Attribution

I guess everyone knows about this by now.

As a musician (you know, the type who actually makes music and doesn’t just sing, etc.), I really sympathize with Mr. Granada’s plight. Bukas Palad even has one of his songs on album; and given very barat sa budgeting ang BP, ¹ We wanted to include some songs by Yano at some point – but never pushed through because of fees involved it’s safe to assume that Mr. Granada is not unreasonable with his “rates/fees.”

I know the economy’s in a credit crunch and that everyone’s looking for the cheapest way of doing things. And for the most part that’s fine; they just get what they pay for. But to blatantly “game” the system the way they’re dong and screwing someone like they did Mr. Granada… that just really gets on my nerves!

If you have been following my site and its contents since the beginning, you’ll know I’m big on attribution. I always give credit where credit is due. If I repost anything, I always make it a point to cite the source. If there’s a photograph I put in my account that wasn’t taken by me, I put notes on each and every one of those photos stating as such.

When it comes to music, I’m extra particular with attribution… to about a factor of 10 – because given there are so many elements involved in music making, it’s easy to take credit even if it’s really not deserved.

There’s composing, there’s arranging, there’s lyric writing, there’s even “performing.” Whichever of these elements you involve yourself in when doing a musical piece – you tend to be very protective of that “contribution.”

Looking at my music page, if you take the time to click on the song titles (to see the song info) I take the time to explain how the song came together – if there are parts that I did on my own, had help with or didn’t do. And looking at the list as it is, I’ve already been through the different scenarios.

For my original compositions, all aspects are done by me, from music to lyrics to arrangement, to instrumentation and vocals. For the remake of Hallelujah, I was simply an arranger, ² and I didn’t even veer to far from the original so maybe I shouldn’t call myself an arranger for that instrumentalist, and performer. For Wonderful World, GP was [just] an arranger… and I was a performer. For GP’s compositions, I’ve had varying degrees of “involvement:” For Jess, I was just the singer. For Do Do Do, I wrote and interpreted most of the verses. For Sleeping Alone, I co-arranged it, did the bulk of the intrumentation, and performed it. Whatever the case, I don’t claim ownership on a song unless I’m absolutely sure it’s mine. Being a “composer” of a song is something to be proud of – so we don’t take it lightly.

So you see how particular these things can get – how easy/difficult it was to make them is beside the point – the fact is that the experiences we’ve been through are part of what you hear in those works. And you can never quantify that. If our lives had turned out differently, if we had listened to different artists/musical influences along the way, you may be hearing different songs altogether. As Mr. Granada would say: it doesn’t matter if we’re proud or not with the particular work in question – the fact is it’s our work, and no one else’s. The least these people could do is give credit where credit is due. The chances of coming up with that particular “feel” at that level of similarity is kinda dubious… which is why he’s sending the message in the first place.

Now legally, I personally think wala siya habol ³ But then, he’s Gary Granada, so he should have some clout in the industry to be an exception which is why nga siguro he’s resorting to this viral messaging. What’s happening kse, from what I’m seeing/hearing, is this:

The song was supposed to have been commissioned to someone else eventually… so technically, hindi pumasa yung study niya. Which is perfectly fine – but that stipulates that apart from the lyrics… whatever “contribution” he has given them didn’t make the cut. So the general “treatment/feel” of the song didn’t make the cut – simple as that. So when you hear the broadcasted version… it shouldn’t sound anything like his “take” – which it does. And that’s where all the contention comes from.

Given the probabilities he discussed in the soundbyte, it should be highly improbable for a truly original “take” on those lyrics to be that close to his own “take.” Even if GMA/P&G had stipulated beforehand that it had to be “ballad-esque” (which will limit the approaches a composer could take) there’s still so many possibilities depending on the musical influences surrounding the composer/arranger assigned to the project.

