 |
 |
Why ar these not copyright? This sure looks highly actionable infringing to me. Seven Smolian ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Ross" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 4:51 PM Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Copyright of treasures >I think it's a serious mistake to compromise the intellectual property >rights of professional musicians by placing their performances on the >Internet without their knowledge or permission. It would seem like there is >a subjective difference between distributing field recordings of >traditional singers performing material from the oral tradition like the >ones in the Hunter collection and recordings of professionals who earn a >portion of their livelihoods from sales of their recordings, and who depend >upon the quality of their recordings to generate new gigs. > > In many cases, the San Diego Festival recordings might be > less-than-perfect performances or compositions that the musicians might > not want in circulation. It's simply wrong to assume that "most, if not > all of the performers will be happy to see their work of 30 or 40 years > ago come to light for public enjoyment and scholarly research," especially > if they do not receive any compensation. Putting these recordings on the > Net without permission is little more than theft of intellectual property. > > As archivists, I believe we have an obligation to respect the rights of > the performers. We should never place recordings of living performers into > general distribution without the specific permission of those performers. > As soon as something is on a public Internet site, we (and the performers) > lose control of any subsequent distribution. > > There's at least one case in which a performance from the San Diego Folk > Festival found its way to an LP without the knowledge or approval of the > performer. The producers of the LP (at KPBS-FM) assumed that their > broadcast release was adequate to distribute their recordings, but the > singer (who was also composer of the song in question) didn't know about > it until he found a copy of the LP. And of course, Murphy's Law meant that > it was a song that he did not want in circulation. > > Here at Northwest Folklife, we are making festival and concert recordings > available to researchers and the public in listening stations, but we will > not place the actual recordings online. We evaluate requests for copies > form bona fide researchers on a case-by-case basis. > > At 10/5/2005 10:38 AM, Russ Hamm wrote: >>Our expectation is that most, if not all of the performers will be happy >>to see their work of 30 or 40 years ago come to light for public enjoyment >>and scholarly research. We shall see whether any 'cease and desist' orders >>result. >> >>Unfortunately, a lot of material like this resides in archives that are >>difficult to access. Our model that we would aim for is that of the Max >>Hunter Folk Song Collection at Missouri State University >>(http://www.missouristate.edu/folksong/maxhunter/). Here anyone can access >>the entire sound collection in several different formats, as well as >>complete text of song words and musical notation! Check out their >>statement about copyright - >>http://www.missouristate.edu/folksong/maxhunter/copyright.html. The >>statement essentially acknowledges the rights of the original performers >>and encourages respect and consideration on the part of those who access >>the archive - but places the burden on the user to not violate commonsense >>considerations. > > John Ross > Sound Archivist > Northwest Folklife > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.10/119 - Release Date: 10/4/2005 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.10/119 - Release Date: 10/4/2005