Slashdot Mirror

you know, the one where band members THEMSELVES (gasp !) write music & lyrics

So how can the band members, who are not songwriting specialists, verify that they haven't inadvertently misappropriated music that is already copyrighted? Even subconscious copying may be infringing: see Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music and Three Boys Music v. Michael Bolton. Peter C. Lemire has something more to say about this.

in that case people go to concerts for a very low fee ($2)

Most of the venues that have such low ticket prices are required by law not to admit anybody under 21 years of age. How can independent bands reach the high-school and university-underclass audiences that are otherwise the major labels' captive audiences?

[To reach those without the net,] Then, as now, you sell your disks from the stage.

I was going to make a comment about genres that aren't amenable to live performances. But now I realize that the genres don't overlap much, and touring might actually work to reach them.

You're mixing this argument up with digital distribution of other peoples music.

How can I tell whether a song that I have written is in fact "other peoples music"?

You're saying because it's easier for me to distribute music, it's easier for me to get in trouble distributing music.

That's one way of putting it. With electronic distribution, it's easier for a small-time recording artist to inadvertently get the attention of a representative of an overly litigious music publisher.

the majors must transform themselves into frivolous lawsuit machines (see: linux, software patents etc) we shall see.

Assume that a recording artist claims in good faith to have written a song, and then the artist self-publishes a recording of that song. If there's nothing to prevent music publishers from going lawsuit-happy, riding high on the precedent set in Bright Tunes and in Three Boys Music v. Michael Bolton, then how can the artist cover his proverbial backside so that he doesn't end up bankrupt and listed on Wikipedia as notable for being an artist who got made an example of?

When you submit a screenplay to an agency in the film biz you sign a piece of paper saying: Even if we steal this you can't sue. To protect them from IP problems.

This is intended to avoid the "access" element of infringement. But unfortunately, a small-time recording artist can't take advantage of this because the publishers are likely to make a good circumstantial case that the artist had ample opportunity to access a copyrighted musical work that was put into rotation on commercial FM radio. Such a line of reasoning demolishes the independent creation defense, in effect transforming a copyright into a patent on a given melody. See "Three Chords and the Truth Part II" and "Melancholy Elephants".

Some people like to "own" a song, not a copy.

A "copy" (more precisely "phonorecord" in the case of recorded music) is a physical medium in which a work is fixed, such as a CD or your hard drive. When you buy a CD at the store, you're buying a phonorecord. The only way you can "own" a song is to write it yourself (but even that is questionable).

I don't believe ideas are quite as infinite as some would have you believe. At some point, we'll be up against a wall, and the excessive burden of today's copyright terms just might extinguish entertainment as we know it.

Damn right. "Melancholy Elephants", a short story by Spider Robinson, expresses this sentiment. Unfortunately, the wall of accidental similarity may have already appeared in songwriting: see "Three Chords and the Truth" by Peter C. Lemire and someone's probability analysis.

you would be better off looking at what others did in actual game content and just plunge into the editor to learn how to incorporate their ideas into your own "design pattern".

But if you learn primarily by doing, you might inadvertently copy something that a federal judge would deem protectable expression. Unfortunately, it has happened.

By performing your own interpretation of it on your own instruments

Then you're performing the musical work's melody and still infringing on the musical work's copyright.

or by writing your own arrangement of it

Then you're performing the musical work's melody and still infringing on the musical work's copyright.

or by remixing it to a great enough degree that you have a legitimate claim to it being largely your own work

What steps would one take to do this, to express the same musical idea as a copyrighted musical work but with entirely distinct expression?

or perhaps by writing some lyrics to go with it

Then you're performing the musical work's melody and still infringing on the musical work's copyright.

Before you click "Reply", please read this court opinion and this article.

You code media players to detect the watermark (which would have to be in a standardized format) and refuse to play anything that does not contain the watermark.

So would independent recording artists be able to insert the watermark? If not, wouldn't that be grounds for an antitrust action? Or are they assuming that all possible songs are already copyrighted to a major multinational publisher, as hinted by this article and this article?