Goodnight Kiss Music (BMI) & Scene Stealer Music
(ASCAP) Daily Updates
Goodnight Kiss Music (BMI) & Scene Stealer Music
(ASCAP)
May 28 - June 20, 2000
Today's Topic: THE COPYRIGHT RANGE WARS OF THE YEAR 2000
This "war" started on a
list I'm a member of, on May 24, 2000.
Here's how it keeps going and going and going....
(The <words in between these brackets>
imply one person quoting a post before it.)
FROM JOHN:
Fist James, thanks for the info on spinner.com. It
is patterned on
netradio but designed much better and is far superior.
Re: the ethics of recording from it.
I understand the importance
of purchasing cds, firstly so the artists and composers receive
royalties, and secondly so the record companys can see there is a
need
for them to release this material. My problem is that there
is SO much
music out there in the various genres I enjoy that I could not
possibly
afford to purchase a tenth of what I hear and enjoy.
However, and I will use last night as an
example, the free
recording off the Net can expose one to something or someone new
and
lead them to buy a cd that they would not normally be aware of.
Listening to spinner last night (and
taping several of the cuts) I
heard Jimmy Rushing, backed by the Dave Brubeck Quartet, singing
"River,
stay away from my Door", a song I was previouly only aware
of by
Sinatra. Well, as a result of hearing Rushings version I
have written
down the info on the cd and intend to purchase it in the near
future.
Until I do buy it, I still have that one track from
it on a cassette
to enjoy, and I am sure that a lot of future purchases will come
as a
result of finding gems like that over the Net. To me, those
songs that
I hear on spinner.com do enhance my musical collection, but also
act as
a 'sampler' for future purchases.
John
FROM JANET:
<< Re: the ethics of recording from
it. I understand the
importance of purchasing cds, firstly so the artists and
composers
receive royalties, and secondly so the record companys can see
there
is a need for them to release this material. My problem is
that
there is SO much music out there in the various genres I enjoy
that I
could not possibly afford to purchase a tenth of what I hear and
enjoy.>>
"Your Honor...
I understand the importance of paying for jewelry, as the miners
must have equipment for digging, and their families (allegedly)
need to eat... but there are just SO many beautiful gems,
and I could never afford them all... so just taking what I wanted
seemed to be the right thing to do ... BECAUSE, Your Honor...."
<<the free
recording off the Net can expose one to something or someone new
and
lead them to buy a cd that they would not normally be aware of.
Listening to spinner last night (and
taping several of the cuts)
I heard Jimmy Rushing, backed by the Dave Brubeck Quartet,
singing "River, stay away from my Door", a song I was
previouly only
aware of by Sinatra. Well, as a result of hearing Rushings
version I
have written down the info on the cd and intend to purchase it in
the
near future.>>>
"As it turns out, your honor, my cousin Ethel came over and
was in
such admiration of my necklace, that she is going out to
buy one,
first thing tomorrow. She also told me that Sarah
Ferguson has a necklace JUST like it... I had never realized
how popular these gems were! I am going to buy
the WHOLE set in the near future.."
<< Until I do buy it, I still have that one
track from it on a
cassette to enjoy, and I am sure that a lot of future purchases
will
come as a result of finding gems like that over the Net. To
me,
those songs that I hear on spinner.com do enhance my musical
collection, but also act as a 'sampler' for future purchases.
>>
"Until I do buy it, I'm sure the company is glad to have me
as a walking billboard advertising their jewelry for free.... as
a
matter of fact, I think they should pay me for doing it.
This
necklace not only enhances my jewelry collection, but also
reminds me
I might want to buy more later."
Stealing is stealing. Sorry, John. I don't care if
it's
my diamond necklace or my song, you only have the right to it
that we BOTH agree to. If I don't agree my necklace or my
song
should be given away, then that is my choice. I think if
America
thought of Intellectual Property with the same respect they do
physical property, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
You think it's easy writing a great song? (I know that most
people
believe there's nothing to it.) Getting any interest from
the overwhelming Industry? Then getting success with any
paying
usages after that?? A writer is beyond lucky to ever see one.
Now
you are saying I am to give you my blessing to take it for free
because that might make you want to buy it or something like it
down
the road?
No.
(I'm sorry if I made a bunch of listers mad. But No.)
Janet Fisher
Goodnight Kiss Music (BMI)
Scene Stealer Music (ASCAP)
www.goodnightkiss.com
"How am I writing? (323) 969-9993"
FROM ROBIN:
<< Re: the ethics of recording from it.
I understand the
> importance of purchasing cds, firstly so the artists and
composers
> receive royalties ...
