----- Original Message -----From: Harry KelleySent: Thursday, January 13, 2000 8:09 AMSubject: [disklavier] Re: DUG CensorshipWow!I'm kinda sorry I defended this guy! This attack below is really far worse than any response he got. Guy, I'm assuming you have some ability to deal with conflict that isn't so hostile, no? Come on! Be a sport.
Harry
Todd Muncy wrote:
Here's another update to your poorly researched unwarranted blind-side attack.I went to the site you referenced in your message.I then linked to Harry Fox Agency Site.I searched for all songs written by Gershwin.There were 51 songs listed.Rhapsody in Blue (1923) was not on the list.Why? Because it's in the public domain.I know Gershwin has been dead since 1939, but if you think his descendants are hurting that bad without RIB royalties, why don't we take up a collection.Done with you.Oh, I almost forgot. You copied the DUG group on all these postings. They all came through to my group, but the Yamaha people you so fervently defend, censored and failed to post every damn one of them.Drop dead.-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher B. McNeil, Administrative Hearing Examiner <cmcneil@...>
To: disklavier@egroups.com <disklavier@egroups.com>
Cc: cmcneil@...; <cmcneil@...;>; abuse@egroups.com; <abuse@egroups.com;>; dug@... <dug@...>
Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 10:08 PM
Subject: [disklavier] Re: DUG Censorship
Before accepting this generous offer, it might be a good idea to consider whether Gershwin's estate will receive the royalty it's due. I may be mistaken; perhaps Rhapsody in Blue is now in the public domain, but if it is, it would have to have been put there by the owners of the copyright, and as near as I can tell, that hasn't happened yet. ASCAP has registered the work and as near as I can tell owns the rights to its distribution, even if old dead George didn't perform the piece himself. My concern is that by offering to distribute what you call a good rendition of the piece, notwithstanding Gary Lloyd's good intentions, you're doing three things: you're behaving in a way that casts a real cloud on your respect for the artist and the creator of artistic pieces like Rhapsody; you're setting a poor example to those who would support the arts; and you're violating the United States Code sections that control copyright.Recall that Todd's site benefits from our visits; that the sponsors benefit when we click on the banners, and that the allure of the site is the copyrighted work of people like Gershwin. E-Groups.com prohibits our engaging in conduct that violates the rights of third parties, including copyright infringement or using the Service for what E-groups refers to as acts of intellectual property infringement. Todd knows this, and he's done us the service of explaining how the Harry Fox Agency attempts to enforce the rights of these copyright owners. But enforcement isn't what I'm talking about here; what I'm raising is the idea that we can presume to copy the work of other artists, people like Gershwin today, or Chick Corea in an earlier post, all without recognizing that they created this work and are entitled to be recognized (and compensated) for their efforts. Even if it's just to pay a seven and a half cent tribute royalty, that's still something.
So I'd make this proposition, all in a roundabout way of reacting to the message below. Maybe the reason the Disklavier Users Group shies away from this kind of group is that what we're doing in the E-groups version is not the best way of honoring our heros, the artists who bring joy to our lives. We're a discrete band of thieves, nickle and diming our way by a process of rationalization that leads us to believe it's ok to steal someone's inspiration because now there's the Internet. I'd encourage our loyal readers to read the article available on the website for the National Music Publishers Association, at this link http://www.nmpa.org/nmpa/expression.html
I hope you'll understand: I'm not an artist, but I love Corea's music as much as I love the work of Tom Waits, Metallica, Derek and the Dominos, and Sarah McLachlan. And I think these artists have a right to be compensated for their work. Good as it is, Gary Lloyd's work copying and posting the scores of Gershwin infringes on that right and violates the law, just as does our making copies of the MIDI files. And it doesn't have to be this way. According to the article posted on the NMPA website, "Seeking permission to use music is not difficult, burdensome or costly. NMPA will be pleased to help Internet music users to contact the copyright owners in order to establish a dialog that may lead to licensed uses. The currently infringing sites can eventually develop into sites which serve the interests of all Americans --including those who need to earn a living from their creative works now and those who hope to do so in the future-- but only with the cooperation of those sites' users." I urge Todd and all of the downloaders to consider the ramifications of what they're doing. And I'll urge E-groups to do the same.
Chris McNeil
At 06:45 PM 1/12/2000 -0500, you wrote:
Many of the messages I've sent to the DUG board recently never got posted. I can only assume there is a moderating intermediary choosing what (and who) will and won't get posted. I guess it's now more important than ever to have this alternate forum. In case you wondered, all messages posted to this board, pass through immediately to all members without any screening process whatsoever. Why are these guys so paranoid about their customers (you know, the guys that make payday possible) comparing notes freely?Christopher B. McNeilState of Ohio, Administrative Hearing ExaminerP.O. Box 595Worthington, OH 43085-0595740.549.5400fax: 614.888.2687email: cmcneil@iwaynet.netAnyone else have an opinion on this subject? I would suggest others post messages of protest, but they would undoubtedly get censored and never appear. If you're listening Yamaha, think long and hard about how petty this makes you look.
For the record, the censored message was not threatening or raising hell in any way. I was simply responding to JJWeb's DUG posting today, looking for a good rendition of Rhapsody in Blue that wouldn't set him back $35. My recommendation was that he join the group and download Gary Lloyd's excellent arrangement of it from our vault. Is that a problem Yamaha? It's OK with Gary. That says it all.
To Post a message, send it to: disklavier@... To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: disklavier-unsubscribe@...eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/disklavier
www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communicationsTo Post a message, send it to: disklavier@eGroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: disklavier-unsubscribe@...
eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/disklavier
www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communicationsTo Post a message, send it to: disklavier@... To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: disklavier-unsubscribe@...
Send our cash to your eGroup!
Get $20 from X.com, then send money like email to your friends. eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/disklavier
www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communicationsTo Post a message, send it to: disklavier@... To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: disklavier-unsubscribe@...eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/disklavier
www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
Message
[disklavier] Re: DUG Censorship
2000-01-13 by Buffy
Harry,
No, I think you should not be sorry. The
censorship original email was very strongly worded. It may not have been
as passionate as Todd's, however, it gave a big wollop. He stated in the
first part of the email how "I may be mistaken, but" and then proceeded with a
very strongly and authoritative narrative on censorship. I can't blame
Todd for getting upset. He shouldn't be a sport!! McNeil is an
Administrative Hearing Examiner. He should know better than practically
accuse the group of copyright violations. In addition, he cc it to mailto:abuse@egroups.com. Until
he is sure that Rhapsody is not in public domain, then he should keep his
authoritative demenure to himself. Todd is every bit within his rights to
voice his anger. That is what is so great about the internet, email and
these lists. However, when a person takes it upon himself to hurl
accusations at the group and then "report us"? He deserved it.
Sorry for my passionate reply. This kind of crap really gets me
going.
Buffy Hunt (Just another nobody with no title!!!!)