Copyright Issues in Influencers' Music Usage: Does a Song Played in a Story Have the Same Legal Consequences as a Cover Performed at a Concert?

At first glance, it might seem similar for someone to record a short video of themselves listening to their favorite song in their car and share it on their Instagram story, for an influencer to use the same song as background music for a paid brand advertisement, and for a professional artist to perform someone else's song at a concert with thousands of people.

In all three cases, a musical work belonging to someone else is being used. However, the purpose of the use, the audience it reaches, its commercial nature, the source of the sound recording used, and how the work is published are all different. Therefore, the three uses do not lead to the same legal outcome.

The basic distinction can be made as follows:

• Listening to a song personally is, as a rule, not a copyright infringement.
• Sharing the video where the song is heard on social media can go beyond personal listening.
• Using the song in an influencer advertisement could be considered commercial use and therefore requires broader permissions.
• Singing someone else's song at a concert concerns the copyright holder's representation rights.
• Recording and sharing concert performances online introduces new rights separate from live performances.

Therefore, statements like "I didn't sing the song, it was just playing in the background of the video" or "I just did a cover" do not, in all cases, absolve one of copyright responsibility.

There is no single copyright on music

In everyday life, a song is perceived as a single work. However, legally, multiple individuals may hold different rights to the same song.

For example, in a popular song;

• The person who wrote the lyrics,
• The person who composed the piece,
• The performing artist who sang the song,
• The phonogram producer who prepared the sound recording,
• music publisher or production company that acquired the rights

They may have separate rights.

According to Article 3 of the Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works, all types of musical compositions, both vocal and instrumental, are considered musical works. The law also protects performing artists and phonogram producers as related rights holders. Therefore, the rights to the lyrics and composition of a song should be distinguished from the rights to a specific sound recording released to the market.

For example, when an influencer includes the original recording of a famous song in their video, they may be using not only the rights of the composer and lyricist, but also the rights of the performer and the phonogram producer featured in the recording.

Conversely, if the influencer sings and records the song themselves, they are not using the original phonogram. However, since they retain copyright to the lyrics and music, this does not automatically make the use permissible.

What rights come into play when music is used?

When music is used in a social media video or concert, four main financial rights are important.

Reproduction rights

Recording a song using a phone, camera, computer, or other recording device can be considered reproduction. Article 22 of the law grants the copyright holder the right to reproduce a work, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently. Recording sound within a video can also be considered within this scope.

Right of representation

The live performance, playing, or singing of a musical work in a public place concerns the right of representation. The performance of someone else's song at a concert is a typical example of this right. According to Article 24 of the Copyright Law, the right to play, read, or perform a work in public places belongs exclusively to the author.

Right of public transmission

Uploading a song to Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, or similar digital platforms, making it accessible to individuals at their chosen time and place, raises the issue of the right of public transmission. Article 25 of the Copyright Law grants the copyright holder the authority to permit or prohibit the public presentation of the work, including digital transmission.

Processing rights

The alteration of a song's lyrics, its translation into another language, its significant rearrangement, or the creation of a new version by interfering with its original structure may fall under the right of adaptation. Musical arrangements and compositions are listed as examples of works subject to adaptation under the law. As a rule, the right of adaptation belongs to the original author.

These rights are independent of each other. Obtaining permission to perform at a concert does not automatically grant permission for the concert to be recorded and published on YouTube. Similarly, the fact that a song can be legally streamed on a digital music platform does not mean it can be used in an advertising video.

A Normal Person Sharing While Listening to Music

Listening to music at home, in one's car, or in a setting with friends falls under the scope of personal use, as long as it is obtained from a lawful source.

However, the situation changes when someone records a video of themselves listening to music and posts it on social media. Because now they are not just listening to the song; they are recording a part of the song into the video and making it available to others.

Article 38 of the Turkish Copyright Law permits the reproduction of all intellectual and artistic works for personal use only, within certain limits and without profit motive. However, this use cannot harm the legitimate interests of the rights holder without justifiable cause and cannot be contrary to the normal use of the work. Public social media sharing, in most cases, cannot be considered solely within the scope of "personal use".

