|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:19 pm
Talking to my lawyer cousin about this he brought up a great point.
It doesn't matter what the MPA says.
Besides all that, pre-existing copyright laws already existed.
Which makes this pointless.
One more thing, It's completely null and void, and basicly s**t until the courts say its so.
It's not a law yet, is it?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:25 pm
But they can still press charges on behalf of the artsists, and individuals can win their suits, and ******** it up for the rest. That's how the war on music piracy started back in the day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:31 pm
Well, if this is anything like music piracy, we have nothing to worry about, do we. Last time I checked I can still get all the free music I want without much chance of things happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:55 am
But utnill something happens to reassure website owners, they won't be putting up their tabs again any time soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:06 pm
AshWufei And just when i was thinking, "what next, are they going to prosecute for just PLAYING the damn covers in bars, or in our own homes?", I find this little quote from an article: Quote: 3. Guitar shop in royalty row A music store in Macclesfield has been warned that it breaking the law by letting customers play well known tunes without a license. The Performing Rights Society [PRS] has threatened action against Jones Music. This is sickening. Could you please give a link for the article?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:09 pm
Can't remember exactly how I found the article. Check the BBC website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:13 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:28 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 11:40 pm
Yeah, I just found that out this morning. God, that blows.
Who writes those books anyway? Not the artist, right? I don't feel I should be paying them for tabbing out songs for me, when others are doing it with their own ear and hand like they are, and just sharing what they've got down. They aren't the artist themselves ... just 'cause they can get the "Official" title over their handbook doesn't mean they deserve our money for every album they tab out.
I don't see this to be any different than using GameFAQs on a video game over buying an official strategy guide. Someone else out there took his/her own personal time to discover the secrets and tricks behind the song... they didn't rip it off their handbook, so there are personal variables.
There's just... a lot of things wrong with this. First being that not every album gets tabbed... second being that most places that carry tab books only have a SMALL selection (never the ones I want anyway - I've never seen a Cure one in my stores, for one)... and third being simply that I don't want to have to pay $20 for one song I want to learn - it's a waste of money for the other 11 songs (or whatever).
Personally, I don't see much of any copyright being violated if the tabs are used for personal learning, and the users aren't calling the songs their own.
Also, some songs just tab out the chords after all. I believe the law goes like, that melody and lyrics can infringe copyright if they are used on someone elses song (and is not a cover) - but either way it goes, a 4-bar structure of chords can't infringe copyright, because you can do a lot over it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:43 am
The music industry is the greediest bunch of assholes you'll ever meet, thats the bottom line. But come on, how many people that actually get their tabs downloaded the most (people like Vai, Satriani, EVH, etc), are actually part of this fight against tabs? My guess is none of the above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
