Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?

Subject: Music Info: How Much Should We Post?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 11:01 PM

In the Cruel Ship's Captain thread, Malcolm Douglas makes a good point:

Although it's useful for people to be able to see material without having to go to the library, I'm becoming increasingly uncomfortable about the wholesale copying here of significant extracts from books in print and available at modest prices. Too much of that, and we risk damaging the (small) market for actual sales, and discouraging publication in the first place.

I have to admit that this is a serious consideration, but I'm not sure I agree. I buy every worthwhile songbook I can find (that I can afford) - and the reason I buy them is so I can participate in the discussion. I think that the people who buy traditional songbooks are people like me - people who want to be part of the discussion. This is how I make use of my songbooks - group study of songs. If I couldn't use the book for this, I wouldn't buy them - or at least I wouldn't buy so many.

If we were to post the entire text of a book that's in print or likely to be reprinted, I can see how that might affect sales of the book. I think the only book we've come close to copying in full is the 1959 edition of the Penguin Book of English Folk Songs. Malcolm did a remarkable revision of this book, now titled Classic English Folk Songs, and it certainly would be a shame to jeopardize projects such as this.

So, what's a good balance? Where do we draw the line between what's helpful to post and what's not? Do our threads and lyrics postings help sell books and recordings and help encourage publication, or are we a hindrance?

I think that in general, our music discussion does much to give life to the study and enjoyment of folk music, and that should help the market for folk recordings and books.

What think ye?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: open mike
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 11:25 PM

i was thinking along thes lines when i posted an answer to the western songs for females questions..i was hesitant to post all lyrice, chords and tunes, but wanted the person who asked the question to support some of the musicians by buying thier recordings...those who are struggling, and many are, to make their living from music, do not need to have thier hard-earned songs given away with no gain to them.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: freightdawg
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 11:53 PM

Thoughtful question Joe, and I'm glad you brought it up.

Let me begin by making a confession. When I first discovered this site I started by asking for (and receiving, by the way, from some wonderful 'Catters) some chords to some songs that I was having the devil of a time finding. I just do not have an "ear" for hearing the key of a song, and I don't understand chord progressions that well. Anyway, I deeply appreciate the assistance I received.

However, since that time I have read a lot of threads about the propietary rights of authors/musicians and it has given me pause. I know a lot of chord information is "what works" for certain people, not necessarily the original work of the creator. But if in passing along these lyrics and music information/chords we keep the creator for getting his/her due then we have defrauded them to that extent.

What I would like to see is that when there is a request for lyrics/chords, if someone knows of a source currently in print for that information, that the searcher is directed to that information. If the song/music is traditional, out-of-print, or otherwise impossible of next-to impossible to come by, then our wonderful warehouses of information such as we have here should help with those requests. Even if it is educational, such as providing the key to a song and then giving some advice as to how to "decipher" your own chords such would be better than saying - "here, I just copied this off of my sheet music, this is the original stuff".

Sitting down and working out an original composition is tough. We ought to encourage that by making sure, whenever possible, the creator of the music we are discussing gets his/her creative as well as financial due. If we can encourage someone to buy a whole songbook or a single piece of sheet music, then by all means let us do so in whatever way we can. Sometimes music is just out of print and unavailable. If that is the case, so be it. But let's not make things more difficult in our laziness.

just my .02 worth

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 03:07 AM

I think that most of the stuff we do is very helpful to those who produce books and recordings - it produces a market, I think. If we post a substantial portion of a book, that could be damaging - but if we post everything a book has to say on a few songs, that's different.
I hate it when we get requests for all the lyrics on an album, or for chords for multiple songs from a particular artist. That seems wrong. If we post a song or three from a songwriter, that may encourage people to buy that person's work and learn more. If we set out to post any work in its entirety, then we may have crossed the line.
Generally, though, we don't do that.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 05:08 AM

Sufficient unto the Evil thereof.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 05:27 AM

We should also draw a distinction between collected "Traditional" works and those of living writers/performers. Also considering if the words/chords from a particular LP are available at all. Often they can not be purchased even if you were willing to pay cash.
For instance Richard Thompson songs are frequently asked for. Certain ones in the Digitrad (Dimming of the day) have incorrect words. In the time since I started coming to Mudcat, Richard has started his own web site, which contains all his song lyrics. If someone now wants the words I link to the official versions of them. What is NOT contained on Richard Thompson's web site are chords or music for his songs, and the man himself has not yet put his arrangements in print, so all anyone can do is ask for someone else's interpretation of an accompaniment. In that case it seems fair for a Mudcatter to supply their own set of chords.
With other songwriters this is not possible as thay are not available. With other writers it might be a different situation. For instance Harvey Andrews, who does post visit the Mudcat, would be the best source to ask for his lyrics. I am aware that as a songwriter, Harvey but is only too pleased people to sing his songs, and would be happier for them to get the words right.
Quack!
GtD.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 05:38 AM

Joe, At folkinfo, while we have no formal procedures or methods of tracking, we have a generally uderstood agreement that we take no more than 10% of an in print available book.

