# Copyright question for releases - Label or Artist **URL:** \ **Category:** MusicBrainz\ **Created:** [July 17, 2020, 8:59am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334 "2020-07-17T08:59:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![vzell](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/vzell/32/752_2.png) [@vzell](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/vzell)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 8:59am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/1 "2020-07-17T08:59:03Z")
Given the following release - [Release “Lucky Town” by Bruce Springsteen - MusicBrainz](https://musicbrainz.org/release/b20b4e54-84bb-3b96-ad09-f85fcad96f99) with “© 1992/℗ 1992 Bruce Springsteen” on the medium scan (outer area). Question: How to correctly add these as relationships in MusicBrainz ? Discogs uses a “Label (publishing entity) associated with the artist Bruce-Springsteen)”, see [https://www.discogs.com/label/266838-Bruce-Springsteen](https://www.discogs.com/label/266838-Bruce-Springsteen) for - Copyright © - Phonographic Copyright ℗ Should we artificially create such a label too or should we use the following two relationships: - copyrighted by: [Bruce Springsteen](https://musicbrainz.org/artist/70248960-cb53-4ea4-943a-edb18f7d336f) - phonographic copyright by: [Bruce Springsteen](https://musicbrainz.org/artist/70248960-cb53-4ea4-943a-edb18f7d336f) AND what about the following label [Bruce Springsteen Music](https://musicbrainz.org/label/8b8c0ddc-7800-43c3-8e3b-1ae338714872) ? Is this strictly for the concept of “Works” in MusicBrainz ? The corresponding Discogs label [https://www.discogs.com/label/421415](https://www.discogs.com/label/421415) says: Legal entitie that hold [Bruce Springsteen](https://www.discogs.com/artist/219986-Bruce-Springsteen) ℗ © rights Really confusing… thanks for enlightenment ---
**Author:** ![jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/jesus2099/32/36_2.png) [@jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/jesus2099)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 9:35am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/2 "2020-07-17T09:35:01Z")
In such a case, the artist itself can be used, there is no label names for these copyrights. Copy Bruce Springsteen artist URL and go to the release relationship editor. > [@vzell](#): > > © 1992 Bruce Springsteen Add a Copyright relationship between the release and Bruce Springsteen (paste your URL in the relationship target field). Set Begin and end date to 1992. > [@vzell](#): > > ℗ 1992 Bruce Springsteen Select all recordings (there is a checkbox for that) and batch add a Phonographic copyright relationship to Bruce Springsteen artist. Set Begin and end date to 1992. Write an edit note citing the copyright line and linking to the [package scan](https://musicbrainz.org/release/b20b4e54-84bb-3b96-ad09-f85fcad96f99/cover-art) that shows this and submit. 😉 If this or another release shows different (phonographic) copyrights, we can pile them all up (add them too). ---
**Author:** ![vzell](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/vzell/32/752_2.png) [@vzell](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/vzell)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 9:55am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/3 "2020-07-17T09:55:12Z")
Done … So the ℗ relationship always goes to the recordings itself ? Why is there this option in the AR-Editor for releases ? ---
**Author:** ![jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/jesus2099/32/36_2.png) [@jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/jesus2099)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 9:59am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/4 "2020-07-17T09:59:16Z")
I don’t know. I like them being at the same level as ISRC, in order to see them, whatever the release they are on, anytime. ---
**Author:** ![vzell](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/vzell/32/752_2.png) [@vzell](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/vzell)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 10:00am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/5 "2020-07-17T10:00:21Z")
good idea … thanks ---
**Author:** ![outsidecontext](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/outsidecontext/32/90_2.png) [@outsidecontext](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/outsidecontext)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 10:03am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/6 "2020-07-17T10:03:26Z")
I have seen releases which explicitly specify a copyright for the release itself (“Copyright this compilation …”). Also like with other relationships I guess this can be used if it is not entirely clear whether it applies to all the recordings or not. ---
**Author:** ![jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/jesus2099/32/36_2.png) [@jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/jesus2099)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 10:06am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/7 "2020-07-17T10:06:19Z")
> [@outsidecontext](#): > > I have seen releases which explicitly specify a copyright for the release itself (“Copyright this compilation …”). But this is for © (copyright), at the release level indeed. And ℗ (phonographic copyright), at the recording level (this is just my choice). ---
**Author:** ![yindesu](https://community.metabrainz.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/y/b77776/32.png) [@yindesu](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/yindesu)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 1:25pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/8 "2020-07-17T13:25:13Z")
I still think recording-level ℗ (phonographic copyright) credits was a mistake, and it was intentionally left out of my introduction of copyright relationships to this database. There are plenty of releases where the release-level ℗ (phonographic copyright) credit differs from the tracks. - The release credit may be a single year, usually based on the release date of the specific release. In releases where track-level data is available (certain digital stores and streaming services), the track-level data can be proven to contain various values. - The release credit may be a comma-delimited list of all the years and organizations used in the tracks. In that case, it’s clearly wrong to put other tracks’ years and organizations into the wrong tracks. - The release credit may say “This compilation ℗ (phonographic copyright)…”, in which case it is clearly a release-level credit, not a track-level credit. - The release-level credit may use region-specific organizations that don’t apply to the track-level. ---
**Author:** ![jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/jesus2099/32/36_2.png) [@jesus2099](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/jesus2099)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 5:12pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/9 "2020-07-17T17:12:16Z")
> [@yindesu](#): > > - […] In releases where track-level data is available (certain digital stores and streaming services), the track-level data can be proven to contain various values. > - The release credit may be a comma-delimited list of all the years and organizations used in the tracks. In that case, it’s clearly wrong to put other tracks’ years and organizations into the wrong tracks. > - The release credit may say “This compilation ℗ (phonographic copyright)…”, in which case it is clearly a release-level credit, not a track-level credit. In these cases, indeed, there can be various distinct recording relationships and/or a release relationship set from this release packages. It’s more rare than the usual case with only one phonographic notice, but I obviously use them when I see them (on compilations indeed). > [@yindesu](#): > > - The release credit may be a single year, usually based on the release date of the specific release. […] > - The release-level credit may use region-specific organizations that don’t apply to the track-level. This is the standard case and I think it’s ok and beneficial to have all the local phonographic copyrights and all the successive new dates that sometimes they get with rereleases. Just like it’s ok and beneficial that works gather all their ISWCs and local publishers along the world, various local royalty manager IDs (GEMA, SACEM, JASRAC, …). Just like it’s ok and beneficial that recordings accumulate all their successive ISRCs… ---
**Author:** ![tigerman325](https://community.metabrainz.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tigerman325](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/tigerman325)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2020, 6:38pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/copyright-question-for-releases-label-or-artist/486334/10 "2020-07-18T18:38:23Z")
I only add phonographic copyrights to the recordings if they are on singles or previously unreleased.