No Easy Answers in the Copyright Debate

**MartinMusicMan** · 07-10-2010, 09:14 PM

New York Times blog about copyright issues, piracy, etc.
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/...yright-debate/

blog post by Jason Robert Brown that started it
http://www.jasonrobertbrown.com/webl...ers_a_copy.php

blog by Georgia Stitt (wife of Jason Robert Brown)
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/0...tion-of-theft/

blog by George Ou in which he responds to all the pro-piracy arguments
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/0...tion-of-theft/

**andre251** · 07-10-2010, 09:55 PM

I read two of those links and my head is still spinning. I had no idea that people were pirating sheet music online like they do audio music! That is amazing, but now that I think about it, not too shocking......

So my personal opinion is that there is no easy answer in the copyright debate!!!

*by the way, the plagiarism of the title of this article is purposeful for irony.

**harmonizerNJ** · 07-10-2010, 10:16 PM

One of benefits for me of reading this was finding the site (for the US anyway) where one can make legit purchases of copyright protected sheet music. I had not known of this site before:

http://www.sheetmusicdirect.us/search

I believe that many people will want to do the right thing, if they are told how they can do this.

Full disclosure: I will admit that I was one of those who made copies of other people's vinyl LPs (LPs that I did not own) using my stereo cassette deck during my college years.

**MartinMusicMan** · 07-10-2010, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by harmonizerNJ

Full disclosure: I will admit that I was one of those who made copies of other people's vinyl LPs (LPs that I did not own) using my stereo cassette deck during my college years.

And mixtapes! Now mix CDs.

**F4UCorsair** · 07-10-2010, 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by harmonizerNJ

Full disclosure: I will admit that I was one of those who made copies of other people's vinyl LPs (LPs that I did not own) using my stereo cassette deck during my college years.

You're a bad man harmonizer. The Feds are on their way to visit you!!!

Seriously, it would be easier for those who haven't done it, rather than for those who have, to put up their hands. Who hasn't/didn't??

**rjent** · 07-10-2010, 10:42 PM

I am going to swim up stream here. And I have a very good flame suit. So here goes.

One thing the pro piano player said is: But copyright, like the people who originate the material and the industries that promulgate it, has a lifespan. I think that sums up my attitude about music. Performers, writers, and publishing companies are trying to perpetuate something they did years, sometimes decades ago while the rest of us keep plugging away at our jobs/professions cranking out new product/service, while a person who wrote a song 30 years ago still wants to get paid for that single task. On that I call BS. The government is fully behind this nonsense by creating laws and enforcements and the only entities that can perpetuate a continuous stream of revenue from something they did 20 years ago or so are government workers through retirement programs the real world can't afford to do... do we see a pattern here? I am talking from experience here as well. One of my many hard earned talents is computer programming. It is one of the few things I do well and enjoy. I have written hundreds of programs ranging from accounting to OS utilities. Many, nay, most have been copied and passed around. I filled a niche when I wrote the program, I was paid for my effort, and I moved on to the next project.

I think it is a huge mistake for the music industry and musicians to limit what music can be performed and where. It stifles the whole point of music in the first place.

As always, JMHO.

**Woody Reed** · 07-11-2010, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by rjent

I think it is a huge mistake for the music industry and musicians to limit what music can be performed and where. It stifles the whole point of music in the first place.

The music industry hasn't limited in any way what music can be performed and where. The issue is about compensation for it. Some believe it's there "right" to not pay. It's usually justified by that person saying they can't afford it, but they need it, much like the girl in the blog said. Then others believe if you can't afford it, then you can't have it. Usually the side your on is dependent upon how closely related financially one is to the issue. When it's your livelihood, it's a pretty hot subject. Bottom line is it's stealing. There can't even be a rational argument to the contrary. The only thing that's stifles the music and creativity is the lack of revenue these days. It's very expensive to make good albums. The sales are so low for all genres (there was a report in the last few weeks in billboard that sales had it's lowest week since 1972), that the recording budgets cannot support quality work. It has to end.

