Lyrics and tabs are forbidden.

[Darth Wong]

Technically, the music industry does own copyright on the words associated with music, as well as the music itself. But in a practical sense, they run a great danger when they push too hard.

For a lot of people, the only thing holding them back from music piracy was fear and unfamiliarity with the technology. I knew people who never downloaded a single song for years, but when they were first encouraged to try it and they realized how easy it was, they got immediately hooked and started downloading a boatload of material every week.

The more draconian the music industry's policies are, the more they will encourage fence-sitters to get off the fence and become full-blown pirates.

[romans1423]

Up next: If you practice a copyrighted song, you must pay royalties for playing it. After all, you are enjoying the copyrighted material while the industry isn't getting a dime!

[drathbun]

I really don't see what all the issues are about. How many of you would consider stealing to be a moral or just thing to do? That's ultimately the extreme view of this case.

When someone has a product for sale, and you take that product (or a derivative thereof) and give it away for free, you are stealing potential profits from the original owner of the material. That's the bottom line. The original owner has the right to pursue any legal options open to them.

Think about this... would we be having this discussion 20 years ago? No, because there was no Internet as we know it today, and the "ease" with which people can copy / distribute any copywritten material (be it movies, music, photographs, news content, or sheet music) has simply made it more common.

More common does not make it more legal.

[Darth Wong]

Think about this... would we be having this discussion 20 years ago? No, because there was no Internet as we know it today, and the "ease" with which people can copy / distribute any copywritten material (be it movies, music, photographs, news content, or sheet music) has simply made it more common.

More common does not make it more legal.

What's annoying, however, is that unless the music companies offer sheet music and lyric sheets for sale, they are not just eliminating copyright infringers whose activities are predatory to their sales; they are actually removing a particular kind of product from the market entirely, ie- making it impossible to purchase.

[Amailer]

I don't understand how they could possibly do that- and tabs?
Some people just want to learn...people like me like to play songs by bands and etc and tabs are the way to go.
Is it going to be that soon we won't be able to play a song on the guitar to our friends without paying for playing it?

Not many sites make money of selling tab music and lyrics right?

[romans1423]

1) Not all CDs include the lyrics (and certainly not the tabs or even the chords).

2) Not all CDs which do contain lyrics are accurate and complete.

3) Music books are expensive, often more than the CDs whenever I see them in stores.

4) I may not want to buy 11 other songs' worth of tablature just to get the one song's that I do want to learn.

I have no problem whatsoever with the industry enforcing its rights; that's fine. But it would be nice if they would work more with us rather than against us to the point of doing potentially (or overly) illegal things.

[drathbun]

What's annoying, however, is that unless the music companies offer sheet music and lyric sheets for sale, they are not just eliminating copyright infringers whose activities are predatory to their sales; they are actually removing a particular kind of product from the market entirely, ie- making it impossible to purchase.

But that is their right, is it not?

There is nothing that requires GM to offer crate engines for sale. Crate engines are complete ready-to-go as a drop-in replacement engines. GM might decide that offering crate engines reduces sales of their completed cars and quit selling the engines as a component. That is absolutely their right.

Music companies are under no obligation to offer any service, yet they are allowed to prevent others from offering the same service if it in fringes on their rights as a copyright holder.

[waffles]

It further pushes my decision not to buy new CDs. I can't remeber the last time I bought one. I've gotten everything used, money to the store [always local stuff, FYE and stores like that are just evil piles of shit] and that works for me.

[Drunky]

What's annoying, however, is that unless the music companies offer sheet music and lyric sheets for sale, they are not just eliminating copyright infringers whose activities are predatory to their sales; they are actually removing a particular kind of product from the market entirely, ie- making it impossible to purchase.

But that is their right, is it not?

There is nothing that requires GM to offer crate engines for sale. Crate engines are complete ready-to-go as a drop-in replacement engines. GM might decide that offering crate engines reduces sales of their completed cars and quit selling the engines as a component. That is absolutely their right.

Music companies are under no obligation to offer any service, yet they are allowed to prevent others from offering the same service if it in fringes on their rights as a copyright holder.

Music companies don't have any copyright over the lyrics and tabs. The artists who created the songs offically own the copyright.

My point being is it should be the artists trying to take down the lyric and tab sites not a corrupt organization.

[the rat]

Music companies don't have any copyright over the lyrics and tabs. The artists who created the songs offically own the copyright.

