Creative Commons vs Copyright

[clebertsuconic]

I don't know if this would be the right forum.. but here you go...

I believe Christian musicians should be using "Creative Commons" for their songs instead of Copyright... I have seen lots of churches having to pay yearly or monthly fees (Well, only in US. and I know this is starting also in Brazil) just for being able to sing songs in congregations. That goes against what I believe.

Of course if someone is making money with someone's song.. .then the author, company or whoever is administering the song should also receive his share of the money.

Anyway... I still don't know how someone would protect his authorship (don't know if that word existis... :-) ) of a song on either way... Creative Commons or Copyright. Any ideas on how to do it?


I've never been concerned about that when I was living in Brazil... but someone told me I should be in US. Is that true?

[russhutto]

I don't know if I agree with this.

To protect the integrity of the song, i.e. having it be true to the spirit in which it was written, I would recommend copyright. Churches don't have to pay a yearly fee to sing songs, but a yearly fee for a license to make copies/lead sheets/overhead transparencies/presentation, etc.

Many songwriters are blessed to receive income from the legitimate use of their songs throughout the body. I believe it's God's way of hooking us up with a little "fruit" from our labors. Should we be getting rich? Maybe not, but all songwriters should definitely copyright their songs, especially if they share them with the body.

[clebertsuconic]

Creative Commons, as far as I know also protects you.

BTW: I don't have any strong believe against copyright
(I just wanted to start a discussion on this.)

...of course... as long as one can sing songs on church without the possibility of being sued by the author.


BTW: In a separate thread... how can I copyright something here in the US? what's the way to go?