|
Copyright
Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright
Date: Tuesday, February 17, 1998
So I made a public inquiry about it. Any tablature I get, I'll send to the composers. They can then contact the arranger about its use. Date: Tuesday, February 17, 1998
Sorry everyone. This tune is unfortunately pretty tightly controlled. I would suggest watching those of us who play it already. (In private - public performance is covered by ASCAP. or BMI.). Sorry. Please don't shoot the messenger. Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
If that's the way they want to play, I suggest that we all just stop playing the tune and let it die. Don't let it become part of the folk tradition. Don't pass it on to your children. It's not worth it just to fatten a bunch of Warner shysters. They think that they shall be heard for their much speaking (Matthew 6:7). Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
Um, can I get a copy of that tab you had, for, um, what was it .. Shoguns Fare Well? (I'm sure by the time the tab is played it will not identically resemble any tune previously written ...) And just think of all the other tunes that have multiple names in folk history. Curious, isn't it. Also there is the matter of copyright law anyway -- I'm sure somebody will correct me if I am wrong (or write) -- but if one writes a different *arrangement* of a tune, that arrangement is one's own work (and can even by copywritten itself!) -- a tab version of nearly anything is certainly a different arrangement. Thoughts to ponder. Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
I understand that most music is copywritten...therefore,
even if it is published in a playbook, you are not suppose to record that
piece without permission and/or a fee...but what if you play in public??
Are you not suppose to play a copy written piece if you are playing for
an audience? Especially if you get paid to play?? And do the "copy write"
police ever come around and
Your experiences, please.....
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
Waiting for suggestions. Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
If a tune is a traditional tune, can you legally transpose somebody else's copyrighted arrangement and put it in a dulcimer club songbook ? I.e. - the actual notes and the TAB numbers would all be different, but the tune would would the same, except transposed. If not legal, how much change besides transposing would be required to make it legal ? Alternately, what would be considered a legal source for the melody notes of an anonymous-composer traditional melody ? It gets really confusing when so many traditional songs are published under copyrights. Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
Yes!
Remember the Girl Scouts who were cited for using copyrighted material, "Kumbaya" as a licensed song...BMI at the campground? what a mess! This is an interesting thread because those of us that make our living creating really don't have any protection from people using our material...but then again most of it is folk music and we have to think about our definitions... Men use thought only as authority for their injustice,
and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts.
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
As a songwriter, I have to say that I believe Jay Ungar deserves to be properly compensated for writing that fine tune. If any of us record it, or write arrangements of it, he, and Warners, his publishers, deserve their due. The royalties fatten Mr. Ungar, too. Realistically, if you teach this to your friends at a jam, the Copyright Police aren't going to break your door down. And if you perform it in public it is the venue operators responsibility to give ASCAP. or BMI. their $0.17 or whatever. I think asking $300 to publish it in DPN is out of line, but this tune has already been "pirated" at least once by a band who put it out on a CD, listing it as "traditional", so I can understand that Warners might be a bit jumpy. My thought for the day.... Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
Thanks Date: Thursday, February 18, 1998
Even if we have tab, we can't admit to it (unless we created it ourselves). And we can't send it to anyone without possibly incurring a massive fine and (theoretically) six months in prison (I doubt anyone has ever actually gone to jail over this, but after paying legal fees you might think it would have been easier). This MUST be our "public persona" position on all copyrighted materials. Especially those which are popular tunes owned by the big publishing houses, which I would be willing to bet is the case with your request and which we already know is the case with Ashokan Farewell. In other words, folks: Do what you will, but DON'T tell anyone in this VERY PUBLIC forum that you are going to send them copyrighted material. It's tantamount to pleading "nolo contendere" if the time ever comes you need to plead. Date: Thursday, February 18, 1998
A banjo picker friend of mine was in a band playing for a dance (contra or something like that - not a formal affair)- in Baltimore. They played Ashokan as the final waltz of the night. The venue got zinged for it (by ASCAP. I think). So I wouldn't make any presumptions about Warner Bros. This was a fairly obscure setting as I see it to get "caught" at. Surely there are no royalties due for playing by ear? Probably true so long as it is not for a public performance. Date: Thursday, February 18, 1998
I think you are correct. BUT you must secure permission to make an arrangement from the holder of the copyright on the tune you are arranging. And I suppose in granting such permission the holder could place any restrictions they want on what you can do with the arrangement or on passing on any further copyright permissions with respect to your arrangement of their tune. Another writes:
If you get paid for it, I don't think there is much question that you need permission. I understand that the venue is generally held responsible because most venues pay standardized rates to have music performed in their establishments, whether live or recordings. How this relates to music copyrights held by persons not covered by the ASCAP / BMI. fees I don't know. There are only a few exceptions (one is performance during a religious service), but if you are getting paid for performing, I doubt they apply. (The other exception is for a nonprofit, no admission, non-paid performer event - and may have a few more restrictions beyond these.) Yet another question:
