Why Dancing with the Stars Often Uses Cover Songs Instead of Original Recordings

As Dancing with the Stars returns for its 35th season, viewers will once again see celebrity contestants perform elaborate routines to instantly recognizable songs. But attentive listeners may notice that many of the performances use newly recorded covers rather than the original recording. The reason is not that a cover is “free”; it is that a cover can eliminate the need to license one of the two distinct copyrights involved in pairing music with television.

For a show built around numerous short, highly choreographed musical performances, that distinction can make music clearance more efficient, less expensive, and more controllable. A production that uses a cover still needs permission to use the underlying song, but it may avoid licensing the famous artist’s particular recording.

Two copyrights in one song

A commercially released song commonly involves two separate copyrighted works:

A synchronization license authorizes the use of the underlying composition in timed relation with visual content, such as a television episode, film, commercial, or online video. A master-use license separately authorizes use of the particular preexisting recording—such as the original studio recording made famous by a recording artist. Neither right is covered by a compulsory license for audiovisual uses; they are generally directly negotiated with the relevant owners.

For example, if a show wants to use the original recording of “I Wanna Dance with Somebody,” it would generally need both:

•     A sync license from the owner(s) of the composition.
•    A master-use license from the owner of Whitney Houston’s specific sound recording.

Those are separate clearances because the song and recording are separate assets.

What changes when the show uses a cover?

If the production commissions or records a new performance of a familiar song, it does not use the original artist’s master recording. It is using a new sound recording created specifically for the production.

That changes the licensing analysis:

The key point is that the cover performer is singing the same underlying song, the melody and lyrics are still protected. The production must still clear the composition with the relevant publisher(s). But by commissioning its own recording, the production doesn’t need to obtain permission to use the record label’s original master. Copyright guidance makes this distinction explicit: a sync license can permit a creator to record and use a cover in audiovisual content, but it does not grant rights to the preexisting recording associated with the artist.

In other words, a cover may reduce one category of rights clearance, but it does not erase music-licensing obligations.

Why this can reduce the fee

In television and film music licensing, a sync license and a master-use license for an original recording are frequently negotiated on a most favored nations (MFN) basis, meaning that the license fees for the composition and the master recording are equal.

That means a production seeking both rights may face two related licensing payments:

Total music clearance cost = sync fee + master-use fee  

If the production uses a newly created cover recording instead of the artist’s original master, it may avoid paying for the original master-use right: 
Cover-version clearance cost = sync fee + cost of creating/licensing new master 

The result is not necessarily an exact 50 percent savings in every deal. Music licensing is negotiated, and pricing may depend on factors including song popularity, duration of use, territory, media, episode count, promotional use, streaming availability, exclusivity, and the leverage of each rightsholder. But where the sync and master fees would have been matched under an MFN arrangement, replacing the original master can materially reduce the amount paid to outside rights holders.

The production also gains a practical benefit: it can tailor the new recording to the dance. A cover can be shortened, extended, re-orchestrated, shifted in tempo, or arranged around choreography, subject to the scope of the composition clearance and any approval rights negotiated with the publisher.

The misconception: Covers are not free

One of the most persistent misunderstandings in music licensing is the belief that using a cover song avoids copyright issues. It does not.

A new cover recording may avoid the need to license the original artist’s specific sound recording, but the production still uses someone else’s musical composition. That means the music publisher or other composition owner must still authorize synchronization of the song with the televised dance performance.

For a broadcast production, the relevant questions include:

•    Who owns or administers the composition?
•    Are there multiple songwriters or publishers that must approve the use?
•    Does the requested use include broadcast, streaming, social-media clips, advertising, and international distribution?
•    Does the new arrangement exceed the scope of the proposed license or require separate approval?
•    Who owns the newly made cover recording, and can the production reuse it in future programming or promotion?
•    Are there performer, union, residual, or reuse issues associated with producing the new track?

A cover therefore shifts the rights-clearing strategy. It does not eliminate it.

Why this matters for entertainment productions

For a performance-heavy show such as Dancing with the Stars, music is not merely background. It is part of the choreography, editorial pacing, promotion, clips, streaming distribution, and audience experience. Each additional use can add contractual and rights-management complexity.

Using a cover version can give the show a recognizable song while preserving more control over the recording used in the episode. The production still pays the publisher for the right to synchronize the composition with the performance, but it may avoid a separate license for the original label-owned master. That distinction helps explain why viewers may hear a familiar song performed in a version that sounds close to, but not exactly like, the recording they know.

For producers, brands, networks, and creators, the broader lesson is straightforward: before pairing a song with video, identify which rights are being used. The underlying composition and the sound recording are different assets, often owned by different parties, and each can require its own permission.

Need help clearing music or structuring a music-rights deal? Kronenberger Rosenfeld advises artists, labels, publishers, production companies, platforms, and other entertainment-industry businesses on music licensing, copyright, recording and publishing agreements, and rights disputes. Contact us today to discuss your project’s music-rights needs. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Do TV shows like Dancing with the Stars need permission to use cover songs?

Yes. A TV show using a cover song still needs a sync license for the underlying composition, the song’s lyrics and music. A cover may avoid licensing the original recording, but it does not make the song free to use.

What is the difference between a sync license and a master-use license?

A sync license permits a production to pair a song’s underlying composition with visual content. A master-use license permits use of a specific sound recording, such as the original artist’s studio track.

Why do shows use cover versions of popular songs?

A new cover recording can let a production use a recognizable composition without licensing the original, label-owned master. It can also provide more flexibility to tailor the music for choreography, editing, and timing.

Is it cheaper to use a cover song in a TV show?

Often, but not automatically. A production still pays for the sync license, but may avoid the separate fee for the original master-use license. When sync and master fees are negotiated on an MFN basis, using a new cover can substantially reduce external licensing costs.

Do I need a master-use license if I record my own cover?

No, because you are using a new recording. However, you still need the publisher’s permission to use the underlying composition in audiovisual content.

Can I use a cover song in an advertisement or social-media video?

Not without appropriate permission. A newly recorded cover may avoid original-master clearance, but the brand or creator still needs a sync license for the composition. The license should cover the planned media, platforms, territories, term, and promotional uses. Social media platforms such as Instagram have extensive pre-cleared licenses for music used in connection personal accounts, but brand accounts and sponsored posts usually require separate licenses from the appropriate rights holders.

When should a production company seek music licensing counsel?

Ideally, before filming, recording, or launching a campaign. Counsel can help identify rights holders, negotiate sync and master licenses, evaluate cover-song strategies, define digital and international rights, and reduce infringement and distribution risk.