For example, someone listening to music on their own phone is for personal use. But creating a video of the entire song, along with its cover art, and sharing it with their followers goes beyond the boundaries of personal listening.

Music heard incidentally in the background

A video shot in a cafe where a song can be heard in the distance should not be judged in the same way as a video where a song is deliberately played loudly through a phone speaker and becomes the main element of the video.

Music;

• If it is heard for a very short time,
• If it's not the main topic of the video,
• If it was recorded by chance,
• If it remains so far in the background that it is unrecognizable,
• If it does not create economic value for the sharing

The legal and practical risks may be lower.

However, there is no general rule in Turkish law stating that "music is permissible if used for less than ten seconds." There is no fixed time limit that automatically makes usage of five, ten, or fifteen seconds legally permissible.

Meta explains that sharing music that users have purchased or recorded in the background with their own devices may constitute copyright infringement; simply stating the copyright holder's name, not profiting from the transaction, or not intending to infringe is not sufficient on its own.

Sharing with close friends

Content sent only to family members or a few close friends with whom you have a genuine personal connection is not the same as content shared on a public account with thousands of followers.

Whether the element of "public" is present in a post made to a very limited and personal circle is debatable in the specific case. However, the fact that the account is public, that most of the followers have no personal connection with the person who made the post, and that an indefinite number of people can access the content strengthens the assessment of it being a public post.

Furthermore, even if the sharing is only done to a "close friends" list, uploading the music to the platform may also have consequences in terms of copyright and the platform's terms of use.

Is it okay to use the platform's music library?

Platforms like Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok offer users libraries where they can add music to their content. However, just because a song appears on a platform doesn't mean that user can use it freely and for any purpose.

The scope of the license is:

• Whether the account is personal or business,
• The content has an advertising nature
• Whether the usage is organic sharing or paid advertising,
• The country where the post was published,
• The usage period of the song,
• Transferring content to other platforms,
• Posting promoted as an advertisement later on

It may depend on factors such as these.

Meta's music guidelines state that the use of non-commercial or non-personal music is prohibited unless appropriate licenses are obtained. Meta also explains that if music rights change, previously published posts, stories, or Reels videos may be muted or blocked from viewing.

TikTok explicitly states that businesses and brands should not use the general music library for commercial purposes, but should utilize the Commercial Music Library for commercial content. According to TikTok, if original audio from other users or publicly licensed audio is to be used in commercial content, the appropriate license must also be verified.

Therefore, it shouldn't be assumed that an influencer who can add songs to their personal account can use the same song in a brand collaboration video.

Why Does an Influencer's Use of Music Carry a Higher Risk?

Influencer content often has economic purposes. An influencer;

• You can charge a fee for sharing
• You can obtain free products or services,
• You can earn commission on sales,
• It can increase brand visibility
• You can promote the content as an advertisement,
• Music can increase ad views and engagement rates.

In this case, music is not merely an element incidentally heard in the background of daily life. It becomes a commercial tool that shapes the emotion, tempo, and impact of the advertisement on the consumer.

For example, an influencer could leverage the emotional resonance of a well-known love song in a jewelry advertisement. Similarly, using a popular and energetic song in a sports brand's advertisement can increase the commercial value of the campaign.

This usage often refers to the merging of a musical work with visuals, a process frequently described as "synchronization." While the right to synchronization is not regulated under a separate article in Turkish law, it may require permission under the rights of reproduction, adaptation, and public transmission, depending on the nature of the use.

Which rights holders should an influencer obtain permission from?

If the original song recording is to be used, there are usually two separate layers of rights:

Copyright: The rights of the lyricist, composer, or the music publisher or professional association that manages their rights.

Rights holders of the recording: the performing artist and the phonogram producer or the production company that has acquired these rights.

