Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: MMario
Date: 06 Nov 99 - 07:20 PM

gg - though it's the MudCat that is getting the heat, the REASON is probably the DT.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: MandolinPaul
Date: 06 Nov 99 - 11:20 PM

To be honest, I don't understand a lot of the copyright issues, and the stuff that Harry Fox is about, but here (CLICK) is an essay I found on the web. It's pretty informative.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Nov 99 - 11:27 PM

The original letter was sent certified to Max and Dick, as shown in the beginning of the first thread on this, NO BS Mudcat Under Attack.

From what I understand, money is always needed, esp. when one has to engage a lawyer. I posted info earlier with addys etc. for how people can donate.

I am sure Max would feel better about getting a lawyer, if he knew it was coming or already had a lot of monetary support. He makes this spot for us to create, so we all have a vested interest. Where else can we have this much fun and learn so much at the same time?! Please do what you can afford and if you don't have cash, like Bert said before...go through your attics, donate a piece of handicraft or what have you to the auction; anything is helpful, I am sure.

Sorry if it sounds like I am ranting. I just feel it so important to us all. And, Max, I agree with BK, Moonchild, and WW.

luvyaKat

Subject: VOLUNTEER LAWYERS FOR THE ARTS
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 12:17 AM

Okay, I was in a seach the net mood, so, I hope I get all of these links right:

MAX, MOST IMPORTANT: The Art Law Line is in NYC at 212-319-2910, you can ask a question or two for free. This is the place I was talking about earlier, that I had called. It may take a few days for them to get an answer, BUT they are very helpful.

As an offshoot from that, in PA, there is a branch of the above, called the Philadelphia Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, at 215-545-3385.

Pres. and CEO of HFA is Edward P. Murphy; used to be with Schirmer Pub. in NYC.

According to a non-HFA site I found, which was fairly current, HFA reps only 17,000, not 20,000 pubs. as they claim and it went on to say for "records, tapes, cd's and imported phonorecords" as well "worldwide for publishers for use in films, commercials, television, programs, and all other audio/visual media." Didn't say anything about print or net pub, whether that means anything or not, I don't know.

These guys have a notice at their midi site which they've closed temporarily due to harassment from HFA. They say they are going through their files with a fine toothed comb to remove all copyrighted material. Maybe they have some helpful hints. They can be emailed at [e-mail] .

Hereis a message forum on music law, where questions have and can be posted. Or this is the main page where that forum can be accessed. I forget! There was a music lawyer who had a message on there who can be reached at www.salawzar.com.

I think that is it, for now. Hoep some of this helps, Max, esp. the Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts.

luvyaKat

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Banjer
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 08:59 AM

This whole thing, although I don't understand all its implications, seems to me like the ever ongoing battle. Whenever a group of folks seems to be enjoying something some other group either wants to ban it or profit from it. There comes a time when it becomes necessary to take a stand against the greed or power hungry attitudes of such organizations and this is one of those times!

FIGHT 'EM TO THE BITTER END!!

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jack (Who is called Jack)
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 11:50 AM

I've been giving this a lot of thought over the weekend, and I'm going to say some things that might not

As terrific as this site is, it is not the sole source of folk music information and fellowship in the world. If it were to vanish completely tommorow, I would still be able to pursue and enjoy my interest in the genre, and find friends who share my passion. I would grieve the loss of this particular outlet, one of the best I have ever found if truth be told. However, neither folk and traditional music, nor my/our interest in it lives and dies with this site.

That said, whatever the outcome of this conflict, I very much doubt that it will involve the complete and permanent shutdown of the Mudcat. They can make a lot of threataning noises, but in the end, most of what we do here isn't covered by copyright law and would have to be allowed to continue--provided Max could afford to keep it going. That means the Forum, the personal pages, the Radio, essentially everything but the lyric database aren't under the domain of laws being invoked by our attackers. In short, we would still get to talk to each other, still get to plan gatherings, still get to hear the radio, and still get to share lyrics that we know.

