 sj |
||
|
||
Help: When is it plagiarism?
|
|
|
Subject: When is it plagiarism? From: Jim Dixon Date: 05 Dec 01 - 10:31 PM The other day a good friend of mine was bad-mouthed, sneered at, and laughed at behind his back, and I wonder if I should defend him. What they said about him was this: "He takes the A part from one traditional tune and the B part from another, puts them together, gives it a new name, and pretends he wrote it!" The two people who said this were very scornful, and seemed to think my friend was unfairly claiming credit for originality he doesn't have. I'm not familiar with the tunes in question, so I can't judge whether it's true. So today I asked a third person what she thought. She said, "Yeah, he monkeys around with tunes quite a bit, changing a note here and there to make it easier to play, or whatever. But that's just the folk process." She knows his music quite well, and she wasn't aware of any instance where he had inappropriately claimed credit for anything, in her opinion. Pondering this problem, it occurs to me that a person who takes a traditional song or tune and changes it a little bit is in a difficult position. What do you call it? Do you give it a new name, and call yourself the composer? Or do you keep the original name and call it "traditional?" You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. If you name yourself as composer, you're liable to be accused of "stealing" something. If you call it "traditional" you're liable to be criticized for changing it. Come to think of it, in all the album liner notes I have ever read, I don't recall a folk musician ever saying, "I took this traditional tune and changed it a little."-–although we know this happens all the time. The rule of etiquette seems to be that you can either (1) call the tune "traditional" and don't mention any changes that you made, or (2) claim it as an original composition, and don't mention that you had a traditional source. There is no middle ground. And you can be criticized either way. It doesn't seem fair. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: CarolC Date: 05 Dec 01 - 10:37 PM The people I know who do this sort of thing give credit to the composer or they call it trad, and when they list the titles, they hyphenate. For instance...
Fig for a Kiss / Kid on the Mountain / The Butterfly / Gallagher's Frolic They do this regardless of how much tinkering they've done with the tunes and arrangements.
|
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: ddw Date: 05 Dec 01 - 10:48 PM Jim, This is something that comes around every so often and somebody always points out that Bob Dylan would still be Robert Zimmermann if he hadn't done it. As did Woody and Jimmie and just about everybody else. Poke around in the blues sometime and listen to the "borrowing" of lyrics, licks, etc. that went on amid claims of "writing" the songs. I agree with your friend who shrugs it off as "folk process", but with the caveat that the person doing the hybrid song could soften the criticism by saying it's his "arrangement," rather then his "composition." david |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Crazy Eddie Date: 06 Dec 01 - 03:31 AM "The rule of etiquette seems to be that you can either (1) call the tune "traditional" and don't mention any changes that you made, or (2) claim it as an original composition, and don't mention that you had a traditional source. There is no middle ground. And you can be criticized either way. It doesn't seem fair. " Jim, I am sure i have seen middle ground on some Irish Albums. Something like: "The pigeon on the gate, traditional. Arrangement C. Eddie." I don't know if there is an equivalent for changing words. Maybe Whiskey in the Jar, traditional. Variant C. Eddie? |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Cappuccino Date: 06 Dec 01 - 12:57 PM I was interviewing one of the great contemporary Christian songwriters, Matt Redman, the other week, and he said the great thing about his work is that he can ransack the Bible for lyrics.... and everybody praises him for his songs, and nobody sues him for plagiarism! - IanB |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: GUEST,Les B. Date: 06 Dec 01 - 12:59 PM Jim - I think the problem lies in whether your friend claimed to have composed the tunes. There are always variations and versions of tunes, and, as you know, there is no "right" way to play anything -- just ways that are prettier, or more driving, or more inspired ! Go to any old time fiddler's jam and you'll find people playing Turkey in the Straw (for instance) a whole lot of different ways, to accomodate skill levels and musical sensibilities, and, as long as the tune is recognizable as Turkey in the Straw, it's not considered wrong or going against tradition. Then there's the whole area of different names for the same tune. Cherokee Shuffle in A sounds a lot like Lost Indian which is in D. Or a tune called Waiting for the Federals in one region is called Seneca Square Dance in another part of the country. Maybe your friend is just using alternative titles ? I'd give him the benefit of the doubt until you hear him claim a clearly recognizable trad tune as his own. Then call "bullshit" ! |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: GUEST,Frank Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:38 PM The problem is that it's the system of copyright that we acknowledge. Recording companies make money from songwriters who publish their material with their ancillary publishing wings. Therefore, trad or PD is discouraged because no one makes money from it. There is a provision for "adaptation" of songs in the copyright form. Remember that J.S. Bach did not write the hymns that he arranged. Many classical music composers take a traditional theme such as Aron Copeland did with McCleod's Reel or Bonaparte's Retreat. Stravinsky once said that classical music composers don't plagiarize. They steal. Here's another problem. Lyric ideas are lifted all the time by singer-songwriters from traditional sources. Tunes are