Carol Kaye and why we need help protecting our stuff....

[electracoyote]

This thread and this reminds me of Joe Bonamassa on when he met Gary Moore:

"I saw him [Gary Moore] and thought, this might be my only chance, so I went up to him and said, 'Hi, I'm Joe Bonamassa, and I owe you a lot of royalties from the riffs I stole from you.' He shook my hand and said, 'No problem, I illegally... downloaded all of your albums!' "

This leads to an interesting point of discussion.

Does anyone actually own a riff such as a lead guitar solo or bassline? How far can you take that idea? Does someone claim ownership and intellectual property for the major scale? Minor scale? The minor pentatonic? Because if they do, a whole lot of people owe someone big time for all the riffs that are based on the major, minor, and minor pentatonic scales, and I'm leaving out dozens of other common scales and modes from which guitarists and bassists gleen their lines.

Honestly, if I play a cool bass riff over a minor scale to a pop song that sells a jillion copies, am I owed something (beyond my one-time payment or performance royalty) for that line? Or is my line just as much a product of the song and the scale I'm using, neither of which were created by me (?)

How can you claim "ownership" of something that you merely amalgamated and tweaked using things that came before, and they are the direct result of the influence of a song and chord structure which you didn't write, and were possibly influenced by a writer, arranger, or producer?

Not to take anything away from Carol, but she's one of hundreds of thousands of session cats who laid down some great lines--are they all going to be owed some kind of financial settlement beyond their agreed-upon payment?

 

[Depth_Charge]

I think everyone agrees that Slash wrote the intro lick to Sweet Child of Mine. That there's your answer IMHO.

 

[Ric5]

There's a better lesson to learn here. Plan your finances so that you DONT have a mortgage when you're in your 70s.

Yes ... also a lesson to young people who think they will get rich in music.

Bands don't have pensions or 401k plans. Bands don't have medical benefits. Bands don't get paid holidays or sick days.

 

[gttim]

Yes ... also a lesson to young people who think they will get rich in music.

Bands don't have pensions or 401k plans. Bands don't have medical benefits. Bands don't get paid holidays or sick days.

And if you do not write the songs, you will not be making the money.

 

[electracoyote]

I think everyone agrees that Slash wrote the intro lick to Sweet Child of Mine. That there's your answer IMHO.

That's a pretty good example. That lick is somewhat unique, almost more a central melody which, when paired with the chord progression, would probably constitute intellectual property.

But let's take the quote above where Joe Bonamassa felt he needed to apologize to Gary Moore. Apologize for what? Where did Gary Moore get his ideas? Moore put his own spin on it, but a great deal of his playing was directly influenced by guitarists and musicians who came before.

I think Bonamassa's apology was unwarranted, it was probably a misguided attempt at complimenting and recognizing a great guitarist. Moore on the other hand (RIP), shouldn't have felt so justified in stealing Bonamassa's music.

Let's take a classic bass line: "California Girls." Written by Brian Wilson (not Carol Kaye), he admits to being influenced by country western bass lines from the '50s. It probably seemed pretty original when he injected it into a pop song in the '60s, but it wasn't. I don't think the bass line to "California Girls" is anyone's property.

My point is, I don't think most bass lines are anyone's property.

 

[gttim]

I think Bonamassa's apology was unwarranted, it was probably a misguided attempt at complimenting and recognizing a great guitarist. Moore on the other hand (RIP), shouldn't have felt so justified in stealing Bonamassa's music.

I think it was a joke on both their parts. Bonamassa was jokingly paying homage, and Moore was giving him s*** back. I wouldn't read that much into it. That was a great comeback on Moore's part!

 

[electracoyote]

I think it was a joke on both their parts. Bonamassa was jokingly paying homage, and Moore was giving him s*** back. I wouldn't read that much into it. That was a great comeback on Moore's part!

That makes sense. And it was a great comeback, if truly in jest.

 

[JAUQO III-X]

My point is, I don't think most bass lines are anyone's property.

If you were called to play on a session and the artists says that he/she wants you to play an original bass line(that you write) and the song gets released and becomes a hug hit and every one involved makes millions but you.

And then you find out that you didn't get co-writers credit.

How would you really feel about your bass line?

 

[narud]

If you were called to play on a session and the artists says that he/she wants you to play an original bass line(that you write) and the song gets released and becomes a hug hit and every one involved makes millions but you.

And then you find out that you didn't get co-writers credit.

How would you really feel about your bass line?

depends if your bassline is paramount to the tune. good times was a great example. i remember flea having beef with bust a move over only getting paid for the session, but a line like that is pretty inconsequential to the song.

 

[JAUQO III-X]

depends if your bassline is paramount to the tune. good times was a great example. i remember flea having beef with bust a move over only getting paid for the session, but a line like that is pretty inconsequential to the song.

If you have co-writers credit you should be compensated accordingly.

 

[electracoyote]

If you were called to play on a session and the artists says that he/she wants you to play an original bass line(that you write) and the song gets released and becomes a hug hit and every one involved makes millions but you.

