Hi!
There's such a situation:
A songwriter asked a vocalist to sing a vocal line for a song (whole song and the vocal line is written by the songwriter).
Where is the boundary between changing a melody by a vocalist and the natural "human changes" in length of notes while recording vocals?

Let' discuss a situation in which throughout the whole song there are such differences between what the songwriter wrote, and what the singer sang
like in the example in the pict:
https://zapodaj.net/f64d8411a50df.jpg.html

At the top of the pict there's a melody written by the songwriter (sent to the vocalist).
Below there is the way the vocalist sang the songwriter's melody.

1) Has the vocalist changed the melody?
2) If yes, should he become a co-writer of the song? (if he sang this melody this way)


3) If the vocalist (in the example in the pict) has not changed the melody, then where is the boundary at which the vocalist would start to be a co-writer of the song?



What if a vocalist shortens or prolongs duration of some words/syllables?

What if he swings while singing?

 

Anytime you work with another artist its important to specify how much each contributor owns in a particular song. A split sheet is a quick agreement you can use to clearly establish who owns what and %'s. If someone is being paid to record a part or parts on your song then you would use a "work for hire" agreement saying you own 100% and the other person is just hired for their part. If you are just messing around and recording with someone who lays some vocals down and nothing is written down about who did what then technically that singer is entitled to an even split with the other songwriters on the track.

 

As said, it's always good to have an open dialogue on how much contribution each person involved has. In Sweden (STIM) we can specify the percentage of rights/royalties per song, which helps if there are several people involved.
If a singer has altered the melody in some way (but still hasn't contributed with lyrics) then it can seem fair with splitting the percentage of songwriting up, to whatever you agree on. Besides, if you are fair it's more likely that the singer will return to you and do more work. It's just ethics and fairness, and being just goes a long way.

 

How would you assess the example in the picture (in the first post)?
Are these melody changes made by the vocalist too small to give him a percentage in songwriting? (he changed a bit the lengths of some words, not the pitches)

 

As an outsider, I would say no - he didn't create something new. If I totally ripped off Beatles' melodies and just made a few notes a bit more legato, I don't think I would consider myself "the creator" of these melodies.
But here's where you discuss with him and ask what he thinks. I'm sure you can work something out.

 

Copyright is a complicated thing for many. Chord sequences can't be copyrighted unless the sequence is uniquely recognizable for a certain song, in other words when and if these chord progressions immediately remind you of a song. (think Beethoven's 5th-opening) Copyright will go for the main melody, most of the time the vocal melody (or solo voice) in combination with the lyrics. Of course the main melody is a consequence of what is being played as a chord structure underneath it (the legal heir of Marvin Gaye can tell you the details!) so if the combination of these ingredients are found in a newly written song and bare the ghost of that priorly released song, you are in trouble.
The copyright of a song goes to the author of the song, the person(s) who wrote the complete song (chord structure, main melody and lyrics)
and they are divided in mechanical rights and performing rights. A performer (the singer in your case) could claim the s.c neighboring rights but not if you live in the USA. The thing is, the US never signed the Convention of Rome and therefor are excluded from these neighboring rights. With the Digital Performance Rights in Sound Recordings Act of 1995, there is a public performance royalty in sound recording for non-interactive digital transmissions that works the same way. If a performer's music is publicly performed via satellite radio, internet radio, or some other form of non-interactive stream (that is, the customer cannot pick a specific song, cannot rewind the song, cannot play the song repeatedly) like Pandora, a performer should get paid via SoundExchange.
Long explanation to tell you that you are the owner of the copyright of your song (you came up with the vocal melody and the lyrics, the chords) and your singer rightfully owns the neighboring rights (outside USA) or related rights.

 

Both me and the singer are from countries in the European Union.
What exactly the singer will have a right to?
(After he gives me a permission to use his vocal recording in my song commercially)


Do I have to report him as a performer in a PRO or anywhere?

 

Ok, so you guys live in a country that is a signatory to the Convention of Rome, that makes it easy: You have the FULL copyrights to the song and your singer has the Neighboring/Related rights for his vocal part (each and every time your song gets broadcasted on radio, internet radio, television, etc. as long as the song can't be picked to play repeatedly by a consumer). Check the Collective Rights Management Organizations (CMO's) in your country like the PRS (UK) Gema (Germany) SACEM (France) and PPL (UK) STAGMA (Germany) ADAMI (France).

 

Here's an example of a songwriter and resulting vocal performance which is completely different.
Michael Jackson got no writing credit.

 

You have to specify the singer's role in writing. If he says he gives you permission verbally you have to be able to prove that in court. If you guys have a song that becomes a hit and nothing is in writing between you and the singer, he can say "that's my voice and I am entitled to my writers share" in court.

 

it is vary rare to end up in court over a song. my friend did, but it was a yuuuge hit. bettr yet, maybe make sure what the singer is adding isnt worse than your original melody. singers tend to over sing. if it's better give em a 10 % writers cut. or an appropriate % if they made it tons bettr. Just a thought. Good luck!

 

You mean I own 100% of the author's copyright and 100% of the rights to the master recording (of the song), right?



While registering the song's copyright I'll probably have to report the guy as a vocalist (filling some form), and that's all. I will not need to do any more formalities, right?

 

Yes, that is the case. You are the master owner since you are the one who invested in these recordings. Remember that when you release this song on your own label, you have to inform your Related Rights Organisation about the 'who did what' on the song. It is mandatory by law to give the exact label info describing everyone who participated in making the song see the light of day.

 

And if I choose not to register the song's copyright, then all the formalities I need to do is to have the vocalist sign a 'release of his rights' to the vocal recording, right? Nothing more

 

a written agreement yes.....but if you plan not to register the song and he does, you're screwed anyways. It's your call.....

 

Speaking of the agreement between me and the vocalist transferring to me the rights to use the vocal recording,
Does it matter whether this agreement is signed before or after the vocalist records his vocals?
Can the vocalist send me his vocal recording, and I'll sign with him the agreement e.g. a months later?

 

sounds like you need to talk to a lawyer ..with all the critical points... you have a #1 er on your hands?

 

The picture almost seems like a joke, because for all intents and purposes, that is the exact same line. I'm no legal expert, but unless someone proves they actually wrote the melody and not just embellished it, they don't have an argument. Not as a co-writer at least.

To answer your questions:

1. No.
2. No, even if 2 is yes.
3. The vocalist and the original song writer sit down together and write a melody. Taking part in the actual process of writing the melody, not just embellishing a note here, ad-libbing a note there.

 

You know when threads are started with questions like:
how can we get a better drum sound?
and people chime in, 'Buy a drum set, any cheap drum set is better than samples' or 'just resurrect Buddy Rich and hire him' answers?

Dude I think you can find another singer?

 

Something you gotta know, one didn't hire Buddy Guy, Buddy Guy hired you and then demanded perfection every second of every show and rehearsals, but not in a nice way.