From "Getting Permission: How to License & Clear Copywrighted Materials Online & Off": As a general rule, parodying more than a few lines of a song lyric is unlikely to be excused as fair use. Performers such as Weird Al Yankovic, who earn a living by humerously modifying hit songs, seek permission of the songwriters before recording their parodies."

What's the experience of the Am I Right community? What about merely publishing the parody lyrics vs. actually making a recording? And what techniques do you use to locate the agency you need to contact to request permission?

From "Getting Permission: How to License & Clear Copywrighted Materials Online & Off": As a general rule, parodying more than a few lines of a song lyric is unlikely to be excused as fair use. Performers such as Weird Al Yankovic, who earn a living by humerously modifying hit songs, seek permission of the songwriters before recording their parodies."

What's the experience of the Am I Right community? What about merely publishing the parody lyrics vs. actually making a recording? And what techniques do you use to locate the agency you need to contact to request permission?


Well, I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me the fundamental difference between publishing a parody and recording it, is that when you're recording it, you're actually using someone else's melody, which is protected by copyright.  Whereas with published material, it's (presumably) all your own original words.  A song's structure, rhyme scheme or theme aren't protected by copyright.

Having said that, however, it occurs to me that even if my intention was to merely publish original lyrics without recording them, I'd still want to get an answer on the legalities of referring to the lyrics as "Sung To The Tune of X" or "A Parody of X".

I know one of the better writers on this site feels that it's ok to leave a line or two of the original in the parody. I've thought a lot about that and he certainly has a point; especially if it can add to the parody in some way.  I've kept that tip/suggestion in mind and will use that idea if it serves to enhance the parody.
Personally, I try to rewrite nearly every word (although as a one dimensional writer with the majority of my parodies using the Beverly Hillbillies original song, the opening always uses the os opening of "Come and listen . . ."

When filing a copyright registration for parodies, under section 1, nature of this work, you (I) fill in "Song parody lyrics based upon pre-existing work."  Section 6 of the application is for Derivative Work or compiliation, in several of my cases for example, I entered "The Ballad of Jed (Theme from the Beverly Hillbillies") by Paul Henning."  I don't believe that a copyright would be granted for plagiarized works; all of my copyright registrations have been granted.

(It's only $30 and highly recommended.)

Hope this helps,
bob

As a general rule, parodying more than a few lines of a song lyric is unlikely to be excused as fair use.


I've read up a little on copyrights (in the US), and that's the most conservative statement about parody I've seen. My understanding is that parody is fair use, whether you're parodying a few lines or the whole thing. Case law seems to indicate that as well.

As for copyrighting your parody, if you write something, you own it. Registering the copyright, as RJP suggests, may help determine authorship if you ever find yourself in a battle - and you may be entitled to more damages if somebody screws you - but, again, if you write something, you own the copyright whether you register it or not.

But I'm no lawyer, so I recommend not taking my word for it on either of these points and, instead, doing your own research to the point that you're comfortable. There's a ton of stuff on the Net about it.

xoxox
Spaff

You're exactly right spaff.  As long as you're not plagiarizing and also crediting owner of the original work and any idea that in the work that didn't come to you, you have nothing to worry about. You read some of the really good writers on this site and you see that the original song is part of the parody result - these people don't want to steal anything from anyone; they want their work to be the best because they did.

You own what you right and therefore control the use of that work.  Personally, my ego enjoys people posting my work on variouis Internet sites as long as I'm given credit.  The $30 copyright registration fee is well worth the insurance.  By law, copyright infringement is $150,000 per infringement (not per work) plus attorneys's fees.  Without copyright protection, you're subject to a settlement or would go to trial - you'd probably win, but the outcome would be different than if the work were copyrighted. 

As a writer, you know when you've produced something brilliant - copyright when that happens because someday, somewhere, somebody will steal it.

Later,
bob

I've read up a little on copyrights (in the US), and that's the most conservative statement about parody I've seen. My understanding is that parody is fair use, whether you're parodying a few lines or the whole thing. Case law seems to indicate that as well.

As for copyrighting your parody, if you write something, you own it. Registering the copyright, as RJP suggests, may help determine authorship if you ever find yourself in a battle - and you may be entitled to more damages if somebody screws you - but, again, if you write something, you own the copyright whether you register it or not.

But I'm no lawyer, so I recommend not taking my word for it on either of these points and, instead, doing your own research to the point that you're comfortable. There's a ton of stuff on the Net about it.

xoxox
Spaff



This is how I understand it myself. As long as you credit the original artist, there's not much to worry about, even if you do make a recording. This is for a couple of reasons: The parody doesn't compete with the original since they appeal to different audiences; hence, the original artist isn't going to lose any money as a result. Second, assuming you don't perform or distribute the parody for commercial purposes, you stand to gain nothing either.
To return to the original post, while Weird Al does ask the other artist for permission, he says on his own website that the law supports his ability to parody without permission. Doesn't get much clearer than that.

You only have to worry about it if you begin to earn money from it. That's why I never have posted my parody performances on a webstreaming site such as mp3.com (nor do I earn cash from my covers)

You only have to worry about it if you begin to earn money from it. That's why I never have posted my parody performances on a webstreaming site such as mp3.com (nor do I earn cash from my covers)

Well, that's exactly the issue. I'm working with a friend and his band to create a CD of parody songs that will be sold. So I'm planning to go the safe route and request permission.

From what I´ve seen and heard about this issue the most likely thing to get you sued is to write a text, original OR parody, about the copyrighted trademark of "Barbie". Michael Jackson also doesn´t take it very good if a text about him reaches nationwide audiences. And wasn´t Arnuldh threatening to sue some text about him during the California election?

Certainly asking for permission is a smart way to go.  I'd spend the $500 (NYC rates) for a consultation with a copyright attorney if you're going to market something like a cd in case there are other things you have to worry about.  However, if you own the copyright to what you're producing, there's no problem.  I granted a performance license agreement for one of my parodies - I was paid.  I'm not aware that I owe a royalty to the owner of the original song.  (Certainly, I would pay it if I do.).
Hope that helps,
Later
bob