Pat Boone, Fats Domino, Little Richard etc.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by boogle, Oct 6, 2010.

  1. boogle

    boogle Guest

    Can someone help clarify if Pat Boone did pay royalties for his covers of Aint that a shame, tutti frutti, etc. or did he get around it by change the lyrics a bit. If he did pay royalties does anyone know how much he had to pay?

  2. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    Apr 4, 2006
    Blacksburg, VA
    Boone would have had to pay the publisher of the song "mechanical" royalties of so many cents per song per record. The publisher would have to pay the songwriter. There is a legal "compulsory rate" which is effectively the maximum rate. A lower rate could be negotiated - and might well have been for Boone.
  3. dvdhawk

    dvdhawk Well-Known Member

    Dec 18, 2008
    Western Pennsylvania, USA
    To add to Bob's answer:

    I would have to assume Pat Boone's record company would have legally been required to pay the mechanical royalty rate of the day. (Which from 1909 until 1976 was 2-cents per copy sold of each song.)

    Here's a link to some of the legal history of US copyright law as provided by an entertainment lawyer.

    If you're asking in hopes of recording someone else's material the Harry Fox Agency is the best one-stop place to handle everything you need to do so legally. Harry Fox Agency

    2010 mechanical rates are 9.1 Cents per copy for songs 5 minutes or less

    1.75 Cents per minute or fraction thereof, per copy for songs over 5 minutes.

    If you're asking to find out if some minor changes in the words change ownership of the song - the answer is no. Pat Boone's version is clearly recognizable as a derivative version. Weird Al can completely change the words, but still has to pay the original composer because his version is still recognizable.

    Hope that helps.

Share This Page