Lyrics and tabs are forbidden.

Discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users.
Forum rules
General Discussion is a bonus forum for discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users. All site rules apply.
Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta » Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:30 pm

Is it me, or are various organizations in the music industry trying to compete to see who can piss off the public most? Seriously, fighting against downloading music is one thing, but tab and lyric sites?

Note about something posted earlier in this thread:

Tab books are not written by the artist. Books with guitar or bass tab are done pretty much the same way that tab sites are done, just by professionals who also have a bunch of equipment to isolate a track and slow things down without changing pitch, etc etc etc. In other words, there very often are many things transcribed in a way completely different from how the artist played tham(for example, with a guitar, it will be the correct notes, but at the wrong frets, etc ect etc). Occaisonally the artist might review the book, and point out some changes, but even that's pretty rare. In other words, your not buying a book by the artist, and these things aren't cheap. They're $30-$40 each.

This in the end hurts the 14-15 year old kids just picking up an instrument trying to learn a few of their favourite songs. They don't have 30 bucks to use towards a tab book, and downloading a few tab sheets off the net, tab sheets which are usually not even very accurate, is in no way going to hurt anyone. Chances are that 99.9% of the time, the artist the kid is trying to emulate started off the same way(well, depending on age, it might not have been with the internet, but still the same concept).

As for lyrics, what a waste of time. Most people can decipher the lyrics just by listening to the song. On occaison, if they can't figure out a line here or there, they'll look on a website. I seriously doubt many people will instead by a book to figure out a few phrases, unless they seriously have money to burn.

Jail time for this? This person should get a beating just for suggesting that so much money is wasted on a few people trying to help out musicians learn how to play.

Ahhh heck, while we're at it, how about we make it illegal for kids to rip pictures out of their magazines and tack them to their walls, since I'm sure this is starting to hurt the revenue of the poster industry.

Swizec
Former Team Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:42 pm
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Post by Swizec » Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:33 pm

Yes, but what you've just explained isn't copying. It's like, you CAN make a painting that's LIKE mona lisa, bout you can't paint mona lisa exactly and try selling it as mona lisa.

With the other example, again, you're just "inspired" from it, you changed it. Now if you were to start singing Nothing Else Matters and saying it's YOUR song, that'd be breaching copyright

At least that's how I understand copyright

the rat
Registered User
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:58 pm
Location: The UK

Post by the rat » Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:05 pm

Swizec wrote: Yes, but what you've just explained isn't copying. It's like, you CAN make a painting that's LIKE mona lisa, bout you can't paint mona lisa exactly and try selling it as mona lisa.

With the other example, again, you're just "inspired" from it, you changed it. Now if you were to start singing Nothing Else Matters and saying it's YOUR song, that'd be breaching copyright

At least that's how I understand copyright


You're correct. The song is copyrighted the very moment it is created and that is all parts of the song. Including the notes.

Technically, Karaoke singers should be paying royalties to the original writer of the piece when they perform a song. Although this, in part, is covered by the licensing laws (at least in the UK)

If AC/DC write Highway to Hell and you stand on stage and perform that song you should pay them royalties. If you transpose that song to musical notation or tab then you should get their permission and/or pay them royalities. It is their product.

I'm not saying the music industry is right. Blocking tab sites will do them more damage in the long run but Northern your grasp of copyright law is incorrect.

Blankety Blank Man
Registered User
Posts: 881
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:54 am

Post by Blankety Blank Man » Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:11 am

Northern wrote: Plus, what would you consider copying? Did you know that when an artist writes a new song he or she doesn't register it anywhere.
You don't have to register a copyright to have it valid. Registering it just gives you a metric ****ton more weight in court, and there is one kind of copyright you can register (can't recall the name... a friend of my father had it when he fought Apple over something or other... twice) that assumes everybody in the courtroom knows that you have the copyright, and if they don't, they had better learn soon ;)

However, if you don't guard yourself against copyright infringements, you lose a lot of power when you do finally try to fight. which is why my father's friend was bothering to pay the lawyer fees to fight Apple over his copyright

ibmsystems
Registered User
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:04 pm
Contact:

Post by ibmsystems » Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:11 am

Swizec wrote: Yeah, all the notes and lyrics are copyrighted, what you just described could go for software, paintings, everything, and we know you CAN't just trace mona lisa and sell it as your own ;) A lot of people have gone to jail for doing such things.


But in the music business I find a wee thing a bit disturbing, it has been claimed that it is nowadays impossible to make an original melody, so where's all the copyright going to for everything the music business does? Just a wonder, copyright probably dies at some point in time right?

Just a wonder, copyright probably dies at some point in time right?


Yes musics copyright ends within 5 years of it's starting date or less depending on it's popularity etc.

Happy Holidays Everyone! :D

User avatar
drathbun
Former Team Member
Posts: 12204
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: TOPICS_TABLE
Contact:

Post by drathbun » Sat Dec 24, 2005 2:54 pm

My comments below are based on US Copyright laws, which may be different in other countries.
You can copyright a material, but you can't copyright a script.
For that you have patients which btw, don't apply to lyrics, pictures and the like.

It's like saying that it's illegal for me to make a game that has experience/levels system because it was already done by DAoC and such.

Wrong. You can't copyright concepts. You can copyright a specific implementation of those concepts. It's like you can't get a patent on ice, but you can get a patent on a specific technology used to make ice.
I could write a song that's almost like nothing else matters but change a few words here and there and there you have it - a new song...

