Klarinet Archive - Posting 000076.txt from 1998/08

From: "Kevin Fay (LCA)" <kevinfay@-----.com>
Subj: [kl] Copying = Stealing
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 13:03:43 -0400

If you copy a score, you're not buying another one. The economic effect is
exactly the same as if you went to a store, took 2 cans of beer off the
shelf, and paid for one (with the explanation that "it's only for my
personal use . . . ")

The argument of "who's to know?" is the theory commonly used by shoplifters.

Copying music is stealing, pure and simple. The rules are pretty clear on
when it's allowed--there are limited exceptions for criticism,
scholarship/study and parody. The rest of the time, the law says you need
to pay for each copy you use.

I am continually astonished that people don't get the idea that stealing
intellectual property is wrong. I see it every day in the software
context--people assume, I guess, that because it's so easy to copy software
that it must cost nothing to produce, so stealing it is OK. Not true: it
costs a great deal to produce, and stealing it is not OK.

The actual printing of sheet music is only a small part of the expense of
producing what you buy. Composers need to eat, too. Even for works in the
public domain (e.g., long-dead composers), the costs can be considerable.
Until recently, engravers were required--they didn't work for free. The
costs of distribution are high--especially for what is, in economic terms, a
very small market.

In certain instances, software is licensed on a "site license" basis, where
you pay a set fee and have the right to make as many copies in your
organization as you want. Some elementary band music may be licensed on
this basis--you get 1 copy of each part, and can photocopy away. Most of
the stuff you see, however, is not--you need to pay for each copy you use.
It is that simple.

kjf

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Charette [mailto:charette@-----.org]
Subject: Re: [kl] Copywrite Question for "Experts"!

From: Dirk Kussin <dirk@-----.de>

>It is also not allowed just to copy the score for my own use, without
>changing the score? (E. g. if I would like to treat the original score
>(in a booklet, collection ...) with care.) I cannot imagine.
>
>Is this strict copyright law restricted to musical prints? I'm pretty
>sure that it is allowed (at least in Germany) to copy a (say
>scientific) book in the library, and also to copy your own book, if it
>is for your own use. (If not: then the many copiers in the libraries
>of our universities would be illegal.) But I don't know if this is the
>same with musical material.

The International Copyright law, to which Germany subscribes, makes it
illegal to copy an entire work. The "fair use" statue applies to copies at
the library; excerpts of printed works may be copied for study, but not the
entire work. The US Copyright law is in most cases a bit more restrictive
than the International law. Music copyrights tend to be more restrictive
than "regular" (books, etc.) copyrights.

>On the other hand, if you copy a score for your own use, who cares
>for? Who will know it? Isn't the question of purely academical
>interest?

It is against the law. Whether or not you get prosecuted is of interest :^)

N.B. - I am _not_ a lawyer, nor do I claim any authority in this subject. My
knowledge has been gleaned from reading the applicable laws, cases, and
through conversations with lawyers pursuant to my thoughts of starting a
clarinet music rental company (along with making sure I stay out of trouble
on the Web site).

Re: Renting music
It's just about impossible to start a company to rent out music. Each work
that I rented out would have to have explicit permission from the copyright
holder, or I'd have to become a bona-fide library - which brought along
_another_ interesting set of required qualifications. I gave up the idea.

Mark Charette@-----.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------