**rjent** · 07-11-2010, 01:18 AM

Originally Posted by Woody Reed

The music industry hasn't limited in any way what music can be performed and where. The issue is about compensation for it. Some believe it's there "right" to not pay. It's usually justified by that person saying they can't afford it, but they need it, much like the girl in the blog said. Then others believe if you can't afford it, then you can't have it. Usually the side your on is dependent upon how closely related financially one is to the issue. When it's your livelihood, it's a pretty hot subject. Bottom line is it's stealing. There can't even be a rational argument to the contrary. The only thing that's stifles the music and creativity is the lack of revenue these days. It's very expensive to make good albums. The sales are so low for all genres (there was a report in the last few weeks in billboard that sales had it's lowest week since 1972), that the recording budgets cannot support quality work. It has to end.

Oh it is ending. The way music is produced, performed and presented is going to change. Whether "professional" musicians want to admit it or not, the music industry has been controlled and killed by the corporate greed that infiltrates all capitalist processes. It is the very thing that the "Outlaws" of the seventies were rebelling against. Guys like Willie Nelson, Johnny Cash, Walon Jennings and the others, were saying that they wanted to just play their music their way. When their way, and How their way. I know for a fact that Branson, and those associated with it, are doing very well. I would imagine most of the minstrels of the middle ages lived hand to mouth as well. Music is music. Sometimes I wonder if we should even be trying to make a living off of it ....

Just like actors, just a handful of people can actually make a good living from music. Anything else is just greed in a lot of peoples eyes

**FremontSax** · 07-11-2010, 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by harmonizerNJ

One of benefits for me of reading this was finding the site (for the US anyway) where one can make legit purchases of copyright protected sheet music. I had not known of this site before:

Full disclosure: I will admit that I was one of those who made copies of other people's vinyl LPs (LPs that I did not own) using my stereo cassette deck during my college years.

Originally Posted by F4UCorsair

You're a bad man harmonizer. The Feds are on their way to visit you!!!

Seriously, it would be easier for those who haven't done it, rather than for those who have, to put up their hands. Who hasn't/didn't??

No the recording industry got the feds to place a levy on blank media. This money was returned to the recording industry and made up for their lost profits.

Private_copying_levy

I have no idea if the levy is placed on Hard Disk Drives and Solid State Memory.

**FremontSax** · 07-11-2010, 01:31 AM

I always liked the Grateful Dead model. Come to the concerts, record them, trade the recordings just don't charge for copies.

And people came to the shows and the Dead made lots of money.

marketing-lessons-from-the-grateful-dead

**teledyn** · 07-11-2010, 03:06 AM

in vancouver, during the Olympics, street buskers were required to pay royalties for the songs they performed. That's complete neurotic lunacy, but that's where the argument takes this.

John Coltrane never made much from My Favorite Things, the bulk of the money went to the estate of the copyright holder of the composition (which is rarely the artist) which is tragic as it is insane and yet, that is where this argument takes us.

Friends of mine play traditional Irish music, yet their lawyer gets a significant chunk of the profits of their CD because some of those tunes may have re-asserted their 'copyrights' and the holders can now milk the efforts of their distant ancestors. That is total neurotic lunacy, but that is where this argument takes us.

the policy is unsustainable, that is the bottom line. I stand next to your lawn and I assert that where my shadow falls is now to be considered my property and anything of value ever found there, or 500 feet below there, is mine and given to my heirs. That is just insane, but ...

for your collective amusement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 and just as apropos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcvd5JZkUXY

**Pete Thomas** · 07-11-2010, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by rjent

while a person who wrote a song 30 years ago still wants to get paid for that single task.

Are you saying musicians shouldn't be paid? I make my living from royalties, I work very very hard and the music I write is exploited and enjoyed by people. Why should I not deserve the right to make a living from the work I do? Is it just because sometimes I enjoy my work that people think it should be taken from me without adequate recompense?

