[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Rhapsody in Blue and the death of Jazz



On 1 Jun 2002 at 22:28, Ernest Miller wrote:

Date sent:      	Sat, 01 Jun 2002 22:28:35 -0400
From:           	Ernest Miller <ernest.miller@aya.yale.edu>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Rhapsody in Blue and the death of Jazz
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> What chilling effect?  Should we abandon copyright entirely?

Bzzzzt...that's the fallacy of the excluded middle. No...but copyright must not 
be extended down to the point that it even starts to infringe the first 
amendement. Is a jazz musician's music any less speech if a computer program 
is? It takes my brain to read source code but I can understand the speech of 
many jazz musicians without having to read words. 

THe point here is that speech is not must vocalization. It included printing 
200 yrs ago and technology has created more means. Speech, what is that? Speech 
is the expression of ideas and emotions.

While I reazalize this is heresy to many, but the alternative to an growing 
number of fair use defenses is simply to reduce the protection of copyright. 
Where is that balance?

> 
> microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> > It's not the accountancy...it's the chilling effect that is the problem.
> > 
> > On 1 Jun 2002 at 22:07, Ernest Miller wrote:
> > 
> > Date sent:      	Sat, 01 Jun 2002 22:07:43 -0400
> > From:           	Ernest Miller <ernest.miller@aya.yale.edu>
> > To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Rhapsody in Blue and the death of Jazz Send
> > reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > 
> > 
> >>The cost of a mechanical reproduction license, so that I can sell my 
> >>cover of Britney Spears' latest is $0.08.  Not too bad.
> >>
> >>microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> >>
> >>>D.C. has a valid point. Creativity is not something one turns on and off like
> >>>a lightswitch or a candle that one snuffs out at will. And it is not beholden
> >>>to a fee extraction machine based upon planning and prepared thought. Do we
> >>>really want to tell a Jazz musician at the end of his set "oh you had two
> >>>bars of britney that's $100,000, three stanzas of Steppenwolf...depreciated
> >>>lately that's $1000 fork over the check.." ,"but I didn't realize I did
> >>>that", "too bad the sanctity of intellectual property must be preserved and
> >>>you have transgressed...can't pay...well don't play"...what ASSCAP has
> >>>created is nothing more than a accountancy system that attempts to enslave
> >>>creativity. At the risk of offending any accountant reading this but
> >>>CREATIVITY AND ACCOUNTANY ARE ANTIPODAL. THe only time creative accountancy
> >>>takes place fraud is involved - witness Enron.
> >>>
> >>>On 1 Jun 2002 at 21:06, Ernest Miller wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Date sent:      	Sat, 01 Jun 2002 21:06:00 -0400
> >>>From:           	Ernest Miller <ernest.miller@aya.yale.edu>
> >>>To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> >>>Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Rhapsody in Blue and the death of Jazz
> >>>Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Not true.  There are plenty of versions.  There is a mechanical license for
> >>>>songs.  Anyone can record one ... you just have to pay the heirs a legally
> >>>>set fee.  If I want to do a cover of the latest from Britney Spears, I could
> >>>>... so long as I paid the fee.  Britney couldn't stop me.
> >>>>
> >>>>D. C. Sessions wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>It's been observed that (at least according to the traditional
> >>>>>forms) Jazz -- _the_ American musical form -- is dead.  It died,
> >>>>>they tell us, of starvation. Jazz is at heart an improvisational
> >>>>>derivative of popular music and for the last few generations
> >>>>>there hasn't been any popular music available for improvisation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>What killed Jazz?  Why, for instance, aren't there any variations
> >>>>>on the theme of /Rhapsody/ /in/ /Blue/, the great Gershwin tune?
> >>>>>Why hasn't someone worked variations on /Appalacian/ /Spring/?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Well, in short because the heirs and assigns of Gershwin and
> >>>>>Copland won't allow it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Amazing, isn't it, that composers today still can't build on
> >>>>>classic works composed before their grandparents were born?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Would someone *please* explain how this promotes science and
> >>>>>the useful arts?
> >>>>>
> 
>