Originally Posted by pathardy

CAVEAT: IANAL, so consult one, as always.


this is an excellent question, and it is the reason for collaboration agreements signed.

With a CA, you can avoid all the pitfalls of the default empowerments granted by copyright law on collaborations
and the operative word, if you read the law, and you should,
it says that a "copyright exists when the work is in tangible form".

However, things are a bit different with derivative works.

If you don't have a CA signed, make sure you don't record
the final result of both lyric and music, or put it to
a sheet music because ( i.e., "tangible form" )
that is the point at which all the
empowerments granted copyright to collaborators kick in
( which is why I have CA's signed, so I can record without it being
a "copyright" because I get the collaborator to agree
in writing this is so, i.e, that the "tangible form" does not
exist as a state of copyright, until I, as composer, register the copyright via my online account at www.copyright.gov and I, as composer, reserve the right to execute the registration ).

Get an attorney to write the collaboration agreement to your specifications, and consult with an attorney, because, yes,
there are serious ramifications you need to know before you
embark on any collaboration with anyone. if whomever you collaborate doesn't want to sign a CA, if
you think you are really talented and might some day make it big, well, I wouldn't work with that person, if I were you, but that
is me. and, the big reason is for bad experiences I have and later regretted that I didn't have a CA signed.

Pat Hardy Lockwood


Thats the part of the law, that is kind of iffy. Two people can write a song all day or night, and never put any of it in tangible form. For example, they can improvise a song at a gig, and never record it or write it down. I knew a band that used to do this, they would say "ok, lets pick up where we left off last week, how did that go again, it was kind of fun to watch not just improvised solos and music, but songs.

If a member of the audience went home and wrote it down or recorded it, and then copyrighted it, he would then own the song.

it's clear the guys at the gig wrote it, but the other guy has the document saying it's his.

To me, all a copyright says is "i was the first person to claim this song for myself" actually, somebody else could have copyrighted your song before you did, and you wouldn't know cause they dont listen to what comes in the door.

Not sure any copyright is real protection, especially when up against a big name artist, where everybody is inclined to believe them.

Nothing really proves anybody wrote anything.

Just my opinion.