by Gary Ewer, from “The Essential Secrets of Songwriting” website:
Many songwriters are not aware of this, but chord progressions, as such, are not protected by copyright, and can be used by other songwriters. This makes sense, because if you had to come up with a unique progression that the world had never heard before for each song you write, you’d be out of songs very quickly.
It is a very useful songwriting exercise to take the chord progression of a famous song, and then apply a new rhythmic pattern, tempo and/or time signature to see what else can be done with it. You’d be very surprised to know how often this happens. Did you know that the famous musical theatre ballad “Hey There” from “The Pajama Game” follows, for a while, the chords and even the melody for Mozart’s Piano Sonata in C Major?
You won’t be able to take copyright melodies and doctor them for your own needs, (unless you do a considerable amount of doctoring!) but try this: Find a song that you really like, extract the chord progression, and then try playing it using a completely new tempo and new basic rhythm. To use the same chords with the same rhythm as the song you found it in starts to move into the copyright infingement area. So be sure that your use of the progression is unique.
This type of borrowing works better for songs that use standard progressions. The more unique a progression, the harder it is to hide where you got it.
This is a completely legal use of another chord progression. You can’t do this with another songwriter’s melodies: they are subject to copyright, and are protected from other people “borrowing” them. And infingement is essentially a cumulative thing: borrowing chords is legal, but borrowing the rhythms, instrumentation, and any other identifiable aspect of a song starts to look like stealing. Just be careful.
FREE OFFER: Gary’s newest e-book, “The Essential Secrets of Songwriting- Chord Progression Formulas” is being offered for free when you purchase any other of his songwriting e-books. Read more..
Alice
/ February 26, 2010Actually, copying a chord structure and using the same tempo of an existing song is perfectly legal, and deos not infringe anyone elses copyright whatsoever. If this was illegal Spice Girls and various other pop acts wouldn’t have ever made a record. All their songs are ‘influenced’ by other hit tracks. Creating new songs over exisitng hits goes on all the time in the pop charts. One listen to the top 40 and this will become obvious.
garyewer
/ February 26, 2010Right.. I believe that’s what I said. I only suggested using a different tempo as a way of generating something unique and creative. Chord progressions are not protected by copyright, and most certainly tempos are not.
-Gary
Matt
/ January 23, 2011Hi Gary,
Thank you for this post, but I would also like to ask about rhythmic motives, are they protected? Because I often find my melodies sound a bit familiar to what I’ve heard somewhere, mainly not because of the melody (the notes are different), but rhythmic melodic motives are close to something already published. Sorry for posting it here, just did not find an answer so far
garyewer
/ January 23, 2011The issue of rhythmic motif is a tricky one to answer. Personally, I’ve not heard of someone’s authorship being challenged based on the similarity of the rhythms to another song. In general, you’ll want to avoid anything that reminds someone else of another song. The only exception to that would be song title and chord progressions, both of which are not protected by copyright.
I’d recommend playing it safe. If your song’s rhythms come close to reminding you of another song, see if you can get the same effect by altering your song’s rhythms. It’s usually quite easy to do this, and avoids having anyone think you’re trying to ride the popularity of an already-established song.
-Gary
Matt
/ February 17, 2011Thank you for the reply, Gary
I work in a dance genre and use pretty much the same instruments as everyone with the same sidechain pads etc. I already discovered I used the progressions from existing dance tracks, with a lot of instruments similar actually, though my progressions are a bit modified…As I understood with the borrowed chord progressions as long as one is using different melody (with occasional similar leaps, cos the notes will be the same anyway because of the key), different rhytmic motives, evidently different lyrics:) and more or less different beats everything is completely legal, am I right?
As dance music got into mainstream, everyone is trying to copy the sound and almost any pop record I could hear recently is similar to some other songs….. And in the world of club music the same chords are just normal….