Even if the influencer re-records the song themselves, the rights to the lyrics and composition remain. While they may not have exercised their rights to a specific phonogram because they didn't use the original recording, the necessary permissions from the copyright holder must still be considered before the new recording can be included in the advertising video.

Tagging the singer does not constitute permission

The fact that an influencer tags the artist's account, writes the song title, or includes the statement "All rights reserved to the artist" in their post does not constitute permission for use.

While specifying the rights holder may be important in some cases for the protection of moral rights, it does not replace permission to use financial rights.

Likewise;

"I love this music very much."

"It is not intended to infringe copyright."

"I only used a short section of the song."

"I did not earn any direct revenue from this content."

Such statements do not automatically render a use requiring permission legally permissible.

Can the brand also be held responsible along with the influencer?

If a post using music was created as part of a brand collaboration, the responsibility may not lie solely with the influencer.

The ad copy and video may have been prepared by the brand or an advertising agency. The music may have been selected by the brand, sent to the influencer, or approved by the brand before the content was published.

In this situation;

• Influencer,
• The advertising brand,
• Advertising agency,
• The production company,
• Others who publish content as paid advertising

They may be held responsible according to their contributions in the specific case.

Including a clause in an influencer contract stating "All copyright responsibility related to the music belongs to the influencer" does not prevent the rights holder from directly contacting the brand or other responsible parties. Such a provision is primarily important in terms of the internal relationship between the parties and their recourse claims.

According to Article 52 of the Turkish Copyright Law, contracts relating to financial rights must be in writing, and the rights transferred or permitted for use must be clearly indicated. Therefore, instead of a general statement such as "The right to use the music has been acquired," matters such as reproduction, performance, public transmission, advertising, digital media, territory, and duration must be explicitly regulated.

Can an artist sing someone else's song at a concert?

When an artist performs a song by another artist at a concert, it is commonly referred to as a "cover." Covering songs is not prohibited in itself. However, if the work is still under copyright protection, the necessary performance permits for live performance are required.

Article 24 of the Copyright Law grants the author the right to use a work by performing or playing it in a public place. Concerts, festivals, nightclubs, or paid events attended by thousands of people are clearly public performances.

According to Article 41 of the Copyright Law, public venues, whether with or without admission, must obtain permission from the rights holders or their representative professional associations for the use of works and performances, and must pay the financial rights fees stipulated in the contract.

In Türkiye, MESAM, MSG, MÜ-YAP, MÜYOR-BİR, and other professional associations operate in the field of rights management regarding musical works and related rights. The role of these professional associations is to manage the rights of their members, collect licensing fees, and distribute them to rights holders.

Should the artist or the organizer obtain permission?

In concerts, the licensing process is mostly handled by the concert organizer, venue operator, or company organizing the event. Article 41 of the Copyright Law also imposes an obligation to obtain permission and pay fees for performances in public places.

However, it cannot be said that the artist bears no responsibility whatsoever.

If the artist determines their own repertoire, decides which works to perform, and performs the works knowingly, they are the one directly performing the act of representation. The organizer must ensure in the contract that they have obtained the necessary licenses.

In its assessments of live music performances, the Supreme Court considers the professional performer's ability to determine their repertoire and whether the venue operator can interfere with the repertoire in determining liability and intent.

Therefore, the following should be clearly stipulated in the concert contract:

"Regarding the repertoire to be performed at the concert, the organizer will cover the representation permissions and copyright payments from the copyright holders and professional associations."

However, this provision does not automatically absolve the artist of all liability to third parties if they continue performing without authorization, knowing that they do not have a license.

Do I need to get permission from the original artist for a cover version?

It's not always the lyricist or composer who makes a song famous.

For example, a song might be performed by a famous artist, but the lyrics and music might belong to someone else. When performing a live cover, the representation rights of the copyright holders are of primary importance.

If the artist performs the song live with their own orchestra at a concert, they do not use the original sound recording. Therefore, as a rule, the original phonogram producer's rights to that particular recording are not exercised.