It would be tempting to copy some wholesale but that is where we attempt to draw the line at what we consider fair usage there.

The Penguin book is an interesting case as at the time of folkinfo starting, it was out of print (and thus by our agreement a candidate for a wholesale copy) and I would imagine that at the time Ed, etc. did thier work here, there was no reason to suspect the new version under the other title would be produced. In our (later) case, we heeded Malcolm's advice.

Overall, I think it is a hard one and I don't think we can be expected to be able to read the future or to not hold material on an iffy ground that something might be printed and available again one day simply as it was printed once before. Other than that, I think one should try to play fair and I don't see 1/10th of a book being sufficient to stop anyone buying the book - I'd hope the effect is the opposite.

Jon

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Rain Dog
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 06:57 AM

Geoff the Duck mentioned : "We should also draw a distinction between collected "Traditional" works and those of living writers/performers."
It would be good if people included the name of the writer when they post lyrics to the database.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: red max
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:26 AM

I think Joe has a point about producing a market. There's plenty of evidence that access to information can actually stimulate purchasing. Remember all that talk about Napster killing music? I read that recent stats showed CD sales actually INcreasing, downloading be damned

I work for the British Library, and in the early days of internet growth there were dire warnings about the death of print, but in the fact the volume keeps going up

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:43 AM

I think we need to look at it this way: In the long run, which way will society as a whole be better off? By having more music available free on the Internet, or by having more music available in books that can be purchased? Put that way, I think the answer is kind of obvious, but I will reflect more on it before I comment further.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Grab
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:12 AM

From what little I know of this, I'd second Red Max's argument. Chords and lyrics from the web can replace a songbook to a certain extent, but they don't give you the dots for the song (which are useful to many people), they aren't necessarily accurate, and there usually isn't a complete set of every song someone's ever written. Also a songbook often gives bits of biographical detail about how/why the song was written which you wouldn't otherwise know about. And CDs and songbooks are too expensive for me to buy everything I see - but if someone recommends something or the lyrics look interesting, I might consider getting it.

For "traditional" songs, I'm not sure that anyone has a right to expect an income from just publishing the text of the songs. But there certainly is still a place for books *analysing* those songs and their origins, and my belief is that this is where a folklorist's purpose lies. The best books of folksongs also have details about the song's origins and history, and are well worth the money. We may well see the death of those cheap little song booklets printed on A4 that you find buried in boxes in music shops ("20 favourite Irish tunes" or whatever) with words, dots and bad copies of some cheesy woodcut pictures, but that's no great loss to the world and I can't imagine anyone makes any money off them either.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: greg stephens
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:23 AM

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: beetle cat
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 03:02 PM

Aren't libraries taking away from book sales too?
But yes, I see what you are saying and I'll be more careful about what I ask for next time.
Actually, I went to the library, and took out the books mentioned in the other thread, and boy would I ever love to own them all. Also, I would have had no idea where to start without your hints.. people here just KNOW everything. It's amazing. Lets all just make sure we site our sources, if its not straight from the memory, 'cause then I'll know what books to keep my eyes open for in the future.
cheers
mary.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 05:27 PM

Besides book sales, royalties and copyrights on *songs* are certainly an issue.

One of the things many of us assume about "folk" music is that it's freely available to the public. We never think about paying for the right to learn and perform well-known songs ~ but when compositions are the work of living songwriters, it's only fair that they receive compensation for their work, *especially* when the work is so good that it earns a degree of popularity.

Now, I don't have the sightest compunction about playing a Dylan song, for example, without sending Bob a check, nor about treating Lennon/McCartney stuff as though it were in the public domain. But songwriters who are barely making a living (e.g., any number of our members) could use a few bucks compensation when others among us see fit to use their work in our own performances, or even when their lyrics get "published" here in a thread or in the DT.

Probably doesn't happen too often, though, does it?

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Dave Wynn
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 05:58 PM

John Tams actually publishishes his lyrics on his website. This is either to allow the listener to fully appreciate his (IMHO superb) lyrics or to allow the use of them by aspiring singers. His diction on his recordings is excellent so collecting them that way is not a problem. So why then does he publish his words on the web?

John if you are out there it would interest this thread to know how you feel about this and why you don't sell them exclusively in a song book!

