I really can't imagine why you'd want to come across as having not written it
I didn't immediately want to take credit for the article because as yerricde, so many people had put me on their foe lists for allegedly repeatedly ramming the issue down their throats on every single music-industry-related article. I guess they just couldn't handle the facts about the copyright incumbents' monopoly on songwriting.
I'm saying that the existence of non-material, non-intrinsically-scarce, copyrighted works challenges the very idea of property.
Land is scarce. Real property is how governments recognize this scarcity. Likewise, artistic labor capable of producing original works is scarce. Copyright is how governments recognize this scarcity.
it's how 60-whatever % of sites run on Linux while 60-whatever % of boxes running web servers run Windows.
And not all those 40 percent of non-Windows servers run GNU/Linux; some run FreeBSD or Solaris operating systems. If well under forty percent of servers run sixty percent of sites on GNU/Linux, this indicates strongly that GNU/Linux is much stronger than Windows at virtual hosting. Statistics clearly indicate that not as many virtual hosting rely on Windows to handle the increased loads of such an environment. Just look at all the IIS web servers that give HTTP 403.9 (Too many connections) errors so quickly to see why.
The URL may work today, but what happens when the site moves to a more scalable system?
Then the system uses a rewrite rule to HTTP Redirect each page in the old URL-scheme to a page in the new URL-scheme. What's so hard about that? Cool URIs don't change.
This does however break UK, and I presume most oher western copyright law.
In the United States, "the fair use of a copyrighted work[...], for purposes such as [...] scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." (17 USC 107; emphasis added by yerricde).
What I thought they were going to do was bring to fruition physically-based synthesis of the human voice.
You're looking for "formant synthesis." SoftVoice text-to-speech software already does this, but its singing sounds a bit robotic. You may know SoftVoice as the voice behind "Invasion of the Gabber Robots (All Your Base Are Belong to Us)" by The Laziest Men on Mars.
and you can have your very own 24 hour copyright free mtv!
A good music industry lawyer will probably be able to argue that any song you write, even using algorithmic composition, infringes the copyright in at least one existing top-100 hit. Details
Maybe it could compose the chant melody by recognizing actual chords in the samples, and applying known hamonic rules to end up with a melody to put on top of it
But because the space of pleasing music is so littered with copyrights, anybody who publishes such a song may get sued into oblivion. Believe me; I tried implementing algorithmic composition once, but I noticed bits and pieces of songs I knew to be copyrighted in its output, and who knows what other copyrights the program violated.
no one is forcing you to listen to a "Clear Channel" type station in the first place.
How about every employer in fields where employees do not telecommute? If all the music stations that one's car can receive are owned by Clear Channel or another nationwide radio giant, what other choice is there to listen to while driving to and from work?
Anyway the point is that the guy pointed out that most pop tunes were rehashes of older pop hits.
And this is how the situation perpetuates itself. If somebody new to the scene comes in and tries to write an original song, he will undoubtedly get bit by an earworm of a song that was popular decades ago but is still copyrighted. Then the older song's publisher will sue the rookie.
and then of course, there's those who say that Classical music tried every combination possible
The established songwriters' counsel will do everything in their power to downplay this theory so that they can prevail in a copyright infringement case. The argument might go a little something like this: if the rookie has heard the established songwriter's song even once on the radio, and the two songs are "substantially similar," then the rookie has infringed copyright.
Apparently, the only way to avoid a lawsuit entirely is to cover songs from the public domain.
Why can't some guy with a tracker create an original tune?
There are things that can easily be done with a live performance that can't readily be done with MID, MOD, S3M, XM, or even IT, such as vocals and electric guitar effects.
DVD players
on
DVD-Rs go 8x
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You can't connect a removable hard drive to a TV nearly as cheaply as you can put a DVD Video Recordable disc in a DVD player.
Re:When does this quote get old...
on
DVD-Rs go 8x
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
True, but materials engineers estimate that we're well within a power of ten of the limit of how fast DVD media can spin without breaking.
There are plenty of programs out there that will capture your computer's audio output.
They won't work with Windows Media Player, whose Secure Audio Path requires audio output drivers to 1. be signed by Microsoft WHQL and 2. turn off cleartext digital outputs. Read more
The iTunes player lets the user convert iTMS purchased tracks from AAC+DRM to stereo 16-bit linear PCM. Just set up a script that burns 74 minutes worth of audio to CD-RW and then rips it to FLAC. From FLAC you can re-encode it to whatever you want. Yes, using two layers of lossy encoding (AAC followed by MP3) does add a bit more noise than using one layer, but when the one song you want costs $0.99 instead of $12.99 for the whole album, at least I find it worth it.
If you want to listen to iTMS purchased tracks on any platform, you have to waste time downloading them, and you have to waste time flipping burgers to afford them. So why can't you set up a script to burn a CD-RW and rip FLAC files from it and run it while you shower?
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for the complement about the article.
I really can't imagine why you'd want to come across as having not written it
I didn't immediately want to take credit for the article because as yerricde, so many people had put me on their foe lists for allegedly repeatedly ramming the issue down their throats on every single music-industry-related article. I guess they just couldn't handle the facts about the copyright incumbents' monopoly on songwriting.
No, Doomjuice is an open sores virus, as it utilizes an open sore (that is, port 3127) left by MyDoom.A to get in.
Maybe if we made old movies free we would not need to pay millions of dollars to create new movies.
In that case, your argument may not in fact be against copyright itself but instead against the Bono Act.