Anon
/ August 26, 2011This post is very useful- thank you. I would like to ask a similar questions about groups of notes as part of a tune. There have been times I have been writing and there was a song in the background because someone was watching the TV. I heard this and thought: if I had those notes to work from, I would take the melody in this or that direction and then I got so carried away that I forgot all about how I got these ideas until years later. Sometimes I have used 3 of the same notes in a row but at a different tempo and in the context of a tune that goes of in a different direction. I did the same thing when I heard a film soundtrack. Twice we have 3 of the same notes in the same order but whilst I was listening to it, I said to myself, “I would take those notes in this direction” and wrote a melody with a tighter structure as opposed to the soundtrack I heard that does not have regularly repeating choruses and verses. This particular song has words which the soundtrack doesn’t, but although my melody is faster, has words to go with is and is more structured, they both have a similar cultural sound. Is this allowed?
garyewer
/ August 26, 2011In general, the issue of whether or not a song has been plagiarized relies heavily on whether or not a song sounds like the original. It is usually fine to take 3 successive notes from an existing song, because those 3 notes will not necessarily lead anyone to say, “This new song is just a copy of an old one.” In fact, what you describe (taking an existing song, changing the tempo, etc., has been done quite often. As I mentioned in the post, “Hey There” from “Pajama Game” uses the same first notes (considerably more than 3) of a Mozart piano sonata. So if you’re plan is to take 3 notes, and develop them in a different direction than the original tune, it should be fine. It gets trickier, of course, if the chords, rhythm, instrumentation, and other elements, are also used from the original. The best advice is to play your creation for several people, and see if they notice a similarity.
Good luck!
-Gary
Anon
/ August 26, 2011Thank you Gary. It is an unusual song to consider in a way because it does not have the ordinary verse-chorus repetitive structure. It only uses the same notes for about 15 seconds and then the writer changed the phrases, style and instruments. Thank you for your insightful post. It gives me a few things to think about…..
Thanks again : )
Benimation
/ February 20, 2013It must be said, though, that everything Mozart created is in the public domain. You can do whatever you want with it, without having to worry about copyright infringement.
garyewer
/ February 20, 2013True, except that you can’t claim that you’re the author of his music.
G
Martin
/ February 8, 2012Hi, a guy sent me some music and I wrote the lyrics and vocal melody to his music. His music is keyboard based r&b sound.He’s decided to mess me around. Can I take my vocal melody/lyrics and use the same chords but make a use a rock backing myself and release the song or a ballad?
garyewer
/ February 8, 2012This might be a little complicated. When you say that he sent you music, I’m assuming that he sent you something like chord progressions with rhythms. You then added a melody and you had a product that was considered finished, correct?
If this is the case, it really all depends on whether you and/or he have a finished song. If he’s got a recording of your melody and lyrics added to his music, he is probably thinking that the song is complete, and it probably is. In that case, the best course of action would be to try to work out an agreement with him regarding sharing copyright, royalties, etc. It also depends on what you mean by him “messing me around.” Do you mean that he’s taken your melody and lyrics, and now considers the song to be his? If that’s the case, and if there is potential money in this, you need to get some legal advice to see what you can do.
All this serves to remind us that it’s always best to get an agreement in writing before partnering with someone on creating music. I hope this situation can be solved for you, because it’s usually a bit messy, and it can be very stressful.
Good luck!
-Gary
obert
/ May 14, 2014It would also make a difference if he did a copyright of the material, if not the first one to
get one has the song rights.
GW
/ April 22, 2012I recorded a melody with the lyrics on a small type recorder and took it into a music store in a local mall and asked to have the same played with a piano to see how it woudl sound. The pianist played it on a piano that added cords, etc. and I really loved it. It was exactly what I mean’t for it to be, but of course I can’t play it. The piano recorded it all on a CD for me to keep. Can this version be the official version for my copyright?
sylvester
/ August 12, 2012What about create backing tracks ‘in the style of’? For example, can I legally create a backing track with drums, bass, guitar, and keys that is essentially the same as Journey’s Don’t Stop Believing and sell it as a karaoke version or guitar jam track ‘In the style of Don’t Stop Believing by Journey’? There would not be any melody – just rhythm tracks. This is a purely legal question – not ethical or moral. I use Journey as an example.
garyewer
/ August 16, 2012Hi Sylvester:
I’m not a lawyer, but I believe that part of the determination of copyright infringement has to do with how similar one song is to another. So even though chord progressions, basic rhythms, instrumentation and so on (i.e., backing tracks) are not protected by copyright, it becomes a problem if you borrow all of those elements from a well-known song, put them together, and try to call it your own song. Once a legal determination is made that what you’ve done is too similar to something else, that’s when the line gets crossed.
