OT: Difficult copyright issue.

Comments

farss wrote on 12/22/2003, 2:23 PM
Funny how the holidays seems to bring out the worst in us.

Seeing as how I started this thread, do I own the copyright to it?
Could there be a book / movie in it?
Just joking guys!

I hope some of you in the US are going to enjoy a white Xmas, here in Sydney looks like we'll all be as roasted as our turkey.

Can I take this opportunity to thank everyone whose helped and entertained me over the past year. I'd like to wish you all the best for the new year and a safe and enjoyable holiday. May your God, whoever he is, shower you with happiness, if you don't have one, good luck for the New Year anyway.
farss wrote on 12/22/2003, 2:37 PM
SPOT,
isn't that the issue in so many cases. We'd all be happy to just let common sense and good judgement rule our behaviour if it wasn't for those damn camels that don't have either of those trying to find a way to screw us.
BillyBoy wrote on 12/22/2003, 3:15 PM
I just wrote a new song and I will fiercely defend my creativity and immediately seek copyright protection.

Here it is:

"hmmmmmmmmm"

Copyright (C) 2003 BillyBoy, esquire

Caution, if you read it out loud, technically you may be "singing" my song and you may be violating copyright laws, according to SPOT anyway. I don't know what happens if you just read it to yourself quitely. I guess that's OK, but no humming. ;-)
pete_h wrote on 12/22/2003, 3:19 PM
This tread has really gone to far. The points have been made by all sides.

Can we not agree, to disagree and be done with it.

Most of the posters (arguing with each other) on this thread have contributed a vast amont of knowledge to this board and I'm sure most of us looking for advise here, appreciate their contributions, but this flaming must stop !!!

How about each one of you (and you know who you are...) just respond to this post by saying "Merry Christmas" or what-ever if you disagree with that phrase.

Let's move on......

Pete

DavidMcKnight wrote on 12/22/2003, 3:23 PM
Yep...it's just not a holiday around the house until old feelings get dredged up and you hear someone say...

"..what the hell is THAT supposed to mean?"

aw, Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays everyone!
winrockpost wrote on 12/22/2003, 3:36 PM
Damn, I miss Zippy.

Happy Holidays to All !!
Spot|DSE wrote on 12/22/2003, 3:52 PM
Happy Solstice to all, even you, Billyboy. Hoo'hzoo' naa' naa', doo' Keshmesh Hozhoo!
BillyBoy wrote on 12/22/2003, 4:03 PM
Merry Christmas

or in the more common North American native languages the following more or less also mean Merry Christmas, holiday greetings...

Alussistuaqegtaar
Danistayohihv
Gozhqq Késhmish
Hoesenestotse
I'TAAMOMAHKATOYIIKSISTSIKOMI
Kasmish Bihozhi
Mitho Makosi Kesikansi
Nitak hollo chito yukpa
Ojenyunyat Sungwiyadeson homungradon nagwutut
Yá'át'ééh Késhmish
pete_h wrote on 12/22/2003, 4:26 PM
I do have to admit, this has been one of the most entertaining threads I''ve seen.

Merry Christmas to ALL !!
jazzvalve wrote on 12/22/2003, 4:31 PM
Geez even when SPOT is nice backt o billyboy billyboy has to be a jerk.
Merry Xmas to everyone!!!!! Thanx for all the help in the forums. See you next year!!!!!!
ladyblade wrote on 12/23/2003, 6:36 AM
Do a search of the forums Jazzvalve.
You'll realize this is Billyboy nature.
He accuses and yells and name calls and later excuses it to being sick or as sick humor.
He does occasionally have something of value to add. Do like me and click "Ignore User".
SPOT is <very>passionate and helpful whether you agree or not. Maybe that is why he is a successful artist. I'm greatful that he tries to help. Billy appears as just an angry person. I hope he finds peace in 2004.
I pray the entire world finds greater peace in 2004. When you enjoy the freedom to even have these arguments? Please remember our families overseas who are enduring more significant battles. My son is with the 443rd Military Police Company serving in Iraq.
God bless & Merry Christmas to all.
CrazyRussian wrote on 12/23/2003, 7:52 AM
I also would like to extend my appreciation and thank you to everyone who contributed to this topic, very interesting, very educating, very timely. Thanks to all of you guys and Happy Holidays.

P.S. Has BB screen name was accidently swapped with Zippies??? No, no CAPS, then what happened to BB??? Has BillyBoy somehow magicaly transformed into BullyBulldog??? Come'n BB, we know you're better than this. Come to your sences!!!
BillyBoy wrote on 12/23/2003, 7:54 AM
Just further proof this forum like all others has its share of morons, fools and idiots.

