Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Royalty-free (RF) material subject to copyright or other intellectual property rights may be used without the need to pay royalties or license fees for each use, per each copy or volume sold or some time period of use or sales.
Music licensing is the licensed use of copyrighted music. [1] Music licensing is intended to ensure that the owners of copyrights on musical works are compensated for certain uses of their work. A purchaser has limited rights to use the work without a separate agreement.
If the template has a separate documentation page (usually called "Template:template name/doc"), add [[Category:Music templates]] to the <includeonly> section at the bottom of that page.
The Harry Fox Agency (HFA) is a provider of rights management and collector and distributor of mechanical license fees on behalf of music publishers in the United States. HFA has over 48,000 music publishing clients and issues the largest number of licenses for physical and digital formats of music. [1]
For example, for a musical, the rights must be obtained for the book, lyrics, and music. A producer can also hire a writer to create a work. This could be defined as a Work for hire. If the work is a work for hire, the copyright of the material would be given to the producer of the show, not the writer.
Classical [vague] sheet music, for example, is widely available for free use and reproduction. Some more current works are also available for free use through public works projects such as Internet Archive. This and similar projects aim to preserve and make readily available thousands of public domain music files, many of which have been ...
A music synchronization license, or "sync" for short, is a music license granted by the holder of the copyright of a particular composition, allowing the licensee to synchronize ("sync") their music with various forms of media output (film, television shows, advertisements, video games, accompanying website music, movie trailers, etc.).
The 9th Circuit, affirming the earlier District Court ruling in favor of Diamond Multimedia, [14] ruled that the "digital music recording" for the purposes of the act was not intended to include songs fixed on computer hard drives. The court also held that the Rio was not a digital audio recording device for the purposes of the AHRA, because 1 ...