 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: sinebar
Date: 2009-04-07 11:57
I had Pete Fountains version of "a closer walk with thee" transcribed into written music. My question is who owns the copy rights of the trascription? Me, Pete Fountain, or the transcriber dude? The reason I ask is I would like to share it with other clarient players. Not for sell but for free and legally of course.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-04-07 12:18
sinebar wrote:
> I had Pete Fountains version of "a closer walk with thee"
> transcribed into written music. My question is who owns the
> copy rights of the trascription? Me, Pete Fountain, or the
> transcriber dude?
No, maybe, maybe.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sinebar
Date: 2009-04-07 14:01
Mark Charette wrote:
> sinebar wrote:
>
> > I had Pete Fountains version of "a closer walk with thee"
> > transcribed into written music. My question is who owns the
> > copy rights of the trascription? Me, Pete Fountain, or the
> > transcriber dude?
>
> No, maybe, maybe.
Ok so if I don't own it, is it illegal to give it to others? Any lawyers out there?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-04-07 14:12
sinebar wrote:
> Mark Charette wrote:
>
> > sinebar wrote:
> >
> > > I had Pete Fountains version of "a closer walk with thee"
> > > transcribed into written music. My question is who owns
> the
> > > copy rights of the trascription? Me, Pete Fountain, or
> the
> > > transcriber dude?
> >
> > No, maybe, maybe.
>
> Ok so if I don't own it, is it illegal to give it to others?
Think about it ... giving away something you don't own ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2009-04-07 14:13
At the very least you need the blessings of the transcriber. (who owns the copyright of the transcription but not necessarily the rights to distribute such a transcription)
And you might need Pete's (or the composer's, whoever the owner of the tune may be) blessings to perform that piece in public.
FWIW, IANAL.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-04-07 14:19
sinebar wrote:
> Ok so if I don't own it, is it illegal to give it to others?
> Any lawyers out there?
The Pete Fountain recording is protected by copyright. It's probably the record company that owns the copyright.
If the transcription is of the Pete Fountain recording, then it is illegal for you to distribute it to others without the permission of the copyright owner.
The original hymn, on the other hand, is in the public domain (in fact, no one even knows who wrote it). So if you want to make *your own* New Orleans-jazz-style arrangement from the original hymn (as opposed to copying Pete Fountain's), you're free to do so.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sinebar
Date: 2009-04-07 15:02
At the very least you need the blessings of the transcriber. (who owns the copyright of the transcription but not necessarily the rights to distribute such a transcription)
And you might need Pete's (or the composer's, whoever the owner of the tune may be) blessings to perform that piece in public.
FWIW, IANAL.
--
Ben
The title of the song in question is "a closer walk with thee" which might be public domain by now since it's such an old song but I'm just speculating. However Pete's version of that song I'm sure is copywrited.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sinebar
Date: 2009-04-07 15:08
The original hymn, on the other hand, is in the public domain (in fact, no one even knows who wrote it). So if you want to make *your own* New Orleans-jazz-style arrangement from the original hymn (as opposed to copying Pete Fountain's), you're free to do so.
So what if I just changed a few notes on the transcription making it different than what Pete played it and different than what the transcriber did? Would that make it my own since it is public domain?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-04-07 15:24
sinebar wrote:
> So what if I just changed a few notes on the transcription
> making it different than what Pete played it and different than
> what the transcriber did? Would that make it my own since it
> is public domain?
Probably not. The transcription of Pete's arrangement is probably not public domain (it might or might not be - it depends on what a court might decide - it depends on how much original content has been added). You'd be making a new arrangement (which is what Pete did with a PD song) of an arrangement under copyright.
Start with the public domain song, arrange it to make it your own, and it probably will be your own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-04-07 17:41
The only safe route is to start with the original public domain tune and make your own original arrangement.
"Did I make it different enough?" is the wrong question when it comes to copyright. Copyright is about copying/modifying existing protected material. The question you should be asking yourself is, "Did I take from the copyrighted arrangement?"
Making changes to a copyrighted work (called making a "derivative work") is copyright infringement, too--not just copying.
My favorite example: George Harrison (of Beatles fame) was sued for copyright infringement and lost because the court found that he illegally created a derivative work "My Sweet Lord" from the Chiffons' hit "He's So Fine." (Personally, I like the George Harrison song better, but that's beside the point....)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2009-04-07 17:54
mrn wrote:
> My favorite example: George Harrison (of Beatles fame) was sued
> for copyright infringement and lost because the court found
> that he illegally created a derivative work "My Sweet Lord"
> from the Chiffons' hit "He's So Fine." ....)
Through "subconscious plagiarism" no less. Though the court found that Harrison had not consciously copied the song, (the genesis of the song showed it was an independent creation, at least on the conscious level), since Harrison admitted he had heard "He's So Fine" when it was popular, the tune was there at at least the subconscious level and the end result is that "My Sweet Lord" infringed on "He's So Fine."
And an interesting story around the whole thing about who ended up actually getting the money (bankruptcies, people working two sides of the disagreement, estimated royalties, more lawsuits, ...)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-04-07 21:40
Mark Charette wrote:
> Through "subconscious plagiarism" no less.
That's absolutely true. Kind of a weird (and scary) decision because of that. But it does demonstrate pretty clearly the notion that creating an unauthorized derivative work is infringement. It's not the same tune, even if it's very similar
What's even weirder is that had Harrison never heard the song before, but independently wrote the identical song, word for word and note for note, that would not be copyright infringement.
Or if he had consciously written a bona fide *parody* of "He's So Fine," that probably would have been considered a fair use, which would negate any finding of infringement.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
