I'm certinaly not going to be selling mine anytime soon. I don't expect them to be shutting down lyrics websites just like that. I'm holding my ground on this...
Yep, I refuse to buy music. I get it for free on the radio now. Let someone else pay. Oh and when there's a comercial on, I switch stations. Screw um all!
What ground, exactly, are you holding? When the Warner Chappell lawyer shows up with a lengthy complaint, seeking not only disgorgement of any money you have received but all kinds of punitive damages, you are going to need more than attitude. As a legal matter, lyrics sites seem to me to be pretty close to indefensible. Someone wrote those words and has a copyright on them. While in some cases the rights end up in the hands of massive corporations, in other cases there is a guy in a ranch house outside LA or Nashville living not so large on his share of the songwriting royalties from his vintage 1967 one hit wonder. Tab sites are a bit different. There are copyright law exceptions - such as for educational use - that tab sites arguably fit under. After all, one of the points of tab is to listen to a song, write down what you thought you heard, and share it with other folks to see if they think your transcription was accurate. Learning to hear and transcribe is a big part of what goes on with the tab writers in the tab site communities. Sometimes, the better tab transcriptions are more accurate than the song books put out by the publishers, because the song books rarely take into account unusual tunings, and sometimes try to push all the songs into easier to play versions that differ radically from the actual recording. The big tab sites make a lot of noise about this educational aspect in the terms of use. They also - or at least the smart ones - no longer present the full lyrics but only scattered words so you can orient folks at to where you are in the song. Whether that will work no one can say, especially since even the biggest tab sites are not rich enough to go toe to toe with the music industry in court. But lyric sites - I can't even see what the line of defense is. That some of the lyrics sites are big does not mean that they cannot be shut down. Napster and Grokster were a lot bigger, and as they showed us sometimes the bigger you are the harder you fall. If someone tried to give me a big lyrics site, I think I would refuse the gift. If I had to own one, I would be trying to act proactively to get legal one way or another going forward in the hopes that I could avoid a lawsuit for past transgressions.
Can you provide a reference to this? Parts of the law, which expand on fair use for education, apply only to accredited non-profit education institutions. Furthermore, textbooks that use copyrighted material pay for that usage. Moreover, there are restrictions in place, such as delivering allowable works in allowable methods, which only include secure delivery mechanisms that don't allow copying said works. Finally, in some instances, a work can be duplicated by an accredited education institution for classroom delivery provided that said copies are retrained by the institution. I am interested to know exactly which part of copyright law you are referring to in case I missed something. Thanks
My point was that lyrics sites are hopelessly screwed, but that I think there may or may not be a refuge for tab sites. I might be wrong even in that, but I'm not going to go research it for you for free. I can say that your citation is off point to the argument I would be making, if I were ever to bother making an argument. You are talking about section 108, which deals with xerographic reproductions of documents. Whatever tab sites do, and whatever sections of the copyright law they violate, I am sure about one thing - it does not primarily involve xerox copies. The argument I would make would be a fair use argument, which has long common law roots and is now codified in section 107. I'm not saying that it would work. I'm just saying that the process of ear training involved in tablature, when tablature is properly used as an education tool, is a lot different than verbatim copying of digital files or printed pages, and a fair use analysis would help determine whether it is different enough. If you are really interested, you need to hire a lawyer. I am NOT your lawyer, and this post is NOT legal advice.
I was not asking you to research as I don't believe you have any legal experience. I asked for a reference to your claim because it did not appear accurate. There is a difference. As to educational use, I was not referring to §108. Moreover, educational use is for accredited educational institutions only, not some website claiming to be "educational."--as per definitions. As to fair use, it is not fair use when you use a complete work or apply obsessive usage. Therefore a tab site is not covered, however, the tab sites I have seen did not print entire works either. Additionally, the ones I have seen cite their source and don't pass the work off as their own. As was mentioned, tab sites are a different breed than lyric sites. The trouble really comes in when you begin engaging in commerce (IE adsense, paid links and other sponsorship). You are now monetizing their work for your own gain.
After this was posted, I read in another thread that you attended law school. Congrats on that. That's a big accomplishment. What part of law did you gravitate to? I saw your post said that Intellectual Property was not a field you were well verses in. As to the monetizing issue, by engaging in commerce you simply remove potential defenses. Additionally, it is a little less about law and more about people--and how they act in relation to how a work is used. As always, people need to get correct legal advice from a lawyer and not a posting forum. However, since this is not a law board in the true sense, I don't think diving completely into the issue is warranted.
I am not the expert. My experience on the matter comes from business use. I have been in the content creation field for over a decade now and IP is one of those things discussed and addressed on a constant basis. As time went on I learned a great deal from my associates who were IP attorneys and of course reading the law and court summaries. I ended up being soaked in the law and began researching and reading more and more. As to "legal" experts, I don't know who is the real expert on this forum (perhaps the moderators). Hopefully you will stick around and share on the areas you find interesting. Sorry to see that you left the law. Perhaps politics could be your next endeavor.
It appears that Google is supporting the movement for lyrics on the internet though. Take a look: http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/topnews/wpn-60-20051220GoogleLyricsSearchDjvu.html
Google is anti-rights. They must have this philosophy that everything is fair game and should be free. Their actions to date, like with the book scanning, shows they have no regard for the hard work of others. Perhaps I am wrong.
So, supposing I read a book, and write down the text as I read it? Then post what I read? Is that OK? As a wise BJ freak once said....It's the copyright stupid.
I didn't want to jump into the middle of anything because it seems that most are pretty much on the same page. marketjunction, raycampbell, espesially you 2. Looks like you both have some good advice and experience. But noone has mentioned this...as we are all overlooking the fact that one of the rights afforded to a copyright holder is the right to make derivitives. This, IMO is where lyric and tab site fall. Someone mentioned citing a source every time they play a song. You know, that's not very far from the truth any more. Being a musician, I can say for a fact that in order for me to play, record & perform a copywritten work I need to purchase and utilize licenses. Such royalties are distributed accordingly and I get the license or "right" so-to speak to do certain things with the song. Just for instance, I played, and recorded a famous band's song. A license was needed for me to do those things and under that license I can make duplicates (up to 5000) and give them to family & friends, but in order for me to put that recording on the on the Internet I need to get a different license. And just for the sake of saying, I am not a lawyer and do not give binding legal advice. I do have IP experience through being a research assistant in a law firm and currently learning even deeper into this area, the medical field moreso.
A copyright holder has exclusivity and derivative works violate that exclusivity. The copyright holder can do whatever he or she wants to with their work. If you make a derivative work, without consent, it violates the copyright. This is the just of it, but read the Copyright Act for more details, possible exceptions and so forth. Mandkr67, play me a song. I am not an attorney, but I play one on TV. (sorry, had to say it)