Following criticisms of British copyright law that it is influenced by Romantic ideals of authorship, I ask whether it makes sense to distinguish between music composers and performers in law. Drawing on interviews with classical and popular music performers and relevant case law, I examine how performers negotiate and exploit different rights in order to determine ownership. Evidence suggests that rather than a binary, musicians’ creative work can best be represented as moving along a continuum between composition and performance with both concepts socially much in use. Musicians position their work on this continuum according to three motifs: composer–performer discourses and careers, genre and power relationships. I argue that the legal categories of joint or individual authorship, adaptation and performance protect most contributions to a musical work and align with the social understandings of different types of contributions. Yet I also note that, viewed more normatively, a recasting of the rights could help shift those social understandings and alter the inequalities inherent in both musical practices and the law.
AguilarA (forthcoming) Pioneering the orchestra-owned label: LSO Live in an industry in crisis. In: Ramnarine (ed) Global Perspectives on Orchestras: Essays on Collective Creativity and Social Agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
ArnoldR (1999) Are performers authors?European Intellectual Property Review21: 464–469.
3.
ArnoldR (2007) Copyright fandango. European Lawyer11(67): 1–2.
4.
ArnoldR (2010) Reflections on “The triumph of music”: copyrights and performers’ rights in music. Intellectual Property Quarterly2: 153–164.
5.
ArnoldR (2011) Content copyrights and signal copyrights: The case for a rational scheme of protection. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property1(3): 272–279.
BarronA (2004) The Legal Properties of Film. Modern Law Review67(2): 177–208.
9.
BarronA (2006a) Copyright law’s musical work. Social and Legal Studies15(1): 101–127. DOI: 10.1177/0964663906060985.
10.
BarronA (2006b) Introduction: Harmony or dissonance? Copyright concepts and musical practice. Social and Legal Studies15(1): 25–51. DOI: 10.1177/0964663906060972.
11.
BellidoJ (2016) Forensic technologies in music copyright. Social and Legal Studies25(4): 441–459. DOI: 10.1177/0964663916628621.
12.
BentlyL (2009) Authorship of popular music in UK copyright law. Information, Communication and Society12(2): 179–204. DOI: 10.1080/13691180802459948.
13.
BentlyLBironL (2014) Discontinuities between legal conceptions of authorship and social practices. In: vanEM (ed) The Work of Authorship. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 237–276. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/j.ctt12877zb (accessed 8 June 2016).
FirthA (2015) Music and co-authorship/co-ownership. In: RahmatianA (ed) Concepts of Music and Copyright: How Music Perceives Itself and How Copyright Perceives Music. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, pp. 143–166.
17.
FreeD (2002) Beckingham v. Hodgens: The session musician’s claim to music copyright. Entertainment Law1(3): 93–97.
18.
GoehrL (1989) Being true to the work. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism47(1): 55–67. DOI: 10.2307/431993.
19.
GoehrL (2007) The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works, Rd. New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
GripsrudJ (2014) Creativity and the sense of collective ownership in theatre and popular music. In: vanEM (ed) The Work of Authorship. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/j.ctt12877zb (accessed 8 June 2016).
21.
GuibaultLSalamancaOvan GompelS. (2015) Remuneration of Authors and Performers for the use of Their Works and the Fixations of Their Performances Final Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office. Available at: http://bookshop.europa.eu/uri?target=EUB:NOTICE:KK0115246:EN:HTML (accessed 13 September 2016).
22.
McDonaghL (2012) Rearranging the roles of the performer and the composer in the music industry: The potential significance of Fisher v Brooker. Intellectual Property Quarterly1: 64–76.
23.
PhillipsTStreetJ (2015) Copyright and musicians at the digital margins. Media, Culture and Society37(3): 342–358.
24.
RivasC (2012) Coding and analysing qualitative data. In: SealeC (ed) Researching Society and Culture, 3rd ed. Sage, pp. 366–392.
25.
SealeC (2012) ‘Sampling’. In: SealeC (ed) Researching Society and Culture, 3rd Rev ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 134–152.
26.
SilbeyJ (2015) The Eureka Myth: Creators, Innovators, and Everyday Intellectual Property. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
