Jason Robert Brown Battles Music Copyright Infringment — Page 2

I feel like his point about the library was that it's a last resort. Like, if you absolutely can't afford a few bucks then you can take the book out of the library and use it once. I don't think he meant to copy it.

Updated On: 6/30/10 at 03:52 PM

I in general find it troubling how much people (not just teenagers) make up copyright laws. The one I hear the most often is you don't have to get rights to produce a musical if its educational and you're not charging admission. It's educational! No rights!

MADE UP! Might have been nice if it was like that, but it's completely fictitious. Where did this come from? The amount of stuff you can show educationally and be protected is limited and certainly not an entire work.

NOW--are people going to fight these things? God knows people show things educationally all the time that are technically against the law, and if its part of a class there aren't many people out there who care. However, when it comes to presenting a show with an audience and such.. the fact that it is school affiliated does not alleviate one from paying for grand rights.

Question...you play for actors, right? As a coach or teacher?

How often do you come across music that isn't photocopied or downloaded (recognizing that you can pay and download a song from the interwebs)? Do you say anything to them about it?

I mean...how much music have I copied at Lincoln Center in my life? How many classes have I taken where the teachers give you photocopies of the music?

Though my 'grind to a halt' was clearly hyperbolic, cracking down on photocopies of music for auditioners would be really bizarre. And difficult.

I wonder if Michael Lavine gives a percentage of his fees to the composers whose work he copies for his clients?

Does anyone know?

People can argue the legality or morality of this issue for ages; the practice isn't going to change.

Personally, I can understand Brown's frustration - he sees hacks like Allee Willis get rich from "co-writing" songs like "The Neutron Dance," while his shows flop and his royalties add up to maybe $35 a year. (Yes, I exaggerate. I don't know if he gets any royalties.) But meanwhile, his work does get produced - it might be more attractive to focus upon that.

"How often do you come across music that isn't photocopied or downloaded (recognizing that you can pay and download a song from the interwebs)? Do you say anything to them about it? "

If I'm coaching / teaching, I certainly do say something about it if they have a clearly illegal copy of music that there is no excuse for not having legally. Not only is it a legal issue, it is a your-pianist-being-able-to-read-it issue.

Photocopying is obviously a much more difficult issue. I have photocopies of lots of things that I own so that they can be in a notebook independent of their original binding.

There isn't any clear easy answer to all of this, but I don't buy the argument of "it's a necessary illegality." It's the way people have been doing it for a while, and no one wants to change. And as you can see from the girl JRB was talking to, a lot of people don't give the issue a thought from the perspective of the men and women who spend lots of time writing the music we all love so much.

It also needs to be said that its important that we as a theatre community SUPPORT theatrical products. We love that theatrical products are made. Published vocal scores have higher standards of editing than unpublished scores that make the trading circuit. Cast recordings make scores thousands could never hear known across the world. However they are PRODUCTS and if they don't make *any* money, then there will be a day when they no longer are released.

I would be intensely hypocritical to say anything that suggests I only have legally-obtained music. Like most people in this business, that's of course not true. And perhaps its a rationalization, but I do make a point to support the release of things I want to be released with my wallet, and its been my experience that this is becoming the minority of people in this business.

Updated On: 6/30/10 at 04:14 PM

I guess it would all depend on if the composer owned the publishing rights to their music, though.

A photocopy and pdf would be the same thing in this instance.

AH! Good point.

Perhaps it's time to do a cost/benefit analysis of actually granting the publishing rights (as opposed to retaining and selling your music yourself).

Yes, but piracy does result in someone getting something whose creator didn't get compensation for. So you have cheated them their compensation by making an illegal copy.

Photocopies of music you own legally are legal under fair use as I understand it, which is why photocopies present a huge hard-to-police gray area.

When 10 people come in with "People Will Say We're in Love" with the same artifacts and markings all over them, I pretty much assume it's an illegal PDF.

Updated On: 6/30/10 at 04:51 PM

Do a cost/benefit analysis of using publishing houses all you want, but I think its the content creator's right to decide how and if their creations are distributed, no?

Only if they have the distribution rights.

While I'm not entirely in agreement with JRB as he disregards fair use, the bratty child who believes "my parents won't let me use their credit card" is the equivilant of a "starving artist" definitely needs to be smacked upside the head (and with a lawsuit so it will sink in)- especially since she's crying starving artist to an artist who would be starving if not for people legally buying rights to his music.

---

As a side note.... did the first few exchanges remind anyone else of Everyday Rapture? That was the first thing I thought of as I read the exchanges.

And JRB is totally right.

---

My favorite part is that he explained an inter-library loan in his reply.

---