Keep in mind that not making money is NOT any exception to the copyright laws which reserve to the holder of the copyright (usually the composer) the right to do just about anything with their product, including making arrangements for different instruments. And lastly:
A tune in the public domain is free from copyright restrictions. I'm not sure what you mean, therefore, by someone else's arrangement. Do you mean harmonies or chord changes or tablature for another instrument? If you are only using the tune there is probably no problem since they can't copyright the tune, only the arrangement. But if you are not using their "arrangement", just the melody of a traditional tune, sounds to me like that is not a problem. You could check with the many traditional, celtic, and other music indexes on the net and probably fine a lot of the traditional tunes if you wanted to check for another source of the tune. Date: Thursday, February 18, 1998
Perhaps a little, but consider: People who write for magazines are usually paid somewhere between $50 and $500 per page. (Maybe more nowadays...I was paid about $125 back in 1987.) So is it really out of line for the owner of the copyright--in legal effect, the author--to ask to be similarly compensated? You could argue that the revenue should be shared between author and arranger. And you could argue that DPN's limited circulation should cause the per page price to drop. But how far should it drop? Warner Bros. Is a big company. I'd be willing to bet that they actually LOSE money at $300, since they undoubtedly have a lawyer go over the contract, check signatures, etc. And then they have to pay the secretary or legal assistant to file the contract. And keep archives. And. Here I am arguing from the opposite side of where I want to be. I hate doing it. But...well, if I had written an article that might be worth $300 if I submitted it to Byte magazine, I'd be reluctant to let some low circulation internet newsletter publish it for less than that, wouldn't I? (Again, the situation is not completely analogous: DPN is one of only two places where the tab COULD be published "commercially." (There isn't any Byte Dulcimers mag, is there?) Maybe some of the songwriters here could help answer the question: How much do YOU expect to get paid for a song that is published? How much do YOU expect to get when somebody publishes a special arrangement of it? Is the market really so cutthroat that you have to GIVE songs away? If so, maybe I'm glad I write computer articles instead of songs. (Giving words away, in the hopes somebody will buy your CD, is smart marketing. At least I hope it isn't pure desperation.) And how does all this relate to sharing tab among friends? It's a tough moral question. How do you feel about giving a friend a tape copy of some CD? My PERSONAL opinion is that anybody who owns some legal copy of a song (e.g., a tape, a CD, or even sheet music in some other form) should be entitled to get a copy of my tab. After all: they paid for the song once, already. And that position makes it easy to understand why a publicly printed magazine should pay for copyrighted material: There is no way that every reader of that magazine already owns some form of the song. Is this position overly protective and restrictive? Especially for clubs, etc.? Maybe. Not an easy question, I think. Again, what say you songwriters who actually hope to make money off your efforts? Date: Thursday, February 18, 1998
True that ASCAP. and BMI are the music police but as far as Warner Bros. sending out their lawyers I still don't believe it is worth it to them...Most venues probably already carry an ASCAP or BMI license so I am surprised that they got "zinged" Though this be madness, yet there is method in 't. William Shakespeare, Hamlet Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
My viewpoint is that this situation comes under respecting others' rights and valuing the music we love so much. The original intent of copyright laws was good: to do both of these things. Like most good intentions it does not always work out well or conveniently for us. But you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I'm a fan of my colleagues and the brilliant brotherhood of folk musicians I have heard. My life would be easier if I never had to deal with copyright questions, but I want to respect the creativity of the artists, and believe our music is just as valuable as pop music, so it's perfectly in order that it should be protected and be considered worth a fair remuneration. I've always thought our "alternative" forms of non-pop music offer spice, beauty and excitement to the otherwise boring and bland menu served up everywhere by the big-time music mills. It occurs to me that if we don't honor copyrights on our kind of music the effect is to drive the small recording artists/performers/songwriters/arrangers out of business and their creative, exciting music gets hushed. What we have left on our plate after that is - guess what? - lots of bland, noisy radio pulp produced enmasse by the big-time music purveyors. They'll have all the market, make lots of money and thrive. Let's support and value our wonderful alternative music and the rights of those who make it. Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998
I've been reading all the posts about Ashokan Farewell, copyrights, etc. with great interest. Thought some folks might like to hear about my experience with the song's publication. I was writing a monthly column in our club's newsletter (NGFDA's Foothills Footnotes), and, like many people who have posted about Ashokan Farewell, I found that A LOT of people wanted tab for the song. I called Jay Ungar and asked for permission to arrange and publish it in the newsletter. I explained that ours was a non-profit(actually a tax exempt)organization, and I would not be making any money from the arrangement, nor was the organization making any money from it. What we were doing was strictly for the purpose of education. Just like DM has described, Jay informed me that the rights to all but the fiddle version(fake sheet)belonged to his publisher, and I would have to get permission from them. Jay owns the rights to the fiddle version. So I called the publisher in LA and went through the same hoo-ha(non-profit, education, etc.). "Fine", they said, "$300 please". "Thanks but no thanks", said I. Our newsletter, at the time, had circulation of only about 100-150 people. It just wasn't worth it. So back I went to Jay. Jay, incidentally, was VERY cordial. He really wanted to help, but legally his hands were tied. He felt really bad that the music business