Updating your own copyrighted work

April 16, 2009 7:01 AM

I have written a number of songs that I have gotten copyrighted through the US Copyright Office. Each copyright runs between $35-$45 to have done. If I change the lyrics or add a verse to one of my songs, do I have to go through the whole process again to re-copyright the updated version of the song including paying the fee, or I am still safe because the original song is copyrighted?
posted by hdh to media & arts (14 comments total)

IANAcopyrightL, but because one doesn't have to register a work for it to be copyrighted, you should not need to re-register. If a revision to your song substantially changes it (so that it is nearly unrecognizable as the original) it would probably be the prudent thing to do to register it as a separate work from the previously copyrighted song.

Some relevant bits from the Copyright faq:

When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

Do I have to register with your office to be protected?
No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.”
posted by ocherdraco at 7:12 AM on April 16

Your new song is already copyright; in the US, works of art are copyrighted as soon as they are created and 'fixed', meaning published or performed. Filing a copyright with the government copyright officeis a formality to assist in legal protection in the future, but you're not any less 'copyrighted' without the filing (that said, if you're worried about protecting your art, a filing is always a good idea). Your new song is considered a derivative work based on your original, and can have a copyright of its own, but it's still subject to the original song's copyright; for example, if you wrote the music and lyrics of the original song, and somebody took just the music and wrote new lyrics, you'd be protected; sobebody else setting your lyrics to different music, you'd be protected, too; using one verse of your lyrics to different music in a much larger song, you'd be protected, although it would be a little harder to argue; a few lines of difference does not open a loophole in your copyright protection. If your question is, do I need to formally copyright the derivative work for protection, the answer is, "no, you don't have to, but it will help." If your question is, does the new version of the song harm my original copyright, "no, it does not." IANAL, and copyright protection is extremely nebulous (it only gets tested when people are arguing about it), but the courts tend to side with the copyright holder, even if a copyright was not filed, so you should be in good shape.
posted by AzraelBrown at 7:13 AM on April 16

works of art are copyrighted as soon as they are created and 'fixed', meaning published or performed.

Fixed does not mean "published"—writing it down on a piece of paper or typing it into a computer is good enough.
posted by grouse at 7:19 AM on April 16

I believe the only purpose of registering it is to make a claim against a copycat easier. You need to prove you thought of the song first. So register it, get a lawyer to sign something, whatever.

(I think you can actually register an album's worth of songs, which could save you money.)
posted by devnull at 7:36 AM on April 16

Filing a copyright with the government copyright officeis a formality to assist in legal protection in the future, but you're not any less 'copyrighted' without the filing (that said, if you're worried about protecting your art, a filing is always a good idea).

Not so fast. Registering a copyright does assist with legal protection, but don't understate the value of registration. Specifically, 17 U.S.C. § 412 provides that two remedies: statutory damages and attorneys fees are not available to unregistered copyright holders.

Essentially what this means is that if you don't register a copyright, the only thing you can get when you sue for infringement is an injunction stopping the infringing activity and actual damages (you only get the amount you can prove you lost). On the other hand, registering allows for statutory damages (congress has decided for you how much it is worth) of up to $150,000.

The difference between actual damages and $150,000 statutory damages is hardly a formality. Likewise with awards of attorney's fees.


As for whether the changes you make to a song would require you to re-register them to get this protection, that's not something anyone here can really answer for you. The biggest problem that jumps out at me is added verses. Yes, if someone stole the whole song you could probably just use your original copyright and registration, but what if all they stole was the added verse?

These kinds of things are very fact specific and it would probably be in your best interest to either a) talk to a lawyer about it or b) just file a new registration for the new song if you want/need the extra protections afforded to registered copyrights (which you might not care about).
posted by toomuchpete at 7:40 AM on April 16 [2 favorites]

Everyone upthread is right. However, what's missing above is the fact that if you decide to sue someone in the future for infringment, you can register the work at that time in order to gain the benefits of registration, before filing suit.

"Copyright" is not a verb. A "copyright" is the right of an author to be the only person who is allowed to make copies. What you're asking about here is the process of registering your copyright with the government.
posted by JimN2TAW at 7:58 AM on April 16

However, what's missing above is the fact that if you decide to sue someone in the future for infringment, you can register the work at that time in order to gain the benefits of registration, before filing suit.

Not really. You have a 3 month grace period to register the copyright. After that, if the infringement takes place before the effective date of your registration, you cannot receive statutory damages or attorneys fees.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:15 AM on April 16

(I think you can actually register an album's worth of songs, which could save you money.)

Absolutely; this is what I always do.
posted by malocchio at 8:26 AM on April 16

What Pete said.
posted by JimN2TAW at 8:40 AM on April 16

Don't worry. No one is going to steal your songs. At least not anyone who will make money from them. It's such an overrated fear.
posted by fourcheesemac at 10:18 AM on April 16 [2 favorites]

Firstly, like everyone has said copyright is assumed, i.e. once something is 'created' then you possess the copyright. I have never heard of anyone paying the US Copyright Office to copyright a song, but I'm sure they're very happy to take your money. I say this with the caveat that whilst I write music as my profession I am in classical music (God, I hate that term) so things might be a little different on my side.

Anyway, I have to say that I do agree with fourcheesemac, this is such an overrated fear. People think that the moment they've written something they should immediately clothe themselves in legal iron lest the song thieves get at them. It's very rare indeed. That having been said, if your work is online or distributed in any way you should be looking at joining either BMI or ASCAP, I'm with the PRS (as I'm from the UK) so I don't have a personal preference or bias as to which one of these US organizations is the best. You should probably check each one out yourself (and ask around if you know people who are members) to see which you prefer.
posted by ob at 11:54 AM on April 16

I have never heard of anyone paying the US Copyright Office to copyright a song

Don't be silly. Go on over to the US Copyright Office's website and search for any artist you've ever heard of before. Like, say, the Rolling Stones. They have the registered copyright to hundreds of songs.

ASCAP and BMI are for licensing, related but not the same as copyright..
posted by toomuchpete at 1:19 PM on April 16

If you've reached the point where licensing your songs with BMI or ASCAP is a good idea, it means you have been or are about to be recorded for profit, you have a publisher or are self-published and you should register your copyrights. In that case, minor changes to a work after it's copyrighted officially are insignificant in legal terms.
posted by fourcheesemac at 2:06 PM on April 16

Don't be silly. Go on over to the US Copyright Office's website and search for any artist you've ever heard of before. Like, say, the Rolling Stones. They have the registered copyright to hundreds of songs.

I should clarify what I meant: I've never heard of this being done by anyone who wasn't in a position to stand to loose a lot of money from this. So yeah, of course the Rolling Stones register copyright for every song. At $45 a pop it seems pretty darn expensive for something that in all likelihood is going to happen.

Yes, I do know that BMI and ASCAP are not the same thing as copyrighting, but if your work is available to the outside world in any format then it's a good idea to join.
posted by ob at 2:24 PM on April 16