Those are genuine Christmas greetings.

http://users.aol.com/WSCaswell/x-amer.htm
Spot|DSE wrote on 12/23/2003, 8:45 AM
Billyboy, I can cope with you pissing on me, but being a bigot AND insulting the mother of a veteran in one breath? Haven't you any shame at all?
C'mon man, cool out.
BTW, my post, literally translated, is "Walk in beauty, Happy Christmas" in my language. If you look at what you copy/pasted from some site, you'll see that 2 variations of what I said are contained therein. Our language, unlike English, doesn't have sarcastic retorts, so please know I meant what I wrote sincerely. To everyone, including you, Billyboy. Let this end, will ya?
Merry Christmas. May 2004 be the best year ever, for all of us.
BillyBoy wrote on 12/23/2003, 9:24 AM
So why don't you think my Christmas greeting wasn't genuine?

I don't know what tribe you belong to, so I found a site that has a Christmas greeting in MANY Native American tongues, just to cover the bases. I was writing my reply at the same time you were writing yours. While yours was posted first, I started BEFORE you posted looking for a site that had native American greetings.

For my trouble instead of you graciously accepting my Christmas greetings to you, here you are again trying to say I'm pissing on you. And now you call me a bigot and I'm the one throwing insults?

Your idea of 'letting it end ' is first needing to insult me again?

This whole thing started when YOU exploded over trying to defend your extreme views on copyrwrite issues. Instead of calmly defending your position you immediately attacked me. Go back and read how you originally responded.

I should just lay down and let you or anyone else jump up and down on me as much as you want? Then after your done I should be the one to apologize?

The hypocrisy of some posters here is indeed amazing.




Matt_Iserman wrote on 12/23/2003, 10:40 AM
BillyBoy, conflict resolution is one of my interests. Could you help me out here? You stated that Spot exploded and immediately attacked you. Could you please point out where?

By my reading, you called him hypocrite and accused him of selectively violating federal law. His immediate response was "calling me a hypocrite takes me aback." That seems like a rather sedate response to your charges.

Am I wrong?

Back to the topic... I believe that the reason copyright law is so casually violated is because, as written, some parts of the laws are too restrictive. Thus, the entire copyright law is ignored. If the laws were re-written to be more in line with what is generally believed to be the common sense "right and wrong" then I believe copyrights will be respected more widely.

Having looked at some of the pricing out there for music, it becomes quickly clear that the majority of the cost of some projects would be on licensing the music.

For example, I wanted to include a thirty second clip of a song from FreePlayMusic.com on my web site. (I had previously made a photo montage for personal use using the song and now would like to use a clip on my web site as a demo of video services.) I contacted FreePlay and told them my situation and what I wanted to use it for and they responded that it would cost me $250.

Now, as the copyright holder, they have every right to ask for whatever they like in payment; however, $250 is lkely to be more than I gross in a year as I largely do my work for fun and, thus, charge little or nothing ('cause the folks that come to me can afford little or nothing).

Is $250 a reasonable amount to charge for a thirty second clip that is included as a sample on a web site that fewer than 50 people might here in a year? Whatever your answer, this, to me, is why a lot of copyright law is casually ignored.

In my case, I am just thankful for Acid and its loops. I'll go throw my own music clip together. Maybe I can convince the wife I just saved her $250... I'd like to get some of Sony Loops discs...

Spot|DSE wrote on 12/23/2003, 11:47 AM
For 200.00, you can get 5 ACID disks on sale til the end of the year. This is a great savings. Click the Products tab up top, go to the ACID page.
P.S. Check out the Spanish Guitar library!! WOW! One of my faves. Also, I like Ilona, a vocal library.
BillyBoy wrote on 12/23/2003, 12:40 PM
Miserman... please read the ENTIRE thread, don't pick and choose a few words here and there or take it out of context and then form a conclusion.

I agree COMPLETELY with you. Its the way copyright laws are written. My whole point was illustrating how insane the laws are that something as asinine as a so-called "song" like Happy Birthday has full protection and yet someone can for all practical purposes copy big chunks of some computer manual, claim it as a "his" book and think that somehow that is different.

I didn't say SPOT did anything wrong, and I didn't infer that's what he did. I fully understand it is common practice and in fact almost unavoidable when explaining something like how to use software to not repeat large sections of what's in the manual doing little more if anything than changing a few words around. What I pointed out was to illustrate how goofy copyright laws are in general because they allow someone to write a book that way, but you can't sing for "profit" the stupid song Happy Birthday that has no more than six words. If that isn't goofy, then I don't now what is. If singing six words is wrong and "borrowing" thousands of words is OK, then for sure there is something broke in the copyright laws which was my whole point.

