| previous by date | index | next by date |
| previous in topic | topic list | next in topic |
Hi Fritz,
After I posted I realized my first sentence may have been a tad rude, so apologies. I guess this topic gets my ire up, since although I have the utmost respect for the work and creations of others, the current state of intellectual property law is a freaking mess IMHO. I’m not a lawyer, but it hardly takes one to realize this. Throw in the current software patent nonsense and we have a bigger mess. Pretty soon we will be able to copyright the timbre of our God given voices the way things are going. It’s pretty scary because it is ruining a lot of things, most of all music. The one thing I perhaps didn’t make clear was that software programming and patch programming are converging very quickly. I can foresee (if it hasn’t already happened at Korg and the rest of them) a sophisticated software tool that pretty much does the work. Where’s the creativity there? A machine makes it up and if the ‘programmer’ thinks it sounds good, well then, put it in the can. Big whoop.
That’s the reason I own a Mellotron, a String Ensemble, a Minimoog (okay a Voyager) and even a Marxophone (what the hell is that, you ask?). Nice analog instruments without a computer doing any heavy lifting. Oops, there I go again…..
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of fdoddy@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 9:42 AM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: samples and copyright
Thanks for the clarification John. I was merely referring to a performance royalty (on synth programming) from a musical reference as it would relate to a musical performance. In my 30 plus years in music I have never encountered it nor had the option of pursuing it when I had the occasional gig as a programmer (synth that is) I understand your point completely from an intellectual property/software standpoint.
In my field, it is getting harder and harder to retain the right to profit from a performance over time, so my guess is entry into the coveted world of royalties is being squeezed everywhere. At least Intellectual property/ownership rights are still intact!
fritz
-----Original Message-----
From: lsf5275 <lsf5275@aol.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Feb 25, 2011 6:22 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: samples and copyright
Welcome to the group John! Is this your first post here?
John is the owner of the "Johnny Neel" Mellotron, #525
Frank
In a message dated 2/25/2011 4:30:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, hammaren@geoconcepts.com writes:
Well, as a programmer, that’s not entirely true. Whatever agreement was signed whether that person was an employee or outside consultant would dictate what remuneration was received. If the agreement stipulated that the employee or consultant received a royalty in whatever fashion was agreed, then that would be it. But, on the other hand the agreement would be between those two entities, not the end-user or consumer. In that case, whatever agreement or license agreement that was agreed to upon sale of such product would be in force between end user and manufacturer of product. I have not looked at whatever legalese came with my Triton for example, but since I have not read about any brouhahas regarding this, it is probably safe to assume that end users are granted a general use license for whatever purpose including performance. That’s not to say the programmer may not get a cut of total unit sales. What probably would not be included would be redistribution of said programs for the purpose of the end-user profiting from that work. Pretty much the same as if you cloned a Triton and sold it as a TritonGrande’ with all the sounds intact. But there is nothing to say he couldn’t profit from performances of his work if the end-user agreement stipulated it. Kind of hard to enforce this, but the way things are getting in this world, don’t count this out some day. Particularly since we are at the point where every, and I mean every device and person will have an IPV6 address in 20 or 30 years and whatever it is we will do will have some form of tracking associated with it. Look at Microsoft. Software as a service is a prime example – compose a doc and pay them a royalty. That’s their future.
It ain;t mine.
Cheers,
John
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of fdoddy@aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:44 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: samples and copyright
He probably signed a "work for hire" agreement, and besides, it is not a performance, but instead,programming. In the US, there is no performance royalty on programming, that would make no sense.
fd-----Original Message-----
From: mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Feb 25, 2011 12:46 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: samples and copyright
How about the guy who programmed the synthbrass sound on the DX7 ?
Should he get paid or sued everytime the sound is heard on the radio ?
// Mattias
Den 2011-02-25 17.56, skrev "Mike Dickson" <mike.dickson@gmail.com>:
On 25/02/2011 13:01, feline1973 wrote:
Nobody knows the name of the people on the tapes and so PPL don't have this info so they ain't getting paid at present.
Well..we know some of them. Trouble is I suspect most of them are dead.