uploading an mp3
Hi friends. When i upload the mp3 for the soundfont comparison i ask me about what was concerned in copyrights.
By example: The music theme i play only a little there was “As the deer” from Martin Nystrom, a living composer.
Since i play it only a little, im not selling it, and is for testing purposes, is all ok?
Suppose i upload it for free share?
–>>Really im not worry about this file, but i want to know a little about mp3 sharing for the future: When is allowed, when not. etc. Any knowledge will be apreciated.
If you bought the clip, or have direct permission from the copyright holder to have it…then yes, you can use it for “your” personal use. In simple terms, this is the way the law intends a mp3’s use. BUT, even if you had any of the above, in technical terms, you do not have the legal right to distribute any form of music! No one is going to snoop on you making copies of CDs or compressing audios to mp3s. Just be careful where you share them.
check this site out http://skaiste.elekta.lt/Books…_07.htm
do you own research…and be careful
Some examples:
Uploading a mp3 and giving it for free: What legal concerns you can found?
1-You write and play a music theme (its your own)
2-You play a music theme from "Beethoven"
3-You play a music theme from "Britney Spears"
4-You make an arrange on a music them of “Britney Spears” ( really it need a good arrange 
)
5-Any other situation?
Two issues as I see it:
First is that someone developed the music/sound and will have recorded this to a medium such as paper/hard disk/cd, etc. This is the orginal works and it protected by copyright law for (I think) 70 years after the originators death. You then have the recorded works, i.e. you take the idea, with permission of course, and record it or perform it. You are then protected by copyright law. So, both originator and recording artist are protected by law.
Second issue is that someone comes along and sees or hears (more likely) something they like and thinks “I’ll have some of that in my song”. The only way that someone can do this is if they are either assigned the copyright, i.e. the orginator transfers the copyright to someone and has either limited or no rights the the original works (maybe for a given period as well), or that someone is licensed, i.e. given permission by way of license for, maybe, a fee.
When you buy a CD of your favourite band, although the CD is yours to do as you wish with, songs that it contains are merely licensed to you. The license has limitations on what you as a listener, recording artist, etc. etc. can do.
In essence then, I can write 3 notes in a particular way into a musical score, and so long as I can proove that these 3 notes were my idea, I am protected by copyright. If I find, and can proove, that you have used, even just 2 of the notes of my song, I could sue you under that law.
That’s the law. What about the practicality? Can you really police this muddle? Well, sometimes, as we have seen, but it takes some prooving and quite a bit of effort to bring any case to court
What about when you are at the downtown coffee shop and the group in the corner is playing a bob dylan cover? Do they have to call ol’ bob and get permission? does it matter if they are getting paid for the gig or not?
Matt
The coffee shop has to pay money to the local representatives of ASCAP and BMI to get the right to allow cover music to be played there. Sometimes the local reps let small joints slide, but more and more they’re cracking down and so the coffehouse has to close down the open mike night.
About getting paid or not: this doesn’t affect whether you’re in violation or not, but it does affect whether it’s criminal or not (here in the US, that is). If you’re not doing it for personal gain, then it’s not criminal. But you can still be sued.
Companies frequently do stuff they can be sued for, taking a “business risk”. I occasionally do a similar thing with respect to cover music, as a “personal risk”. I make it a point that, in general and as feasible, artists get paid. So I buy the music I like even when I can get it for free. But on the other hand, I’ll post a recording of a cover tune now and then. The latter is skirting the law – I can usually make a case for “fair use” meaning that it’s for educational purposes, and it is really.
But I find it unlikely I’ll be sued, and it doesn’t bother my conscience since I’m a big supporter of both local and big-biz music. They get a lot of my money, and I’m happy to pay it. So I don’t lose any sleep because I posted my recording of a Steely Dan song, for example. I bet Donald Fagen wouldn’t lose any sleep over it either. If asked to remove it, I would.
(No doubt, if Donald heard my version, he would ask me to destroy it! 
PS: Smitty’s right on all counts. It used to be 50 years but now it’s 70 years after the author’s death. This will become an issue again, when it’s been 70 years since Walt Disney’s death, because Disney, Inc. will want to protect it’s Mickey Mouse property.
Nice explanation Jeff. Thanks all guys!
| Quote (Smiffy @ Oct. 15 2004,07:24) |
| In essence then, I can write 3 notes in a particular way into a musical score, and so long as I can proove that these 3 notes were my idea, I am protected by copyright. If I find, and can proove, that you have used, even just 2 of the notes of my song, I could sue you under that law. That's the law. What about the practicality? Can you really police this muddle? Well, sometimes, as we have seen, but it takes some prooving and quite a bit of effort to bring any case to court |
It's like the old Vanilla Ice controversy.There was a riff from, I think, Queen (or someone like that) that sounded very similar to the riff in Ice Ice Baby. Vanilla Ice argued that since he added a hammer-on in the beginning, it was ok. There is a classic clip of him going "well, the other song goes 'dun dun dun duda dun dun' and mine goes 'duda dun dun dun duda dun dun." I would argue that since he sucks and Queen rules, he loses the debate anyways. But maybe that isn't legally supportable.
fish
That fact that anyone, except the deaf, would know right off it was the same riff, and it was a sample of the Queen riff used without permission to boot, might be why V. I. Whiteboy got in trouble. 