Now the reason why it’s “tricky” is because the lyrics are not really Mr. Granada’s. The adjustments may be his (meter, etc.), but the lyrics aren’t his – period. And it is a fact that lyrics does play a big part in a song as a whole. ⁴ But again, with lyrics… I wrote the majority of the lyrics for “Do Do Do,” but I still consider it as GP’s composition and not my own Then there’s the matter of the difference in new melody – which he also doesn’t claim to own. So what he’s claiming is sort of a subjective thing… but any musician can see (or rather, hear) his point clearly – and I’m sure will agree with him.

I guess the best analogy of why it’s so tricky legally would be a common practice in the IT industry with regards to using licensed photographs. People tend to “work-around” the legalities by modifying the photographs beyond recognition. If you change a photo enough for it to be different from the original, then you’re hopefully in the clear… legally speaking. But of course we all know (and God knows) that that wasn’t really your photograph. And if you’re getting paid for using it, konsyensya nalang talaga katapat mo.

Going back to the music; there was an incident where the band Coldplay was sued by Joe Satriani for copyright infringement – because they had a song that was similar sounding to his. I won’t discuss my opinion on the matter for the sake of brevity – but lets just assume that Coldplay was innocent ⁵ I’m not saying they’re guilty either – I’m just stipulating a hypothetical situation as a point of argument – the case that could be asserted for them to be innocent is the case of coincidence.

“Coincidence,” in their context, is possible because we’re talking about artists who’s music get a lot of circulation. So it is possible that they heard Satriani’s song before (doesn’t matter when really), then the memory of it was deposited in their brains – then as they were writing new material, that (now subliminal) memory cropped up without them knowing. In that case, that is a perfectly legitimate argument. Unfortunate, but legitimate.

So it begs the question; could the same argument be applied to Mr. Granadas case? I don’t think so. The key here is prior memory (whether subliminal or not). This new “composer” they have commissioned couldn’t have possibly made a similar sounding song by coincidence because Mr. Granada’s “study” wasn’t in circulation (the project wasn’t done… how could it be circulated?). For the possibility of “coincidence” to be considered, said “study” should’ve circulated enough to generate enough recall to the people who listened to it.

So the only way he could’ve made such a similar sounding “take” is either by a miracle (the odds of which have been explained by Mr. Granada)… or he had heard the original study. And given how shady these organizations do things… I really wouldn’t be surprised if the latter was the case.

I’m guessing it was just your typical “being cheap” scenario: We get composer x cuz he’s/she’s cheaper… let him/her listen to more expensive composer y’s work and just work from that. That way, we get composer y’s treatment while paying composer x his/her cheaper fee. Which is sickening given how much money these organizations make.

---

When working on [wed-development] side-projects, I personally don’t agree to do studies for free. I remember people asking me to make websites, only to back out when I told them that I charge even for the studies. I only agree to do multiple studies for free only if there’s already a contract saying that I already got the project – and even then, I usually limit it to three… anything more and they start paying more. If the budget is bigger, then maybe I can even throw in a couple of freebies. But basically you get what you pay for. If you don’t pay for much… you don’t get much. Simple as that. I’m not sure how it is with the music industry, but as far as my line of work goes… this method seems to be effective in protecting ourselves.

Because let’s face it, Philippine business culture is very abusado; they usually like to milk you for more than your wroth – and the feel justified in doing so because everyone else allows themselves to be screwed over. These tactics aren’t new to me.

If you approach me for work, then you obviously know (or should already know) what I’m capable of. If not, then ask for a portfolio of my past works… don’t waste my time trying to prove myself to you by making something new specifically for you… only to find out that you had those designs to be implemented by some cheaper outfit. Once I start creating anything new, the clock on the project should start ticking then, and ends when I finish the project.

I think Mr. Granada has every right to claim IP on his work. If his study didn’t pass, then it didn’t – and we shouldn’t be hearing anything similar to it. Because if they wanted such a similar sounding take… that means that it did pass. And if they claim it didn’t pass entirely, then it’s only fair to have him further revise his work until it sounded like that. Not take that same work and pass it to another person/outfit.