Copyright Enforcement Coming to a bar near you

[astrummer]

Originally Posted by JohnZ

Not true, either use public domain songs or get permission from the copyright holder or you are legally liable for infringement......scouts included.

My wife works full time for GSUSA (Girl Scouts) and we've run across this many times.

From the GSUSA website:

Q: Is there a Web site with Girl Scout songs that I can use without permission?

A: No. Before using any Girl Scout songs, you should check to determine their copyright status. If a song is copyrighted, you cannot use it without permission.

Q: Can I request a listing of songs, such as graces or camp or action songs?

A: No, such a listing is not available. If you want to use songs in a certain category, then you must be specific about the title of each one.

Q: Am I allowed to use only the words (not the music) of copyrighted songs without permission?

A: No, copyright laws cover both the words and music of a song. Permission must be granted.

I know that the topic under discussion is complex, but without a simple and relatively inexpensive way to just sing some songs with kids legally there seems to be something drastically wrong here.

[JohnZ]

Originally Posted by astrummer

I know that the topic under discussion is complex, but without a simple and relatively inexpensive way to just sing some songs with kids legally there seems to be something drastically wrong here.

Here's some more information from Girl Scouts:

Copyrights and You

Most songs have a writer and a publisher who have the copyright to them (own them). These songs aren't published on Girl Scout Web sites because they do not belong to Girl Scouts of the USA. Most of the songs listed in the Girl Scout songbooks are either there because special arrangements were made with the publisher or author, or because they are now in the "public domain." That means they have been around so long that no one owns them any more—the author is usually no longer living and no publisher can claim ownership. Here's a quick guide to what you can and cannot do:

You Can:

Put together a collection of your favorite songs in a personal notebook.
Sing songs for fun around a campfire or in meetings without special permission.
Get fined heavily if you use someone's song illegally.

You Cannot:

Publish your own book of songs for others without securing permission or paying for the rights.
Make a book or tape of songs to sell without asking permission and/or paying user fees for the use of the song.
Pass out song sheets with copyrighted music or words/or both without getting permission.
Sing songs in a program and charge admission without permission or paying a fee for use of each one.
This applies to everyone—girls, leaders, troops, councils, camp staff, and so on.

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by JohnZ

Not true, either use public domain songs or get permission from the copyright holder or you are legally liable for infringement......scouts included.

My wife works full time for GSUSA (Girl Scouts) and we've run across this many times.

From the GSUSA website:

Q: Is there a Web site with Girl Scout songs that I can use without permission?

A: No. Before using any Girl Scout songs, you should check to determine their copyright status. If a song is copyrighted, you cannot use it without permission.

Q: Can I request a listing of songs, such as graces or camp or action songs?

A: No, such a listing is not available. If you want to use songs in a certain category, then you must be specific about the title of each one.

Q: Am I allowed to use only the words (not the music) of copyrighted songs without permission?

A: No, copyright laws cover both the words and music of a song. Permission must be granted.

John,

I said "As a practical matter.... I'm am unaware of the Boy Scouts (or Girl Scouts) ever being sued. Perhaps you could provide a citation or link to where they have been.

[astrummer]

I don't think this is a definitive word about a non profit sing along but from the following link..

http://www.intelproplaw.com/Forum/Fo...num=1151289342

Q:If I were to play an original and purchased CD amongst elderly folk in nursing homes for a sing-along event and handed out only the words to these songs so that they could sing along...would that be cause for concern regarding a copyright infringement. Do the songs need to be more than 70 years old? Also...this is a free event. It's strictly entertainment for nursing home residents.

A:That sounds like fair use to me. You'd likely fly under the copyright owner's radar in any event.

I also found this interesting excerpt from the following website ( also non authoritative but from someone who knows more than I do)

http://ipcentral.info/blog/archives/...01_index.shtml

"During the past 90 years, to solve political controversies and to hand out economic freebies to sympathetic supplicants, Congress has sweet-talked authors into giving up their right to say yes or no to a use of their works -- the essence of a property right -- in exchange for a longer term. A long list of special pleaders now gets free use of copyrighted works, including small businesses, veterans' groups, bars, scholars, restaurants, fraternal groups, marching bands, Boy Scout troops, nursing homes, libraries, radio broadcasters and home tapers. Another long list of powerful industries gets to use copyrighted works in exchange for a small government-set fee, whether the author likes it or not: cable and satellite companies, record companies, juke-box operators, public broadcasters and, most recently, Internet companies."
(Ralph Oman, Letter to Editor, Washington Post, March 11, 2002, p. A20.)

If it is indeed true that "A long list of special pleaders now gets free use of copyrighted works", I would like to know who is on that list or what the criteria are for being on that list.........