was putting the song out of our reach. After several phone calls, some legal research, and a lot of creative thought, Jay finally agreed to let me LITERALLY transcribe the notes from the fiddle version into dulcimer tablature and to copy and publish the fake sheet. I had to properly acknowledge copyrights, state that the song was used with permission, state that the transcription was for educational purposes only, and print a "no copy" warning on the sheet. Written permission was given for one publication of X number(I forget how many)copies, and I had to fully describe to Jay how we were using the song. We published the tab along with my column, which I used as a lesson on transcribing tunes from music manuscripts and harmonizing them in dulcimer arrangements. The song I used to teach these things was Ashokan Farewell. The concept worked really well (IMHO), and I think a lot of people got more insight into how to play and arrange songs themselves when no tab is available. I'm telling all of this to make three points: 1) People in the music business are not all money-grubbing trolls. Many (and Jay Ungar in particular)truly care that their work enriches our lives. 2) "Where there's a will, there's a way"(who said that?). There are a lot of ways to learn and pass along songs besides on a tab sheet. Some ways are even BETTER than tab. 3) I forgot who made this point in this thread (sorry), but I agree that dulcimists need to learn better how to play and harmonize tunes by ear. Also remember that just because you figure the tune out by ear doesn't mean that you can't write it down in tab for yourself so you can remember your work for later use. Finally, I want to emphatically state that don't want ANYBODY who reads this list mail to contact Jay asking him for permission to do the same thing we did. He bent over backward for us, and he spent a lot of time and energy doing for us what turned out to be a VERY big favor. Given the popularity and demand for Ashokan Farewell, I would hate to think that I opened the door for a bunch of dulcimists to claim so much of his generous nature. If you want to learn the tune, get someone to show it to you and learn it by rote. You can always write it down in a tab for your own use; doing this is really good for musical development. Better still, figure it out by ear. It's a fairly simple song - just about anyone with a bit of dulcimer experience and a basic knowledge of chords can do it. Sorry this post is so long, but I really wanted to get past the negative "Verboten" direction of this thread and show the human side of the topic. There, I feel much better! Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998 9:03
I'm not a lawyer, but I do have a small interest in this subject. I need to get to work soon, so this will be brief. Anyone who wants to find more info on this should see Marji Hazen's Public Domain web page. Briefly, a copyrighted piece of music cannot be played in public venues without permission from the copyright holder. For the vast majority of copyrighted material you get permission by buying an ASCAP. or BMI license. It's the VENUE, not the performer that gets the license. Playing your arrangement of a copyrighted tune is still a copyright infringement. Buying the music on tape or CD does not confer other rights to the use of the music. (publishing tab, etc.) Whether or not you get paid has nothing to do with whether or not it is a copyright infringement. (Though it may have a bearing on how much damages you have to pay.) Public domain music is music that is more than 75 years
old (in the US, 90 years old elsewhere.) You can copy, arrange, perform,
etc public domain music free of charge as long as you work from a PRIMARY
SOURCE.
Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
As a club - make it the rule that you only hand out the old time music and music written by members. If the tune or arrangement is copyrighted, you will break the law playing somewhere, sometime. And you are breaking the law by making copies and handing them out. Encourage your members to arrange music. Write on the music that it was arranged for the public domain. The place that the "copyright police" will show up is at small fairs. When you play at a government sponsored event or for a bar or concert hall, they pay ASCAP. and BMI which covers you. But you are still not supposed to perform a piece without permission which is nearly impossible to get.... It is all a big catch-22. It is impossible to play much music without breaking the law. Bottom line - if you are a small group - play what you want at weddings, churches, etc. At fairs and the like - unless they paid ASCAP and BMI (there are two or three more out there, too) stick to public domain music. As a club - Don't hand out copies of copyrighted music. If a tune is copyrighted but not covered by BMI or ASCAP - the songwriter would have to catch you playing the song and press charges against you. BMI and ASCAP are not going to pursue someone playing a tune that they do not have the rights over. But at least make an effort to stay legal. Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
I just had a meeting with a publisher who's looking for new writers and arrangers. He pays the writer/arranger 10% of the music he sells. He didn't talk about performance rights.( BMI and ASCAP regulate performance rights.) When a publisher buys your composition/arrangement, he OWNS the copyright. You can't even copy it for your friends, because you don't own it any more. If someone paid $300 for the right to publish a song that is owned by that publisher, the writer/arranger would get $30. There are many expenses involved in publishing music, distributing it, advertising, etc. and $300 doesn't really seem like a huge amount. I don't think anyone should begrudge the poor writer/arranger for receiving $30 for his work which is distributed in a magazine. No one can copyright a public domain tune. If you write tab for a traditional tune you have the right to share it with anyone you want to. Its yours unless you sell (or give) your right to someone else. Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
One addition , and admittedly I am a strong - no, very strong - advocate of every musician tapping their creative spirit. Avoid being on the paying end of copyright issues and practice your composition skills everyday. You may end up with an album or sets worth of original material ! It's not magic, just a result of freeing your mind and expressing yourself. Go for it !!! Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