However, at the concert;

• If the original song recording is used as playback,
• If a sample has been taken from the original recording,
• If the artist's published phonogram is played directly,
• If live vocals are added over the original recording

The related rights of the phonogram producer and original performers may also come into question.

Can the lyrics or music of a cover song be changed?

An artist can perform another artist's song with a different interpretation while preserving its basic structure. However, if the lyrics are changed, translated into another language, new sections are added, or the work is significantly rearranged, then adaptation rights come into play.

For example;

• Translating a Turkish song into a foreign language,
• Adding new verses to the song lyrics,
• Turning words into advertising slogans,
• Substantial alteration of the work for a purpose other than parody,
• Creating original arrangements that alter the fundamental characteristics of the music

Processing permission may also be required.

Attribution of the author's name and preservation of the integrity of the work are also within the scope of moral rights. Article 15 of the Copyright Law grants the author the right to determine how their name is attributed, while Article 16 allows them to prevent unauthorized alterations to the work. Alterations that impair the quality of the work or damage the author's honor and reputation may constitute a violation of moral rights, even if financial permission has been obtained.

Singing at a concert and sharing a concert video are not the same

An artist may have legally performed another artist's song at a licensed concert. However, recording the performance, live streaming it, or subsequently uploading it to digital platforms constitutes a separate exercise of rights.

Recording the concert invokes the right of reproduction, while live streaming or uploading it to YouTube invokes the right of public transmission.

If the performance license obtained for the concert only covers live performance;

• The preparation of the concert film,
• The song was released as a YouTube video,
• The performance will be published on Spotify or similar platforms
• The use of the images in the commercial,
• Live broadcasting via television or the internet

Additional permission may be required.

In the Turkish Copyright Law, financial rights are independent of each other. Permission granted for one right does not automatically encompass other rights. Furthermore, in financial rights agreements, the usage rights must be specified separately and in writing.

On YouTube, some cover videos may remain on the system through content ID requests from music publishers, with advertising revenue being shared with the rights holders. However, this does not automatically mean that every cover video is legally compliant or that the uploader has acquired all the rights.

What happens if the song's copyright protection period has expired?

According to the Turkish Copyright Law, the protection period for financial rights generally lasts for the lifetime of the author and for 70 years after their death. If there is more than one author, the period is calculated from the death of the last surviving author.

Live performance of a composition whose copyright has expired may be permissible in terms of the author's financial rights.

However, there is an important distinction here: even if an old composition has become public domain, a specific recent recording of that composition may still be protected by the associated rights of the performer and phonogram producer.

For example, a classical piece composed a century ago being performed live by the artist themselves is not the same as adding a contemporary recording of the same piece by a modern orchestra to an advertising video. In the former case, the copyright on the composition may have expired; in the latter case, the associated rights to the specific recording used may still be valid.

Legal Consequences of Copyright Infringement

The copyright holder may have various claims regarding the unauthorized use of music.

Removal of content and cessation of infringement

The rights holder may request the removal of social media content, the muting of sound, the cessation of an advertising campaign, or the prevention of a concert performance.

The platform may also mute or block content, transfer revenue to the rights holder, or impose sanctions on the account within its own copyright mechanisms. Meta states that content may be muted or blocked if music rights change or if usage does not comply with the rules.

Multiples of the license fee

According to Article 68 of the Copyright Law, in cases of unauthorized performance, reproduction, or public transmission, the rights holder may claim up to three times the amount they would have requested if a contract had been concluded between the parties, or up to three times the prevailing licensing fee.

This demand can reach significant amounts, especially in high-budget influencer campaigns. The number of ad views, duration, the recognition of the music used, the campaign budget, and the scope of use can all affect the determination of the licensing fee.

Material and moral compensation

The copyright holder may claim compensation for the material damages suffered if fault is found. Failure to credit the author, use of the work in an advertisement that damages its reputation, or unauthorized alteration of the work may also give rise to a claim for moral damages.

