This is a totally off-topic niggle, but 'work product' is linguistically incorrect legal jargon and I hate how it's seeping into and diluting proper English.
Work product or evidence of work product, like a simple journal or diary of appointments with notes, "kept in the course of business," or similar whether protected or not, can mean many things.
The lyrics would be copyright or Intellectual Property. I guess I am not understanding the concept of "linguistically incorrect legal jargon." It is a legal term of art.
What don't you understand about 'linguistically incorrect'? 'Legal term of art' is synonymous to 'legal jargon.' As you understand that it is legal jargon concerning legal work, why are you applying it to song-writing? 'Product' means the end result. So the song is the product of the work, the 'work product'. Notes and things would be the by-product. Because by-product can be of particular importance in the law, lawyers made a special term (as they often do; there are a handful of professions in which there seems to be a particular effort to generate unnecessary jargon, apparently to make outsiders think the profession is more complex than it is), to refer to their by-product. Then other people, trying to sound fancy and educated, take those jargon terms and replace the common terms in other contexts and the specific meaning of words becomes diluted.
Sorry for O/T. If anyone wants to discuss this further or have the whole 'evolving nature of language' discussion, we should do it in the sandbox.
Emily - it was not for point of argument. But, any work journal that anyone keeps in the course of business is work product. Labor means "work" and the fruit is the "product." That is not rocket science.
If an electrician keeps a journal of his or her jobs, dated, with work notes that is evidence of work, that can be of relevance. It does not have to be prepared for court but can be used as court evidence. But if kept, if the electrician is sued for whatever reason, that appointment book helps him show when and where he or she was. Everyone can show work product if they keep evidence of their work. The notes can be incorporated by reference to support the evidence of the work.
In the legal context, there is a work product "doctrine" that protects the legal theories of the lawyer.
And it was a suggestion to those who are in the creative artistic process to continuously protect the fruits of their labor.
The law, once broken down to it's smallest concepts, is not that difficult. It is more a function of hard work than anything else. Statistics and trigonometry, is harder than law school in my opinion. And it is relevant to this discussion.
If people had been in the habit of keeping everything that was written, copied on a xerox machine or on carbon paper (old school style) this would likely not be an issue in contention. People can learn from other's mistakes. I hope that the music schools are teaching the students the importance of protecting their intellectual property, digitally. It only makes sense. Common sense.
Author