You're kidding? Anything under 100,000 is miniscule. Many of the computer magazines boast circulation heading towards the millions. Does DPN even have 25,000 circulation? I'd be surprised, given what their ad rates are. No one can copy right a public domain tune. We weren't referring to public domain tunes. We were referring to tab that we create, for ourselves, to tunes such as "Ashokan Farewell." Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
2) "Where there's a will, there's a way"(who said that?). There are a lot of ways to learn and pass along songs besides on a tab sheet. Some ways are even BETTER than tab. 3) I forgot who made this point in this thread (sorry), but I agree that dulcimists need to learn better how to play and harmonize tunes by ear. Also remember that just because you figure the tune out by ear doesn't mean that you can't write it down in tab for yourself so you can remember your work for later use. These are all excellent points. Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
Copyrighting a fairly complex piece - a two or three dulcimer arrangement is understandable. The more notes one has to play with the more complicated the arrangement. But three strings stuck in DAD - the possibilities are apparently minimal, to me at least. Multi-instrument arrangements, entirely new tunes and above all performances or recordings, yes, but old stuff on a standard mountain dulcimer - I don't know. Date: Thursday, February 19, 1998
A flawed copyright system is better than no copyright system. If the flaws can be fixed, then our energies and monies should be put into a realistic effort to fix the system. Anybody out there willing to initiate the fixit effort and lead it for a year or two? Date: Friday, February 20, 1998 12:54
The funny thing about tab though, is that after you learn the song the way someone else plays it, pretty soon you start fooling around with it and the version you come up with ends up your own anyway! I do not believe that these people caused any harm by sharing a song that they obviously cared enough about to spend time on , tabbing and teaching. I am sure that none of them would have trespassed on another's rights if they had been informed that they were doing so, and the pleasure shared far outweighs the sin. I agree that this is a subject that is both timely and informative but how unfortunate that those of us who have shared in this discussion will now feel little less free to share what we truly enjoy for fear we are treading where we have no right to be. Date: Friday, February 20, 1998
The arranger "owns" the right to copy the arrangement . . . that is: To make multiple copies and pass them out to whomever they please . . . and unless a person has permission from the arranger to make copies, it is like "borrowing somebody's stuff without asking". Its not an infringement to take the same PD tune and write your own arrangement. And yes, you can only do SO much with 3 strings. Performance rights are another issue. (My .02 worth) Date: Friday, February 20, 1998
RE: The thread about copyrights/arrangements etc; tho't I share a couple of personal observations. I cannot second the idea of developing your own arrangements strongly enough. Aside from helping you develop your own unique playing style, making up your own arrangement will let you grow as a musician. Quite a number of years ago I was one of the judges at Winfield. Sitting in an airless little room behind the stage, I heard someone (to this day I have no idea who) play flawless renditions of two of my arrangements from my first LP. Was I flattered? Kind of. Did I give the player a high score? Nope. I feel if you are serious enough to think you deserve to be called a "champion", than you should be showing what you can do creatively as a musician. I have also heard at least one recording containing note by note transcriptions of some of my arrangements...without credit. It's a weird feeling hearing them come back without the memory of the playing. I'm not against playing other's arrangements (I remain grateful to the elusive Peter Tommerup for letting me use a couple of his unique arrangements on my first recording. And I do play some of Ray Kane, Leonard Kwan and Keola Beamer's slack-key pieces....both because they are perfect in their own way and because they are helping teach me a new and wonderful way to play the guitar). I think the issue here is more one of perspective. Obviously, as someone who has written hundreds of dulcimer arrangements-and makes money from it--I want people to play them. And I am thrilled when I hear a student finally master a difficult piece. But I am even happier when I hear a student use one of my arrangements as a point of departure for a new, personal exploration. That is where the music really begins. Like L sezs, we who love this music owe a debt to those who create it and pass it on. And I can think of no more fitting way to pay that debt than to master our instrument and our craft. Aloha, Date: Friday, February 20, 1998
Can I copyright my arrangement of a public domain tune? Yes! You may copyright your arrangement. This is done all the time with classical music. Mozart is public domain but there are lots of copyrighted editions of his music out there in classical music land. How can that be? Well, the key word here is edition. Someone has taken his manuscripts or early published works (out of copyright - even BEFORE copyright) and edited them in a particular manner. When we take a traditional tune and make a tablature, we are editing the tune. We are presenting it in a new manner. And please note that only your arrangement is copyrighted. Someone else could take the same tune and do another arrangement and copyright their version. This happens with Mozart and it happens with Old Joe Clark. By the way, including the manuscript source or other information about the source of the tune on the published sheet music is always helpful. A good example is my arrangement of "Haste to the Wedding." I have a fairly obscure Manuscript source for the melody that is different in the B music than the more commonly played version. I included that informationt on my published version. Incidently, it is included in my book "EuroTunes." Now. One other point to raise. If you are the first to publish a traditional piece of music, you may legally copyright that piece of music. How that copyright covers parrallel variations of the tune (other versions of the same or greater age) is tricky. In the 1960's, John Jacob Niles and Joan Baez traded lawsuits over "Black, Black, Black is the Color of my True Love's Hair" and I do not think any definitive legal precedence was established. Aw shucks, I can see it coming. In April when I get Al Kohn's annual ad for his book on music copyright and licensing, I'm gonna have to buy it. ;-( Date: Saturday, February 21, 1998
