Perspective | Is "original singer" a legal right?
Published:
2025-08-01
Recently, singer Zhang and Wang have been embroiled in a heated controversy over the original singer of the song "Annual Rings." This article will not delve into gossip, but will analyze from a legal and commercial perspective the role of the "original singer" and introduce the legal relationship between the copyright holder of a song and the singer.
Recently, singer Zhang and Wang have been involved in a heated dispute over “Annual Rings” a song, concerning the original singer. This article will not delve into gossip, but will analyze from legal and commercial perspectives the role of the "original singer," and further introduce the legal relationship between the copyright holder of a song and the singer.
"Original Singer" is not a legal concept
1. Who is the copyright holder of a song?
Generally, the creation and release of a song involves at least the composer, lyricist, performer, and recording producer. Of course, in many cases, the number of these parties varies. For example, the composer and lyricist may be the same person, and the recording producer may be a large team. The authors and performers may also be more complex. For example, the composer and lyricist may sometimes be the same person, and a singer-songwriter may be a "three-in-one" combination of composer, lyricist, and performer. Performers themselves, besides singers, also include guitarists, drummers, and other instrumentalists, backing vocalists, etc., involved in the performance. However, for the sake of simplicity, we will simply use these four parties to represent them.
The Copyright Law has complex provisions regarding the rights of these parties. Simply put, the copyright of a song belongs to the composer and lyricist, which means that anyone who wants to sing this song must obtain authorization from the copyright holder, i.e., the composer and lyricist. In this case, Wang is the copyright holder of the lyrics and music, and Wang can naturally sing this song. At the same time, anyone else, including Zhang, who wants to sing this song must obtain Wang's permission. At the same time, the record company, as the producer of the recording product, also needs to obtain authorization from the composer and lyricist, Wang, if it wants to record Zhang's singing. Of course, from the current situation, this authorization was not problematic. Therefore, Zhang can sing this song, and the record company can also record and release Zhang's singing.
In short, unless there are other special contractual arrangements, the copyright holder of a song is the composer and lyricist. Anyone who wants to use this song must ultimately obtain the permission of the copyright holder. Next, we will discuss the rights of the performer and the recording producer.
2. What are the rights of the performer and the recording producer?
The rights of the performer and the recording producer are not copyrights, but rights related to copyrights. We usually call them neighboring rights Neighboring rights are rights established based on the labor of performers and recording producers in the dissemination of works.
The performer, i.e., the performer mentioned in the Copyright Law, actually has no rights to the song itself. They only obtain the right to sing the song within a certain scope with the permission of the copyright holder. At the same time, the singer's performance of this song gives them the performer's rights mentioned in the Copyright Law. Anyone who wants to use this performance (e.g., a record company wants to record the singer's performance, a television station wants to broadcast the singer's performance live) must obtain the singer's permission.
It should be noted here that the singer's rights are directed at "their performance," not the work itself. The act of singing does not give the singer any rights to the song itself. We will further discuss this later. From this perspective, if another singer (e.g., Wangzai Xiaoqiao in this case) wants to sing this song, obtaining permission from the performer Zhang is meaningless. To put it jokingly, after obtaining permission from Zhang and their record company, Wangzai Xiaoqiao can play this specific recording and lip-sync at their own concert, but if they actually sing, they may be infringing.
After obtaining permission from the copyright holder and the performer, the recording producer can record the performer's singing of this song. The finished product after recording is the "sound recording". Anyone who wants to use this sound recording (e.g., a TV drama wants to use this recording as an insert song, or a Bilibili UP master wants to use this recording as background music) must obtain permission from the recording producer.
3. Is there a legal difference between the original singer and a cover singer?
Here, we need to clarify a common understanding—it's not wrong, but a difference between legal understanding and common understanding. That is the concept of "cover". In fact, there is no concept of "cover" in law, and correspondingly, "original singer" is not a legal concept either. As mentioned earlier, the copyright holder of a song is generally the composer and lyricist of the song. Unless there are other special rights arrangements, singing a song requires obtaining permission from the copyright holder, not from other singers. That is to say, if a network singer covers Faye Wong's “As Promised” , they do not need Faye Wong's permission, but only the permission of the copyright holder of "As Promised" (lyricist Tang Tian and composer Qian Lei)—although we usually say that it is a "cover" of "Faye Wong's" song, legally speaking, it is actually "singing" "Tang Tian and Qian Lei's" song.
