Song translationEN

Music Localization: Rights for Covers, Adaptations and Translations

Jack Clawson

Dictem Editorial

September 16, 2026

14 min

Music Localization: Rights for Covers, Adaptations and Translations

In short

Anyone localizing music moves between three legal regimes: a cover in Germany goes through GEMA without the author's consent, while every adaptation and every lyric translation requires the author's approval under § 23 UrhG. This article sorts out the licenses and shows what additionally needs to be clarified for streaming, downloads and audiovisual use.

Table of contents

Why music localization touches two layers of rights
Cover version: performing without the author's consent
Adaptation and arrangement: when consent becomes mandatory
Translating song lyrics: the underestimated license
Licensing internationally: GEMA, mechanical license and streaming
Music in audiovisual media: sync license and master rights
Rights clearance in practice: checklist for localization projects
Frequently asked questions
Sources

Key takeaways

Cover versions of published works do not require approval in Germany; licensing runs through GEMA.

Every arrangement and every lyric translation requires the author's consent under § 23 UrhG, even without commercial use.

In the USA, a statutory compulsory license applies at 13.1 cents per download; pure streaming is licensed by the platforms via The MLC.

Music in audiovisual media requires a sync license from the publisher and a master license from the label; a GEMA license does not cover synchronization.

Unauthorized translations and arrangements risk cease-and-desist letters, injunctions, disclosure claims and damages.

Why music localization touches two layers of rights

The scenario is an everyday occurrence in studios and editorial teams: a song is to run as the intro for a podcast in Spanish, as a jingle for a Japanese online course, or as the theme tune of a localized series. As soon as an existing recording or composition is converted into a new language version, you are legally moving on two separate levels, both of which must be cleared before the first second is published.

The first level is the work rights in the composition and lyrics. They belong to the authors, i.e. the composer and lyricist, and in practice are often held by a music publisher that administers the rights. The second level concerns the specific sound recording, the master. These rights are usually held by the record producer, i.e. the label, together with the performing artists and producers. Anyone using an existing recording needs both levels; anyone re-recording bypasses the master but still uses the original work.

Collecting societies cover only part of the usage. On the work level, GEMA licenses mainly performance, broadcast and making available to the public, while GVL remunerates the related rights in the recordings. The actual clearance for an arrangement or a synchronization, however, does not fall under these blanket schemes. And an important point for context: a cover version is not a new use that replaces the original. It still uses the protected work, just in a new recording.

Rights level	What it covers	Typical rights holder
Work rights (composition and lyrics)	Melody, harmony, song lyrics, translations and adaptations of the work	The author, frequently represented by the music publisher
Master level (sound recording)	The specific recording, e.g. the label master	Label or phonogram producer, performing artists, producers
Collecting societies	Public performance, broadcast, making available, streaming remuneration	GEMA (work level), GVL (recording level)

A cover is a new recording of an existing piece of music in which the melody and lyrics are largely preserved, possibly with different instruments or in a different arrangement. GEMA defines the boundary as follows: the cover version reproduces the original almost identically, with the recording limited to performing the work without any copyright-relevant change.[1]

For studios, this is the good news: covering already published works does not require approval in Germany. The licensing of the musical works is handled by GEMA, regardless of which artist performs the works, and the original authors receive the full remuneration collected by GEMA.[1] The cover performer derives no authorship claims to the work from this, and no participation as an adapter is granted. However, they do receive their own royalties from the neighbouring rights in their recording.

Two limits nevertheless remain. Insignificant changes to the recording are permissible under Section 39 of the German Copyright Act (UrhG), and the author cannot prevent them. If the adaptation, however, interferes with the shape of the work, the author may prohibit a distortion of the original under Section 14 UrhG. The boundary lies where the reinterpretation stops reproducing the work and starts reinterpreting it.

Cover in the strict sense: melody and lyrics are preserved, licensing runs through GEMA, no consent required.

Insignificant changes (Section 39 UrhG): permissible, e.g. small instrumental or dynamic adjustments.

Distortion (Section 14 UrhG): the author may prohibit it if the version distorts the original or alters its message.

Always check separately: the new recording creates its own neighbouring rights, which must be granted contractually.

As soon as the work is altered beyond mere re-performance, the legal situation changes fundamentally. Under Section 23 (1) UrhG, adaptations or other transformations of a work, in particular of a melody, may only be published or exploited with the author's consent.[2] GEMA cites as typical examples changes to the lyrics, the melodies, the instrumentation, the song structure or the rhythm, and emphasises that the transitions are fluid and must be clarified in each individual case.[1]

There is no detour via the collecting society for consent: it can only be obtained directly from the author or rights holder, not from GEMA.[1] If the work is published, the enquiry goes to the publisher, otherwise to the authors themselves. GEMA registers adaptations as independent works only if the adapter can present the adaptation permission from the original authors or the publisher. Without this permission, the version remains invisible in the repertoire, and no royalties flow.