Follow-up:
To create such tab would be a violation of the copyright unless permission was obtained to create the tab/arrangement, wouldn't it? Date: Saturday, February 21, 1998
Bill also discussed the publishing end of the songwriting field. His opinion is that a 50/50 split on a song would be a fair deal. A quote directly from the man "No deal is better than a bad deal" If you sell your material outright to a publisher you are doing yourself a disservice. Start your own publishing company - Who knows what will happen to your song down the line-and like Jay Unger you may have no control of your own works. Sell the use of the song not the song itself. That way you, as the publishing company, will retain the rights to dictate how it is used in other publications and applications. Recording - After a song or tune has been recorded, anybody can record it provided that they pay royalties. (the current statutory rate is .0675 per cut per album) This money goes to the publishing company that owns the song. - (Another good reason for starting your own publishing company.) And they cannont deny you the right to record their works. We didn't get into arranging other peoples works too much - except that I asked him about arranging his works for the dulcimer and he said "No problem, unless you are going to publish it or record it." Then he wants his dues. A personal finding that may be of interest. Several years ago I wrote a tuneand sent it to the Library of Congress for copyrighting. The copies that I sent were in standard notation with chords and dulcimer tablature. They were returned with the notation that tablature is a method not an arrangement and was not copyrightable. I just removed the tablature and the copyright came through fine. Just thought I'd throw this little bomb into the fire. Is there any update on this?? For those of you in the Western Ohio and Eastern Indiana area who missed Bill last night, I have booked him for a house concert on Thursday evening October 1, '98. The concert will be held in the Dayton Ohio area. I will post the particulars when details have been worked out. Well I'm off to the Greenville Festival for the weekend. Hope to find some response on all this Monday morning. Tra La, Tra La Date: Saturday, February 21, 1998
I am curious as to which version you refer. As I was preparing some teaching materials in the Spring of 1992, I checked. Old Joe Clark was included in a Crown Publishers/Random House volume Song Fest, edited by Jane and Dick Best, published 1964. Random House could not determine the copyright. However Crown checked, and found the song to be in the public domain (or at least the version in Song Fest version of the song was PD). Armed with a letter from the publisher, this is the version I use. This does bring up an interesting point about the many different versions of tunes. Some versions are copyrighted and some are not and this opens the way for lawsuits. Black, black, black is another song that has this problem. John Jacob Niles copyrighted it but Joan Baez copyrighted, sang and published another version and got sued. She countersued. I am sure there are many more such examples. AS we have discussed previously on the list, Roy Acuff Music apparently has copyrights on many "traditional" Old Timey Tunes and has enforced that copyright. This frankly is abuse of the concept of intellectual property and the laws designed to protect it. And speaking of Song Fest, it is an incredible song book from the American Hootenany period of folk music from the 1950's and 1960's. Copies are rare and worth holding on to if possible. Date: Saturday, February 21, 1998
It depends on whether the tune is copyrighted or public domain and who did the tablature. Let me sum up my understanding of the law on this matter in terms of three scenarios. SCENARIO 1: THE TUNE IS COPYRIGHTED. All versions and arrangements of the tune are copyrighted by the copyright holder(s). It does not matter whether you change the key, meter, add or subtract notes, write new lyrics, etc. ALL versions are still covered by the original copyright. You may make an arrangement for personal use only. You may NOT distribute copies of your arrangement to anyone without permission. This is the case with "Ashokan Farewell". SCENARIO 2: THE TUNE IS TRADITIONAL AND SOME VERISONS ARE COPYRIGHTED. This one is questionable. The copyright, in theory, could cover all versions. If you publish a version of the tune, you could be sued for copyright violations. If you can find a version in the public domain and/or dated earlier than the copyrighted version you probably are okay. But you may still have to defend yourself in court. "Black, Black, Black is the Color of my True Love's Hair" is an example of this category. SCENARIO 3: THE TUNE IS TRADITIONAL AND IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. You may make arrangements to your hearts content. The arrangements are yours and you may copyright them. You may distribute your own arrangements. If the tune as you present it has NEVER BEFORE been published, you may also copyright the tune. This is your edition or version of the tune. Note that some else's edition may be copyrighted - Scenarios 1 & 2 could apply. Mozart's music would be an easy example for this scenario. Now, How about making copies in clubs or for friends? If the copyright is owned by some one else, WITHOUT EXPRESS PERMISSION YOU MAY NOT MAKE COPIES AT ALL EXCEPT FOR PERSONAL USE (BY YOU AND YOU ALONE). The Fair Use aspects of the Copyright law do provide some exceptions to this. But for us, in clubs and festivals, it is PROHIBITED for us to make and distribute copies of tunes and arrangements copyrighted by others without their express permission. Consequently, all those "playbooks" often used in dulcimer clubs, consisting of page after page of other peoples published or otherwise copyrighted music, are ILLEGAL if permissions for each piece were not collected. Those playbooks consisting of page after page of tunes previously published by Mel Bay, or in DPN or copied wholesale from Boone, 1993 (to which one member of your forty member club went) are timebombs waiting to go off. The club and its members could be sued at $10,000+ per page (50 pages = $500,000). Good bye houses, cars, dulcimer, dulcimer club, and because you are a convicted criminal, maybe