Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > 'Queen' (album) copyrights question

forum rss feed
Author

Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 26 Oct 04, 15:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I've got question for Queen experts like John S. Stuart, Sebastian, Mr.Scully or someone else: all the songs' copyrights from 'Queen' album stated to 1973, except 'Great King Rat', 'My Fairy King' and 'Mad The Swine', which are to 1972. Why? What does it mean?

Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 26 Oct 04, 16:26 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Well I think it doesn't connects with demos, only if they were afraid that someone could stole demo tapes and use them :-) 'Under Pressure' was released at 1981 and copyright is to 1981, though the rest of Hot Space to 1982 - I can understand it... Can it means that they wanted to release those 3 tracks at 1972 or what? No ideas!

Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 26 Oct 04, 16:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It was their first album and I don't know when they exactly signed the contract, so maybe that's why they weren't so fast to copyright it, though strange too...

juls user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 158 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 26 Oct 04, 16:33 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Not exactly when it is written, but when it is protected by law. Here in Germany we have the GEMA for such things.
The record company usually protects the titles given to them with copyright for exactly 50 years. In England from 2005 Jan. 1st f.e. Elvis copyrights will be free again.


Special thanks to Arif Mardin who arranged and produced some hot and spacey horns on "Staying Power" ;-)
Jjeroen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4781 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 27 Oct 04, 04:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Not true, ThomasQuinn...

A song is never protected when it was written. It's only protected when the author GETS it protected. You can also protect lyrics and music seperately. Example: a lyric can be written and protected in 1971 while the music is written (or finished) later on and could be protected years later. The fact that these songs where copyrighted earlier is just because they were probably finished earlier and asked for copyright earlier. Indeed it is not common to protect demo-recordings.

An example from reality: my band's latest album has 5 songs that are copyright protected in 2004. There's two from 2003, three from 2002 and even one from 2001. It will not be released until 2005. One of the two that were copyrighted in 2003 btw, was already finished in late 1999 but was dumped and later resurrected and copyrighted 4 years after writing. These things just happen and it all just depends on when the author takes the time to go into an office and fills in the forms...

Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 27 Oct 04, 15:34 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It seems like truth, but anyway it's strange! I am really not sure, that Freddie left all his duties and rushed to office just for to copyright these three tracks as early as it was possible. And at 1972 they have had the whole album completed and in the early of 1973 recorded some of those tracks for BBC, maybe there were some plans to release them earlier than the rest of tracks? I don't know.

Jjeroen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4781 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 05:13 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Oh, no... here we go again. Thomas! Think for a minute. If you write a song and don't fill in the form how on earth will anybody know about it??? Getting songs protected before you go into office and fill in the form is IMPOSSIBLE and I'm sorry, but that is sooo 100% logical. Do you thingk there's some guy at that office saying 'hmmm, I can smell that ThomasQuin has just finished writing a song, let's copyright protect it. Imagine someone would write the same song before Thomas gets to my office.'

I'll state it even stronger: your songs are not copyright protected even before you PAY for the protection!

No offence, but this just takes some logical thinking.

Jjeroen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4781 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 05:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

double

Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 07:28 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It seems like Queen experts can't answer... Pity, because it's interesting for me.

Fenderek user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4924 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 08:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Serry Funster wrote:

It seems like Queen experts can't answer... Pity, because it's interesting for me.
Jesus, man- you got the answer, just think it through- they copyrighted some songs in 1972 and some others in 1973- see? That's all...

Jjeroen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4781 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 11:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

All cool, Thomas!

But the 'gemeentekantoor' is an 'office' with a 'desk'as well! ;-)


Spud user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 293 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 12:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The principle that Thomas is illustrating is the similar in the UK under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, which states that there is no formal procedure for copyright. Once an idea has been expressed, copyright exists. Copyright on song lyrics and scores lasts for 70 years, sound recordings for 50.

It is vastly different for example a patent where the intellectual property to, say an invention, has to be formally registered and applied for. Patents are also territorial ie UK patent only valid in the UK.

Anyway enough of my droning!!


'Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, maybe happy.'
Serry... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 28 Oct 04, 15:23 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Fenderek: that's not the answer! I understand that if the copyrights stated to 1972, that means that they protected it at 1972, or you took me for a fool? I just ask why!!!

If I ask all those experts what Roger recorded in his garden on the last week or what Brian did on this day 30 years ago - I'll get the right and exact answers, but when I ask why they protected only these three songs before the rest you answer 'because they did it before' and that's all!

"Why the called 'The Miracle' album as 'The Miracle'? Because there is such song. Well, why it doesn't calls 'Scandal' or 'The Invisble Man' then???"

There's some more in it and I'd like to know what!

P.S. There's Foolin' Around 12" mix and it exists not because 'someone mixed it and here it is', but because it was planned for proper single release. That's the example of the answer to question!