I said all kinds of lyrics (that tiny selection is completely uninteresting) and please dont alter my words and put my name on it, thanks.
The point is that there IS an existing industry of publishing those lyrics. Whether an artist choses to publish their lyrics is their right to decide. If those lyrics are published it is their right to chose who, how and for what compensation.
Until the copyright expires. Then its public domain.
(And don’t ask me to defend the recent extensions of corporate copyright, other waise known as the “Sonny Bono Mickey Mouse Protection Act” because I won’t. IMHO that was a travesty.)
As for the second, AFAIK all I did was put quotes around the significant parts of your words. If any got chnaged then I apologize but I am not aware of any changes.
JK
Well, here is one of the more rare times when I disagree with Jeff. I think that the record labels coming after sites for posting the words to a song is just awful. Now, if those sites are charging visitors for this, that’s one thing, but for sites that just post the words to a song that you still go out and buy, totally different… As well, if there was sheet music that accompanied the lyrics, it would be wrong. But the WORDS? Total crap and an abuse of the music association’s position.
Show me how the lyrics, just the lyrics, being posted damages sales. ONE SOLID example. I can’t think of a one.
-Chris
EDIT: I should also add that if the use of those lyrics is for a monetary gain for anyone other than the artist, then, again, it is a different issue. But posting them so listeners can sing along with tunes they purchased? COME ON!
Chris,
What about the lyrics book you might have bought?
Are you saying that poetry has no value, only music? I can think of a great many peopel in the history of literature that woudl disagree.
I just showed you. Click the amazon link I posted above.
JK
Hardly the point anyway is it. All the artistic content of the music is owned by these people. Whether its just or not isn’t the issue. Whether its logical or sensible isn’t the issue. The content that is given away on these web sites (whether for free or not) is not theirs to give.
Kev
That is the nut. Thanks Kev.
The point is that there IS an existing industry of publishing those lyrics.
Yes, and it covers about 0.00001% of the stuff you can find in the evil internet. Unfortunatelly its that part which doesnt interest me at all.
As for the second, AFAIK all I did was put quotes around the significant parts of your words. If any got
chnaged then I apologize but I am not aware of any changes.
You cut of some part of the sentence without indicating it with […] and thus you altered the meaning slightly (to something I wouldnt have said).
@kev
All the artistic content of the music is owned by these people.
We all know that.
Whether its logical or sensible isn’t the issue.
It so is the issue and I’m free to vent my anger about it. I think its benefitical for everyone if you bitch (=bad image) about bad practises of some company/industry/whatever and if you praise thinks like good customer support (=good image).
A single opinion doesnt change much… its the sum of those opinions, which makes em more or less successful.
IMHO if someone sits down and transcribes the music themselves and offers it for free then there is np.
This person just might get everything right but in comparison to the professional it will only be guessing.
The pro gets his stuff from the source and that costs money which in turn the pro intends on getting from the customers who buy the ‘real thing’.
@Jeff:
While you have your opinions… but calling Britney Spears’ music ‘poetry’…no way man, no way!! 
That may be the issue you want to talk about, which of course you’re welcome to do. Personally, I couldn’t give a flying ferret what they do, but then I’m a white male between 20 and 30 with X amount of disposable income so I don’t get a say any more (something random I feel like discussing ;))
I thought the issue of that started the thread was whether this was “stealing” or not. Which, without a doubt, it so blatently is.
Personally, I feel there is way too much bitching in the world where people will either come down for the pop culture side (oh no, the record companies are bad man!) or the self-oriented side (oh no, I’m going to have pay for something that I felt I could legitimately steal before!). I’m not saying that the case here, and on this particular topic, I couldn’t give a stuff. I’ve bought plenty of TAB before and have never downloaded any.
Kev
Shrink-wrap & a no-returns policy makes that rather difficult However I’m more likely to buy the artist’s next CD, if I enjoyed the last one, and having the lyrics is definitely part of that for me. So I am voting with my feet to some extent.
Incidentally, I do buy less CDs these days, but that is more because of having a large existing collection and an aging taste in music.
@Kev - I don’t think that there’s any doubt that the lyrics are their IP & they have the right to have unlicenced sites taken down. It’s just that it seems counterproductive. As I do buy my music legally, I’d stop bitching, if all CDs came with lyrics - but they don’t. The good news is that often artists with decent lyrics often do get them included. I’m always so pleased when thats the case 
But thats exactly the point.
-
There are people (even on this thread) that think its not their IP and its not stealing.
-
When a CD doesn’t come with lyrics its because the person who owns the IP has decided that they arn’t giving you the written word (or the right to republish it) - they’re giving you a copy of the track (admittedly you’re paying for it). Yet again, its there right to package the IP however they choose to. When you realease a game, you don’t have to release the source. Thats your choice.
As to the idea of bitching, complaining and making arguments based on “ah but it’d be better for you if you did it this way” to gets things changed, I think thats extremely naive (and I’d know, I’m naive in the extreme ;)). The only thing that would make anyone in this sort of industry make any changes is money, and the only way the masses can effect that is to not buy the product that don’t conform to your ideal.
And yes, I know “if you don’t like it, don’t buy it” isn’t a very good argument - but its the only one that would actually have any effect.
