Perhaps it does, but the laws apply in the same manner to all music. Most truly traditional music isn’t copyrighted in the first place, and thus there are no copyright issues anyway, as it is in the public domain–it belongs to everyone. But if one wishes to perform copyrighted music for profit or to record or publish it, the law is plain that one must get permission from the copyright owner.
If no copyright claim is made, there is no issue. If the author is anonymous (at least if he remains so), there is no copyright issue. But if a tune is copyighted, you must obtain permission before recording and selling it.
What harm could come of seeking the written permission the law requires of those who would record music covered by valid copyright?
[ This Message was edited by: Walden on 2002-08-24 04:39 ]
Just a thought, The best places for musicians to get info re copyright as well as checking out current government legislation, would be the established recording/publishing companies dealing with trad music. I did not realise how important their role is until I had occasion to use them. It is a vital part of their business to deal with these issues on behalf of copyright owners and artists thereby leaving the musician free to create. Thats the way it should be, so now I ain’t worried and I feel the benefit of being better informed than I was before. On composing original trad music,If I go through the painstaking process of learning trad music that is passed down through generation and through sessions etc, then eventually start to write my own tunes, then I would consider them to be of trad origin cos thats where my roots are and thats where the inspiration comes from to write them even though they may relate to the present day. I would also consider that we should all make the effort to make sure a composer is credited with his work, especially if he/she has to earn an income from it but also to pass down to future generations, who would have the benefit of more accurate records to study and learn from, to keep the tradition going. My final thought would be, that while I agree that trad tunes have a ‘life of their own’, I still have to consider that, If I write a tune, I have to believe that it is good enough in the first place without anyone else adding to it. If I was to hear my tune being played or perhaps a different and possibly even better version of my tune, then great!! this means that my tune was good enough to inspire some other trad player, this would keep the tradition going! in the way that it should.
I have written a few tunes myself, several of which have been recorded by other musicians. I was always just delighted if someone else took the trouble to learn something of mine. I think that in Ireland this would be the general attitude. The money from royalties is very small, it’s that little bit of recognition that counts. There was a tv series on rte a few years ago called a river of sound. In it they included three tunes of mine played on the harp. Of course I was delighted. However when it was released on BBC video they acredited my tunes to Turlough O’Carolan! Although I still got the royalties I would much prefer to have had my name where it was supposed to be! As I say royalties tend to be pretty small but having them registered with IMRO ect just gives you that protection if one day you watch a movie and something you wrote turns up on the soundtrack. Another point of interest is that in Ireland if you record a CD and you record a set of trad tunes, for example The lark in the morning Coppers and Brass, you can register these tunes as “trad.aranged by Joe Blogs”. This gives you exactly the same royalties as if you composed them yourself!
Perhaps it does, but the laws apply in the same manner to all music. Most truly traditional music isn’t copyrighted in the first place, and thus there are no copyright issues anyway, as it is in the public domain–it belongs to everyone. But if one wishes to perform > copyrighted > music for profit or to record or publish it, the law is plain that one must get permission from the copyright owner.
Walden, first of all US laws do not apply to all music. And no matter what law applies, I think what Peter is saying is that it is part of this music that composers tend to place their tunes into the public domaine.
Also, I don’t think you’ve quite understood how copyright works. You don’t “copyright” a tune. You compose a tune. And if you do, you have the copyright. You can register a copyright, and if you do, suing infringers and collecting royalties get’s easier. But that’s it. You can see how this way of looking at “rights” to a tune doesn’t fit with a tradition that regards it as part of a tune that it gets played by many different players with different styles and variations.
On 2002-08-24 04:23, Walden wrote:
What harm could come of seeking the written permission the law requires of those who would record music covered by valid copyright?
The harm could be that people lose sight of the vital process by which traditional music lives and breathes and stays alive.
On 2002-08-24 01:26, Walden wrote:
I’m just saying that it’s a good idea to stay within the law …
You know, it’s funny. I have been thinking about that one for years now, and I have found that whenever it counts, there’s no easy answer to the question whether it’s a good ideas to stay within the law or not.
The harm could be that people lose sight of the vital process by which traditional music lives and breathes and stays alive.
That was my point in bringing up this topic in the first place. Folk music, like language, is evolving and influenced by many factors. It would be a shame if commercialism and marketing become major forces in guiding the development of the ‘tradition,’ which would effectively cease to become traditional. (More like Country & Western/Nashville vs Americal folk). Scary. It goes back to the consensus attitude on this subject, not what the law actually states. Brendan’s response was beautiful and informative. This isn’t a musical genre people go into for the money, though, is it?
Tony