Covers in the commercial music industry may sometimes face more complex situations, such as rewriting lyrics. In 1989, Japanese singer Kondou Masahiko sang the song “Sunset Song” , with lyrics by Otsu Akira and music by Makaino Kouji. Later, Lin Zhenqiang used the melody of this song to rewrite the lyrics, creating "A Thousand Thousand Que Songs" which was sung by singer Vivian Chow. Here's a question for you: Who is the copyright holder of "A Thousand Thousand Que Songs"? Who does Vivian Chow need to obtain authorization from to sing it? Who does Leslie Cheung need to obtain authorization from to cover "A Thousand Thousand Que Songs" at his concert that same year?
Therefore, from a legal perspective, there is no difference between the original singer and a cover singer. "Original singer" has no legal meaning. So why is Zhang still fighting for the "only original singer"? This is because, while the original singer has no legal meaning, this identity has commercial value. The original singer is not a legal identity, but in the public's perception, it has strong identity attributes and traffic value. As mentioned above, although the copyright holder of a song is the composer and lyricist, we still habitually associate the song with the singer who first sang it. Faye Wong's "As Promised," Jacky Cheung's "Kiss Goodbye"... Every time people repeat these statements, they are essentially giving these stars (and the record companies and agencies behind them) a traffic boost and further binding them to these songs. At the same time, this binding will also bring a lot of actual benefits—for example, if a gala wants to find a singer to sing this song, the organizer will naturally first think of inviting the original singer, rather than finding another singer to cover the song. As an aside, we can still discuss whether "original singer," although it has no meaning under copyright law, involves personality rights under the Civil Code?
II. What does Wang's "withdrawal of authorization" mean?
1. Can Wang withdraw the authorization?
Here, we cannot see the specific contract text between these parties in this case, so we cannot judge whether Wang can actually withdraw the authorization legally. We can only wait for the disclosure of more information later. Because in the music business model, the composition of entities and authorization are far more complex than what we have discussed before. We will only introduce the legal issues here.
As mentioned earlier, Wang is the copyright holder, and Zhang sang this song with Wang's permission. For example, this is equivalent to Wang being the owner of a house and renting it to Zhang to live in. So, can Wang say from one day, "Starting next month, I won't rent it to you anymore, you move out"? This depends on how they agreed initially. If the two initially agreed to "permanent and irrevocable authorization," then Zhang can of course continue to live in this house (that is, continue to sing this song); conversely, if the two agreed to "monthly renewal," then Wang can of course ask Zhang to "move out next month" at any time. More complex situations are also possible. For example, if the two initially had "permanent and irrevocable authorization," but also agreed that Wang could revoke the authorization if Zhang violated the agreement, then further judgment is needed.
2. What will happen if the withdrawal is successful
Of course, from the current perspective, Zhang's team's statement is "You have no right to withdraw, I have the right to continue singing, but I won't sing anymore." We will only introduce the legal issues. If Wang can effectively withdraw the authorization, then Zhang will have no right to sing this song afterwards. However, it should be noted here that the rights of all of Zhang's performances before that will not be greatly affected.
As mentioned earlier, once a performer performs, they have the corresponding rights to that specific performance. For a song, there is only one copyright, but the performer's rights can be continuously generated and are independent. For example, Zhang sang once in the recording studio, 10 times at a concert, and once at a TV station's gala, then these 12 performances generated 12 performer's rights. Moreover, these rights are independent of each other. For example, the TV station can record singer Zhang's performance at the gala, but if the TV station wants to use Zhang's recording and video from the concert under any circumstances, it needs to obtain permission from Zhang again.
At the same time, since the performer's right is an independent right, even if Wang successfully withdraws the authorization, it only means that Zhang cannot sing "in the future," but the previous performances and recordings of the performances, their rights are still retained by Zhang and the record company. In particular, generally speaking, for the convenience of transactions, record companies, copyright holders, and singers often sign a "package authorization," that is, after the record company produces the recordings, they can independently authorize the use of these recordings without needing to obtain permission from the copyright holder again. Therefore, after the authorization is revoked, although Zhang cannot sing anymore, and the recording producer cannot record anymore, for the versions that have already been recorded, if a TV drama wants to use it as an insert song, it still only needs the permission of the record company and is no longer controlled by the copyright holder.
Summary
In fact, although the concept of traffic economy has only emerged in recent years, the public's understanding and the value of traffic have developed together with the entire entertainment industry. Thirty years ago, the A Thousand Nights Dispute " refers to the battle for the original singer's identity between Vivian Chow's "A Thousand Thousand Songs" and Anita Mui's "Sunset Song"—but in fact, both songs are works with new lyrics based on the Japanese song "Sunset Song." Therefore, this dispute between Zhang and Wang over the "original singer" is not a legal rights dispute, but a dispute over public perception and traffic. I will continue to pay attention to the development of this case, especially the handling of "revocation of authorization," and I will discuss it with you again when I have the opportunity.
Key words:
Related News
Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Region
Address: Floor 55-57, Jinan China Resources Center, 11111 Jingshi Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province
