INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Music publishing composition records for AI review
A song’s composition and the recording of that song are separate works in U.S.
NAICS 512230 · Music Publishers
A song’s composition and the recording of that song are separate works in U.S. Copyright Office materials. A publisher can create a synthetic catalog to test whether an assistant identifies the composition record and flags any separate master or territory question. U.S. Copyright Office on compositions and recordings
Invent a composition, two recordings and two partial grants with different scope. Give one grant an end date. Ask which rights are documented for the practice question, what percentage or territory remains unresolved, and which record belongs to a recording instead. Score the source and scope separately. Use original text or no music files.
Exclude real lyrics, contracts, identifiers, royalty amounts and split records. Ask the relevant rights holders and legal reviewers before using any real catalog or assets.
Describe a composition evidence benchmark
Original Fiund exercise
A composition grant and a master grant cover different records
An invented composition has two dummy recordings and partial practice grants. No music, lyrics, real identifiers, royalty figures or actual splits are used.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| MU1 | Catalog map | Composition C1 has recordings M1 and M2, each with a separate master-source record. |
| MU2 | Composition practice grants | G-A covers 60% of C1's stated U scope in North through day 20. Remaining composition scope unrecorded. |
| MU3 | Master practice grant | M1 master permitted for U in North through day 30. No M2 master grant supplied. |
Question for the model
What scope is documented for a C1/M1 U request in North on day 15, and what would be unsupported about calling the combination fully cleared?
Show the reference answer and checks
MU2 documents only 60% of the stated composition scope for C1 on day 15, leaving the remaining scope unresolved. MU3 separately supports M1's master for that time and territory. The master grant does not fill the composition gap, and C1's partial grant does not supply M2's absent master permission. Report each work and grant independently rather than declaring the requested combination fully covered.
- Using a master grant to resolve an unprovided composition share.
- Applying M1's permission to M2 because both record the same composition.
Fields to preserve
- Composition-to-recording relation
- Separates the underlying work from each master.
- Share, territory and term
- Limits the stated composition coverage.
- Master-specific source and purpose
- Keeps recording permission independent of composition scope.
Test another case
Ask about day 25, when the composition grant has expired but M1's master term remains active. Require both a scope and a term check.
Use invented catalog entries and original text only. Exclude real lyrics, contracts, catalog IDs, royalty reports and ownership-split records.
Discuss a contribution
Describe the sources you control, the task they could support and what has already been checked. Use the existing-data assessment for an archive or the collection brief for a new recording project. The contributor agreement defines Fiund’s licensing authority and compensation. A guide or fictional exercise does not establish an accepted collection or a sale.