Spot

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: GEST
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 06:11 PM

Most songwriter/performers with whom I correspond are appreciative of having their lyrics or lyric arrangements published accurately in a specific venue such as GEST Songs Of Newfoundland And Labrador. With proper copyright information: ¹there is no excuse for ownership to be ignored, ²others can determine who to contact for use information, ³and royalties can be properly assigned.

Problems arise when lyrics are published helter-skelter on-line with no accreditation. They lose their sense of accuracy, they are copied willy-nilly, and authorship, ownership, and royalties are lost with their unprofessional (perhaps criminal) use.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 06:25 PM

Books published on the Internet are handy, but they aren't real books. You can't carry them round with you and flip through them and stick them in a guitar case. Books are objects over and above the text they contain. What publishing a book on the Internet does, if it's a book you really like, is make you want to get hold of a hard copy.

And all the evidence seems to be that it works that way.

Of course if you've got a book that's got two or three pages worth reading ,and the rest is padding, it might work the other way But I don't think books like that really deserve much protecting.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: GUEST,jennifer
Date: 14 Feb 05 - 11:31 AM

In answer to the question about John Tams' lyrics. I can't answer for him as to why he doesn't mind them being online, but can say why they got there. Specifically they are on my website (me not being himself) because it was quite a common request what the lyrics were to one song or another, and I was fed up waiting for the songbook. Some songs aren't available on audio having been only performed in the theatre. Some people still can't hear the words however clear the diction might be, for example if they are Danish. In fact there was one line that his wife Sally had been hearing wrong for years.

I have been criticised for putting them up on the grounds that the publisher of the future songbook would not be pleased (never mind that the copyright on them probably rests with the record labels) and possibly them being online has reduced the motive for writing the songbook... but for me the final word rests with Sally and she has said leave them up there. If you want I can try and find out what his feelings are.

Jennifer

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Genie
Date: 15 Feb 05 - 04:16 AM

Rain Dog said "...It would be good if people included the name of the writer when they post lyrics to the database. ... "

I couldn't agree MORE! One of my biggest pet peeves is seeing song lyrics posted online or printed out WITHOUT songwriter attribution (or, worse, songwriter credit given to some singer who recorded but didn't write the song). Aarrrghhh!

Another is seeing INCORRECT lyrics posted because someone was too lazy to check them out and, instead, just posted what they GUESSED were the right lyrics. Often, this version of the "folk process" results in diminution and dilution of the lyric creativity of the songwriters.

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: GUEST,jennifer
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 02:33 AM

"INCORRECT lyrics posted because someone was too lazy to check them out and, instead, just posted what they GUESSED were the right lyrics"

But how do you check them out?? Short of sticking the sheet in front of the artist and hoping he's got his glasses on and is concentrating?

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 02:59 AM

Many songwriters DO post their lyrics on their websites these days, & sometimes the actual Music. Some years back, when I couldn't find my own "Paul, . . ." book with The Wedding Song which my brother wanted for my neice's wedding at the eleventh hour & I didn't have time to write it out for him, I went on Noel Stookey's own site, & there was the sheet music with his blessings!

I think that most of the time 'Catters are sharing info about tunes/songs in the public domain. The few times someone asks for lyrics &/or chords we might consider doing more pm-ing. On the quite unusual occasion that I have looked for for lyrics &/or chords on the www for a song not in the public domain, it was for my own personal enjoyment, or maybe once or twice when I was getting ready to do some old time songs at the local nursing home.

   The only time I ever asked on the Mudcat for some Music is when I had to do a specific song requested by a family for their mother's funeral--& it could not be found locally at a Music shop. A wonderful "Catter faxed a copy to me, instead of posting it--I actually needed to be able to read the melody notes, & the accompanist, the piano part. I would never expect anyone to post actual "sheet Music" copies or copywrited tunes/songs on this or any other site--unless, of course, it was with the proper permission.   

I guess that if we use discretion, this issue will not get out of hand, & we 'Catters will continue to be about Traditional Music, while upholding respect for those who make their living with their copyrights.

   ***guest, Jennifer, incorrect lyrics drive me bonkers, too!

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 08:55 AM

Often enough changes in a song or a tune that has been passed on by someone from memory may result in "diminution and dilution of the lyric creativity of the songwriters". But sometimes it works the other way. And that is how "the folk process" works.

After all, the same thing happens when someone sings their own songs, even without knowing it - the edges get chipped off, the superfluous verses get forgotten, the words that trip you up will be replaced.

To quote Sydney Carter once again: "Having made a song, you sing it; but writing it is another matter. Particularly if, like me, you seldom sing it the same way twice; fresh possibilities will keep appearing. You change a word, you bend a note; did it work or didn't it? What you put down, in the end, is nothing but a variant."

Subject: RE: Music Info Ethics: How Much Should We Post?
From: Once Famous
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 11:19 AM

I think you ought to consult a copyright lawyer.