[sdiy] Filter Banks & CSound - electronotes

[Dave Halliday]

Although I do agree with you regarding the Jim Baen web site ( and Janis
Ian's wonderful essay ), the ElectroNotes collection is still under
Copyright laws.

#1) - Look at it as a performance.  J.S.Bach's 'notes' are long out of
copyright but if I were to sample a Glen Gould recording, I would need to
make a payment to his estate.

#2) - In his infrequent posts to another list, ( usually forwarded
e-mails ), Bernie has expressly said that the work is copyrighted.

#3) - The amount that he is charging for a copy is not much more than the
basic cost of duplication.  He is not getting rich on this and by buying
'from the source' you add incentive for him to keep the library together for
future experimenters.

Imagine the amount of work that would be needed to compile this if one had
to start over again from scratch...  How would you like it if someone
started ripping-off chunks of your life's work claiming that it was FREE
FREE FREE for ALL!!!

</rant>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> [mailto:owner-synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl]On Behalf Of J.D. McEachin
> Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 10:43 AM
> Cc: synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] Filter Banks & CSound
>
>
> Someone wrote:
>
> > >> > I don't like to put up circuits that appeared in
> Electronotes, since Bernie
> > >> > is still selling back issues.
>
> As I've pointed out before, almost all of the ElectroNotes material has no
> copyright.  The copyrights on most of the Preferred Circuits Collection
> are invalid, in that the material was previously published without
> copyright, and under the copyright law of the time it was not possible to
> retroactively assert copyright.  Even if the material WAS copyrighted, you
> are entitled to redraw the artwork and paraphrase the text, especially
> since your website would be nonprofit / for teaching purposes only.  But
> Bernie has been known to do websearches for EN material on occasion, so I
> would have to speculate that if you mention EN or him by name you MAY be
> faced with complaints to your ISP to remove the material, who will
> probably force you to despite the fact that you've complied with copyright
> law (it would take a lawyer to establish this, and it's easier for the ISP
> to just give in to complaints).
>
> Here's a thought - mention the source and author in a graphic file rather
> than raw text, so it doesn't show up on a search engine.  It wouldn't be
> right to publish without this information, but putting it in text/html
> would probably lead to problems.
>
> I know Bernie has his apologists, but the fact is, the material was
> published in the public domain.  You can't argue ignorance, because some
> authors, most notably Thomas Henry, DID choose to assert their copyright.
> Whether you choose to honor the later change in heart is your decision,
> the law is clear that you don't have to.
>
> What's sad to me is that, if the experiences of Jim Baen at www.baen.com
> are any indication, putting the best of the EN material on the web would
> probably increase sales of the printed back issues.  And it would help
> DIYers.
>
> JDM
>
>
>