> My problem is that
> there is SO much music out there in the various genres I
enjoy that I
> could not possibly afford to purchase a tenth of what I hear
and
> enjoy.>>
>
Therefore there should
be a way for you get it without cost and
with no compensation given to the composer or performer.
Hmm?
> Stealing is stealing. Sorry, John. I don't care
if it's
> my diamond necklace or my song, you only have the right to
it
> that we BOTH agree to. If I don't agree my necklace or
my song
> should be given away, then that is my choice.
>
> (I'm sorry if I made a bunch of listers mad. But No.)
> Janet Fisher
Thanks for the
commentary, Janet. I'm in agreement with you.
FROM CAM:
Hi Janet,
I would like to start this reply by stating that I am in
agreement with you.
Being a photographer I often run into the same sort of problems
with
people copying my photographs. Unfortuately modern technology has
made this such a simple procedure that it has become far to
acceptable.
Your analogy of the theft of gems is a good one but unfortunately
the
laws of the land definitely draw a distinction between the theft
of
physical property and the theft(borrowing) of intellectual
property. The
copying of music for personal use seems to fall into that large
grey area
of "fair use" and does not constitute theft in the same
light as theft of
personal property. On the other hand, copying and reselling this
music
for personal financial gain is indeed theft.
The argument that the copying of music for personal use does lead
to sales
of the musician's recordings actually has a lot of validity. I
believe MP3 is
using this argument in their defence and they have statistics to
back it up.
I think the whole premise behind Spinner is to sell more CD's by
providing
this free service on the web, and I'll bet you it's working well
at doing just that.
Not that I am in total agreement with this new dispursement of
music over the
web (MP3) but the fact that it is a great promotional vehicle and
does lead to
sales of music which may have not been heard if it wasn't for
services such as
Spinner, MP3.com, Napster, cannot be denied.
FROM DY:
This may be a strange post - but consider what happened
during the
musicians strike in the 40's. Now we've heard from Janet F.
This
gives you a new feel of what was going on at that time between
consumers
and generators of music in the industry in the 40's. It
seems to me
that a workable solution to satisy generators of music for their
efforting has not been adequately or realistically found yet.
The new
technologies including the web have grown faster than the legal
minds
and semantics regarding rights can handle.
Consider - if you could run a PC scanner over a Lexus and it
would
duplicate the vehicle. This sounds great to consumer ears,
but it would
be disastrous to the auto industry and any other future
industries where
this would be applied.
ASCAP and BMI even working together, would probably not satisfy
the
needs of "music generators" who aren't members of those
groups. So
you've got to appreciate the life blood threat that is involved
in what
our Janet Fisher is expressing.
FROM PATTY:
Dear Janet (and all),
Does this mean I have no right to sell any
music I have, over the years,
acquired at my garage sale? And am I a thief if I buy some
music at somebody
else's garage sale? The artists are not being recompensed
for their property
here....
FROM CATHY:
Patty,
I just thought of this other inquiry with regards to your
question on song
sheets and copyrights -- would it also depend on whether the
company who sold
that particular song sheet, was still in business? Also the
arrangements of
these songs may be different than the current arrangements today
of the same
song; Would this affect the copyright status of that particular
sheet and the
year it came out? I'm probably talking a bunch of nonsense. :}
But I've been
wondering about your question, myself.
BACK TO JOHN's RESPONSE:
Sorry, but stealing is illegal, recording from radio, TV
or the net is
legal. My recording music from the Net deprives NO ONE of
anything, nor
does my collection of 2000-2500 movies and concerts recorded from
Televison or any bootleg cassettes or videos I may happen to have.
As a matter of fact, I would not even be
convicted of stealing your
diamonds if you were to deliver THEM to my house and give them to
me.
CAM'S RESPONSE:
> Janet Fisher wrote:
>
> Stealing is stealing. Sorry, John. I don't care
if it's
> my diamond necklace or my song, you only have the right to
it
> that we BOTH agree to. If I don't agree my necklace or
my song
> should be given away, then that is my choice. I think
if America
> thought of Intellectual Property with the same respect they
do
> physical property, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
>
> Hi Janet,
> I would like to start this reply by stating that I am in
agreement with you.
> Being a photographer I often run into the same sort of
problems with
> people copying my photographs. Unfortuately modern
technology has
> made this such a simple procedure that it has become far to
acceptable.
>
> Your analogy of the theft of gems is a good one but
unfortunately the
> laws of the land definitely draw a distinction between the
theft of
> physical property and the theft(borrowing) of intellectual
property. The
> copying of music for personal use seems to fall into that
large grey area
> of "fair use" and does not constitute theft in the
same light as theft of
> personal property. On the other hand, copying and reselling
this music
> for personal financial gain is indeed theft.
