Project Opus

Already a member? SIGN IN HERE.
Username:  Password: Forgot your password?
Sign up as a FAN or ARTIST.

Copyfraud: The Other Side of Stealing Music

December 13, 2007, 11:43 am
Jeremy Lim
Artist, West Vancouver

Posts: 435
Joined: 2007-02-18
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago

The original post was found on Boing Boing.

Quote:
Copyfraud is everywhere. False copyright notices appear on modern reprints of Shakespeare's plays, Beethoven's piano scores, greeting card versions of Monet's Water Lilies, and even the U.S. Constitution. Archives claim blanket copyright in everything in their collections. Vendors of microfilmed versions of historical newspapers assert copyright ownership. These false copyright claims, which are often accompanied by threatened litigation for reproducing a work without the owner's permission, result in users seeking licenses and paying fees to reproduce works that are free for everyone to use.

Copyright law itself creates strong incentives for copyfraud. The Copyright Act provides for no civil penalty for falsely claiming ownership of public domain materials. There is also no remedy under the Act for individuals who wrongly refrain from legal copying or who make payment for permission to copy something they are in fact entitled to use for free. While falsely claiming copyright is technically a criminal offense under the Act, prosecutions are extremely rare. These circumstances have produced fraud on an untold scale, with millions of works in the public domain deemed copyrighted, and countless dollars paid out every year in licensing fees to make copies that could be made for free. Copyfraud stifles valid forms of reproduction and undermines free speech.


December 13, 2007, 1:34 pm
Melodic Energy ...
Artist, Vancouver

Posts: 194
Joined: 2007-02-21
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Rights or Wrongs

I'm sure that an advanced payment to those who create monumental additions to the public domain, is the best way to go. If all creations are valued by their usefulness to society and their estimated longevity and this value is allotted to the creator at the time of creation (or while in progress), then the creators could then have the resources and motivation to do their thing.
There may be hardships in setting up a system like this but it will be easier to maintain the copyright distributions because all work would go into the public domain and be free for the taking, without guilt of thievery from the creator, who has already been paid.

Let's fix the copywrongs
mary krismaz

--

xaliman
http://melodicenergy.com

Save the environment and use 100% recycled art.


December 13, 2007, 7:02 pm
amos dettonville
Artist, Louisville

Posts: 461
Joined: 2005-10-02
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
letters I've written, never meaning to send...
Quote:
Anyone can create a version or arrangement of a public domain song, and then copyright that version under his/her name. This makes this particular arrangement of the song untouchable by anyone except the arranger, even though the original song from whence it came is still part of the public domain.
http://www.royaltyfreemusic.com/public-domain/

with music - one can always, legally use a song under public domain - and the safest way is to produce your own arrangement.

the reason - some of the above mentioned is not (legally speaking) copyfraud - is because the works have been altered (in many cases) and then copyrighted under the new sound, arrangement, look, etc.

andy warhol's coca-cola prints and campbell's soup cans - are covered in several ways. fair use - and rearrangement. even though it is the likeness of a copyrighted image it has been changed so as to be its own work - and something protected as warhol's own creation.

ultimately, they should be protected because it's an artist rendition of something in seen in the public square. if you cannot paint a copyrighted image of a soup can - then you couldn't photograph Times Square or most restaurants.


soup anyone?


maybe just one can of soup?


or maybe a coke and a smile?

i am not saying there isn't copy fraud ... it's just that art is reflecting of the work of others - even public domain music and songs.

companies have built themselves around copyrighting collections of "arrangements" of songs that are in the public domain. even christmas carols and such.

i don't know if i am saying any of this is right or wrong - mostly just running my mouth (erh, um keys) and adding my $22.50 (inflation don'tcha know).

peac4d.
amos

p.s. jem - you might like this article and site:
http://www.godspy.com/culture/Andy-Warhol-Transubstantiating-the-Culture.cfm
http://www.godspy.com

--

peac4d.
amos

border="0" alt="count the flying monkeys!">
count the flying monkeys!


December 13, 2007, 8:20 pm
Melodic Energy ...
Artist, Vancouver

Posts: 194
Joined: 2007-02-21
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Food for thought

A creative person could live off of a can of soup for ever!

If you make arrangements Eye-wink

--

xaliman
http://melodicenergy.com

Save the environment and use 100% recycled art.


December 13, 2007, 8:26 pm
amos dettonville
Artist, Louisville

Posts: 461
Joined: 2005-10-02
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
um um good, um um good, that's what campbell soup is...

dang that's both funny and true.

touche!

peac4d.
amos

--

peac4d.
amos

border="0" alt="count the flying monkeys!">
count the flying monkeys!


December 14, 2007, 8:32 am
amos dettonville
Artist, Louisville

Posts: 461
Joined: 2005-10-02
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Guardian Angels

sitepronews had a piece on copyrights, etc.

an interesting read: http://www.sitepronews.com/archives/2007/dec/14.html

Quote:
Copyright – Any written text, artistic work, or computer program is automatically protected by copyright. Anything you or I write, be it published, online text or unpublished, handwritten text, is copyrighted. Also anything we draw, paint, photograph, film, or compose is also protected by copyright. Copyright can be registered, but it doesn't have to be in order for it to be illegal for individuals to copy someone else's work. Copyright also lasts for an extremely long time. Usually it lasts the duration of the author's life plus fifty years at which point it becomes a part of the public domain and can be used by anyone.

just something to add to the discussion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aabqmOX720

peac4d.
amos


Abomination from the Mysterious Ominous Sanctuary


--

peac4d.
amos

border="0" alt="count the flying monkeys!">
count the flying monkeys!