job, and certainly life as you know it, etc. Would it happen to us in the dulcimer community? It might. We are particularly bad about this as a community. And the publishers are discovering this. So eventually you will be discovered and a publisher may decide to make an example of your club. A publisher's lawyer might already have a copy of your book, too. By the way, a similar situation existed in the Roman Catholic Church in the 1970's. The Archdiocese of Chicago was sued by a publisher for several million dollars. "The church?" you ask. Yep. And it was a publisher of church music that sued (and won - the Archdiocese paid dearly). If the tunes are important to your club, buy the books or get every member a subscription to DPN (raise your dues to cover the cost, get them delivered to the club headquarters, get some extras to sell at events). Books cost $5 - $20. DPN is $20 a year. Booksellers give discounts for quantity purchases. If a club buys enough copies of DPN, Maddie might give the club a discount. She certainly wholesales them to music stores. Write her and ask. If the tune is truly uncopyrighted you may of course distribute your own arrangements as you choose. Of course, if someone else distributes your arrangements, they need your permission (see previous paragraph). So what may you keep (legally) in your playbooks. Well, if you invite me, or Miss L, or someone else to do a workshop for your club, ALL the members present at the workshop may put their copies of the workshop materials in their books. However, as noted, the club members may not make additional copies for those missing members unless they have the workshop leader's permission. I imagine that if it is one or two members, permission would be readily given. However, if half the club missed the workshop, then maybe you'd better invite the leader back down to do the workshop a second time. Date: Sunday, February 22, 1998
Date: Saturday, February 21, 1998
I guess it all boils down to how much you want a person to continue to arrange, write, record music. When 4 people come into my booth - buy four tapes and then discuss each copying theirs for the other three - I wonder how long they think someone can continue to record with this. Folk and traditional music is just not the Top 40 on the hit parade. Musicians need your support. I really enjoy all the new books and tapes out there. Support your musicians. Give them their just due. I can't think of one millionaire in the dulcimer kingdom who has made his fortune either writing books or recording. Come to think of it - I don't know many dulcimer players who aare millionaires. Knew one once - but that is all. He made his money long before he ever learned to play. Everything boils down to being responsible. Most musicians are pretty good people - they deserve our support.....Note-Ably Yours. Date: Sunday, February 22, 1998
This is interesting as I have copyrighted two books with both standard notation and tablature with no problems. The LOC personnel are however of varying knowledge levels on the subject of what is or is not a musical arrangement. Also, a book may be differently considered that a single tune. Date: Sunday, February 22, 1998
This raises an interesting point. (At least it's interesting to me.) Someone else mentioned that when he submitted a tune for copyright, it was refused because it had tablature. This would suggest that you couldn't copyright a tune that was only transcribed in tab. So I wonder is a tab only arrangement of a tune copyright infringement? If I show someone how to play a copyrighted tune on the dulcimer by just showing them the fingerings and playing the tune there is no infringement. Correct? As the previous posted had mentioned the tablature was rejected because it was a "method". Does it then follow that a sheet of tablature is not an infringement? I don't know but it just made me go hmmm. Date: Sunday, February 22, 1998
I'm not sure the jury is in on this one. Ultimately, the OLGA will have to remove the materials. This has already happened with other sites. While I have not checked, the links could point to offshore sites. Another possibility revolves around the Internet precedent that is gradually being set - Sites are not responsible for the content they carry if they simply are a relay point. Thus the OLGA "mother site" to which new tabs are posted is the only site that can be sued. P is right - 'twill be interesting. Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
I often perform other people's songs as well, so I follow this rule of thumb: if the song has been recorded, I perform it without worry. Just as anyone may record a song that has already been recorded without further permission, I go ahead and sing it in public, trusting that the venue has paid its ASCAP and BMI fees. The songs I choose are usually written by contemporary folk writers, not top-40. In every case, when I eventually talk to the writers, they consider it a compliment -- as do I when I find out people are singing my songs. In no case have I been asked to pay for the privilege. I know of a choir in New York City, though, that is using a friend's song. They asked for her four-part written vocal arrangement and offered to pay her per performance. That sounds appropriate to me but I'm not sure they had to do that by law. The crucial time to ask permission is when the song has not yet been recorded or widely published. In fact, the only legal way I know to get a song like this is to have the artist give me a tape and lyric sheet, so they're totally involved in the process. On two occasions I've been granted permission to record a song before the writer has done so. I get it in writing and arrange to pay the usual royalties (also known as obtaining the "mechanical license" for the song). Also, a comment about Bill Staines. His songs are registered with BMI, so I'm not surprised he hasn't seen a dime from ASCAP. We only get paid by the organization our songs are registered with. I'm with BMI and have received small amounts from time to time for radio airplay, as I imagine Bill must, too, since he's played nationwide. It's true that artists below pop-icon status don't receive any of the money that venues pay for licensing. The Folk Alliance has been lobbying these organizations over the last few years to achieve more equitable distribution, but I haven't heard of any change. Hope this helps, Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
No kidding? By whom? I didn't even know there was a known
"composer". Are you sure its not just a specific set of lyrics that's copyrighted?