[JohnZ]

astrummer,

The only truth in your last post is that you are likely to fly under the radar.

[astrummer]

Originally Posted by JohnZ

astrummer,

The only truth in your last post is that you are likely to fly under the radar.

Didn't claim that they were authoritative only that they were from sources more knowledgeable than me.

[Eracer]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

Copyright infringement is wrong, civilly, criminally and morally. Anyone who downloads copywrited music without legal exception (e.g., author's permission, legitimate purchase for $$) is as thief, plain and simple.

How many times do I have to agree, before people stop feeling the need to remind me of that?

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

You think the law should be changed.

I never said that.

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

I pay for copies of music I wish to own, whether it is printed publications or recordings. Works for me.

As do I. As do most people. I realize that my thoughts on this are not what the thread was originally about. Thanks for the discussion.

[guitaniac]

How many of you folks who claim a strict adherence to the law can also claim that you've never knowingly performed an ASCAP, BMI or SESAC registered song in an unlicensed venue? Even if the onus is on the venue to get the license, wouldn't the performer be complicit in an illegal act?

At the very least, I suspect that most of you strict adherence proponents who understand how the licensing works, and who frequently "play out" (paid or otherwise) with registered material, have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy with respect to the licenses.


Gary

[Floyd Allen]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

How many of you folks...have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy with respect to the licenses.


Gary

I have told new venues we developed they can expect a visit from the ASCAP/BMI meanies eventually.
But I'm not not a strict adherence guy. Just (mostly) a law abiding citizen.

[Alpione]

Originally Posted by martind gibsona

Eracer,
Now, at no more than $.99 per download, it is possible to get the music you want --LEGALLY -- by the track. Real Player, in most cases, even lists the entire CD for $9.99 no matter how many songs are on it. So the industry has provided exactly what you asked for ... a "distribution system that will provide easy access to high quality music for a reasonable fee." Now what's the excuse?

I guess it depends if you consider a 128k AAC that can only be played on a finite number of devices "easy access to high quality music."

Me? I have an iPOD filled with live recordings by bands that allow taping. I've ripped many of my own (purchased) CDs and get iTunes gift cards from friends and relatives, but wouldn't buy them myself because the sound quality is so lousy. Many people complain about the DRM. It's annoying, but to me far less of an issue than the (very)lossy format at most music stores. If I could buy full quality tracks in FLAC/SHN, I'd be much more apt to go nuts on iTunes or a similar system.

Adam

[JohnZ]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

How many of you folks who claim a strict adherence to the law can also claim that you've never knowingly performed an ASCAP, BMI or SESAC registered song in an unlicensed venue? Even if the onus is on the venue to get the license, wouldn't the performer be complicit in an illegal act?

At the very least, I suspect that most of you strict adherence proponents who understand how the licensing works, and who frequently "play out" (paid or otherwise) with registered material, have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy with respect to the licenses.


Gary

It's not the responsibility of the messenger, it's the venue.

[astrummer]

Ralph Oman, who I quoted in an earlier post did hold the position of U.S. Register of Copyrights from 1985 to 1994 which is why I give some weight to the ( rather incomplete and without adequate context) quote that I found from him. If someone knows more background as to why he made those comments I would be interested. I have reached the limits of my mental thesaurus in googling for better context.

[JohnZ]

Originally Posted by astrummer

Ralph Oman, who I quoted in an earlier post did hold the position of U.S. Register of Copyrights from 1985 to 1994 which is why I give some weight to the ( rather incomplete and without adequate context) quote that I found from him. If someone knows more background as to why he made those comments I would be interested. I have reached the limits of my mental thesaurus in googling for better context.

A registered copyright and a registered song with BMI or ASCAP aren't the same thing.

[astrummer]

Originally Posted by JohnZ

A registered copyright and a registered song with BMI or ASCAP aren't the same thing.

Would one however be a subset of the other? Wouldn't a registered song with BMI or ASCAP necessarily be copyrighted?

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by martind gibsona

The system is in place. It's called iTunes or eMusic or the Real Player Music Store or Napster or ... even Walmart has gotten into the act at $.88 per song. People used to like to argue, "Why should I pay $17 for a CD when I only want 2-3 songs off of it?" So they'd get their friends to copy the CD for them, or they'd set up swaps where several of them would buy one CD and everyone would get a copy of it. Now, at no more than $.99 per download, it is possible to get the music you want --LEGALLY -- by the track. Real Player, in most cases, even lists the entire CD for $9.99 no matter how many songs are on it. So the industry has provided exactly what you asked for ... a "distribution system that will provide easy access to high quality music for a reasonable fee." Now what's the excuse?

The "excuse of the day" is that they don't want the DRM that comes with purchasing songs in that manner. And I do agree that it's a real PITA to deal with.