adapted and readapted and often claimed as original because they are adapted (different). Then then there is the problem of arrangements. An arrangement of a song such as Scarborough Fair can often set a song aside as being "original" and in fact when part of it is rewritten, such as in the Canticle, then using the "adaptation" criterion in the copyright form becomes a matter of economics. Publishers don't like to see adaptations much because it causes administrative problems in collecting royalties. Bottom line, everyone steals a little or a lot. Name one song and another can be found to preceed it that sounds similar or shows previous "access". If the singer-songwriter thing weren't about making royalties then it would'nt be such a big deal. Who would care except maybe the writer or composer? I think that when a song becomes popular and it is tradition-based and that can be clearly established then it should be mandatory for it to be in the public domain but a lot of people who make their living in the song writing and publishing business are not going to like this. At least it keeps the courts and music attorneys busy. Frank |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Jim Dixon Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:53 PM Here's the way the American Heritage Dictionary (my CD-ROM version) defines "arrange:" Music. To reset (a composition) for other instruments or voices or for another style of performance.This is more or less the definition I learned years ago (I can't remember where; I never had any formal training in music theory) and that I always had in mind. In my mind "arranging" might include transposing, changing the tempo, changing the way you accent certain notes, adding or omitting grace notes, and so on, and maybe even changing the harmony—but that it would NOT include changing the basic melody line. I don't know what you would call it if you DID change the melody. Adapting, maybe? I just found these examples on the Internet: Ten and Nine (2:40) Arranged and adapted by Liam Clancy Buked And Scorned - Words and Music Arranged and adapted by Harry Belafonte and Robert DeCormier How is "arranged and adapted" different from just plain "arranged"? Is this just legalese like "all and sundry"? |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: GUEST,truckerdave Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:58 PM Some of the old folk songs don't make good sense, lyrically or musically from a songwriters point of view. It's perfectly alright for someone to "clean up" an old folk song and change the music around, as i do sometimes. Just don't claim it for your own cause you didn't really write it, just changed something that was already there. Doc Watson did it a lot, never heard anyone complaining about him doing it. Long as someone uses the "arranged and adapted by........" prefix it's fine by me and you can copywright your "arrangement" if it's not like anyone else's. I personally don't as i feel it's in really bad taste to do so. A traditional song should belong to everyone. If anyone wants to play my particular version of an old song, go for it. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Bert Date: 06 Dec 01 - 02:01 PM If the tune is easily recognizable then it's OK to write new lyrics an claim it's your song as I did with Silicone Cindy. Everyone knows I didn't write the tune so it's OK, and hardly worth mentioning. Or if I've changed an original tune a lot so that it is almost unrecognizable then again it's not really worth mentioning the original tune. As in Bathing Angel You've all heard me sing it on Mudcat Radio but can anyone guess what the original tune was? As for fiddle tunes they all sound the same anyway so what the hell. HTML fixed. Bert, you left out the closing quotation mark in one of your links. --JoeClone, 6-Dec-01. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Jim Dixon Date: 06 Dec 01 - 02:24 PM By the way, I don't see "copyright" or "©" anywhere on my friend's self-published CD's. I'm pretty sure he never expected to receive any royalties, and never got any advice from a lawyer or a professional music publisher. His liner notes simply say "Tune by ---". I'm still trying to figure out whether my friend was unfairly criticized. I guess I'll have to research the tunes he allegedly stole from and form my own opinion. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: MMario Date: 06 Dec 01 - 02:28 PM I would suggest that the appropriate response to the people making the comment would be "meow" |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: M.Ted Date: 06 Dec 01 - 02:32 PM The two people that you overheard suffer from powerful jealousy, sneering and snideness, badmouthing and mockery generally (especially in the creative arts)are the refuge of the threatened, the insecure, and the envious-- Even in their disparagement,they recognized that he created something original--they were just trying to undercut the achievement by making it sound like it wasn't really that much work at all--
|
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Malcolm Douglas Date: 06 Dec 01 - 03:01 PM It's also possible that they were right, and he is a plagiarist; there is no point in our judging him, or them, without knowing the facts. Returning for a moment to Jim Dixon's post, the worst thing about Ten and Nine "Arranged and adapted by Liam Clancy" is that it's not even a traditional song; it was written by Mary Brooksbank (not Brookbank, as stated in the DT file). She died in 1980, so the song is very much in copyright; it is inexcusable that apparantly no attempt was made to credit her on the recording in question; Clancy originally recorded the song in 1965, when it was less easy to research such things (though her authorship was always widely known), but the compilation referred to was issued in 1999, so there is no excuse for perpetuating the error. It's usually called Oh Dear Me, or The Jute Mill Song. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Lanfranc Date: 06 Dec 01 - 06:14 PM I'm with Tom Lehrer on this one.