I'm saying that the existence of non-material, non-intrinsically-scarce, copyrighted works challenges the very idea of property.
Land is scarce. Real property is how governments recognize this scarcity. Likewise, artistic labor capable of producing original works is scarce. Copyright is how governments recognize this scarcity.
Are the CD-R companies labling seperatly on purpose or what? What are they trying to pull?
CD recorders designed to be connected to stereo systems require CD-R Audio or CD-RW Audio media.
it's how 60-whatever % of sites run on Linux while 60-whatever % of boxes running web servers run Windows.
And not all those 40 percent of non-Windows servers run GNU/Linux; some run FreeBSD or Solaris operating systems. If well under forty percent of servers run sixty percent of sites on GNU/Linux, this indicates strongly that GNU/Linux is much stronger than Windows at virtual hosting. Statistics clearly indicate that not as many virtual hosting rely on Windows to handle the increased loads of such an environment. Just look at all the IIS web servers that give HTTP 403.9 (Too many connections) errors so quickly to see why.
I thought MPEG-2 video compression and AC3 audio compression were patented in major portions of Regions 1 and 2.
The URL may work today, but what happens when the site moves to a more scalable system?
Then the system uses a rewrite rule to HTTP Redirect each page in the old URL-scheme to a page in the new URL-scheme. What's so hard about that? Cool URIs don't change.
This does however break UK, and I presume most oher western copyright law.
In the United States, "the fair use of a copyrighted work[...], for purposes such as [...] scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." (17 USC 107; emphasis added by yerricde).
What I thought they were going to do was bring to fruition physically-based synthesis of the human voice.
You're looking for "formant synthesis." SoftVoice text-to-speech software already does this, but its singing sounds a bit robotic. You may know SoftVoice as the voice behind "Invasion of the Gabber Robots (All Your Base Are Belong to Us)" by The Laziest Men on Mars.
and you can have your very own 24 hour copyright free mtv!
A good music industry lawyer will probably be able to argue that any song you write, even using algorithmic composition, infringes the copyright in at least one existing top-100 hit. Details
I'd rather see the commercials for Konami's Dance Dance Revolution get dubbed with "Aiyaiyai, I'm your MSN butterfly" or the like.
Which personal injury law firms, other than Glaser & Ebbs of Indiana, use that one?
if the ISP isn't even giving the user the chance to whitelist the email because it's being blocked at the gates
Not with any of the e-mail providers I've used. They simply route junk mail into a different IMAP folder.
Maybe it could compose the chant melody by recognizing actual chords in the samples, and applying known hamonic rules to end up with a melody to put on top of it
But because the space of pleasing music is so littered with copyrights, anybody who publishes such a song may get sued into oblivion. Believe me; I tried implementing algorithmic composition once, but I noticed bits and pieces of songs I knew to be copyrighted in its output, and who knows what other copyrights the program violated.
Along these lines, you may find this short story by Spider Robinson interesting.
no one is forcing you to listen to a "Clear Channel" type station in the first place.
How about every employer in fields where employees do not telecommute? If all the music stations that one's car can receive are owned by Clear Channel or another nationwide radio giant, what other choice is there to listen to while driving to and from work?
Anyway the point is that the guy pointed out that most pop tunes were rehashes of older pop hits.
And this is how the situation perpetuates itself. If somebody new to the scene comes in and tries to write an original song, he will undoubtedly get bit by an earworm of a song that was popular decades ago but is still copyrighted. Then the older song's publisher will sue the rookie.
Yes, it could happen, and yes, it did happen: Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music .
and then of course, there's those who say that Classical music tried every combination possible
The established songwriters' counsel will do everything in their power to downplay this theory so that they can prevail in a copyright infringement case. The argument might go a little something like this: if the rookie has heard the established songwriter's song even once on the radio, and the two songs are "substantially similar," then the rookie has infringed copyright.
Apparently, the only way to avoid a lawsuit entirely is to cover songs from the public domain.
Why can't some guy with a tracker create an original tune?
There are things that can easily be done with a live performance that can't readily be done with MID, MOD, S3M, XM, or even IT, such as vocals and electric guitar effects.
You can't connect a removable hard drive to a TV nearly as cheaply as you can put a DVD Video Recordable disc in a DVD player.
True, but materials engineers estimate that we're well within a power of ten of the limit of how fast DVD media can spin without breaking.
There are plenty of programs out there that will capture your computer's audio output.
They won't work with Windows Media Player, whose Secure Audio Path requires audio output drivers to 1. be signed by Microsoft WHQL and 2. turn off cleartext digital outputs. Read more
In the United States, for Windows or Mac users:
The iTunes player lets the user convert iTMS purchased tracks from AAC+DRM to stereo 16-bit linear PCM. Just set up a script that burns 74 minutes worth of audio to CD-RW and then rips it to FLAC. From FLAC you can re-encode it to whatever you want. Yes, using two layers of lossy encoding (AAC followed by MP3) does add a bit more noise than using one layer, but when the one song you want costs $0.99 instead of $12.99 for the whole album, at least I find it worth it.
Sure, I can remove the DRM now. But will I be able to in the future?
I'm guessing that the iTunes Music Store TOS answers this clearly.
If you want to listen to iTMS purchased tracks on any platform, you have to waste time downloading them, and you have to waste time flipping burgers to afford them. So why can't you set up a script to burn a CD-RW and rip FLAC files from it and run it while you shower?
Who would have jurisdiction over a platform outside the nominal 12 miles or so from land?