An exception is free use: if the newly created work maintains a sufficient distance from the work used, it does not constitute an adaptation within the meaning of Section 23 UrhG.[2] This boundary is always assessed on a case-by-case basis in the event of a dispute. GEMA therefore recommends contacting the rights holder in advance in case of doubt to gain clarity.[1] For a localisation project with a fixed schedule, this is an argument for putting rights clearance at the beginning, not the end.

Criterion	Cover version	Arrangement / adaptation
Melody and lyrics	largely preserved	are transformed (lyrics, melody, structure, rhythm)
Author's consent	not required	mandatory under Section 23 UrhG
Licensing	via GEMA	only directly from the author or publisher
GEMA registration as an independent work	not applicable	only with a submitted adaptation permission

Translating song lyrics: the underestimated licence

Of all forms of music localization, lyric translation is the most frequently underestimated. Legally, a translation is an adaptation of the work, and adaptations or other transformations of a work may only be published or exploited with the consent of the author.[3][4] Anyone who translates English song lyrics and wants to publish the translation therefore asks the rights holders for permission, usually the music publisher that administers the rights for Germany. Because the law focuses on publication and exploitation, the consent requirement does not depend on whether the publication is commercial.

A second layer further complicates the chain of rights: a creative translation is itself protected. Under Section 3 of the German Copyright Act (UrhG), translations and other adaptations of a work that constitute personal intellectual creations of the adapter are protected as independent works, without prejudice to the copyright in the adapted work. The translator can thus be the author of their language version. The rights of use in that version therefore need to be regulated contractually, even when the translation was created on commission.

Protection of the original only ends when the statutory term of protection expires: copyright expires seventy years after the death of the author.[5] Where there are multiple authors, the last to die counts – for musical works, typically the lyricist or composer with the latest date of death. Anyone who overlooks these deadlines and publishes a protected translation without permission risks the usual consequences of a copyright infringement: a cease-and-desist letter, a declaration to cease and desist, and claims for information and damages plus the costs of legal enforcement.

Translation = adaptation: publication only with the consent of the author or publisher.

Commercial or not: the consent requirement does not depend on commercialization.

Creative translation: its own copyright under Section 3 UrhG; the translator becomes a co-author of the version.

Term of protection: 70 years after the death of the author; with multiple authors, after the last to die.

Risk in case of violations: cease-and-desist letter, declaration to cease and desist, disclosure and damages.

Licensing internationally: GEMA, mechanical license and streaming

Anyone who wants to exploit a localized version not only in Germany but also in the USA encounters a fundamentally different licensing logic. In the USA, once phonorecords of the work have been publicly distributed in the USA with the permission of the rights holder, a statutory compulsory licensing regime under Section 115 of the Copyright Act applies, the compulsory mechanical license: the songwriter therefore cannot refuse cover usage, as long as the statutory conditions are met and the compensation is paid.[6][7] In Germany, this compulsory licensing model does not exist for cover usage; there, licensing runs through GEMA and the author's consent for adaptations.

The current statutory rate for physical phonorecords and downloads is 13.1 cents per work, or alternatively 2.52 cents per minute of playing time, whichever amount is higher.[8] It was raised to that level on January 1, 2026 from the previous 12.7 cents, as part of the annual inflation adjustment by the Copyright Royalty Board. For pure streaming platforms such as Spotify, this procedure does not apply: they handle mechanical licensing through The MLC, which administers blanket licenses for interactive streaming and download services on behalf of the US licensing landscape.[9][10]

Two practical rules from US licensing are also relevant for international projects. First, every audio release of someone else's work in North America requires a mechanical license covering the formats used; in some cases separate licenses are needed for downloads and physical phonorecords, available for example through the licensing services of the Harry Fox Agency.[11] Second, every license refers to a specific recording: two different recordings of the same cover require two separate licenses, because each new recording constitutes its own reproduction of the work.

Aspect	Germany	USA
Covering after first release	Licensing via GEMA, no consent required	compulsory mechanical license, songwriter cannot refuse
Rate for physical releases and downloads	no fixed statutory rate, GEMA tariffs	13.1 cents per song (as of 2026)
Streaming	GEMA remuneration via platform agreements	blanket license via The MLC
Licensing downloads	via GEMA or the publisher	license must be acquired in advance, e.g. via HFA

Music in moving images: sync license and master rights

As soon as music is combined with visuals – in film, series, commercials or social clips – a third licence type comes into play: the sync licence, known in Germany as the film production right (Filmherstellungsrecht). GEMA makes clear that the consent of the rights holders must be obtained in advance, regardless of whether it is a major film production or a hobby project.[12] If an existing recording is also used, a master licence from the label is additionally required, which clears the specific recording.

