Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Simon
Maybe it's terminology we're having a problem with. What is it that you mean when you say "the master"? Is it a physical spool of tape? Or something similar?Indeed Mark. That tape contains the performance. It's a physical thing and my argument is that that physical thing is subject to the same rules as other physical things. The song, used to create it, I agree, should pass at some stage, as defined by society, into public domain. In the same way that a design for a house will..but the house does not. Or a design for a super yacht..the yacht and anything it earns remains private but eventually someone can use the design and the concept to make their interpretation of the yacht. Like a song, except, happily, with a song, you can do it from day two (day one being the writer's chance to record it first either by his/her self or someone of their choice.
It works well in the recording industry and has for a century.
-
PS as Rob Stowell notes upstream, copyright does not apply to ideas, only the expressions of ideas.
I think we've moved beyond that to the physical thing that comes from the expression of ideas...that's what a few of us were asking about, and, and I'm with Rob(bery) here, have not to date had an argument, that, I at least, can buy. Lots of skirting around the edges but no response to the core contradiction, at least none that convince me. Sacha came closet with the shelter argument but there are, as I tried to point out, fairly massive holes in that too.
-
Simon
I don't want your master tape. Keep it.I want the content that's on it to be released into the public domain as lyrics, as sheet music and as the expression of the one who recorded it first, in the form that they used.
Glad to see you are coming around there Mark, because you seem to be. Although the content on the tape is not the song, it's something constructed from the song and for over a century it's been recognized as a separate entity with an separate ownership that has nothing to do with the song, lyric or sheet music. You still seem to be confusing the two.
Since I own that master (not the song), the benefit of it should only accrue to me. However I wish to exploit it. Just like the owner of a Frank Lloyd Wright house being able to charge for tours.
Yes, you physically own the master tape. No, you don't own the song.
Which is what I've said over and over again in this thread. That's been my point exactly. So, since you now agree I own the tape, I'm asking why it's any different from a piece of jewelery which is made from a copyrightable design. That copyright expires but the ownership and the benefits of the ownership of that piece of jewellry last for ever. And even if one copies that exact jewel once the copyright expires, the ownership and the right to exploit and benefit from that ownership of the original never expires.
You are granted a period of exclusive use as a benefit deriving from its creation, and as an incentive to create more works
No, the song is, as I've pointed out earlier, available for anyone to construct another independent property out of, from day one. I guess in that way IP in the music industry is perhaps more evolved than other fields of the arts.
-
Don..see above..as I far as I can see the line where personal ownership starts and ends is fairly clear.
The fault here is to try to blur what is a fairy easily made distinction but then to apply that blur selectively.
-
Sacha, a house has money earning potential beyond it's mere value as a shelter. A million other items that have the same potential offer no shelter but remain private, potentially exploitable items forever.
Like a master tape, they are merely objects derived from ideas. the cultural value of a master tape is really neither here nor there surely..that is only relevant to the potential return from the tape. It is still the fruit of an idea like those other items..the realisation of labour when applied to an idea.. The idea reverts to society as it does in any item at the end of term...all well and good. The physical result of that idea in the case of a house or a diamond ring or a car or a computer does not but continues to offer the owner a value forever. Why is that different for a recording.
-
That wasn't me claiming it, it was simon, rob stowell, kerry etc who felt no one had answered it sufficiently in a logical and clear way.
Agreed Rob...I really don't think, Don, that anyone here has been able to argue persuasively why one physical object with income earning rights differs from another. Why does the master tape differ from the house?
-
dude... bali is in queensland. why else would there be so many aussies there?
They're, I think 3rd or 4th in the list of visitors now, after Japan and China, and I think, South Korea, depending on which figures you see.
-
It was no better in the UK in the 60s & 70s.
I was asked a question about keeping the Maori tribes out of the settlements in Slough circa 1990.
But it's very easy to get righteous about all this. I'm overwhelmed, but no longer surprised, in NZ by the amount of ignorance I encounter towards Asia when in the country. If I could count the number of times I've had to correct a comment about Bali being in Thailand, or, once, Queensland. Or, and I guess it's related, but had to field questions as to if Bali has recovered from the Tsunami.
I asked a guy who said he'd spent a couple of months in Bali if he'd been to Java..no only to Jakarta.
Then there are the endless questions as to how we deal with those wily, dangerous, Muslims....a very common enquiry but little different from the UK one I quoted above.
-
But it was hard to keep a straight face on occasion.
I asked an American here if he liked Thai food. He said, dude, I've only been in transit in Taiwan.
-
My favorite comment on Powell:
The McCain campaign have done some digging on this Powell guy and apparently he has never done a day's plumbing in his life. Ergo, his endorsement counts for 'zippo, nada , nothing.... '