-Gary
Grace
/ December 22, 2012what about using a line from a song in the lyrics; Making a play on them… but the line is well known in that song… is that illegal?
garyewer
/ December 23, 2012Generally, a quick quoting of a line from a well-known song, in a kind of parody fashion, is usually OK. I’ve never heard of anyone being taken to court over that sort of thing.
-G
sou
/ January 17, 2013Hello, great post! I just wanted to ask you whether I can use the rhythm of a chord progression, and change the chords (different scale with different chords); the rhythm is simple, but the chords are changed in a similar fashion in both compositions? Thanks in advance! Best Regards
garyewer
/ January 18, 2013I think I’d need to hear an example of what you’re talking about. Rhythms are not protected by copyright. You are only treading on thin ice if your song reminds the listener strongly of the original tune. For example, if you like the opening piano chords, and the rhythmic way they’re played, of “Saturday in the Park” (Am7-D9-Dm7-C), and you choose to do the same rhythmic approach, but substitute the chords with others (for example, Fmaj7-Am7-G9-Am9), that would be too similar, and you could be in breach of copyright.
-Gary
sou
/ January 18, 2013Thanks for the answer. It actually sounds similar to the original, especially because I used similar synth patch, but it is also different. Could you possibly help me if I send you the samples to listen and compare? I tried to send you an e-mail from the website but unsuccessfully. Best Regards
Kristian Wilkins
/ May 2, 2013Hi there Gary – can you give me some advice please?
I answered an ad – a muso with a ‘finished’ instrumental track wanted a vocal melody and lyric written over it. He said I could do it on the basis he liked the tunes on my website.
I wrote it almost immediately as I really liked his track and melodic guitar line. He gave me no brief for the lyrics and only guidance on the style of the melody – he said he liked Toto, Marillion and modern bands like Coldplay and wanted ‘just something that fits’ and ‘something melodic’ and ‘something special’.
When I’d written it I sent him the lyric – which he rejected out of hand because it was political/environmental. And then he became anxious that my tune would be too ‘Beatles’ – my main influence.
I told him it would basically sound like one of my tracks with his production, and not to worry because the tune was a strong one as he’d briefed in fact, packed with sus4, 6th and b5 notes in the tune – if he didn’t like my performance he could always get a real rock singer involved, because a good song is a good song. I even offered to re-write the lyric, but said I’d probably do my own version with the existing one.
In fact he did reject the tune as well. I had told him that as far as I was aware because we had collaborated the melody/lric couldn’t now be separated from his track/riff, because a finished song had been created, but he said he hadn’t heard the tune and so was entitled to reject it – it was never a completed song despite our intent to collaborate.
That being the case I agreed we could go our separate ways – I would take my melody and lyric and do my own version without using any of his melodic parts – and he’d find another tune to fit, though I felt it a shame.
I even said I would give him a percentage (not sure if I have to credit him as co-writer officially?)
But he said I couldn’t use his chord progression… as far as I know, because there’s nothing special about his chords, I should be able to use them (C#m B F# and then E A B for the other section). However, I have actually written a song using hi strack as inspiration… what’s the law on this?
It would seem absurd if I can’t use my tune. But do I have to credit him as co-writer? If I do he may be able to block any licence and so on. I spent a great deal of time writing a perfectly good song and now it’s possibel I can’t use it – because to use different chords would be to mess it up in a bizarre and awful way.
I feel like I’ve done nothing wrong here and bent over backwards to make this work, and he’s got very angry about it, even threatening me with legal action if I were to use his chords.
Cheers in advance! K
garyewer
/ May 2, 2013I’ll preface all this by saying I am not a lawyer, so any comments I make on this are purely my opinion, and not to be construed as legal advice.
If I am understanding the situation, you provided a melody and lyric to someone who had a chord progression that he “created”. He rejected your melody and lyrics. My take on it is that even though you wrote the melody based on his chord progression, it’s not really a collaboration in the normal sense of that word. In other words, I believe that the melody can be separated from the chord progression. If that weren’t possible, I’d write Paul McCartney and tell him that because I wrote a new melody over the chords of “When I’m 64″, he and I are songwriting partners.