Third, a great deal of the DT is public domain, or at least listed with the songwriter's written permission. So even if HFA forces the issue, all they can really make Max and Dick to do is to find the "offending" lyrics (if any) and either a) remove them, or b) obtain permission to include them. That could mean a temporary shutdown while the 'clean-up' ensued. It would be a pain, but it would fall far short of a death knell. Even OLGA, who's database was far more dominated by modern popular materiel (i.e. copyrightable stuff), is working its way back. We might have to follow the same road.

Fourth, (and here I'm just spitballing but I think I'm right), if individual's share copyrighted materiel in a public forum it is not a copyright violation. For example, I can take "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkahban" out of the Library and read it to my Cub Scout Den without being in infringement of copyright. I can tell my neighbor the lyrics to "Subterranean Homesick Blues" as an excercise of my free speech rights. In short, in a public forum we can talk to each other and write to each other about published material of any kind in as much detail as we wish, down to the specific words themselves. In short, as individuals, we can communicate amongst ourselves about lyrics in the public arena, verbally or in writing, in excruciating detail, till we're blue in the face and we're protected by the First Amendment. So if (for example) Katlaughing wants to tell me in a public forum about a song I ask her about, she can. Given that we all have our own collections of lyrics, we can continue to share these lyrics with each other and with any other interested individuals, even if the central DT database is shut down or modified. Max would be no more accountable for this type of exchange than the phone company is for what people say to each other over their equipment. Please not that I am not an attorney, and am just expressing what I think is true. This is not formal legal advice.

Finally, I've read a lot of posts that can be paraphrased as "Max, get in there and fight". There's lots of 60's-style rhetoric about fighting the evil corporate greedheads. Well, its one thing to join Greenpeace yourselve, and navigate your boat between a whale and an explosive harpoon on a pursing ship. Its another to tell someone else to do it.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Áine
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 12:33 PM

Dear Jack,

I'll let others comment on your other comments, but, I do agree that there is more needed here than just moral support -- however heartfelt that support may be.

I encourage everyone who wants this site to continue to contribute not only their moral support but their monetary support. Here's the address you can send a contribution to:

Max D. Spiegel The Mudcat Cafe 5 West Gay St., Suite A West Chester PA 19380 USA

I know that Max appreciates all the cheerleading we're doing for him, but the 'Cat team needs the 'alumni' to kick into the kitty!

-- Áine

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: WyoWoman
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 01:01 PM

Jack, I pretty much agree with what you've said. However, I don't believe the advice to hang in there and not allow himself to be bullied by someone is mere cheerleading or impotent Sixties rhetoric. One of the ways attorneys work (and some of my best friends are attorneys, honestly, so this isn't a smear of the legal eagles) is to bluff and pressure the opposition into dancing to your tune as early as possible.

We/he may need to comply at some point and in some form or other, but I say the demand that he send them the entire database so they can pick out the pieces of it they want to object to is outrageous and shouldn't be negotiated. I may be wrong on this, but I think THEY should be the ones to come up with specific "charges" rather than sweeping in and telling him that he has to present them with a menu.

Just my thoughts at the moment.

ww

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Áine
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 01:32 PM

Dear WyoWoman,

I was the one the used the term 'cheerleading', not Jack. Perhaps my attempt to use a sports metaphor was not exactly the right way to say what I meant.

I believe Jack is right to point out to us that 'we' aren't the ones feeling the pressure from the HFA 'thumb' -- Max and Dick are. To paraphrase Jack's metaphor, Max and Dick are the only ones who "have to navigate their boat between a whale and an explosive harpoon on a pursing ship."

At the same time, we all can't fit into the 'boat' at the same time. However, we CAN help Max and Dick get the fastest boat they can -- by contributing to the Mudcat with funds (as well as supportive words).

If I've got this all wrong, Jack, please post again and clarify your point. Until then, let's don't start backbiting each other about this -- that's exactly what HFA and their ilk would want.

