4 Copyright Considerations for Artists Using Beats
Recording over beats is a typical part of the creative process for many musical artists. However, many artists are unfamiliar with the copyright law pertaining to beats. This makes it difficult to understand the terms and limitations of the license they are agreeing to when purchasing beats from producers. This post breaks down four key considerations for artists using beats to help them understand the scope of their rights and to help them avoid copyright disputes.
1. Producers Typically Sell Copyright Licenses, Not Copyright Ownership Rights
The copyrights associated with a beat are owned by the producer unless the producer has transferred that right to another person or entity. For any given beat, there are two copyrights: one for the composition and the other for the sound recording. Although it’s possible that a producer can assign one or both of those ownership rights to an artist, this is typically not the case when producers “sell beats.” When a producer “sells beats,” they’re usually selling licenses for artists to use the beat in a specific manner.
It is important for artists to know that the following do not confer ownership rights:
The act of purchasing a beat does not confer ownership rights;
The act of purchasing “exclusive rights” does not confer ownership rights (it pertains to licensing as discussed below); and
The fact that a beat is free does not mean that the artist owns it or can use the beat in any manner.
The distinction between licensing and ownership assignment matters because it impacts what the artist can do with the beat without infringing copyright law. The owner of the composition and sound recording copyrights to a beat has exclusive rights to: (1) copy, (2) create derivative works from, (3) distribute, (4) perform both works publicly, (5) display both works publicly, and (6) perform the sound recording publicly by means of digital audio transmission.[1] Artists who do not own the copyright(s) to a beat need permission (a license) to do any of the aforementioned actions.
Artists can confirm that they are entering into licensing agreements by reviewing the producer’s paperwork or terms. If the producer does not have written terms, artists can communicate with the producer for clarification.
2. The Licensing Terms Dictate the Scope of What Artists Can Do with the Beat
Licensing terms can vary from license to license. The terms limit what the artists can do with a beat. As a starting point, artists can look out for some of the following possible limitations.
a. The number of new songs the artist can create with the beat.
Licenses for beats often limit the number of new songs that the artists can create with the beat to 1. This typically isn’t an issue for artists but is important to understand in case the artist wants to create several new songs with a beat.
b. The number of beat downloads.
Some licenses limit the number of times an artist can download the beat. This limitation is helpful for artists to know to avoid any issues arising from losing the beat file or downloading it to an incorrect device.
c. Permission to do some, but not all of the 6 copyright rights exclusive to owners.
As discussed above, copyright owners of beats enjoy six rights. A license does not necessarily grant the licensee permission to exercise all six of these copyright rights. Often, a beat license grants some but not all.
For example, a license may permit an artist to copy and create a derivative work with a beat, but not the rights to distribute and perform the beat. This would mean that the artist could download the beat and create a new song with it but would not be able to distribute the new song on any platform or perform it live without infringing copyright. That producer may be selling those rights under a different license.
d. Conditions such as limitation of streams or music video views.
Some licenses are conditional upon a limited number of streams, radio plays, or music video views. If the conditions are not met (if plays or views exceed the cap), then the artist must enter into another licensing agreement to avoid copyright infringement.
e. Restricted synchronization rights.
Some licenses prohibit synchronization or place limitations on synchronization. Synchronization is synchronizing a sound recording with a video. When artists make music videos, they are synchronizing their song with a video. Some licenses prohibit synchronization entirely. Others place certain limitations such as:
the number of videos with which the artist can synchronize the new song;
the length of the video(s); and/or
the purpose of the video (for commercial or non-commercial purposes).
f. Resale prohibition.
Many beat licenses prohibit the resale or sublicensing of the beat in its original form. This means that the artist can’t turn around and sell rights to use that beat to other people.
These limitations demonstrate a shortlist of possible ways that licenses can narrow the scope of what artists can do with the beat at issue. There are many more possible ways that licensing terms limit this scope. The above list can act as a starting place for artists who want to review licensing terms but aren’t sure what to look for. Artists can look for specific terms that may be deal breakers for them or check the scope of their rights before a release. For a more comprehensive review of licensing terms, artists should contact an attorney to review their license.
3. Exclusive Licenses Mean that the License is Not Being Sold to Another Artist
Many artists are familiar with the fact that producers sell “exclusive” and “non-exclusive” beats. An “exclusive” or “non-exclusive” license has a very specific legal meaning. Exclusive licenses grant rights to one party; the licensor cannot grant these rights to another party. Non-exclusive licenses grant rights to a party that can also be granted to other parties.
Websites and producers may not be using the legal meaning of “exclusive license” when marketing beats as “exclusive.” Artists may want to verify whether an “exclusive” beat means an “exclusive” license before purchasing a beat.
Artists that want to avoid other artists using the same beat in their songs can do so by entering into exclusive licensing agreements. As many artists will note, this type of legal exclusivity is usually more expensive as the producer cannot sell the licensing rights to other artists.
4. The Producer May Assert Ownership Rights Over the New Song
The licensing terms for a beat may also assert ownership rights over the composition and sound recording of the new song. Often, licensing terms provide for a 50/50 split in ownership of the composition copyright of the new song where each the producer and artist own 50 percent. This splits the performance and mechanical royalties for the composition and, relatedly, requires that the artist disclose producer information when registering the new song with Performing Rights Organizations (performance royalties) and the Mechanical Licensing Collective (mechanical royalties).
The license may also assert partial or complete ownership of the sound recording of the new song. In this case, the producer would be licensing the artists rights pertaining to the new sound recording. The artist’s rights pertaining to the new song would be limited to the terms of the license. Artists can review the terms of their license to determine which copyrights, in part or whole, they own.
The above considerations show the importance of reviewing licensing terms before and after purchasing beats. Doing so can help artists make sure that they are purchasing rights that make sense for their plans and don’t take any actions that could lead to litigation. This article does not constitute legal advice. Artists should consult an attorney if they want a comprehensive review of a specific license.
If you are an artist or producer looking to understand more about the copyright rights relating to beats, please feel welcome to book a Consultation or Contact Me.
[1] 17 U.S.C. § 106.