[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, scotartt]

["Michael Benson" <michael.benson@pristop.si>]

Scott, much of what you wrote in your posting just doesn't compute. Or if it
does, I've been living in a parallel universe. And maybe both statements are
true. Where did you get your information? Cover versions can't be released
(certainly in the film world -- and it must be so in recordings-land as
well) without clearance from the holder of the rights to the song. Not
necessarily the song-writer. I'm currently petitioning an outfit called Rolf
Budde Musikverlage for the right to do a very "off" cover version of a
vintage Allman Brothers song for a film I'm making. I'm asking for the
so-called synchronization rights -- not the master use rights, which have to
do with using the actual original recording concerned. The former cost less
than the latter, but they cost. (For me, both are way too expensive, but
that's another story.)

> Strictly speaking though, if a work has previously been released as a
> recording, then the composer can't control who else can record and release
> the composition.

The holder of the rights to the tune can. Certainly when it comes to use in
a film. Would releasing a CD be any different?

> If you wanted to perform or record a Beatles cover, or a John Cage
> composition, they can't stop you.

Again, where did you get this info? Technically, the above may be right: you
can sing it from the stage, and you can record it -- but you can't release
it without approval. Why do you think the Cage estate would be wasting its
time if that was true?

> Seems to me people often confuse compositional rights with the rights on
> the master tape (i.e. a specific performance of a composition). You can't
> use a sample of the Beatles, but you can re-record their songs without
> asking.

Under US law, and again my information has to do with film, the only time
this is true is if it is a satirical version of the song. Satire is
protected under the first amendment. But satire is narrowly defined in the
law.

Which raises the interesting question of if this shorter dub version of
Cage's silence, complete with a total absence of any sound at all from the
beginning to end, a complete absence of sound, but less of it, can qualify
as satire... Satire of the silent kind.

Best, MB





_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold