Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Not quite on point, but an interesting case study regarding the performance of Folk music here in Ireland, whereby traditional "tunes" are developed and refined throughout years of session playing amongst multiple players and thus no one is assigned copyright in terms of composition. From IMRO's website: "In the case of Irish traditional music, no copyright issues arise when the music performed is part of a body of work that has been passed down from the time that would clearly indicate that any responsible copyright term has expired, and usually the origins of the music are anonymous. Variation and ornamentation tend to be the distinguishing features of the contemporary performance of this music. Such embellishments, however, do not create a new copyright arrangement because they exist only in the performance and not, as previously indicated, in any tangible form, such as writing or a recording. In such situations, it is presumed that artistic considerations only arise if the embellishments referred to are repeated by a third party. However, should recordings be made of such performances a right is recognised in those versions of the performance." There's all sorts of controversy regarding copyright of Folk music, which you may find interesting. Please read: http://www.beyondthecommons.com/iff2003.html As a result, few unpaid traditional music sessions exist, to my knowledge. R On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Matt Davignon <mattdavignon@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, in fact, there are two things that are copyrighted - the composition > itself and the recording. Often when people pursue licenses to use > samples > of another artist's work, they need to acquire both. > > There's a famous copyright case Newton V Diamond, in which the Beastie > Boys > acquired the mechanical (recording) license to use a sample of James > Newton's "Choir" in their song "Pass the Mic". Newton's record label > sold it > to them without consulting Newton. Newton sued over the compositional > license. (In this case, the record label held the rights to the recording > and Newton held the rights to the composition.) Newton actually lost, > because the "compositional element" was represented by only 3 notes on > the > sheet music, and that wasn't considered enough to be identifiable. > > > -- > Matt Davignon > mattdavignon@gmail.com > www.ribosomemusic.com > Podcast! http://ribosomematt.podomatic.com > http://www.youtube.com/user/ribosomematt > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Petri Lahtinen > <kollegavalmentaja@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> yes - the process of making something that is immaterial material. >> Making records. >> >> 2012/1/19 Per Boysen <perboysen@gmail.com> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Dennis Moser >>> <sinsofmachaut@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > "Mechanisation?" What, exactly, do you mean by this? >>> >>> Guess he means the process of capturing a music recording on a physical >>> medium. >>> >>> Greetings from Sweden >>> >>> Per Boysen >>> www.perboysen.com >>> http://www.youtube.com/perboysen >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Petri Lahtinen >> >> > > >