Can someone explain why, legally, Keith can't just photocopy or re-engrave the deteriorating parts?


If I buy a CD, I have the legal right to rip it to my iPod, back it up to my hard drive, burn a second copy for personal use, etc. If I buy a piece of software, I have the legal right to make a backup copy of my installation CD in case the original gets damaged. Why does copyright law permit "fair use" backups in these cases, but prohibit the duplication of sheet music for backup purposes?


- Darcy

-----


I wholeheartedly agree! 

I'm sure being a seasoned Finale user Kieth could make the parts almost identical to the originals and if one includes all the copyright blurb in the footer, who is going to know anyway?Somehow I just can't envisage a 'copyright police' trapsing round the world to Australia, appearing unannounced at every band concert in every venue and scrutinising every part on every stand with their magnifying glasses to see if the music is the authentic not. 

Everyone knows that there are thousands of bands out there with endless photo copies of lost parts and damaged scores in their libraries. 

The important thing is that the orginal version was bought legally, he has tried to track down the publisher and that he not attempting to profit from this or defraud anyone. 

It is he who will need to invest the time and materials to do this anyway so who is actually losing out? Certainly not the publisher if they no longer exist and the composer(s) will still get any royalties from performances or recordings so it is to his benefit anyway.

Jonathan 


_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to