From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V5 #320 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Sunday, September 26 1999 Volume 05 : Number 320 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: ginko biloba...look into it [Tom Ditto ] Re: ginko biloba...look into it......end it [FAMarcus@aol.com] RE: ginko biloba...look into it ["Foghorn J Fornorn" Subject: Re: ginko biloba...look into it The copyright on a work of art gives the copyright holder complete control over its copying. Hence, taping a song in a concert is illegal. It isn't particularly prosecutable, because the serious monetary penalties are associated with the resale of the work, but if a record company wants "to make an example" of someone, it would be one royal (royalties) pain. Moreover, there is a "punative" penalty, and I think it's up to three figures. I think you could count on the fingers of one hand the number of times this law has been enforced for tree trading of a concert tape, but that's because lawyers cost $200/hour and the return on the enforcement wouldn't come up to the ankles of the court costs. Nonetheless, the law itself is perfectly clear. You can't do it legally without the permission of the copyright holder. The copyright law applies particularly to Happy Rhodes whose concert work attempts to sound just like her registered copyright works (a copy of each disc should be found at the Library of Congress). The law is a little more fuzzy when it comes to improv, but the concept is that if the work can be traced to the artist, the copyright is intrinsic, whether or not it is actually filed with the government. I applaud the liberal attitude of the Greatful Dead who went beyond just letting people air tape and allowed for taps into the sound board. However, it is interesting to note the Fisch (spelling?) have backed away from their Dead-like taping policy with the advent of MP3 and now discourage the distribution of their concerts in MP3 format on the internet. I wish this had not become an issue, because here is a strong argument for the development of an emerging artist's base of support if concert recordings are allowed to circulate. "Fortune after fame is the name of the game." If a copyright holder put the kibash on the Danbury tape, she pissed on the fire rather than fed it. Anyone who appreciates Happy's work would naturally aspire to the highest level of a realization, buying the studio release after sampling a concert. There is a special case when the concert falls short. Then it might be best to try and hide the concert from the public. Perhaps that is the opinion of the copyright holder in the Danbury case, either that their performance was poor or that the recording was lousy. From what I've read here, neither is the case. Another fix on the situation is that concert tapes will circulate come hell or high water. Given that it is inevitable, the best response to the situation is creative participation rather than blind opposition. I recall that the Danbury bootleg was going to have custom art. The artists could have insisted on printed pointers to their recording labels and other means to hook the listener into the mainstream. This might be regarded as condoning a copyright violation, so the request would have to be made informally, but I'm sure it would have been strictly followed among the outstanding persons who make up this list, the occassional gay baiting notwithstanding. Tom ditto@taconic.net "Do you copy? Over..." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 12:30:26 EDT From: FAMarcus@aol.com Subject: Re: ginko biloba...look into it......end it In a message dated 9/25/99 10:11:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ditto@taconic.net writes: << This might be regarded as condoning a copyright violation, so the request would have to be made informally, but I'm sure it would have been strictly followed among the outstanding persons who make up this list, the occasional gay baiting notwithstanding. >> i find it refreshing to occasionally read an intelligent, articulate and, informative response such as this letter. maybe the lunatics haven't taken over the asylum afterall. fred ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 12:39:45 -0400 From: "Foghorn J Fornorn" Subject: RE: ginko biloba...look into it >>> The copyright on a work of art gives the copyright holder complete control over its copying. Hence, taping a song in a concert is illegal. The first statement is true, but the second part does not necessarily follow. You gave the counter example in bringing up the Grateful Dead. If taping a song in concert is in itself strictly illegal, then the Dead were co-conspirators all those years by permitting it. So the copyright owner does have the control. If they choose to pursue copyright infringement, they have a case, since they have a piece of paper that shows they own the rights. But strictly speaking, taping in a concert does not appear to be illegal in and of itself. It *may* be a copyright violation. It might not be. Depends on the specific copyright restrictions, or *if* the recorded material even has a copyright. If you taped an artist's between song banter and created a mix of that leading into album copies of her songs, it is the latter that could get you in trouble. Not the part you recorded in concert. (Granted, spoken word can be copyrighted, but generally one needs to write it down or record it to establish the content of the copyright. Thinking about this can lead one to a serious chicken and the egg type dilemma). Phish is the currently active band you are thinking of. To my knowledge, no copyright holder has either condoned nor put any kibash on the Danbury recordings. They either don't know about them or aren't making a statement [yet]. The only real statement here so far has been from the organizers of ectofest recommending no further discussion of any ecto sanctioned distribution. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 16:34:21 CDT From: "One Two Three" Subject: Hemlock and Thorazine, Strychnine and Lithium In reference to Foghorn’s insinuation that I should take strychnine…I’ll just say that there are quite a few folks that seem to live for an opportunity to act out their righteous indignation toward a skewed and overblown interpretation of essentially tame comments and observations. It usually stems from unpleasant events in their formative years that give them an unreasoned appetite for contrived drama and chaos, tempered with enough paranoia to make them seem almost like a normal person on the surface. As for his other musings concerning the Ectofest recordings, I believe that, reading between the lines (something that seems to be an honored practice here), he is saying, quite reasonably, that somewhere, with many fine shadings, there is a balance to be struck between the rights of the performer and the rights of the public…but as in most things, people in general (not necessarily this group) prefer to polarize their views and zealously defend one extreme or another. I personally lean slightly toward the rights of the originator to have full control…ain’t gonna happen in this life. I believe that this opinion essentially echoes Chris’s view. Chris also said that I should take lithium or thorazine. I have never taken lithium, but a number of years ago I was offered some thorazine, and tried it. It was not a horrible experience, it was strangely interesting but somewhat unpleasant, and very disorienting. I can say that a grave injustice is being done to the innumerable mental patients who are given this substance on a daily basis…there’s nothing therapeutic going on here, just turns them into a carrot in the corner, easy to manage. I’ll mention in passing that I’ve received quite a bit of private e-mail since my original posting, ranging from high praise to near death threats. I’ll just say thanks to everyone for writing, but I find it curious that what I considered innocouous offhand comments generated any interest at all. Since a few of the correspondents, taking a grain of sand and making it into a beach, accused me of being a “gay-basher, let me assure everyone that nothing could be further from the truth. Two of my dearest friends are homosexual…one is my cousin. I am sure now that someone will write and take issue with me using the word "homosexual" in one instance, instead of "gay", which I think is a stupid sounding term. And I’m sure I can’t say queer, even though “gay” folks say it all the time, because I’m not one… much in the same way you can’t say the n-word, unless you’re black. I honor that tradition and refrain from using the word, because I am a honky. I feel silly saying “n-word”, but I have no desire to precipitate an avalanche of white guilt and/or black anger on myself – should I say “h-word” too? Ridiculous. My favorite TV show is Xena Warrior Princess, which, as anyone who follows it knows, is openly lesbian, regarding the relationship of the two main characters, who are both bisexual. (BTW, I consider the Xena soundtracks somewhat Ectoish, especially the Burial song.) Though I’ve never swung that way myself, I have been in men’s gay bars with friends, where I witnessed shocking but very entertaining public shenanigans one Halloween, and I am very welcome at a women’s bar near my home where the entertainment, the pool tables, and the company are all very good. I have seen a few male (and some all-female and bi) x-rated videos, and it looked like to me that a good time was had by all. Just for the record, my sexual preference is for Asian women, but if I ever took a notion to switch from tacos to hot dogs, it’s no big deal in my mind. 1 2 3 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V5 #320 **************************