Article 70 of the FSEK (Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works) allows for the claim for material and moral damages, as well as the possibility of demanding that the profits obtained by the infringer be given to the rightful owner.

criminal responsibility

Article 71 of the Copyright Law stipulates that anyone who adapts, represents, reproduces, or transmits a work to the public through digital means without the written permission of the copyright holder shall be punished with imprisonment or a judicial fine if the elements of the crime and intent are present.

However, not every misuse of music automatically leads to a criminal conviction. Whether the individual acted knowing that the work was protected and that the necessary permission was not obtained is also assessed in terms of criminal liability.

The Supreme Court's Criminal General Assembly, while acknowledging the existence of rights of public performance and transmission in the use of music in public places, also examined whether the perpetrator was aware of the broadcast content and whether intent was present in the specific case. Legally, purchasing a music recording only provides personal benefit; this does not grant the right to perform the recording in a public place.

The Key Difference Between the Three Situations

Ordinary social media user

Listening to music for personal use is permitted. However, distributing a video of the song to a wide audience may infringe on copyrights and public transmission rights. While the risk is lower if the music is heard incidentally, briefly, and vaguely, there is no automatic "short-term use" exception.

Influencer

The risk is higher because the content is for commercial purposes. The platform's personal music library may not cover advertising. If an original recording is used, the rights of the performer and phonogram producer may also need to be cleared in addition to the copyright holder. The brand and agency may also be held liable depending on the specific circumstances.

Artist performing a cover at the concert

Live performances concern the right to represent. As a rule, the organizer or public venue must obtain the necessary licenses from the copyright holders or professional associations. However, the artist who determines the repertoire and is aware of its unauthorized use may also be held liable. Recording or publishing the performance online may also require additional permissions for reproduction and public transmission.

What should be stipulated in influencer and artist contracts?

In influencer advertising contracts or concert contracts, simply stating "Copyrights will be obtained" is not sufficient. The following points must be clearly defined:

• The name of the musical piece to be used,
• Lyricist and composer rights,
• Whether or not the original phonogram will be used,
• Performer and phonogram producer permissions,
• Whether the content used is advertising or organic content,
• The social media platforms to be used,
• Paid advertising and promotion rights,
• Duration and geographical scope of use,
• Who will obtain the representation rights for the concert?
• Whether the concert will be recorded or not,
• Live broadcast and subsequent digital broadcast rights,
• Whether or not the song will be changed or arranged,
• Content removal and defense process in case of copyright infringement
• Provisions regarding compensation and recourse.

An influencer shouldn't simply trust a brand's statement, "You can use this music"; they should request documentation detailing which rights the brand acquired from which rights holders and for which uses.

The artist should also ensure, through a contract, that the concert organizer has entered into the necessary licensing agreements with professional associations.

Conclusion: Listening to a song is one thing, presenting a song to an audience is another

There is a legal difference between a person listening to music at home or in their car and sharing that music on social media. Similarly, an influencer using a song as part of a commercial campaign to promote a product does not grant the same rights as an artist performing a cover on stage.

For the average user, the limited, incidental, and non-commercial nature of the sharing is important, while for an influencer, the advertising purpose, the audience reached, and the economic contribution of the music to the campaign are paramount. In the case of a concert, the right to represent the audience and the licensing obligations of the public venue are decisive factors.

However, the common point is this:

Just because a song is easily found online, is in the platform's library, has been purchased, or has the artist's name listed, doesn't mean it can be freely used for any purpose.

If an influencer uses someone else's song in a brand advertisement, they must control the reproduction and public broadcasting rights, as well as the phonogram and performer rights. If an artist performs someone else's song at a concert, the organizer must have obtained the representation license. If the concert is to be recorded or broadcast, new permissions beyond the live performance permission must be obtained.

Therefore, the answer to the question "Will I face copyright infringement?" cannot be given solely based on how many seconds of the song were used. The following questions should be answered first:

Where was the music used, to whom was it distributed, was there a commercial purpose, was the original recording used, and from whom was permission obtained for which rights?