Forum
File sharing
I am in a small battle with my dad. He says that downloading/uploading is illegal, but the only music I really downlooad is the live/rehersals stuff. I think that downloading live music is fine because its's copyright free, and its not authorized by the band. He says that the venue prohibits it (look on the back of your tickets, fine print), and he shows me some article from Wikipedia. (The MOST TRUSTED SOURCE on the Internet). I need some help. Im not going to lose this "war" with him. I need to show him that downloading music can be legal. What do you think?
unfotunately its you who are wrong as its the actual songs tha are coprighted bud,not the live performances, read on A song is actually copyrighted the second someone finishes creating it. In any physical form. On CD. Sheet music. Written on a piece of paper. Anything physical. Nothing more is legally required. It's technically protected by copyright laws without registering ANYTHING with ANYONE! Exploring music copyright, and specific considerations that apply to song writers and composers. What copyright exists in music? There are principally 2 types of copyright to consider when we talk about music copyright. The traditional ©, ‘C in a circle’ copyright, applies to the composition, musical score, lyrics, as well as any artwork or cover designs, as all of these are individually subject to copyright in their own rights, (though when you register, you can include them all in a single registration provided they have the same copyright owner(s)). The second type of copyright applies to the sound recording itself, and is signified by the ‘P in a circle’ . How does this work? Suppose you want to record and sell your own version of Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture. This would not present a problem as Tchaikovsky has certainly been dead for over 70 years*, the work itself would now be out of copyright, and available as a work in the public domain. Provided you performed and recorded the work yourself, no infringement would have occurred. * Actual duration may vary due to national laws You would however be justifiably annoyed if someone else simply copied your recording and started selling it themselves. This is where the copyright in the sound recording comes into play. Copyright law recognises the problematic nature of this situation which is unique to sound recordings, and gives sound recordings distinct protection in their own right that is separate from that in the underlying work. The copyright in the sound recording will run for 50 years from the year of recording, or 50 years from date of release if released in that time. Again actual duration may vary slightly from one country to another depending on national laws. Using the work of others If you use samples of music by other authors in your work, ensure that you get permission to use the work before you attempt to publish or sell your work. Similarly, if you use loops or samples available via sample collections etc. ensure that these are licensed as free to use, or obtain permission first. Obtaining permission If you need to get permission to use a piece of music, normally the best place to start is with the last know publisher for the work. They will certainly know how to get permission to use the work, (as they must have permission themselves), so they will certainly know who you would need to contact. If the work is by an U.S. artist, you could contact the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, BMI (Broadcast Music, Inc), or SESAC. Band members agreements Where music is written as a group effort, we recommend that you draw up an agreement to clarify issues, such as which rights belong to which member, and how royalties would be distributed in the event that members of your group leave. For successful commercial bands, incorporation is also an option. As with a normal incorporated company, the band members would own shares in the band/company. In this situation, a band member would typically sell his shares to the other members if he decided to leave. Does copyright protect a band name? Copyright does not apply to names, neither will it apply to single phrases or slogans. Names may however be regionally protected as a trademark which may be carried out via national patent and trademark offices. To qualify the name should be distinctive, not deceptive or contrary to law or morality, and not similar to previously registered band names. Public performance Clubs and venues will generally be licensed for public performance, the administration of this is carried out by various organisations throughout the world In the UK this is dealt with by the Performing Rights Society. In Australia this is dealt with by the Australia Phonographic Performance Company of Australia Limited (PPCA). The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers and SESAC, provide performance licenses in the U.S. ASCAP also provide a list of affiliated organisations dealing with performance rights in other countries.
Well, Nate's site has been running (and steadily growing I might add) for about 3 or 4 years now, and I haven't sensed any legal issues about it. Now the problem with live bootleg recordings / unreleased studio recordings is when people get them from one source, a source that wants to remain secret, and then sells the recording. Now if I see something on eBay, I might buy it, but most likely not. I've only bought one bootleg DVD, and it was for posteriority's sake. (I will never use that word again). But I still think that we (I say we cause this site, not to mention the trading community, operates as just that, a community) operates underneath some funky gray area.
P.S.: Many bands / artists have free songs available for downloads on places like MySpace or even their own page. I know of one indie artist who recently put up each track from his latest album on his MySpace (not all at once) and has several downloads available on his page. And I personally think that as long as you ain't doing nothing that is similar to what happened with Metallica and Napster (I side with Metallica on the belief that the song wasn't even released yet and you could download it, along with the others), you're okay.
You have a point Dave, but the people who record it; there essentially giving the public permission to use it when stuff is uploaded and downloaded. Where did you find this info Dave? I talked to my History teacher; as he is very knowledgeable about this (he was on a gameshow, jeapordy, and won a car+money). He says that there is no copyright. Would it work to download it onto an ext. HD?
continued from above: .... and then disconnect the HD? So ISP's couldnt track it? And Does AC/DC do anything about there concerts being circulated freely for the most part? And would it work to have AC/DC's "seal of approval" for this website, so legality issues would be gone.
ISP's can track you no matter what. Now it depends upon how they use that data. And PS...files never get deleted...they just get overwritten. But I've heard that AC/DC has signed bootlegs before.
if i were in the bands shoes i wouldnt mind this website or bootleg trading and sharing, just NOT SELLING, because if there are tons of recorded bootlegs in circulation that obviously means the band has done well and there is a demand for their music. now i thought you could record stuff but only for personal use and not to be SOLD (which doesnt go on here), i mean its not like we are trading stuff that you can go out and buy at your local walmart,just because we dont want to pay. im sure record and copyright people have better things to than worry about every last bootleg. but thats just my opinion
"Well, Nate's site has been running (and steadily growing I might add) for about 3 or 4 years now, and I haven't sensed any legal issues about it." Technically, Recorded Performances are subject to the same copyrights as the Officially released studio works. The big difference is whom you are going to upset by trading bootleg recordings. And by upset, I mean only one thing-- WHO IS GOING TO LOSE MONEY BY FILE SHARING! It is my OPINION that bootlegging does not attract the attention of the RIAA, but distributing studio works does. It all comes down to money my friend. How much money do you think it cost to release "If you want blood, you've got it?" Studio Time, Mastering, Band Time, Copyright, Lawyers, Manufacturing, Printing, Advertising, Payola... It costs alot, and if no-one buys that album because it was traded freely on the net, Someone would be very upset over this. They have no money invested in the bootlegs, so they are not taking a loss. Lets face it, to us, these bootlegs are worth more than gold. By recording industry standards, these are pretty shitty copies that are not suitable for any type of pressing. Yes--there are some exceptions. But even the best quality bootleg is usually only Good to VG by industry standards. The value goes down even further when converted to a lossy format.. If we were trading a pro-tools copy of pre-release album, YES--That would upset the industry. A Pristine American Gangster bootleg surfaced on the net 2 weeks before it was relased in the theatre. You could buy a perfect copy of the movie at the flea market for $5, long before you could see it in the theatres. Universal studios suffered a multi million dollar loss (Why go see it in the movies? I already watched it last week!) Were they pissed? OH YEAH! Damn dude... I ramble!