar to something else?". I think almost always I'm just being paranoid, but I would love to be able to check against something to be more certain.
> 
> I thought about using Shazam and will probably give that a go, but don't the libraries have some kind of service for searching for similar tracks?
> 
> Any suggestions welcome.


Yeah, VI-C. Just post it on here. If it's even remotely close to a finished piece, you'll hear about it.


----------



## Mike Greene (Sep 14, 2021)

tsk said:


> Seems kind of passive aggressive, but obviously it's your right to ignore me. The internet is a difficult place to have a good conversation. Honestly, I really am sorry for how this little side thread turned out.


You kinda set yourself up for that with your annoyance that Daryl wasn't responding to your liking, and then your little "arrogant" jab. Even calling him passive aggressive is an odd tactic.

When you're asking people for help on something, then social skills are your friend.


----------



## tsk (Sep 14, 2021)

Mike Greene said:


> You kinda set yourself up for that with your annoyance that Daryl wasn't responding to your liking, and then your little "arrogant" jab. Even calling him passive aggressive is an odd tactic.
> 
> When you're asking people for help on something, then social skills are your friend.


Fair enough. I guess I wasn't really calming things down. I just got tired of what I honestly did see as arrogance. I won't go on anymore but I do still think, "don't worry about it, just get insurance" and, "Yes, most composers don't bother. They usually regret that, after their first $250K demand for infringement" felt arrogant to me. Maybe dismissive. I'm usually extra polite on forums but I ran out of patience and started being a d***. I'll admit that.


----------



## tsk (Sep 14, 2021)

PaulieDC said:


> Yeah, VI-C. Just post it on here. If it's even remotely close to a finished piece, you'll hear about it.


That wouldn't be possible for me, since posting it publicly opens one up to potential problems if someone else copies it etc


----------



## PaulieDC (Sep 14, 2021)

Oh I k


tsk said:


> That wouldn't be possible for me, since posting it publicly opens one up to potential problems if someone else copies it etc


Oh I know, wasn't a total serious answer... sorry!


----------



## colony nofi (Sep 14, 2021)

tsk said:


> That wouldn't be possible for me, since posting it publicly opens one up to potential problems if someone else copies it etc


Another idea. If you think the future earnings for this piece are likely to be decent, why not send it to a musicologist for an opinion? They're not legally binding of course, but you are likely to get very good advice given their reputation relies on them giving good advice?

It is common practice for music co's to use them when anyone is feeling squeemish... and its not out of the question to get agencies to pay for it if they're the one's who have been asking to move things closer to the ideas of a reference track.

May I also suggest that you just change it up a bit? I cannot know how important the artistic intention of what you have written is - however, given that you are putting it out there for potential sync, it likely isn't that dear to you. Just change it a little. Then a little bit more . Have fun with it. Treat it as a challenge. Give yourself 2 or 3 hours and just see what you come up with.


----------



## tsk (Sep 15, 2021)

colony nofi said:


> Another idea. If you think the future earnings for this piece are likely to be decent, why not send it to a musicologist for an opinion? They're not legally binding of course, but you are likely to get very good advice given their reputation relies on them giving good advice?
> 
> It is common practice for music co's to use them when anyone is feeling squeemish... and its not out of the question to get agencies to pay for it if they're the one's who have been asking to move things closer to the ideas of a reference track.
> 
> May I also suggest that you just change it up a bit? I cannot know how important the artistic intention of what you have written is - however, given that you are putting it out there for potential sync, it likely isn't that dear to you. Just change it a little. Then a little bit more . Have fun with it. Treat it as a challenge. Give yourself 2 or 3 hours and just see what you come up with.


Thank you. For this track, it probably wouldn't have been worth a musicologist, but that is an interesting idea for the future. I wonder if you can have on file that you sought a musicologist's opinion, and their professional opinion was "no issues found" or something in case there's ever a problem.


----------