My point being is it should be the artists trying to take down the lyric and tab sites not a corrupt organization.

Yes but the contract to the company means that the artist belongs to the company and that they have an interest in all work that artist produces while under their contract.

[Darth Wong]

What's annoying, however, is that unless the music companies offer sheet music and lyric sheets for sale, they are not just eliminating copyright infringers whose activities are predatory to their sales; they are actually removing a particular kind of product from the market entirely, ie- making it impossible to purchase.

But that is their right, is it not?
There is nothing that requires GM to offer crate engines for sale.

Isn't there a legal requirement for car companies to offer spare parts for a certain number of years?

[lilybony]

what is copyright? that's the point

[prince_of_oreon]

What's annoying, however, is that unless the music companies offer sheet music and lyric sheets for sale, they are not just eliminating copyright infringers whose activities are predatory to their sales; they are actually removing a particular kind of product from the market entirely, ie- making it impossible to purchase.

But that is their right, is it not?

There is nothing that requires GM to offer crate engines for sale. Crate engines are complete ready-to-go as a drop-in replacement engines. GM might decide that offering crate engines reduces sales of their completed cars and quit selling the engines as a component. That is absolutely their right.

Music companies are under no obligation to offer any service, yet they are allowed to prevent others from offering the same service if it in fringes on their rights as a copyright holder.

Music companies don't have any copyright over the lyrics and tabs. The artists who created the songs offically own the copyright.

My point being is it should be the artists trying to take down the lyric and tab sites not a corrupt organization.

If you take a look at any sheet music you will generally note that in the footer there is a line that says Copyright 200* by Crazy Music Co. or some such. The Copyright is usually administered by a company with the connections to enforce it.

I can understand the RIAA's concern over mp3's- but the tabs issue is ridiculous. People have been playing popular tunes on guitar since forever. They were playing House of the Rising Sun, and Crazy Little Thing Called Love with notes jotted from the notebook of a friend. Suddenly because distribution is large-scale they are concerned.

I've got piles of bass tabs and I never really even stopped to think there could ever be a problem. If they dont want people getting tabs online, why don't they actually produce tabs for every song they own the copyright to?

Even if they did start producing tabs, I'm not entirely sure I would enjoy the clone element of being forced to play the song the way the RIAA wants me too. The open tabs movement is nice because it offers different alternate renderings which can be rearranged to taste.

What's next? Licences which enable the listener of a song the ability to sing along to the music?

Next Week's Headlines:

RIAA Sues Man Heard Whistling Black Balloon Illegally.

[Dustin07]

Now they will be able to profit from them, simple as that. A record company puts up a website with tabs and lyrics and you ahve to pay a fee to register or you don't get any tabs nor lyrics. This will ensure you get almost perfect tabs as they will probably be writen by the artists themselves, or there's bound to be someone in the whole company that knows them, and it will also ensure the record companies' profits are skyhigh.

They already do profit from tabs. Those tab books are pretty damn expensive, IMO... I have a few... that is why I spend a lot of time at places like e-tabs.org and whatnot, can't afford to go out and buy a tab book everytime I decide I like ONE song from the artist.

however, with that said... I WOULD probably pay, say $1.99/tab for the true tabs from the musician if they decided to start making them available on artist websites.

[drathbun]

What's annoying, however, is that unless the music companies offer sheet music and lyric sheets for sale, they are not just eliminating copyright infringers whose activities are predatory to their sales; they are actually removing a particular kind of product from the market entirely, ie- making it impossible to purchase.

But that is their right, is it not?
There is nothing that requires GM to offer crate engines for sale.

Isn't there a legal requirement for car companies to offer spare parts for a certain number of years?

Spare parts, maybe, I don't really know. It was probably a stupid example. But parts are one thing, crate engines (which make it "easy" to replace an engine) are another thing. If they wanted to make it hard to replace an engine they would require you to buy all the parts individually. But like I said, probably a stupid example, just what I came up with at the time.

Suddenly because distribution is large-scale they are concerned.

Exactly. As I said in another topic, distribution of "infringing" content costs next to nothing. Rewind a few decades and people were probably writing out their own music based on what they figured out. They might share with a friend or two. Today someone can write out tabs, put them on the internet, and give them away to anyone in the world. Even if that person doesn't charge for their work, it's still impacting the rights of the original musician or the company he has a contract with. It's more visible now because it's easy.

Easy != legal.