The Basics of Music Licensing in Digital Media - Videos, Podcasts, Commercials, Downloads, Fair Use - What Questions Should You Be Asking?

Broadcasters need to be aware that ASCAP, BMI and SESAC (the "performing rights organizations" or PROs) don't cover them for all uses of music - especially uses that may be made on station websites.  Offering downloads, podcasts, and streaming video featuring music all require specific permission from music rights holders.  And, as we wrote just last week, incorporating music into recorded commercials also requires specific permission from rights holders - not just your routine payment to the PROs.  As music usually has two different classes of rights holders - those that hold the rights to the musical composition (the lyrics and music in the song, usually held by a publishing company), and the rights to the "sound recording" or "master recording" (usually held by the record companies), knowing who to ask for what rights can sometimes be complicated.  To help explain some of the basic issues of where to go for what rights, Davis Wright Tremaine has put together a Guide to the Basics of Music Licensing, available here

The Guide also addresses some of the controversial issues in music licensing, and the question of "fair use", a concept often cited but also often misunderstood.  So check out ourGuide for a basic introduction to the law governing music rights issues. 

Using Music in Advertising or In a Video Production? Secure the Necessary Rights - ASCAP, BMI and SESAC Licenses Are Not Enough

Using music in commercials is not as simple as just paying your ASCAP, BMI and SESAC royalties.  While many broadcasters think that paying these royalties is enough to give them the rights to do anything they want with music on their stations, it does not.  The payments to these Performing Rights Organizations (PROs) only cover the right to publicly perform music, i.e. to broadcast it.  They do not give you the right to take the music and "synchronize" it with other words or video material, e.g.  you cannot put music in a recorded commercial or otherwise permanently fix it into a recorded audio or video production.  Instead, to make such a production, the producer needs to get the rights to both the underlying musical composition (the words and musical notes) and, if you are planning to use a particular recording of a song, the rights to use that particular recording ( the "sound recording" or "master recording").  Getting these rights may very well require that you deal both with the record company or performing artist whose recording you plan to use, and the publishing company that represents the composer of the music.  And, as some artists may have concerns about having their music used to pitch some products, getting the rights to that artist's version of a particular song may not be easy. 

Even using the tune of a familiar song in an advertisement, with different words, is not permitted without getting the rights to do so from the publishing company.  A copyright holder in a musical composition has the right to prepare "derivative works" of that composition.  A derivative work is one that uses the original copyrighted material, but changes it somehow - like putting new words to an old tune.  Many think that "fair use" permits the making of a parody of a song, so they are allowed to use the tune as long as they produce a new version that is funny.  However, in the copyright world, fair use is not that simple.  A parody, to allow use of the original tune, must be making commentary or criticism of the original song.  Being independently funny or amusing, or otherwise dealing with some independent social or political issue, does not give you the right to use the music without securing permission from the composer of the music first.  A recent story in the Hollywood reporter's legal blog, THR,esq.com, told the story of a Congressional candidate, Joe Walsh, who thought that it would be cute to use the music of former Eagle Joe Walsh, to make fun of Democratic politicians.  As set out in that story, Eagle Joe Walsh's attorney did not find the campaign song very funny, and sent a very strong letter objecting to that use (the LA Times site had at one point had a link to a video of a band playing the candidate's version of the Joe Walsh song "Walk Away", but it now says that the video has been taken down due to a copyright objection). Don't let your station be the recipient of such a letter - get the rights to use music in commercials or other productions. 

Even the use of music in "live" programming, which would typically be covered by the public performance right, can lead to problems in this digital age where content is regularly repurposed.  We have seen cases in the last year where producers of live television programs that include the use of some music have been sued by the holders of copyrights in that music.  Why isn't this covered by the ASCAP, BMI and SESAC royalties?  Because these programs are often recorded, and then rebroadcast as re-runs on the station.  Or they are recorded and made available for downloading or on-demand streaming on the website of a station or program producer.  The copyright holder in both the musical work and the master recording has an exclusive right under the copyright law to license the reproduction (i.e. the duplication or copying) of the work.  So, when the work is duplicated on the tape used for the broadcast of a re-run of a "live" program, or where excerpts are copied on servers or other digital storage devices for on-demand playback on a website or through some other digital playback mechanism, the reproduction right is triggered.  Thus, program producers need to get the rights for these uses.

There is commercial production music available for these purposes, where rights are pre-cleared.  Also, it is often possible to get the rights to the musical work, and have that work recorded by a local band to avoid having to get the master rights from a popular band.  But whether you are using production music or locally recorded music, be sure you know what rights you are getting, and what rights you need for the purpose to which you are putting the music, to avoid running into trouble.

Look for the Davis Wright Tremaine Guide to Music Law Basics, to be available very soon.

Don't Use "Super Bowl" in an Ad Without Permission - But How About in Other Programming?

The term "Super Bowl" is a trademark owned by the National Football League, and it is protected very aggressively. What does that mean?  The biggest no-no of all is to use the term "Super Bowl" in any advertising or promotional announcements that are not sanctioned by the NFL.  This prohibition includes sweepstakes and contests as well.  Advertisers pay high licensing fees to the NFL for the right to use the term "Super Bowl" in their advertising.  You will almost certainly hear from the NFL's attorneys if you use the term in advertising without explicit authorization from the NFL.  So no "Super Bowl sales" in your ads - and don't refer to your station as the "Super Bowl Authority" in your promotional statements.  These restrictions explain why you often hear it referred to as "The Big Game."  But this restriction does not mean you cannot utter the words on air under any circumstances. 

There is a court-created trademark concept known as "nominative fair use."  Under this concept, trademarks can be used when necessary under certain conditions.  First, the mark must not be readily identifiable in any other way.  For example, you do not have to refer to the Pittsburgh Steelers as "the professional football team from Pittsburgh."  Secondly, you can only use the mark to the extent necessary to identify it.  Repeated gratuitous use would cross the line - for instance if you repeatedly state that your station is "the place to hear everything about the Super Bowl."  And third, you cannot do anything to suggest a false connection or sponsorship arrangement.   What does this really mean?  It means that DJs can use the term "Super Bowl" editorially in discussing the game on air (but not in a way to imply that the station has a connection to the game, or not in a repeated way analogous to a station slogan or positioning statement).  It means that news stories about the game can refer to the "Super Bowl."  The NFL will not consider such uses to be trademark infringement so long as the use is reasonable.  In fact, from an editorial perspective, the NFL appreciates some hype about the game to attract viewers and general consumer interest in the game.

Another dangerous activity is sponsoring a large screen viewing of the Super Bowl.  Even if you refer to it as the "Big Game" to avoid trademark issues, a public large screen display of the game violates the NFL's copyright in the telecast of the game.  You specifically want to avoid showing the game to an audience on a screen larger than 55 inches diagonally, or on any screen if viewers have to pay to watch the game. 

If you follow these guidelines, you should not have any legal problems relating to the NFL's ownership of both trademark and copyright rights in the Super Bowl.  Enjoy the Big Game!