Parts of this are simple to answer. Simply put, he cannot make a legal claim to that chord progression. Those particular chords that you mention have been used in thousands (or more) songs, and it’s why chords are not protected by copyright. You have nothing to worry about. Regarding the melody: if you wrote the tune, you own the tune, and he doesn’t. You may have written the melody at his request, but as I say, it’s not a collaboration in the normal sense of that word.
A chord progression has the same legal status as an idea: not protected by copyright. So if I say, “I’ve got a great idea for a song: I’m going to sing F-major arpeggios over a C-G drone using the Book of Exodus as my lyric,” I haven’t done anything yet that’s protected by copyright. If you actually do it before me, then it’s protected by copyright. It’s the same thing with chords.
So in my *unofficial* opinion, you could take your melody and lyrics, and then take “his” chord progression, and owe him nothing. But having said that, if you’re really worried about it, you might want to get legal advice.
I’ll also say that the adage “Once bitten, twice shy” is a great one. Be VERY careful when answering ads. If you really think that it’s your ticket to success to answer ads like this (and it usually isn’t), you need to get an agreement in writing (signed, etc) before you send them anything. But whenever I see ads like this, my first reaction is to run away from my computer screaming “FIRE!”
Cheers,
-Gary
Alan Sheahan
/ May 11, 2013Hi Gary. Quick question: Is it copyright infringement if I were to record the chords of a well-known song on acoustic guitar (just the chords – nothing else) in the same rhythm as the original (or a close interpretation) and sell it on a cd (say)? God knows it would be awful but would it still be an infringement? :-) Thanks,
Alan
garyewer
/ May 12, 2013One of the most important aspects of copyright infringement is the general similarity between songs. Chord progressions are usually exempt from copyright protection because they are used over and over again in so many different songs. But once you take a particular song’s progression, and then add the same rhythmic treatment, perhaps using a similar instrumentation… you’re starting to get into dangerous territory. The truth is that you’re probably in a grey area with this. It’s why high-profile cases go to court and infringement has to be determined, and it’s not usually an easy task. My instincts would tell me that if you are purposely using someone else’s chord progression, along with the rhythms that were used in the first place, I wouldn’t go there.
-Gary
Alan Sheahan
/ May 12, 2013I appreciate it’s a tough one. But I guess if I lifted a complete set of chords with the same rhythmic tempo and put down an entirely different melody over it, starting melodic phrases in different places to the original with differing phrase lengths etc., the majority of people wouldn’t even recognise that the two songs were derived from the same canvas. In fact I was curious about this and I tried it out with my sister just today. She is a piano teacher with an excellent ear and particularly good at spotting even the remotest lift. I played the chords of “Michelle” by The Beatles (which she loves) on guitar and sang a completely different melody over the top, making sure it was nothing like the original melody. She could not for the life of her see the similarity before I had told her! I was amazed. I think melodic lifts are far easier to spot than chordal ones. Has anyone ever heard of a court ruling of copyright infringement based solely on chord progression? I’d be really curious! Thanks for that Gary. Alan
Bernie
/ May 21, 2014It happens all the time. He’s So Fine vs My Sweet Lord, Alan Parson’s Eye In The Sky vs Lady Antebellum’s Need You Now. Every once in a while someone’s going to have an idea for a song that either coincidentally sounds like another, or subconsciously use a musical phrase that they didn’t realize ey had heard before.
Dorit Elena K
/ August 24, 2014I have a similar issue as others here but not exactly. I was almost in a new band, and was given a music track to write to. I wrote something really great, that was accepted. One of the best things Ive written. Melody and lyrics. The band ended up going with a guy, and also I only met the main music writer. So I want to keep the melody and lyrics. I have recorded accapela on video and its online..but how can I make this truly mine? I was thinking of having someone help me with a piano arrangement as opposed to the prog rock guitar track I wrote to. I want to make this my own song and perform it live. The guy said something like I can take the lyrics to another song if I want (obviously…I wrote them) but melody and lyrics mean I need somewhat the same progression. help?
garyewer
/ August 24, 2014You may need to get some legal assistance with this one, and I can only weigh in on this as a non-specialist in the legal world. In other words, don’t take what I’m saying on this as legal advice.