SPOT grossly over reacted. He needed to call me a bunch of names for my "sin" of making an illustration. Read again ALL of what I said. I said SPOT's book was good for newbies and also that most computer books are much about reperating of the manual. I'm sorry that truth upsets some people. I used that as an illustration since SPOT is always defending copyright laws in the extreme. My illustration was meant to show how it looks form the consumer side. Being a author myself a dozen years ago I too know what's its like to get ripped-off. Being a consumer as well, I also know what the other side is like.when you want to use a song, are willing to license it and have to jump through hoops, waste all kinds of times fill out a bunch of paperwork and even after all that worry about some third or forth or fifth party jumping up with their hand out as well. Its INSANE! It isn't that people are trying to rip "artists" off, rahter artists and the groups that support them put all kinds of roadblocks in place that in effect ends up shooting themselves in the foot resulting in less not more revenue which after all is what this issue is all about: MONEY.

Then I wish him a Merry Christmas in what I hoped was his native language, and he then says I'm pissing on him. And he is suppose to be the one with hurt feelings?

Give me a break.
RexA wrote on 12/23/2003, 1:19 PM
quoting...
>
Subject:
Posted by: busterkeaton (Ignore This User)
Date: 12/22/2003 3:35:07 PM



<

It seems that if you create a message where the Subject field is blank, then the message won't show up in "threaded view" on this forum. Actually there is an entry in threaded view, but no way to select it so it can be read. The message does show up in non-threaded view.

I guess this is a "feature" of this forum software package.

Nice message, though, Buster. I like your effective, but minimalist style. Almost as good as "rub sticks".
BD wrote on 12/23/2003, 1:40 PM
Merry/Happy Holidays, everyone!

May your personal giftgiver bring you everything that you deserve. And may he/she give an entire suite of Pinnacle products, including the older ones, to everyone named on your "Ignore this User" lists.

Brandon's Dad
filmy wrote on 12/23/2003, 6:00 PM
>>>For example, I wanted to include a thirty second clip of a song from FreePlayMusic.com on my web site. (I had previously made a photo montage for personal use using the song and now would like to use a clip on my web site as a demo of video services.) I contacted FreePlay and told them my situation and what I wanted to use it for and they responded that it would cost me $250.<<<

Are you sure it was Freeplay? The music they offer is free. Below is the exact wording of their agreement:
======
"FreePlay Music, Inc.'s musical compositions and recordings may be broadcast and/or copied for the purpose of being included in any programming or advertising being produced for transmission over any medium (including radio, television, satellite, wireless or internet media) worldwide. FreePlay music may also be synchronized in programming for the purpose of retail videotape or DVD distribution, if such distribution follows broadcast or transmission of the synchronized FreePlay music in the programming over radio, television, satellite, wireless or Internet media. These rights are also granted for personal, non-commercial uses. These reproduction rights (known as mechanical, synchronization and master recording rights) are absolutely FREE, and are granted in perpetuity. You're free to include FreePlay music in programming or advertising for distribution anywhere in the world."
========

I don't see where you even have to contact them and ask to use the material, that is why I can't see 1> why you contacted them and 2> why they would tell you it would cost $250 to use in a 30 second clip. Unless I have misunderstood the above agreement terms you can use the music for anything, anhwhere, at any time - for free.
kameronj wrote on 12/23/2003, 6:31 PM
I read the first two posts....and then the last two. Without going knee deep into the pool - the first post was incorrect as far as the law (in the States, anyway).

Again, maybe by not reading the threads it has already been covered - but current copyright law in place, if I purchase an audio CD I have every right to copy that CD to another CD, or put it on my computer for my personal use.

If you really want a good grip on the US copyright law, just go to the library of congress website and read it. It's out there for all to read.

One of the MAIN things registering my works with the copyright office does is protects my works - and I am the only person who has the right to make modifications to my works or (in the case of music) make derivitive works.

That is...unless someone wants to pay me to use my stuff. Then...they are not buying my work - only the right to use it for x-y-or z.

The current copyright laws and digital media acts and all the hollaring about P2P file sharing is basically trying to throw up a big smoke screen. The process and law is pretty simple.

Yes...there are some exceptions that are not as blatently clear - but it all pretty much works itself out in the end for those who just take the time to read the law (versus other websits blogging about the law or their own thoughts).

I have recorded and released a number of CDs, been nationally radio airplayed and blah blah blah....so if someone decides they want to purchase my album and copy it and sell it (or even give it away)....that's just wrong.

It's against the law - and it's wrong.

I worked hard on my product and wouldn't want some yahoo to treat it like nothing and do things with it that is against the law.

The law applies to more than just music too. Just think about creating a product and people getting their hands on it without paying for it (law or no law...that would be wrong)

But I digress.

As long as the thread was about US law - I can comment. If it wasn't - never mind my post.

Merry Christmas to all....and to all knock some boots!
filmy wrote on 12/23/2003, 6:54 PM
kameronj - did I miss something? What did that have to do with miserman's post about Freeplay and my response to it?