I got as far as your 'giving a correct definition" before smiling.

You really think the term "folk" is anything other than what it is? Where music is concerned, it is a wide musical genre.

If you support Jim and his "oral tradition" nonsense, more fool you. Most "traditional" songs "in the oral tradition" have been copyrighted broadsheet ballads before ever tit trousers tried claiming them as from his or her mother's knee.

I mentioned Famous Flower of Serving Men as an example I happen to know the details of. it was written by Laurence Price and published under copyright in June 1656. If I could be arsed, I could find plenty more.

No problem, it remains a folk song. It's just that Jim's silly definition that you are supporting for some illogical reason falls at such hurdles.

If you recall, the question was "What makes a new song a folk song?" You and Jim think a new song can't be a folk song, whereas all songs were new once. Many of them copyrighted too. Indeed, just about all the ones any of us know have been published...

Don't worry though Michael. I only call folk music folk...