-- Áine

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 03:08 PM

Max & Dick, if it would be helpful, those of us who have time, could start going through specific blocks of the DT and note which are copyrighted, by whom etc. If we split the work up, it wouldn't have to be just you guys trying to do so, although you'd have to take the info we gather and delete or write for permission. Either way, please let me know if this would help, in a proactive way. If HFA hasn't even narrowed it down, perhaps we can before and if they even get a chance to point out the *offenders*.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Mudjack
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 03:09 PM

I have some special words for the Harry Fox Agency, eat catsh#8 and die"
Jack, I have to agree with what you're saying, but that would mean "go and get a life". You mean there is life after the Mudcat?
Mudjack

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Sapper_RE
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 03:29 PM

Does this Harry Fox shower of Sierra Tango have offices on this side of the pond? If so, where and what is the phone number?? Sounds like they need shafting up the arse with a barbed wire pole!!!! Bob

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 05:14 PM

I've been trying to figure this out. What does the HFA have to gain by shutting down DT? What are they afraid of? Does anyone know?

It seems to me that these questions have to be answered. It's too easy to say that it's all about corporate greed or naked power. What is the HFA issue? As far as I can tell, they feel that they are protecting the rights of copyright and songwriters and composers as well as the right of publishers to collect royalties on the use of the material that they represent.

In short, it's too easy to demonize them and it's time beter served to get to know what they are worried about and address that issue. What is the real agenda behind their position?

I have thought for a long time now that copyrights have not served the public as well as they might. They do serve songwriters, publishers and composers by protecting their financial interests.

I get the feeling that in this battle there are two opposing sides who don't speak a common language. This may be the key to the solution. IMHO the more you demonize the HFA and attempt to run at it Don Quixote style, the sooner the noble goals of DT might be defeated.

What is the stated issue on behalf of the HFA about this?

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 05:37 PM

Frank, Max tried to figure that out, but they were unwilling to dialogue, fromt he sounds of it. I think it is an issue of control. The more they gobble up the smaller sites, the more they will control of all lyric sites on the net.

The only way to deal with these sorts is through a lawyer who can obfuscate and dissemble the same as thier lawyer. If you look at the first thread, where Max printed the original letter, you will see they are NOT being straightforward at all in their stated puprose. How can we divine that without a clue from them?

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jeri
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 06:39 PM

I also believe they're trying to gain control of this site, or at the least set themselves up as THE lyrics site.

If they were protecting their clients' rights, they would simply have given Max the information he requested - what material they found objectionable. They say they will do this when they file charges. Why do they want it to go that far when he's perfectly willing to work to resolve the issue? Possible reasons:

They don't know what songs are in the database because they've never been there. They quite possibly have not had any specific complaint, and are going on an assumption that if it's a lyrics site, some of their clients' songs must be included. This would be a reason to ask Max for a list of songs.

Their main goal is NOT to get the offending material removed, thereby protecting their clients' rights to have their songs made available to the public for free only via the HF website.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: BK
Date: 07 Nov 99 - 11:56 PM

Frank: As others have said, it appears that the character of their communication indicated not a legitimate interest that they are valiently trying to protect, but rather a bullying onslaught, presumably to reduce competition on the internet of sources for distribution of materials similar to (but not necessarily the same specific songs as) what is in the DT, which prompts the "demonization." I suggest it's possible that there are few or no actual songs in the DT of interest re their stated purpose. Eliminating potential competition is almost inevitably the real purpose, and one of the oldest ploys in human behavior. If someone spends 30 minutes here, they probably won't simultaneously be also at their site & they potentially loose advertising. (Actually they COULD be at both sites, I have a browser I almost never use that'll do it..)

There is every indication that a reasonable dialog, such as you suggest, is completely counter to their true purpose, & that they carefully wish to avoid any such dialog. Would a field commander tell the enemy troops of his goals? Of course, you are dead right any way, in that it is very important to ATTEMPT to understand their goals. However, IMHO, a realistic understanding will not likely come from them in plain words, if they can help it. I'd be surprised if anything other than bullying & lies came out of "dialog" them. Understanding will have to come in other ways.