A common misconception is that a GEMA licence covers this. It regularly covers uses such as performance or streaming remuneration, but not the synchronisation itself. GEMA likewise points out that, in addition to licensing, further rights may need to be obtained directly from the rights holders – for example, the label's related rights (Leistungsschutzrecht) when using original recordings, and the film production or adaptation right from the music publisher.[1] Nor is there a fixed second limit beyond which music would be free: even short snippets can be protected; legal certainty only comes with a suitable licence.

There is a statutory exception for upload platforms: under Section 10 of the UrhDaG, uses of up to 15 seconds per audio track are considered minor, provided they do not serve commercial purposes or only generate negligible revenue.[13] For advertising, this exception does not apply at all, because commercial purposes are expressly excluded. And for localised versions, an additional rule applies: language versions and territories must be explicitly regulated contractually, because under Section 31 (5) of the UrhG the scope of a usage right is determined by the underlying contractual purpose if the types of use are not individually named.[14]

Sync licence: rights in the composition and lyrics, agreed directly with the author or publisher.

Master licence: rights in the specific recording, agreed with the label.

GEMA licence: does not cover the synchronisation itself, only the subsequent public use.

UrhDaG: up to 15 seconds per audio track on upload platforms, expressly not for commercial purposes.

Localisation: language versions and territories belong in every licence contract.

Clearing rights in practice: a checklist for localisation projects

The preceding sections yield a workflow that has proven itself in practice. It does not begin with the question of which tool generates the translation, but with the legal classification of the project, because the answer determines whether a GEMA licence suffices or whether individual consent is required.

Classify: Is it a cover version, an adaptation or a translation? Only a pure cover is licensed via GEMA; adaptations and translations require the author's consent.

Clarify the chain of rights: Who represents the authors, is a publisher involved, who holds the master rights to the recording, and what role do GEMA and GVL play for the planned distribution?

Draft contracts to fit the purpose: format, channels, term, territories and language versions belong explicitly in every agreement, because anything not regulated remains with the rights holder.

Create an approval log: A reference version with defined edit boundaries documents which interventions the rights holder approved and protects against later claims of distortion.

Maintain metadata: Correct author credits in every version ensure that royalties flow correctly via GEMA, GVL and international sister organisations.

Especially with multilingual formats, the administrative effort grows with every additional language version: each version needs its documented licence, its author credits and its proof of approval. A structured content workflow such as with ContentHub Studio helps to document versions, licences and metadata centrally, instead of scattering them across file names, spreadsheets and email threads. This keeps the chain of rights traceable even when the project grows from three languages to thirty.

Frequently asked questions

Do I need permission to cover a song?

In Germany, no, as long as it is a genuine cover version: the work is merely performed again, with melody and lyrics remaining essentially unchanged. Licensing is handled by GEMA, and the original authors receive the full remuneration. Only once the lyrics, melody or structure are reworked does it become an adaptation, which requires the consent of the copyright holder.

May I translate song lyrics into another language?

Only with the consent of the author or rights holder. Under copyright law, a translation counts as an adaptation and requires approval under § 23 UrhG, regardless of whether the publication is commercial. While a creative translation can itself be protected as an independent work, this does not replace the permission required for the original.

Who grants the rights for an adaptation of a song?

Exclusively the author or rights holder themselves – in practice, usually the music publisher. GEMA cannot grant this consent and only registers adaptations if the adapter can present the adaptation licence from the original author or publisher.

Do I need a Mechanical License for a cover on Spotify?

For pure streaming in the USA, no: platforms such as Spotify and Apple Music license the works themselves via The Mechanical Licensing Collective. It is different for downloads and physical media: here a Mechanical License is required – in the USA at the statutory rate of 13.1 cents per unit, available through services such as Songfile or Easy Song.

Is a GEMA licence enough if music is used in a video?

No. GEMA covers public performance and streaming remuneration, but not the synchronisation of music with images. For that, you need a sync licence from the author or publisher, and if an existing recording is used, additionally a master licence from the label.

How long is a musical work protected by copyright?

In Germany and the EU, generally 70 years after the death of the author. Only after that may the work be freely translated, adapted and re-recorded. For translations, the protection period additionally applies to the translator as a co-author of the language version.

What happens if I publish a translation or adaptation without permission?

This constitutes a copyright infringement. Rights holders typically respond with cease-and-desist letters and declarations to cease and desist, where claims can run into the hundreds or thousands of euros; in extreme cases, preliminary injunctions and damages follow. Platforms may also block or demonetise content.