December 14, 2007, 9:33 am
uberbelly
Artist, Vancouver

Posts: 738
Joined: 2006-02-08
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
always such fun A.M.O.S.


Unholy, Bloodthirsty, Explorer-Reaping, Baby-Eating Lycanthrope Lusting for Yuckiness


Get Your Monster Name

--

Give Me Something Real!


December 14, 2007, 9:52 am
Jeremy Lim
Artist, West Vancouver

Posts: 435
Joined: 2007-02-18
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Hmm ... so, what's the

Hmm ... so, what's the textbook definition of arrangement? How much would a song have to be moved around to be re-arranged? If I drop it an octave, is that re-arrangement?

How about cover songs? If I remix a song, and post it to YouTube, but expect no payment from it whatsoever, is that legal? Are royalties due?


December 14, 2007, 10:53 am
uberbelly
Artist, Vancouver

Posts: 738
Joined: 2006-02-08
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
good question Mr. Lim

I added some of my own lyrics to this Fleetwood Mac tune, along with it being my own arrangement...does this mean I should register it with SOCAN as being part owner in the copyright? So, therefore, if someone covered my cover of this tune I should receive royalties as well?

--

Give Me Something Real!


December 14, 2007, 12:12 pm
Jeremy Lim
Artist, West Vancouver

Posts: 435
Joined: 2007-02-18
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
December 14, 2007, 9:10 pm
amos dettonville
Artist, Louisville

Posts: 461
Joined: 2005-10-02
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
trying to forget my feelings of love...

covers
on cover tunes - cdbaby has a pretty straight forward bit on this:
http://cdbaby.net/dd-covers

arrangements
you cannot rearrange a song that is "not in the public domain" and copyright it as your own. you'd want to follow the trail of advice given on http://cdbaby.net/dd-covers and here http://cdbaby.net/dd-faq

i noticed the double negative above. a song in the public domain can be set to a new arrangement and then be copywritten as a protected work.

doppleganger arrangements
no, i don't think dropping a song one octave would count as composing a unique score or arrangement of notes around a song. the way the companies in hymnals and such hold copyrights is by owning arrangements or tunes used under various hymns (it's one of the ways). hyfrydol is the name of one of these pieces - and several arrangements of this are still copyrighted - even though it's in the public domain (has been since 1944 i think).

music is unique
music is a bit more narrow than - soup cans and coke bottles (and logos) when used in a work of art. it used to be that one could not borrow more than 7 notes worth of lyrics directly from another copyrighted song - one note more and it would be illegal.

and i am wrong about the 7 notes:
No freebies
“I sampled only six bars; I thought that as many as eight is free.” That is simply a record industry urban legend. There is no “free zone” when it comes to copying someone else's work. Keep in mind that a great hook in a song could be as short as one measure or even a couple of seconds. If it's identifiable, clear it.
http://emusician.com/tutorials/emusic_clear/

pretty complicated: http://www.illegal-art.org/audio/historic.html
interesting paper download: www.princeton.edu/culturalpolicy/studentpap/undergrad%20thesis1%20JLind.pdf

publishing and publishers
i do not know what the point of crossing that line is now. i have friends who know much more about this publishing stuff than i do. i think anyone serious about their music in the marketplace might want to know - hire - consult - or something with a publishing agent or publisher - who's job it is to keep up with this stuff and it's changes.

licensing and publishing
and one would want to know about licensing too.
http://www.harryfox.com/index.jsp

it seems that issues around sampling have the most info (makes sense): a google search on sampling and copyright

this might just be one of those topics - the more you know - the less you know Eye-wink

peac4d.
amos


Abomination from the Mysterious Ominous Sanctuary


--

peac4d.
amos

border="0" alt="count the flying monkeys!">
count the flying monkeys!


December 14, 2007, 9:19 pm
amos dettonville
Artist, Louisville

Posts: 461
Joined: 2005-10-02
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
it was a graveyard smash

ah, so many excellent monsters!!!

remove the align=center from the code - and it will move the image over to the left of the page.

there's a cyborg name generator there too? haven't tried it yet.

speaking of zepplin - erh, um copyright click and listen to these (links should open in new window):

zepplin
muddy waters

i once heard a whole album of the old blues songs that zepplin took and used as their own. zepplin really did make the songs their own - and that's all zepplin ever was - a blues band AMPED - that did real blues brit style - but the influences of the greats come very close to being rip offs on many zepplin songs.

--

peac4d.
amos

border="0" alt="count the flying monkeys!">
count the flying monkeys!


December 14, 2007, 9:27 pm
amos dettonville
Artist, Louisville

Posts: 461
Joined: 2005-10-02
Posted: 1 year 3 weeks ago
just a face in the crowd...


Artificial Machine Optimized for Sabotage


Get Your Cyborg Name

--

peac4d.
amos

border="0" alt="count the flying monkeys!">
count the flying monkeys!