"Plagiarise, even though the public all evade your eyes! Alan |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Dec 01 - 06:40 PM Use what you like, change it as you feel - but always say where you got it and what you did to it, if anyone is interested.
When I make a song I normally find a tune will fit itself to it, and I won't know here it comes from till some time later it'll turn out to be a variant of some preexisting tune. I feel that with all the time people have been making music, if a tune hasn't been used alrady, there must be something wrong with it.
When I try to make a song using an existing tune, it always seems to end up with a different tune from the one I started anyway.
Originality is great when it arises naturally - but but I distrust people who actually aim for it. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: heric Date: 06 Dec 01 - 09:04 PM >>>Originality is great when it arises naturally - but but I distrust people who actually aim for it. <<< I wish I could remember the famous person who said something along this vein. He was telling an interviewer something about the worst road to originality was trying to be "different," because you'd polluted your thought processes from the start by trying to NOT be something already in mind. I recall John Lennon saying he was mystified by the My Sweet Lord flap, because he believed that George knew it was too close, and that George could have, in a heartbeat, tweaked it just a little more, and avoided the whole thing. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Art Thieme Date: 06 Dec 01 - 10:14 PM The first one to take it is a plagiarist. After that it's research. ;-) Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Jim Dixon Date: 07 Dec 01 - 01:26 PM I agree that originality is not worth pursuing as an end in itself, and it ought to be considered just as respectable to sing traditional songs, or other people's songs, as to sing your own original compositions. Maybe more so, since there are a lot of good old songs out there in need of preservation, and the great majority of new songs just don't measure up to them. This value system may be the main thing that separates the folk world from the world of pop culture. In the pop world, if you're known as a "cover" band, you might be able to make a living, but you will never get your picture in Rolling Stone. Hell, you're lucky if you can get the local newspaper to review your gigs. I think that's true no matter what style of music you play. In fact, the whole concept of "covering" somebody else's work is alien to folk music. This term comes from pop music and it sets my teeth on edge when I hear it applied to folk music. Not that you shouldn't perform other people's work, but rather, you should be able to perform it without having your performance automatically branded as inferior, and that's what the word "cover" seems to imply to me. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Jim Dixon Date: 07 Dec 01 - 01:43 PM Art: I'd like to modify that. If you steal from the guy who made a hit song out of it, it's plagiarism. But if you steal it from the guy he stole it from, it's research. |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: gnu Date: 07 Dec 01 - 03:16 PM Since nobody asked me, here's my pet peeve. The radio constantly plays a particular musician of great note. Now, I'm sure his albums, tapes and CD's give credit to the people who wrote the tunes, but the radio doesn't. And I've never heard him acknowledge the fact that owes greatly to those who wrote the tunes. Ergo, I meet people who think he's a god. I thought he only ripped off ** **** and various other blues musicians, but, a couple of nights ago, I had the cable tuned to smooth jazz for background and found the music to one of his biggest hits was written by another. I would never actually name the noted hack. That would be in poor taste. Anyone like JJ Cale ? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: M.Ted Date: 07 Dec 01 - 04:54 PM You should mention the name, because if you don't, many of us will think you are talking about Eric Clapton-- But seriously, the radio guys, who actually have the credits in front of them, often never read them. I remember hearing a DJ introduce Manfred Mann (when "Blinded By the Light" was a big hit) as a songwriter. Manfred said he didn't understand why people thought that he was a songwriter, given the fact that all of his hits were covers of other people's songs-- |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: GUEST,yum yum Date: 08 Dec 01 - 02:04 PM In 1981 I penned a ballad and entered it into the new composed ballad section in the local fleadh. I got to the 'All Ireland' with it (maybe I should mention, I BORROWED the air from another ballad) Two years later I was sitting in a pub at a singing weekend and this guy starts to sing it. I was so chuffed I ordered a pint for him and when he finished the song I got up to give him it. As I drew near I over heard someone ask were he got it from, only to hear him reply "Oh its something I wrote a few years ago." Needless to say he didn't get the pint. THAT'S called PLAGIARISM!!! To end the story, I stopped him later that evening when he was on his own and again asked him about the song. When he gave me the same reply I said, "Great song, strange that it's word for word the same as one I composed a few years ago." After begging me not to tell anyone, I got the free pint!! THAT'S called GRATITUDE!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: GUEST,Frank Date: 08 Dec 01 - 04:05 PM Adaptation is when you take an existing melody, rewrite it somehow, juxtapose it with maybe another tune or even alter it to fit a different chord progression. Charlie Parker rewrote many songs putting his own melodies to chord progressions from standard popular songs. Many jazz musicians have done this. Folk musicians do it all the time. For example, Home On the Range started with a different melody than the one we now know. It was adapted lyrically from a poem that was in the newspaper in the 1800's called "A Home, A Home". There is a question as to whether one can call Simon's Scarborough Fair an adaptation. I think you can because he wrote another juxtaposed part to it. Some say he "nicked" the arrangement from Davy Graham but here again, it's a matter of what one deems important in the rewrite. Arranging is taking an existing melody and somehow enhancing it by creatively supporting it with harmony, counterpoint, form dealing with modulations, instrumentation etc. The two are musically different. The former can claim legallly a copyright. As I understand it, arrangements are not copyrightable. If they were, it would be a real mess (not that it isn't to some degree already). The notion of the "cover" tune is simply a pop music development that really has no place in folk music. The idea is to please an audience who is locked into the recording that they are familiar with. It's an awful idea but a lot of musicians can earn a living at it so it can't be all bad. Being a professional musician, I'm in favor of musicians working whatever way they can. God knows it's hard enough to even make a part time career of music. Folklorists and ethnomusicologists are not so concerned with the notion of plagiarism. It's mainly the concern of those who have an economic vested interested in protecting their intellectual property. Ie: singer-songwriters who are looking for those BMI and ASCAP royalties. For folk academic types it's a non-issue unless you happen to be one of those folklorists who when you print up one of the traditional songs they've collected, you can get sued. There are two prominent folksong collectors who employ this practice. (Won't mention them by name). Frank
|
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: Dan Schatz Date: 08 Dec 01 - 04:23 PM A few years ago I made a lullabye, and later realized that part of the melody bore a remarkable similarity to "Peace and Freedom." I love that song, and I also think my newer lullabye is pretty good, too (I'm biased, not because I made it, but because I made it for my niece.) So is the melody an adaptation of a traditional tune? I don't think so; it's too different. But it's also recognizably similar. Maybe what is needed is a new category - tune that are neither adaptations, arrangements, or entirely new, but simply related to older tunes, much as "A Rake and a Rambling Boy" is related to "Wild and Wicked Youth" (in that case, a distant descendent). So my "Cora's Lullabye" is related to "Peace and Freedom," but not an adaptation or arrangement of it. It's kind of a cousin. Dan |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 09 Dec 01 - 04:30 AM If you steal from one source it's plagiarism, if you steal from several it's research |
|
Subject: RE: Help: When is it plagiarism? From: dick greenhaus Date: 09 Dec 01 - 09:42 AM If you don't like the person doing it, it's plagarism. If you do, it's the Folk Process. |
| Share Thread: |