As far as I know, if you’ve added melody and lyrics to a track (by which I’m assuming you mean that they gave you a recording of chords and instrumental arrangement), you’re basically co-writing, and it may be the sort of thing where even if you decide to go ahead and try to make it your own, the creator of the track that was given to you might have a claim to a copyright share. But I am not a lawyer, and so as I say, it sounds like you need to get the opinion of someone in the legal field.
Even though the band went with someone else instead of you, I assume they’re going to go ahead with the song, including your melody and lyrics. So it’s a co-write. You can go ahead and do a new arrangement of that melody and lyric, including changing the chords, the instrumentation, even the genre. But it sounds to me as though this will always be a co-write no matter what. That band needs to know that anything that happens to that song (including copyright, royalties, etc.) needs to include you as a co-writer. Copyright is shared equally no matter who contributed how much. Royalties, and anything that comes from the sale and/or performance of the song need to be shared according to an agreed-to contract. My advice (to repeat, I’m not a lawyer) is to work that out amicably, and get writing your next song.
-Gary
Dorit Elena K
/ August 29, 2014Thanks you for the advice. I dont know if they will use that song. And I honestly dont feel comfortable even speaking with the one member I met because he left me hanging for a month without any feedback or letting me know they went with someone else. The thought of having to keep track of the songs makes me sick. I just want to let it go and just keep my portion of the melody and lyrics. How can anyone leave a singer/writer/musician hanging for a month….when the initial meeting was amazing. The second song didnt go so well and thats why they moved on in my opinion. I mean its just courtesy to let me know right away if they are moving on. Do I really need to be paranoid that they are using the melody lyrics, I think most artists like myself really dont want to get into legal discussions especially when so little work is done, and noone involved is a well known superstar.
George B.
/ October 5, 2014Hi Gary,
I have a lyric writing question.
May an existing, copyrighted instrumental song (without any known/published lyric) be used as a “pattern” to write a lyric/poem — and stand as a poem on its own?
(Ex: To readers if I’m not being clear.)
Presume “Misty” or “Moon River” had been released as instrumentals (again) with no published or known lyrics
I write a lyric/poem that fits* those particular melodies. 100% my words
As long as I don’t record/use the melody WITH the lyrics… Are the words mine to copyright as rhyming poetry?
Thanks for your respected consideration – and I understand you are not giving legal advice as an attorney.
George in Minnesota
*Note: When reading a lyric/poem it will always vary from the actual rhythmical value of the written musical notation.
garyewer
/ October 6, 2014Hi George:
As you say, I’m not a lawyer, so this is only an opinion, not legal advice. My thoughts are that you’d be fine doing so. The lyric on its own would be protected by a copyright that is automatically assigned to you. The fact that it could be sung to a piece of instrumental music that is not your own wouldn’t really enter into the issue. Let’s say that at some point someone wanted to record the instrumental song with your lyrics. I assume they would need your permission, plus the permission of the copyright holder of the music.
In a sense, it’s merely the reverse of the issue where Person A wants to set Person B’s poem to music that Person A has written. As the composer, Person A would need the permission of Person B in order to do so.
Perhaps a lawyer could weigh in on this, because it might get tricky. For example, what if you took “Bridge Over Troubled Water”, and wanted to create a new lyric for the music? Does the copyright holder of “Bridge” get to say “no”? In that case, I assume they do. Since Paul Simon is the sole writer, I assume that he can prevent the new lyric.
Anyway, those are my rambling thoughts!
-Gary
George B.
/ October 9, 2014Hi Gary,
Thank you for your thoughtfully detailed response.
I tend to agree with your perspective that the lyric/poem would stand on its own – as long as one doesn’t try to sing it to copyrighted music without the proper permissions.
Copyright law can be a rigid animal, but I think it would have to bend quite a bit to claim inspiration from an existing “lyricless” melody resulting in a lyric/poem violated any part of their melody.
Rewriting lyrics to any existing song (where we also agree) is another issue — unless it is a parody.
I’ve never seen my question posed before – but I am glad to see that your angle of vision is similar to mine.
Thank you for your time and good thoughts.
George
PS
Parody is another area where I have never been able to get a clear legal definition what constitutes a lyrical parody. The definitions tend to vary depending on the legal source you access. I do know that parody doesn’t necessarily mean comedic.