Klarinet Archive - Posting 000051.txt from 1998/08
From: "Frederick S. Sterns" <fssterns@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Copywrite Question for "Experts"!
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 22:41:52 -0400
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Frederick S. Sterns <fssterns@-----.net>
>To: klarinet@-----.org>
>Date: Sunday, August 02, 1998 9:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [kl] Copywrite Question for "Experts"!
>
>
>>Mark...I wrote in part...
>>>
>>>It is further against the law to copy music you _own_ (not rent) for your
>>>personal use so that you can mark it up & play it without marking up your
>>>original. Copying the music for any reason is a no-no.
>>
>>...here, of course, you seem to be restating the conclusion rather than
>>making a legal or logical argument. I guess I'll have to read the copywrite
>>law and a treatise or two on it to gain a better understanding. But don't
>>misinterpret my intentions here, Mark...I genuinely appreciate the
>>information and knowledge...including the web site reference. I just hope
>>the Music Publishers Association gives an objective and balanced view of
>>the copywrite law and includes all sides of the case where there are
>>divergeant opinions on the meaning of a particular segment of the law.
>>
>>>For more information, visit http://host.mpa.org/ (The Music Publishers
>>>Association homepage). I have personally delved pretty deep into this
>>>subject because of my Web pages.
>
>
>MENC (www.menc.org/copy/) has a very extensive discussion on their site of
>copyright law as it applies to music in general and music education in
>particular. There is also an area in the Library of Congress website
>(lcweb.loc.gov.copyright/title17/). Having taken a fairly extensive look
>through the materials at these sites in preparation for an inservice session
>I did for our music faculty, I have to second Mark's summary. Our ideas of
>common sense aside, with a few very explicitly described exceptions (meeting
>four specific criteria for "fair use") for specific educational uses, the
>copyright holder has the exclusive right to make copies of printed material
>(including music) for any reason. The criteria for fair use are listed in
>any of several places on the web (try searching for "copyright law" with any
>of the search engines for still other sites). Jay Althouse wrote a booklet
>published, I think, by Alfred Publishing Company discussing music copyright.
>Whether as a practical matter you would ever be caught, arrested or
>prosecuted for the copying you're describing is beside the legal point. What
>you're talking about is a violation of copyright and also, assuming the
>materials were rented, a violation of the rental agreement.
>
>Karl Krelove
>Lead Teacher for Music, Neshaminy School District
Karl...thanks much...I truly appreciate both you amd Mark taking the time
to cover this complex, and certainly interesting subject in depth.
I guess my "common sense" has overwhelmed both sides of my brain! I
understand easily what you both are saying but I still find it difficult to
accept [emotionally] the notion that the right to use and play a manuscript
in public for profit pursuant to a contract does not carry with it an
impled right for an individual musician to copy all or a portion of that
music for the exclusive purpose of carrying out the licensed performance.
After all, the licensor has an equal interest in his work being presented
in the best way.
Please note that in assuming this conclusion, I don't question the
copywrite holder's exclusive right to make copies...I say only that there
may be, and should be, an implied right in authorized users ....*unless*
the rental or sale contract specifically prohibits copying for *any*
purpose,including the one I defined...to make copies exclusively to support
the purpose of the orginal license.
But I will begin my "career" in copywrite law by examining the resources
you and Mark offer. Will I become so mired in technicalities and legal
jargon that I'll regret I ever raised the issue? :-)
Regards...Fred
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
