I was in a well-known Roman club with my girlfriend, and I admired a performance by Fitness Forever in ecstasy. I should say "magnificent performance", but I would be pleonastic.
Suddenly, as often happens in their performances, some Valderrama 5 pieces are performed. I should say “magnificent pieces”, but I would be pleonastic here too.
In what relationship are theFitness Forever and of Valderram 5? I'll explain it to you in a few words: they have in common the genius who gave birth to the vast majority of their musical works of art, namely Carlos Valderrama (not the footballer, mind you). The Valderrama 5 are now in the mythology of that niche of the public which, scattered a little throughout Italy, appreciated the gifts of an army of young people who went around having fun, even before having fun. Micio, Diego Rodriguez, Olio, Squalo, Carlos and those other 18-20 people who orbited - jointly or separately - in the big group were sweaty types. And that sometimes, even today, continue to sweat in some "reunions".
Carlos, from time to time, in the FF concerts also continues to play some pieces of Valderrama 5. And in addition to generating the delirium of aficionados, he also makes the guests of honor of their evenings smile, that is the old ones (so to speak ) freshmen who sit in the audience or among the sound engineers' benches.
But what could happen if one of the Valderrama 5 tells Fitness Forever "This is our song and we want a Tot euro for each performance?".
This image makes me laugh at the very thought… But let's get out of the present case and let's talk about that big problem that is the management of collective works.
The golden rule
“In times of peace, the rules for times of war should be fixed”. I don't remember who said it before me, but it doesn't matter: it is an indispensable dogma to follow, always, especially when we are talking about copyright and in particular the right of economic exploitation of the work.
We try to narrow the field of our interest as much as possible, to avoid digressions (so my Boss will be extremely proud of me).
The most classic of situations, to which we will therefore dedicate ourselves, is to find ourselves with a group of songs, integrated in an album whose design identity is well defined.
Said so it seems simple, but in reality it is not. In fact, three scenarios open up, all necessarily to be subjected to a precise definition:
1. The album can be considered a work in its own right, whose identity is so "strong" that it ideally crushes the individual identities of the tracks that compose it. Let's be clear: few will follow you on this path, materially conceivable on quite visionary and complex musical projects… but in any case we are faced with a “complex” work, whose contribution of each author is inseparable from the contribution of the others.
2. A "complex" work - and here we are already on planet earth - can also be the single song in which the contributions made (melody, text, arrangement, etc.) are, as above, indistinguishable;
3. More likely, the album will be a "collective" work, in which the individual contributions are clearly distinguishable and "claimable" by the various artists, while recognizing a right to itself in the hands of the coordinator of the project-album. In this scenario, therefore, we will have a right to those who sweat eight shirts to put together the various tracks, as well as individual rights to the author / authors who created the individual tracks.
These are only the three most common scenarios in real life, verifiable in the magical world of artistic productions. Fantasy (or reality?) Could provide us with other situations, but we would go beyond the didactic purpose of these chats and, above all, I would end up clipping your wings.
The contents
If we understand the principles that regulate the cases exemplified above, we will be able to define and manage in an optimal way the relationships between co-authors.
The hypotheses n. 1 and 2 are attributable toart. 10 of rd 633 of 1941, our famous copyright "North Star". Once the contribution of each co-author has been defined as inseparable, then the copyrights will be shared among all the co-authors, presumably in equal parts and unless otherwise agreed. Furthermore, moral rights (ie the right to "claim the authorship of the work and to oppose any deformation, mutilation or other modification, and any act to the detriment of the work itself, which may be prejudicial to its honor or his reputation ") may be exercised" individually by each co-author ". In this case, the work cannot be published, if unpublished, nor can it be modified or used in a different form from that of the first publication, without the agreement of all the co-authors. But beware: any whims can be overcome in front of the judicial authority, which may be consulted to authorize the publication, modification or new use of the work.
Hypothesis 3 falls within the area of collective work, that is (according toart. 3 lda) the work constituted by the meeting of works or parts of works, with "character of autonomous creation, as a result of the choice and coordination for a specific purpose". In order not to displease anyone (rightly), "the copyrights on the works or parts of works of which they are composed remain standing".
Therefore, in the collective work, two distinct copyrights will coexist (art. 7 lda): one for whoever "organizes and directs the creation of the work" and one for the so-called "processor", within the limits of work made.
What to define first of all?
From the above we can say that it is fundamental:
- Define any copyright sharing agreements other than the provisions of art. 10 of the l. 633: in practice, if the contributions are different and you want to enhance it, let's put it in black and white and quantify (even in percentage terms, trivially) the different shares of exploitation of the work.
- As art. 40 lda, let's take the healthy habit - which many have, and there will be a reason… .. - of giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. I am not referring to Cremonini, as usual, but to the beautiful practice of marking, next to each piece, its author, indicating for example who created the melody and who the text. In fact, "The collaborator of a collective work [omissis] has the right, unless otherwise agreed, that his name appears in the reproduction of his work in the usual forms".
- Thinking that every human story has a beginning and an end. A band also falls under this rule. So, let's think about setting rules on how to "liquidate" the relationships with the one / those who at some point in their life decide, for whatever reason, to take other paths!
The "infra-group" relationships.
Once in a while, I want to be serious. This episode is meant to be more than a simple description of how to regulate the relationships between members of a musical band. Reading between the lines it will be easy to understand.
Especially in times of crisis, our creativity has immense value. But before thinking about what happened to Genesis, Bluvertigo or Luna Pop, we want to try to respect those who share with us a dream, an adventure, sacrifices and sleepless nights in the recording room, smoky inspirations and blows of genius?
Do we want to understand that the brain, inspiration, art are precious stuff? I see discreet players along the streets, both in Naples and in Rome, who are satisfied. If only they converted even a third of the time and energy spent on the road into something more, they would spark. If only they valued themselves and their art, they would give a deeper sense of four notes copied and strummed in a murky trivialization.
Starting with small and humble steps does not prevent you from aiming to fly high….