My Uncle Elmer, a fiddler, died 15 years ago in his 80's, and he used to
play the
Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
Since I'm fairly new to all of this, I wouldn't have the foggiest idea of how to go about "finding out." Where does one go for this info? Sounds more and more to me like this is a very complicated procedure. Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
Sorry, gang. I wish I could give more details, but I just don't know. When I was writing and editing the NGFDA tab session book, we were informed by our legal counsel that the song was still under copyright and could not be used. I was just as amazed as everyone here. Copyrights can be renewed. Other than that, I just don't know. I hope everyone has come to realize how complicated music publishing can be. There is no really easy way to find out if a song is PD or not. Maybe some of the more experienced publisher/writers can help us out here with some resources. When I was recording an album with my band, Full Circle, we tried to be absolutely sure about copyrights on each and every song we did. That turned out to be totally impractical. Copyright lawyers charge about US$200 PER SONG to clear copyrights. We just did the best we could, paid for licenses for all the songs we knew were still under copyright, and took our chances on all the rest. This wasn't a totally blind stab, because there were a good number of songs we were pretty sure were PD. But even at that we were still taking chances. Our club tab book has 50 songs in it. To clear all of them for copyright would have cost US $10,000, which was totally impossible. So we had to either take the chance, given the best information we had, or just forget about producing our session book. Same with the band's album. Now, I agree with all the statements made on all sides
that the copyright system is necessary to protect the intellectual property
and the very livelihoods of the artists who create songs. I, myself, am
one of those artists. But the punitive nature of the system can bring devastating
results down on the heads of relatively innocent
So next time you buy a self-produced book or recording, I hope you will appreciate the risk an artist takes to bring the music to you. Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
The address is: http://ne1.bright.net/pdinfo/pdm2/index.html Hope this helps. Date: Monday, February 23, 1998
There is no really easy way to find out if a song is PD or not. With the advent of the web, the ASCAP and BMI song databases are easy to access. They won't answer all your questions - is it an arrangement? Is it an original? - but they'll move you along the road. Also there is the obvious course of reading the credits on CDs, but, as you point out, these cannot always be trusted, specially self-released ones. But the punitive nature of the system can bring devastating results down on the heads of relatively innocent and well-intentioned people who don't know they're breaking the law and never intended to break the law in the first place. As someone far more eloquent than I posted, ignorance, or good intentions, are no excuse. On the Tinker CD, there were two song composers who we were unable to contact. So we took the $96 or whatever it was we owed them and put it in separate accounts. If we ever find them, or they find us, at least we can say "Here's your money and here are the steps we took to contact you." So next time you buy a self-produced book or recording, I hope you will appreciate the risk an artist takes to bring the music to you. The artist certainly needs to do his/her best to reduce that risk by doing the appropriate homework. My $0.02. Date: Tuesday, February 24, 1998
I think that all of us who have put out recordings have some kind of horror story similar to the one Judy mentioned about people discussing in her booth how they were going to pirate the recordings for each other. We, however, are probably a more knowledgeable group on this subject than the the public as a whole. A case in point: One of my own horror stories is an exchange I had as I was returning home from the Ohio Renaissance Festival on weekend about a year and a half ago. I stopped to get gas just outside of the festival, still in my Renaissance "uniform" and went inside to get some soda and pay for the gas. The clerk was a young man, not quite as young as my son, who recognized me at once. "I was at the festival last weekend, and bought your CD, I really like it," etc., etc., he said as I stood there basking in his juvenile adulation with (no doubt) a silly grin on my face when he dropped his bombshell: "I liked it so much that I made copies for all my friends." The smile froze on my face....My teeth clenched...."Thank you very much," I managed to say as I paid for my gas and got out of there before it got (more) ugly. The point of the story is that this young man had no conception that he had even done any thing wrong. He really meant it as a compliment. "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." Goethe Date: Tuesday, February 24, 1998
Old Joe Clark has no known author. It probably originated sometime in the late 1800s as a song and later became a fiddle standard. It's been recorded many times since the 1920s. It was originally recorded for the Library of Congress in the early 1940s by a muscologist/folklorist Vance Randolph from the Ozark Mountain fiddlers. I have recordings by Doc Watson and Bill Spence and Fennig's All Star String Band, neither of which mentions any copyrights. There have been a variety of different lyrics written to the tune that might be copyrighted. I would think the tune itself is public domain. Date: Wednesday, February 25, 1998
I first checked on Public Domain Info's list. It wasn't there. This does not necessarily mean that the tune is under copyright, however, just that they do not have a positively identified public domain source for this tune. I then looked on Singout magazine's list, and it is listed here as "traditional." This is encouraging, but is not firm proof. I also found in my library a collection of folk tunes that was published in the forties that lists it as "traditional" as well. This is also encouraging, since this particular source, A Treasury of Folk Songs ed. by Slyvia and Ed Kolb seems to be pretty thorough about properly attributing the copyrighted songs that are in their book. Again, however, this is not firm proof. I think it is very likely that there is a public domain version of this song. I think it is also quite possible that the version that everyone knows is identifiable as someone's copyrighted ARRANGEMENT of this song, however. It is also possible that it is an old song that was recently "collected" by some folklorist, who then gets the copyright on it since he was the first to publish it. This is how Alan Lomax got the copyright on a lot of old "traditional" songs. The bottom line is, I still don't really know if it REALLY is public domain. The best way to be sure of this is if you could find a copy of a music book published before 1923 that contains the tune. This would establish the tune as public domain beyond doubt, and you could then use it as you see fit. It isn't in any of the old books I own, and if pdinfo doesn't have it listed, then it probably isn't in any of the old collections that I am likely to be able to lay my hands on easily either. You'd probably "get away" with using it, but unless you find a bonafide public domain source for this tune, it would be safer not to. Considering the possible outcome, it'd be foolish to use it without pretty firm proof that it is in the public domain. If anyone finds a public domain source for "Old Joe Clark," or can firmly identify the primary copyright holder, (not just of an arrangement or of a new set of words) I'd be happy to see it. My curiosity has been well and truly piqued. Date: Wednesday, February 25, 1998