>
> The argument that the copying of music for personal use does
lead to sales
> of the musician's recordings actually has a lot of validity.
I believe MP3 is
> using this argument in their defence and they have
statistics to back it up.
> I think the whole premise behind Spinner is to sell more
CD's by providing
> this free service on the web, and I'll bet you it's working
well at doing just that.
> Not that I am in total agreement with this new dispursement
of music over the
> web (MP3) but the fact that it is a great promotional
vehicle and does lead to
> sales of music which may have not been heard if it wasn't
for services such as
> Spinner, MP3.com, Napster, cannot be denied.
FROM COLIN:
<< Sorry, but stealing is illegal, recording from
radio, TV or the net is
legal. My recording music from the Net deprives NO
ONE of anything, nor
does my collection of 2000-2500 movies and concerts
recorded from
Televison or any bootleg cassettes or videos I may happen
to have. >>
You are actually infringing copyright which is of course illegal.
Copyright is owned by the Radio station, the Television station
and the owners of the recorded work that is broadcast.
Recording off the radio and the TV is illegal.
However, no one has yet found a way to stop it or
to make a charge for doing it, although many have tried,
particularly in the USA where tapes, cassettes and CD-Rs
are taxed specially.
Copyright law is complex and can be different in different
countries, i.e in the UK copyright lasts 50 years in the USA
it lasts 75 years and is renewable.
Basically someone owns the copyright and wants payment every time
it is performed.
FROM ROBIN:
You are correct, Colin. I found this item on
another group which
pertains
to this discussion.
Napster Copyright Defense Rejected
Story Filed: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 10:57 AM EDT
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A federal judge has rejected Napster Inc.'s
defense against a music industry lawsuit that it is protected by
digital copyright law.
The Recording Industry Association of America sued San Mateo-based
Napster in December alleging copyright infringement and related
state law violations. The association accused Napster of
encouraging
users of the company's software and computer servers to trade
copyrighted music online without permission.
Napster officials said the company's service is legal because it
does not directly provide the copyrighted music -- only the means
to
get it.
However, U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel refused to grant
Napster's request that the lawsuit be dismissed, ruling Friday
that
it was not entitled to ``safe harbor'' under the Digital
Millennium
Copyright Act because it ``does not transmit, route or provide
connections for allegedly infringing material through its system.''
The ``safe harbor'' provision was crafted to protect Internet
service providers such America Online, AT&T Worldnet and
Earthlink
from illegal actions committed by their users.
``Although the Napster server conveys address information to
establish a connection between the requesting and host users, the
connection itself occurs through the Internet,'' Patel wrote.
FROM PAUL:
As an internet braodcaster that pays
for the rights to broadcast music, let me
put my two bits in.
The Digital Millenium Act actually protects the
right to make tape recordings via commercially
available recorders. It seems to prevent, however,
activities such as Napster. It also prevent us from
publishing a playlist so people can figure out
when a song is coming up.
Go figure!
And of course, want to mention our internet radio site
which is devoted to the music discussed on this list.
We have a 24/7 'live' station as well as over 40 hours of
on-demand speciality programs (each over 3 hours) devoted to
artists like Cole and Fitzgerald, composers like Gershwin
and Porter and genres like Swing and Broadway. Our
Sinatra program changes every week.
COLIN'S RESPONSE :
Nice to find an internet company who pay for the music.
Everything you quote only applies to the USA of course
but your "programmes" can be received anywhere in the
World.
Do you pay MCPS fees based on "The World" or only
"USA".
The Internet has blown a very large whole in the laws of
copyright.
JANET'S RESPONSE:
John wrote:
<<My recording music from the Net deprives NO ONE of
anything, nor
does my collection of 2000-2500 movies and concerts recorded from
Televison or any bootleg cassettes or videos I may happen to have.
As a matter of fact, I would not even be
convicted of stealing
your diamonds if you were to deliver THEM to my house and give
them
to me.>>
John, sorry again, but I am not DELIVERING them to your house.
Another thief took them from a source, uploaded them to a "fence"
(Spinner/Napster/MP3, et.al), and you WENT TO THE SITE and TOOK
THEM
FROM THE FENCE. Don't even begin to think that I delievered
MY work
to YOUR door. Why do you think it's called "bootleg"?
Whatever it is
that is your chosen profession, would you... (GO
TO PART TWO OF RANGE WARS)
Feel free to send YOUR thoughts on
this new Range War.
ANOTHER PIECE OF HISTORY UNFOLDS IN OUR LIFETIME....enjoy!
BACK TO MAIN PAGE
c.2000, Janet Fisher,
Goodnight Kiss