Also wrong. It's called a derivative work, and is protected under copyright law. Your "new" work has to be substantially different. Look at what happened to Vanilla Ice when he sampled the Queen base riff for "Ice, Ice Baby" a few years ago.
Ahhh heck, while we're at it, how about we make it illegal for kids to rip pictures out of their magazines and tack them to their walls, since I'm sure this is starting to hurt the revenue of the poster industry.

Wrong analogy. You paid for the magazine.
Yes musics copyright ends within 5 years of it's starting date or less depending on it's popularity etc.

Also wrong.

For anyone that wants to read the basics of copyright, there is a very easy-to-read document published by the copyright office that speaks in plain language. You can also read the specific legal text. The plain language version is here and their FAQ is here.
I blog about phpBB: phpBBDoctor blog
Still using phpbb2? So am I! Click below for details
Image

waffles
Registered User
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 6:51 pm
Location: At the track or wishing I was there
Contact:

Post by waffles » Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:03 pm

Here's a quesetion though. What if I paint the Mona Lisa and sell it as a copy? There's no intent to trick the buyer into thinking that they're buying an origional. And anyone who would buy it knowing that it's a copy isn't going to buy an origional anyway.

Yeah, I know the logic is a bit flawed there. There's still issues of whoever owns the rights to it getting money. But look at the basic idea. There's no intent to trick the person into thinking it's origional, or even 100% right.
Image

Swizec
Former Team Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:42 pm
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Post by Swizec » Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:10 pm

waffles wrote: Here's a quesetion though. What if I paint the Mona Lisa and sell it as a copy? There's no intent to trick the buyer into thinking that they're buying an origional. And anyone who would buy it knowing that it's a copy isn't going to buy an origional anyway.

Yeah, I know the logic is a bit flawed there. There's still issues of whoever owns the rights to it getting money. But look at the basic idea. There's no intent to trick the person into thinking it's origional, or even 100% right.


THose are called souveneirs or wtv the spelling is and as you will see are being sold all over the world and in all shapes and sizes

waffles
Registered User
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 6:51 pm
Location: At the track or wishing I was there
Contact:

Post by waffles » Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:13 pm

So what's the difference in tabs? Every site I've been to says that the tabs are made by the person who submitted it and is not necesarily right.
Image

Swizec
Former Team Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 9:42 pm
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Post by Swizec » Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:29 pm

waffles wrote: So what's the difference in tabs? Every site I've been to says that the tabs are made by the person who submitted it and is not necesarily right.


The difference is the record companies want that piece of the pie as well ;)

With mona lisa (for example) "they" already have it :)

geocator
Registered User
Posts: 16242
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:56 pm
Location: On dry land
Contact:

Post by geocator » Sun Dec 25, 2005 12:34 am

The difference is the Mona Lisa copyright expired long ago.

Dagon
Registered User
Posts: 422
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:59 pm

Post by Dagon » Sun Dec 25, 2005 3:35 am

I agree that tabs should be considered fully protected, copyrighted works. However, tabs distributed on sites that have no commercial intention, and are focused on teaching individuals how to play, should be able to freely distribute tabs under “fair use” IMHO. Other sites that may be profiting by having tabs, or profit by selling tabs directly, or have other commercial intentions directly or indirectly involving tabs should rightfully be stopped.

romans1423
Registered User
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 4:44 pm
Location: Connersville, IN
Name: Rick Beckman
Contact:

Post by romans1423 » Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:28 am

Even if sites shut down or if lyrics/tabs are removed from sites, archive.org and Google's cache will retain those pages for quite some time... Will the music industries go after Google for making lyrics publicly available via their cache?

I've removed pages in the past, and I still see in my logs references to those pages when the Google Cache attempts to pull up the stylesheet from people viewing it on Google.

Will Google be force to flush its cache or will the music industry realize how ludicrous their request is? Who'll cave first? Considering the music industry feels they have much more to gain from eradicating "the threat," I could see them being pretty relentless in this.

Rosenrot
Registered User
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 5:36 am
Location: Wadalba, Australia

Post by Rosenrot » Sun Dec 25, 2005 5:51 am

Okay, here's my take on this. Things like lyrics and melodies and the such can come under interlectual property, at least in australia. next, the recording companies are bathing in cash, so they would probably be able to ban the websites.
This just makes me livid, because, when i was starting out on guitar, i relied on tabs tohelp me, now, people who are casually learning guitar are going to bomb out, altho, it will stop the annoying habit of bands just playing covers, altho, thats illegal too unless you ask permission.
Reece

ZoliveR
Former Team Member
Posts: 11899
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2002 7:36 pm
Location: floating in the light, never forgotten

Post by ZoliveR » Sun Dec 25, 2005 6:30 am

If now we must pay to see lyrics, tabs, and so on, it will be even worse to the major music industry to contain the leaks that are already passing a lot.

Blocking all the freedom that had a guy for a private usage, he will find a way to refind them, by any means, and he will not grand anymore confidence in what he buys.

It's already what that happen with the music and the video industry. Albums and DVD's are not so cheap and the price is not going to fall to a decent amount, with or without music/video exchange, so it's a no-end way.

When the sales of the cd/dvd or in cinema are rising, they say nothing, but when it's falling of 2% they rise on their horses in saying "it's because of the P2P, it's because of that"... Of any manners they win lot of millions in our back and in the back of artists....

Tabs and lyrics is the same... They think that in blocking websites to show tabs and lyrics, lot of people will buy the albums or the tabs to see them. False. You can't force people to do what they don't want to do.
No more Team Chocolate Member. I decided to leave, it's my choice. Thanks to all for all these years.
I'm always near if you need news of me. But no more support is given (private notification disabled)

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”