Several people have suggested in the "Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2" thread that there is something to be said for copyright in relation to folksongs, or at least modern songs in the folk tradition.

This is an interesting topic, that I think deserves a thread of its own, away from the legal ins and outs of this particular dispute.

So I'm starting this thread up because I think it might be a good idea to keep the other one one dealing directly with how Max should respond to this pressure from Foxy and Co, and how 'Catters can help out.

As someone who has written a fair number of songs, I would see it as unfair if someone else were to take one of my songs and make lots of money out of it without giving me a fair cut. (I do not think this is very likely to happen, though you never can tell.)

On the other hand I would think it grotesque to suggest that anybody who felt like singing my songs for their own sake should be obliged to ask my permission, or should have to pay me something - or should feel inhibited from changing the words or tune of a song to fit their taste or style.

The whole essence of folk music is that it changes as it is used. There is no "right" version or "wrong version". There may be an "original version", and it may even be possible to trace it. And all of us will prefer one version to another, or we will take a bit crom one verson, and a bit from another, and make it our own, till somebody else picks it up and changes it again - and that is how folk songs change and grow.

And all that is quite at odds with the thinking of copyright lawyers. (And it is also at odds with the thinking of some antiquarian style folklorists - but that is another story.)How that works out is very impoertant - but I also think we nneed to think about the principles ourselves. When you're in the right, you need to know why. And if you aren't in the right, you need to know where you are wrong.

Even if no one else joins in, this is already quite a long thread. Sorry about that.