I don't know about books, but it was recorded in 1924 by the Virginia family band "Fiddlin" Cowan Powers and Family. It was apparently the third best selling country tune of 1924. SO, maybe just wait a year and you should be sure to be okay. However, since I have at least three books of my own with music and guitar and mandolin tabs for Old Joe Clark that say it's traditional and it's not really, if you publish the tab, there's a lot of other people who are more likely to get sued before you. Date: Wednesday, February 25, 1998
S previously shared from Bill Staines:
After fielding private e-mails today off the top of my head, I dug through my books and pulled out the following -- How to Make and Sell Your Own Recording by Diane Rapaport. The 1992 edition was published by Prentice-Hall. This is a great book on all aspects of recording including copyright protection and mechanical licenses. It states pretty clearly that once a song is recorded, other artists have the right to record it as well, provided they file a mechanical license. The book provides a sample form that can be used to request the license from the songwriter or publisher. In my experience, the rate of the royalty payment is negotiable - record companies may request to pay less than the statutory rate. It is also common for them to pay only on sales rather than the total of manufactured units. I've heard conflicting opinions on this for years. Rapaport refers to paying "the statutory rate (or the fee negotiated) for the use of the song, based on records actually sold" and the need to "make a regular accounting of all records sold and returned." Inquiring minds may also want to consult Billboard's This Business of Music book. Take care, y'all, Date: Tuesday, March 24, 1998
Date: Wednesday, March 25, 1998
House OKs Music License Fee Bill
WASHINGTON (AP) - Thousands of small businesses - including restaurants, barbershops and funeral parlors - wouldn't have to pay licensing fees for piped-in copyrighted music under a bill the House passed Wednesday. The licensing provision was added to a broader measure that passed by voice vote. The bill would extend copyright protections for creative works, such as music, by 20 years, and simultaneously bring U.S. law in line with existing international copyright policies. The proposal advanced to the Senate. The fight over music licensing fees was portrayed by fee opponents as one that pitted struggling small businesses against greedy musicians. Business owners won the first round, with an assist from the National Restaurant Association, the National Federation of Independent Businesses and other associations. But singers and songwriters said the fact that many of them are small-business people who also are struggling to make a living was lost in the lengthy debate over the provision. "It affects the guy who only has one hit record, and doesn't make a great deal of money," said Motown star Smokey Robinson, who lobbied House members and watched the debate. "The songs are our business. This is what we sell." The sponsor, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, WI, described instances in which music licensing societies collect multiple payments for material, or small business owners are hassled for money that they didn't know should have been paid. "That's a scam, and that's what my amendment reforms,'' he said. The amendment, adopted 297-112, would exempt all businesses with up to 3,500 square feet of space from paying fees for music broadcast via radio or television unless admission is charged. Also covered are larger business that broadcast their entertainment with no more than six speakers and/or two television sets. The exemptions don't apply to live or recorded music where the proprietor controls the content, Sensenbrenner said. It also would allow business owners with rate disputes with a music licensing society to settle them locally. They currently are resolved in court in New York. One music licensing group, the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, (so that's what ASCAP. means, folks!) said its members could lose at least 15 percent of their income - ranging from a few hundred to several thousands of dollars annually - if the exemption became law. ASCAP's average licensing fee amounts to $1.58 per day, which Robinson called a ``very, very, very menial'' price for restaurants and retail establishments that operate daily. Criticism of the provision was abundant. Rep. Lloyd Dogget, D-Texas, said it was based on the simple premise that "if you can't get someone else's property for free, then pass a law to allow you to steal it from them." Rep. Joe Scarborough, R-Fla., complained that the provision trampled on the property rights of musicians. "For us to just gut their ability to earn a living ... is absolutely ridiculous,'' he said. Earlier, the House defeated, by a vote of 259-150, a narrower amendment by Rep. Bill McCollum, R-Fla., that would have limited the licensing fee exemption to restaurants and bars only It also would have used federal courts to resolve rate disputes.Supporters said extending the copyright law would benefit the United States. U.S. copyright law gives authors, songwriters and other artists exclusive rights to their work for life, plus 50 years. Most European countries offered the same protection until 1995, when the policy was extended to life plus 70 years.Under an 1886 international treaty to which the United States adheres, member countries must honor the copyright protections of foreign works sold and used commercially in their countries. But without a change, many American works would become widely available at dates earlier than their foreign counterparts, jeopardizing millions of dollars in export revenue, lawmakers said. Hmmmmm..... Date: Wednesday, March 25, 1998
It's a good topic for a special festival workshop/discussion group. Date: Thursday, March 26, 1998
So, Yes AA, Buckeye Festival could stand a enlightening workshop for copyright matters. Thank for the suggestion! Please contact Louise or the gals from Sweetwater. Date: Thursday, March 26, 1998
I think this would be a great workshop topic ( or roundtable disscusion) ANYWHERE at any festival...lots if us "newbies" who enjoy playing in public don't want to get burned....nor do we want to unintentially step on toes.... Date: Friday, March 27, 1998
|
