Klarinet Archive - Posting 000158.txt from 2012/01

From: Oliver Seely <oseely@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] community bands
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:49:20 -0500


What I read here is another example of Copyright Law having run amok. Wher=
eas in 1790, the first copyright law was enacted under the new U.S. Constit=
ution and provided for a term of
14 years with privilege of renewal for term of 14 years ("if any of the au=
thors be living"),

and today we have the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act which extende=
d the term of =

copyright protection for most works to the life of the author plus 70 =

years after the author=92s death. =

Add to that the routine exercise of lying among alleged owners of intellect=
ual property (I have a number of Bibles with copyright statements, with no =
mention that the only thing copyrightable MAY be the preface, accompanying =
text and the explanatory notes in the margins -- and even those may not be =
sufficiently creative to get over the bar in a civil court -- has anyone co=
nsidered the hubris one would need to try to copyright God's Word as his ow=
n? Isn't that called plagiarism? 8-) ), copyright statements on works clea=
rly in the public domain, ignoring that the U.S. Supreme Court decided in F=
eist Publications Inc. vs. Rural Telephone Services in 1991 that great labo=
r (the "sweat of the brow" argument) spent in reformatting, alphabetizing a=
nd so on just is not sufficiently creative to be copyrightable, and intimid=
ation. Most copy services will reject a copy request if a copyright statem=
ent is spotted. Never mind that the request may easily be interpreted to b=
e an exercise of the fair use doctrine. If there's a copyright statement, =
no copy will be made because, understandably, the service doesn't want to b=
e sued. The amusing article offered by woodwind.org from the Duke Universi=
ty Law School pretty much sets the stage in this context:

http://www.woodwind.org/clarinet/Misc/46DLJ241.html =

As some of you folks know, every public domain piece of music I sequence an=
d put up on my web page is accompanied by my little joke at the bottom:

Copyright =A92011 by Oliver Seely and assigned to the public domain. It's =
a joke I guess because I'm saying: This work is copyrighted by ME, and don=
't you forget it. Then I give it away.

I took one of my pieces in to a local copy service because I needed it to b=
e in booklet form. The woman at the desk said, "Oh, this is copyprighted. =
We don't do any work which is copyrighted." "Do you know who Oliver Seely=
is," I intoned gravely. "No," she responded. Then assuming my best aris=
tocratic pose I said, " 'tis I. And notice," as I pointed to the work," I'=
ve assigned it to the public domain." "Doesn't matter," she responded. "W=
e're not supposed to copy anything which is copyrighted." So I had to go o=
ver the self-service machine in the shop and do it myself.

No wonder there is widespread contempt for copyright law.

Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox by noting that the libraries of most amate=
ur bands have lots of music published after 1923, and all those bands play =
those pieces at free concerts without any performance agreement with anyone=
. Don't know of anyone who has gotten into trouble over the matter. Maybe=
they actually are not in compliance with U.S. Copyright Law, but as Lauren=
says in the Catherine Tate Show, "I ain't bovvered."

Oliver

> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Doug Potter [mailto:doug@-----.net]
> >> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 12:07 AM
> >> To: 'The Klarinet Mailing List'
> >> Subject: Re: [kl] community bands
> >>
> >> Most of what we play is public domain (out of copyright - which appears
> >> to be the same as the performance rights). =

=

_______________________________________________
Klarinet mailing list
Klarinet@-----.com
To do darn near anything to your subscription, go to:
http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com