Kev
Can you really separate the lyrics from the music and still claim copyright? I think it’s the combination that makes the art. Anyway here in sweden text has to live up to a certain standard, called “Verkshöjd” (can’t think of a good translation), for it to be copyright protected. Don’t know who decides if something is good enough, but I would guess it’s decided in a court of law if somebody questions a copyright claim. Thinking of how stupid, trite and banal the lyrics of most songs are I wouldn’t aprove many lyrics if I were to decide
I disagree simply because what you are describing in most cases IMO isn’t even IP. In modern legal practice, IP isn’t “any random thought I happen to have one day and right down”, it has to be more substantial than that; in the case of lyrics to a song, that’s not (IMHO) really IP - something that people sing along to and hear each other singing and so sing themselves, that’s not what IP is really about.
If you fervently believe that it is, you are walking fast in the direction of totalitarian control of language itself. This is of huge benefit to someone (whoever does the owning), but is in every way imaginable counter to civilization and humanity. Obviously, it’s the way that most record companies knowingly want to go (as has Microsoft), because its more profitable than anything else and their job is to “make most profit possible for shareholders”.
That doesn’t make it something you should support, irrespective of what the law says today.
[quote]1) There are people (even on this thread) that think its not their IP and its not stealing.
[/quote]
I don’t know whether this refers directly to my earlier comment, which states that copying data doesn’t qualify as stealing. If this is so, I would like to clarify my point. I was not stating in any way that copying copyrighted stuff is okay, or whether it should be legal. But as everyone can see, stealing physical stuff from a person deprives this person of property, whereas copying data does not - it may be argued that the act deprives the owner of the profits otherwise obtained from sales, but since the product would probably not have been bought in the first place (seeing as the person who copied the data over and over again couldn’t afford it in the first place), this is a dangerous assumption.
If someone copied 1000 credits’ worth of my copyrighted stuff, I would still be less outraged than if finding 100 credits missing from my pocket.
One more time, just for old times sake huh? I’m not saying its right, I’m not even saying I agree with the practice. Argueing what is and isn’t IP is also pointless then since thats “modern legal practice” and we’re suddenly worrying about “civilisation and humanity”. The point is the thing that is being distributed isn’t owned by the people distributing it - and ownership is claimed by someone else. Claiming someone is “totalitarian” because they believe in the concept of ownership is just a idealist’s way out of the real world.
For reference, no it wasn’t aimed at you. However, whether you personally would be more or less outraged by something doesn’t change whether its stealing or not stealing? or does it? IMO, stealing doesn’t mean taking physical property, it means taking something that isn’t yours - as everyone can see - copying copyright material (in whatever form) is doing.
I’m also quite surprised that you’d more outraged at losing 100 credits rather than 1000 credits - no matter what the case. You could easily by a new Mk3 for that
Kev
To be completely clear here, I agree that tab sites are harmful. In my previous post I jumped the gun a bit and thought this was about “fan sites” posting the lyrics. (I know, I know…RTFA).
I agree with Kev and Jeff that we have to protect an artitst’s property, no argument there. Just would find it silly to hammer fans for such activity as it really amounts to “free” promotion right?
This whole discussions really makes you think. If I hear a song on the radio and sing it in public, am I in violation of copyright infringement?
-Chris
(P.S. I know the answer )
I didn’t start this thread to say that the MI didn’t own the rights to this material or that they had the right to shut down tab sites. I am saying that they are greedy. And it is a load of bull that they are concerned for the artists. They are concerned with lining their pockets. As business people, sure they want to make money, but the appearance of good customer relations will endear people to you and make them more willing to part with their hard earned dollar to purchase music products.
From my perspective, they will be losing money. For me, playing guitar is a hobby. I have other hobbies that are more important to me, but I still enjoy trying to learn. So I will go to a site like http://www.puretracks.com and purchase the music I would like to learn. I in fact spent $21 and put together a CD with 16 songs on it. Then I will find the tabs and try to learn. Without the tab sites, I would have to spend in excess of $70 more dollars to get all the sheet music for said songs. Since not all sheet music is sold as a single, then you have to by a book with it for $20-$25. With that in mind I would have to spend $120 or more to get everything for all those songs. Since guitar is such a minor hobby and being married with kids and some debt, I cannot afford to spend that extra $100 for the sheet music. So now I won’t even spend my initial $21 because I won’t be able afford to get the sheet music.
How is what the tab sites do any different than what we do as game programmer? We put out tutorials on how to write Pong or Tetris or Asteroids or Space Invaders. While the code is ours, the ideas and concepts are not. We are not making money off these tutorials. All we are trying to do is teach people.
3rd party recommendations have the biggest influence (advertisement is very weak in comparison). For example just because I was satisfied with my hoster they got 10+ new customers and these new customers may recommend it to others, which means that the effect is even bigger.
A single opionion can easily result in a difference of thousands of dollars.
[quote]I’m also quite surprised that you’d more outraged at losing 100 credits rather than 1000 credits - no matter what the case. Wink You could easily by a new Mk3 for that Smiley
[/quote]
The person who copied the stuff most likely wouldn’t have bought anything in the first place. Heck, he probably doesn’t even have 1000 credits, how on earth could I then have lost 1000 credits? Most of that money is imaginary. The actual loss of sales is extremely difficult to estimate, but I bet it corresponds to much less than 100 credits on average, not even enough for a Spice Silo.