Originally Posted by rjent

. Whether "professional" musicians want to admit it or not, the music industry has been controlled and killed by the corporate greed that infiltrates all capitalist processes.

I have no problem believing the music industry is controlled by corporate greed that infiltrates all capitalist processes, but it has not been killed. It is undergoing a reluctant change which means some aspects are being killed off while others are emerging. The alternative(s) to capitalism are interesting, but really don't work as that corporate greed you mention is just a corporate version of the inherent greed (maybe part of human nature) that has stopped any idealistic "sharing based" system to take the place of capitalism. Ooops, I'd better stop that line of thought or else a discussion of human nature and economics might turn political.

**Pete Thomas** · 07-11-2010, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by F4UCorsair

Seriously, it would be easier for those who haven't done it, rather than for those who have, to put up their hands. Who hasn't/didn't??

Very true.

Copyright theft is almost unavoidable, look how many people on forums use avatars of cartoon characters that are copyright!. I have certainly done it, but I try to avoid it if possible.

I think there is big difference between:

People who infringe copyright without knowing it's illegal
People who infringe copyright but don't care it's illegal, or deny that it's illegal
People who infringe copyright but admit that they are stealing something

I once rang the MCPS and PPL to ask if I could pay to make a compilation CD for a student. They said what I had to do was contact the record company and publisher of each track to ask permission. What would be really useful is if they could grant people a "one off" licence to allow this. What I did manage to get was permission to upload copyright audio to my website. The licence (Limited Online Exploitation Licence) cost about £75.

Something similar for CD copying or filesharing would be very useful, and I think many people would welcome that.

I'd love to see the laws made more realistic (especially for teachers), but not abolished.

**piwikiwi** · 07-11-2010, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Pete Thomas

Very true.

Copyright theft is almost unavoidable, look how many people on forums use avatars of cartoon characters that are copyright!. I have certainly done it, but I try to avoid it if possible.

I think there is big difference between:

People who infringe copyright without knowing it's illegal
People who infringe copyright but don't care it's illegal, or deny that it's illegal
People who infringe copyright but admit that they are stealing something

I once rang the MCPS and PPL to ask if I could pay to make a compilation CD for a student. They said what I had to do was contact the record company and publisher of each track to ask permission. What would be really useful is if they could grant people a "one off" licence to allow this. What I did manage to get was permission to upload copyright audio to my website. The licence (Limited Online Exploitation Licence) cost about £75.

Something similar for CD copying or filesharing would be very useful, and I think many people would welcome that.

I'd love to see the laws made more realistic (especially for teachers), but not abolished.

I agree, they should make it more flexible to use. It's way too complicated now.

**Pete Thomas** · 07-11-2010, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by piwikiwi

I agree, they should make it more flexible to use. It's way too complicated now.

Yes, I doubt it will happen though.

A while back I went with a delegation from the MU Music Writers Section to a House of Commons cross party conference to lobby for some changes. I'm not holding my breath.

**KennyD** · 07-11-2010, 01:05 PM

My avatar is my photo - but am I potentially in trouble for displaying the curtain behind me in the photo without permission of the maker? Will James Stewart be annoyed I didn't get permissiqon to display his designer shirt? And should I ask Selmer for permission to display an image of a CG Conn Ltd saxophone in the photo? Will Brendan Tibbs be more upset that his mouthpiece is on display in my avatar or that I'm using a Rovner ligature on it in the inverted position?

There was a school 'down-under' that got fined for copyright breach - the music teacher bought a copy of the score for a school performance and made 5 copies for kids to use during lessons at school. The copyright infringement fine for the school was a cool quarter million - thought that's probably only US $200,000.

And should Men At Work really have to pay a royalty scrounging company 5% of all royalties of "Down Under" just because there is a barely recognisable flute riff in it from some folk piece from over half a decade ago that was not even part of the original score?

Sometimes copyright issues just make you scratch your head...

KennyD

**Pete Thomas** · 07-11-2010, 01:25 PM