Re: [Hornlist] YouTube again
Ron said: you might also want to note the huge amount of counterfeiting going on in China and the Far East. Reminds me of the time several years ago on a business trip to Manila. My son had asked me to pick him up a controller for his playstation. I go into a store and ask for one. She slaps 2 boxes with all the sony markings on the counter and says this one is 1,000 pesos and this one is 2,000 pesos I asked What's the difference Her reply, This one is a copy, of course pointing to the 1,000 peso controller. And this was in Landmark, The Philippine equivalent of Macys. Regards, Joe ___ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
RE: [Hornlist] YouTube again
Dear Ron, that is exactly the difference between our game the big game. The big companies have to pay to Harry Fox or the corresponding companies just their share from actual salesw. Right, you heard it right, from actual sales. A marge of about 8% of the list price. But we the niche producers, providing the most interesting things, we have to pay in advance for a minimum of 500 copies, no matter we sell it or not. We do sell them, but for a high price for us. Advertising eats up all the profit too easily, but we have something we can deduct from income. That´s it. The single copies you take for yourself, are tolerated by most companies. Nobody can take you to court if you make a copy from a piece of music, when there is no publisher claiming it as part of his publications. Nobody will take you to court if you make a copy of such pieces to study it to evaluate it. If it is no longer available, you might make a copy rewrite it destroy the copy, as it has been used as a working media only. Here in the E.U., law is different, giving you the freedom to copy that information for yourself, but they prohibit the professional use of it, except things have become public domain. But we are talking here about the personal rights of the individuals appearing as artists in the videos. Their rights have not expired. Public performances do not make the artistic performance public domain. Published video or audio material or unpublished audio or video media is covered either 25 or 50 years depending on the different law in different countries. But self published media on ones own home page is covered by copyright artistic rights as long as no other use is granted. If there is a clear statement regarding this media, that it is copyrighted, nobody is allowed to steal it republish it somewhere else without severe consequences. We do our work expect it be respected. If one needs that (so with my homepage) , one should write a short letter ask for permission, which is granted mostly. But it is more a matter of courtesy than of money. I never charged for the use of pictures or text from my homepage. I give you an example, a true one: Years ago I gave a free copy of Freibergs Naturhornschule to a young American colleague, playing at a smaller theatre. He asked me then, if I could give him another copy of the same work, so he could take it apart for easier copying for his students ! - ing-rrring---rrring ! = ___ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
[Hornlist] YouTube again
Hello list members: this is a warning The copyright infringement coming from the most lawful country mostly (sorry, this is the reality) is unbearable anymore. People (enthusiasts, perhaps, or just naseweiss people) steal videos from any source including home pages of artists (it happen with my own videos) send them up to YouTube. They have zero respect for the belongings of other people, they take (electronic) hands on other peoples propriety. They might get permission if asking. But they just act without using their brain. Or has the understanding of personal rights sunk so bottomless deep ? In your country, where even every word is weighted for good or bad ? What happen ? Why does this happen ? Is the society (and I speak here for our European society also) so weak in the understandings of the basic rights of the individuals on the one side when it goes about ones own self-realization, but 180 degrees different when it goes about ones own rights ? Anyway, as informative such videos might be, they are contraproductive as are all these sites providing copyright free music for free. This will lead to a complete collapse of the real productions (recorded music, printed music, recorded video) thus to a artistic desert, where just the main things will be available with no informations and material about the less good sellers. We are on the best way to such a desert (not dessert !!). Copyright infringement violation of personal rights (read: rights of the performers) should be taken to court. The fines compensations be as in the past in the six-digit numbers higher. ___ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Hornlist] YouTube again
Hans et al., This issue is beginning to be addressed in the courts. Google/ YouTube is being sued by Viacom for copyright infringement to the tune of US$ 1 billion. You can find details, ironically enough, using Google. Carlisle On Mar 15, 2007, at 6:34 AM, hans wrote: Hello list members: this is a warning The copyright infringement coming from the most lawful country mostly (sorry, this is the reality) is unbearable anymore. [snip] ___ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Hornlist] YouTube again
Basically You tube and Viacom will come up with a deal that covers the use of Viacom owned material. Yes it will probably cost You Tube some money along the way. Maybe I am a skeptic but I don't see that as helping all the other illegal uses that occur on a daily basis that infringe on the rights of the little guy or even the medium size guy. Debbie ___ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Hornlist] YouTube again
from: hans [EMAIL PROTECTED] subject: [Hornlist] YouTube again Hello list members: this is a warning The copyright infringement coming from the most lawful country mostly (sorry, this is the reality) is unbearable anymore. Give us some reasonable way to arrange for small-scale rights and we will flood to it. If I want to release a small-scale recording of previously recorded works I either have to spend months tracking down and negotiating with individual rights holders or send the Harry Fox Agency an outrageous amount of money, since they don't deal in anything less than 500 units. Paying rights for 500 units when you only want to sell 100 is ludicrous. If I want to make a copy of a piece of printed music, even one that is out of print, I have to again waste an incredible amount of time and effort dealing with print firms that don't want to deal with someone who wants to make a single copy (I do not include small publishers such as yourself in this categorization, Hans). If I can find someone to grant permission they will often charge an outrageous fee, even though I may have to locate an original myself to make an authorized archive copy since they don't have one any more. Make the music available on-line and let me pay a reasonable amount per page and I will gladly do it. But you could pay for one copy and xerox several more, you say? I can do that now. Give me an alternative and I will use it. The current copyright system is totally biased in favor of large-scale users because the rights agencies have no interest in coming up with reasonable accomodations for the individual licensee. I am not saying the people who are abusing copyright on Youtube/etc. are in the right, but they have damned few reasonable alternatives available to license content. This is the internet era; rights holders should promulgate a micropayment system that would ensure that rights holders are appropriately compensated for their work. The problem with that is they would lose control as well as lose control over the huge amount they skim off the top to maintain their bloated bureaucratic corporations. Copyright was intended to protect the rights of the author for a reasonable and limited amount of time but in the US has devolved into a joke where almost nothing ever goes out of copyright any more. The original intent of copyright was not to give the accumulators the right to tie up the rights to everything basically forever; thanks to Sonny Bono that's effectively the case now. Ron Boerger PS - Since you're slamming the US and to a much lesser extent Europe, you might also want to note the huge amount of counterfeiting going on in China and the Far East. China doesn't even pay lip service to protecting the rights of foreign copyright holders and there are billions of dollars in losses in things like counterfeit DVDs and all sorts of other counterfeit goods coming from China. Fair is fair. ___ post: horn@music.memphis.edu unsubscribe or set options at http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
