Jason Robert Brown Battles Music Copyright Infringment — Page 4

Right, but again I'm not talking about performance. I don't own the text of "Catcher in the Rye," but I can sell you my copy of the book. I can't recite it at Town Hall. And I can't sell you the Xerox I made.

Similarly, I can buy a used copy of a DVD at Blockbuster. But I can't copy that and sell it on the sidewalk.

Updated On: 7/1/10 at 09:36 AM

I'm wrong! Mea culpa!

The first-sale doctrine is a limitation on copyright that was recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1908 (see Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus) and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109. The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer (i.e., sell or give away) a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained. This means that the copyright holder's rights to control the change of ownership of a particular copy ends once that copy is sold, as long as no additional copies are made. This doctrine is also referred to as the "first sale rule" or "exhaustion rule."
Copyright Wiki

Sorry, I was posting at the same time, Phyl. Wasn't trying to beat a dead horse.

Yes, yes, but you're not answering the question - do you think that used book stores are operating outside the law and should be shut down? Do you think it's illegal to sell copyrighted material in a yard sale? How about the Salvation Army stores and Goodwill?

*EDIT - whoops, you did answer that question while I was typing it. Sorry.

This is far from a black-and-white situation, although many people can be quite reactionary about the issue (since money is a much more important topic than anything else, including religion or love, these days).

And remember, Brenna is not selling anything; she's giving away.

I mentioned eBay earlier - there are sellers on there who are marketing mass-copied pdfs of full scores on CD. That I find scummy and criminal. However, eBay doesn't seem to care, because I and others have reported these sellers, and they're still there. Search eBay for cymmedia and aschenbach1791.

Updated On: 7/1/10 at 09:54 AM

And don't forget my earlier question about Michael Lavine, folks (I'm sure lots of you know who that is).

He makes his living by copying music and selling it to others. Do you object?

To clarify, does Lavine only sell things that are out of print? I honestly don't know.

I think - well, really I KNOW - that it was a lot easier to be a scofflaw before the digital age exploded. Or at least to do it more openly.

On a related note, how come that Musical Masters guy was never shut down? Is it because before things were exchanged digitally he wasn't a big enough fish to fry?

Updated On: 7/1/10 at 10:03 AM

I may have gotten the name wrong? That was the "brand" name of the bootleg shows that were sold on tape in NYC. Something like that.

I've heard of the Michael Lavine guy, but didn't know much. If you're correct (and I have no reason to think you aren't), then I do wonder why people like JRB aren't going after him.

To go back to the "people who want the piano/conductor score." I've done it a few times, and I have plans to do this again, but my theatre friends and I, a few times a year, get together and stage readings/productions of musicals in someone's living room. We do it with the P/C score (usually a pdf) and do it for fun. That's why I like having them. (Also, sometimes keys are changed for vocal scores, and I have no gift for transposition.)

I'd love to know what JRB would think of the illegal production I did of "Last 5 Years" with my Muppet. I certainly didn't pay for anything I used (other than the Muppet and our clothing).

---

Not to prolong the conversation/debate lol, but there is also a clause in the Fair Use doctrine that allows for photocopying a limited amount of material. For instance, teachers are allowed to photocopy articles from magazines, excerpts from books, and pages from textbooks and then distribute such copies to students. i can't say for sure if it's a word/page limitation or a percentage of entire work..but it's definitely allowed in some way or another

Obviously, for a single song's sheet music (which is what the original exchange was about)it would be hard to use a "portion". However, if the song is one of many in a song book, I imagine that clause would rightfully be in effect. Thus I would think the teacher/coach handing copies of sheet music would prove to be legal.

---

Like I said, Fair Use is muddy to me, and I think it is for a lot of people. I think a lot of us THINK we know the actual drill (like I thought I did about reselling copyrighted materials) but I think a lot of us are misinformed.

Obviously, for a single song's sheet music (which is what the original exchange was about)it would be hard to use a "portion". However, if the song is one of many in a song book, I imagine that clause would rightfully be in effect. Thus I would think the teacher/coach handing copies of sheet music would prove to be legal.

I don't know about that. What if the song was published on its own? Also, we're talking about photocopying something you don't own (as in getting it from the library). I'm almost certain Fair Use only applies to the one who "owns" that material (the library, in this case). Again, I'm just not sure.

JRB trying to lay this to rest, from his twitter.

"All right, geeks, give it a rest; yes, you deserve everything for free because "the paradigm is changing." Fine, you win. Stop emailing me."

---

Quel idiot.

He's so defended and defensive. I understand he has years of semi-failure to make him thus, but honestly, he would be so much better off if he simply rejoiced in the fact that there are people that like his work.

It's clear he's never going to achieve the success of a Sondheim, Berlin, Porter, or even Galt MacDermott, but he could easily have a more positive attitude about work, art, and money.

As long as you don't distribute your remixed thread, Q, you're fine!