And then you find out that you didn't get co-writers credit.

How would you really feel about your bass line?

This post begs so many questions, I'm not sure where to begin.

IME, "co-writer's credit" applies to the composition, namely the authors of the chord progression and main melody/lyrics.

I know there are groups who give everyone a songwriting credit whether or not they contributed to the chord progression and main melody/lyrics. Is this what you mean? Because otherwise, no, I don't think the bass line constitutes a co-writer in most situations. I'm pretty sure intellectual property laws would support that assertion.

The general arrangement for session players is you play a line that the writer or artist likes and agrees with, the writer/artist pays you a performance fee or royalty, and that's your compensation for your bass line, whether it sells three copies or three million copies.

Whether or not it's fair is purely subjective. But that's the way it is for studio musicians, and they understand this going in.

The session player (Babbit?) on "I Can't Help Myself (Sugar Pie, Honey Bunch)" played an amazing line; it's the first thing you hear and, along with the vocal melody and lyrics, one of the most identifiable parts of the song. Largely on the strength of that bass line, that record has sold many millions of copies. But that session bass player was not a "co-writer" of the song. He contributed to the recording of the song and was compensated accordingly. In a copyright sense, the co-writers are Holland-Dozier-Holland.

There are exceptions I'm sure. For example, if a bassist writes an original composition using his bass as the main instrument and creates an identifiable melody/chord progression, and copyrights said composition as an original piece of music he or she authored, then the bass line can be claimed as intellectual property.

 

[JAUQO III-X]

The session player (Babbit?) on "I Can't Help Myself (Sugar Pie, Honey Bunch)" played an amazing line; it's the first thing you hear and, along with the vocal melody and lyrics, one of the most identifiable parts of the song. That record has sold many millions of copies. But that session bass player was not a "co-writer" of the song. He contributed to the recording of the song and was compensated accordingly. In a copyright sense, the co-writers are Holland-Dozier-Holland.

That's because he agreed to just play and get his check and go home.

 

[THand]

"What about the likes of Sting, who has said he stole more from Carol than is decent."

You really need to quote people accurately.

From Carol's site:

"Carol taught me more about the bass than is decent." - Sting

I didn't put quotation marks on purpose, but thanks for missing my point, Officer.

 

[gttim]

See Matthew Fisher and Procol Harum's legal battle. Organ riff was major part of the song and English courts agreed he should have 40% of royalties, except he waited too long to claim them.

 

[electracoyote]

i remember flea having beef with bust a move over only getting paid for the session, but a line like that is pretty inconsequential to the song.

Good example. However, I find the bass line to "Bust A Move" central and vital to the song. Considering there are little-to-no other support instruments besides bass and drums through most of the track, the bass line pretty much IS the song, instrumentally speaking.

But you said it best: Flea did not co-write "Bust A Move" and only got session compensation, even though that bass line helped that track become a huge dance floor hit and sell millions.

 

[Gaius46]

This post begs so many questions, I'm not sure where to begin.

IME, "co-writer's credit" applies to the composition, namely the authors of the chord progression and main melody/lyrics.

I know there are groups who give everyone a songwriting credit whether or not they contributed to the chord progression and main melody/lyrics. Is this what you mean? Because otherwise, no, I don't think the bass line constitutes a co-writer in most situations. I'm pretty sure intellectual property laws would support that assertion.

The general arrangement for session players is you play a line that the writer or artist likes and agrees with, the writer/artist pays you a performance fee or royalty, and that's your compensation for your bass line, whether it sells three copies or three million copies.

Whether or not it's fair is purely subjective. But that's the way it is for studio musicians, and they understand this going in.

The session player (Babbit?) on "I Can't Help Myself (Sugar Pie, Honey Bunch)" played an amazing line; it's the first thing you hear and, along with the vocal melody and lyrics, one of the most identifiable parts of the song. That record has sold many millions of copies. But that session bass player was not a "co-writer" of the song. He contributed to the recording of the song and was compensated accordingly. In a copyright sense, the co-writers are Holland-Dozier-Holland.

I may be mistaken but for copyright purposes I believe what's required to be documented are the lyrics, melody and harmony - basically the information you find on a leadsheet. Considering that, at least from a copyright standpoint, the bass line is irrelevant.

 

[electracoyote]

That's because he agreed to just play and get his check and go home.

Right.

If a session player can negotiate a better deal, more power to them.

 

[Gaius46]

That's because he agreed to just play and get his check and go home.

Odds are Babbitt didn't write the line in any case. Lots of Motown writers wrote the basic bass lines that Jamerson and company then expanded upon.

 

[electracoyote]

I may be mistaken but for copyright purposes I believe what's required to be documented are the lyrics, melody and harmony - basically the information you find on a leadsheet. Considering that, at least from a copyright standpoint, the bass line is irrelevant.

That sounds alot like my "chord progression, lyrics, and main melody" mentioned above. I think we're on the same page.

 

[Gaius46]

That sounds alot like my "chord progression, lyrics, and main melody" mentioned above. I think we're on the same page.

We are. Was just seconding what you said