I do agree & understand, I think, that you are warning against high levels of moral indignation perhaps jollying folks into thinking that our morally valid cause will surely win in any contest, because we are obviously in the right. (Like the Spanish Civil War? - the bad guys won then... but the good guys had the best songs..) As one of my more cynical lawyer friends used to constantly remind me, "It's not a court of JUSTICE (no matter how it's labelled), it's a court of LAW." Sadly, there's a monsterous difference. There ain't necessarily no such thing as justice in this. You can get justice, but you may have to struggle for it. It's why such demonic folk get away w/their scummy evil.

Yeecchhh, they stink... BK

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jack (Who is called Jack)
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 09:28 AM

With regard to Harry Fox Agency and its purpose.

By removing most of the physical barriers to communication, the internet has thrown the regulation and monitoring of the use of copyrighted material into dissarray. Were experiencing a minor skirmish in a larger ideological war over how information, particularly electronic information should be treated and handled. On one side you have the 'maximum openness' camp, on the other side you have the 'apply the old regulations the same way as before'. The battle rages on several fronts. In the arena of software and operating systems you have the Open Computing advocates represented best by the LINUX operating system, and on the other side you have the closed, proprietary model personified by Microsoft and Bill Gates. The interesting thing is that Gates' views are not an outgrowth of his wealth. Way back before Microsoft was founded, back when Apple was 3 guys in a garage, Gates publised an open letter to the computing community basically stating that the practice of getting software without paying for it by making a copy electronically was Piracy--open and willful theft of another persons work. In fact, Microsoft has assisted in the prosecution of software pirates just to set the example for others.

In the publishing arena, the fact that lyrics, songs, music, books, newspapers, journals etc can now be treated the same way, has the people who make their living off publishing thinking the same way.

My guess is that the publishers represented by HFA have given the agency marching orders. "Try and get a handle on this internet situation. Do something to make sure that if paper publishing becomes obsolete, we still have an inventory! The internet laws will have to get sorted out in the legislature and the courts, but in the meantime, see if you can get these people to stop putting our stuff on the web till we know what our rights are. Twist some arms, set some examples, whatever it takes."

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Frank Hamilton
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 10:52 AM

I can see that there is a different agenda at work here. I support the idea that a legal precedent needs to be set and getting good legal representation is the best approach. Apparently, the reps for HFA have appeared inflexible which leads me to believe that these are not the decision makers but the lower echelon enforcers paid to "do their job".

One of the ways to solve this dilemma is to involve the public. Newspaper articles and reports on NPR would illuminate the difficulties. This seems like a newsworthy issue because it entails the issue of "free speech" and who controls it. Rather than taking a vindictive stance, information should be shared on a factual basis in press releases, public forums and broadcasts.

The issue of "free use" came out some time ago when ASCAP decided to charge the Boy Scout camps for singing songs in front of the campfire. The publicity created by this enabled ASCAP to save face by clarifying their position so that they amended their ruling. Sing Out! would be a starting point for a good article but also getting a columnist to work on this for newspapers would be helpful. A suggested title would be "Who controls the Internet?"

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 02:10 PM

Good idea, Frank; I had mentioned such publicity, too and offered to help out. I am sure the Liberal Opinion Week www.liberalopinion.com and the Casper Star Tribune would carry one of my columns on this, as I am a regular of theirs. I also have fax numbers for a bunch of other national media. kat

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jack (Who is called Jack)
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 04:35 PM

Kat, not to discourage you from trying, but what are we going to tell the liberal press? Nothing's happened here yet but some threatening noises from some lawyers. Lawyers making threatening noises is not news. They do that in their sleep. Until charges are filed or a case is pending or some action is taken, what are we going to say, that they hurt our feelings?

And while the Boy Scout case is instructive, I wouldn't put much stock in its applicability to our situation. Scouting has been and is a significant part of the childhood of millions, and it is something into which people still put great stock. They have, built in, a large, passionate, highly sympathetic support group. All they had to do was couch the issue in the right terms to inflame that support group, stand back and watch the fur fly. "ASCAP TRYING TO STOP THE BOY SCOUTS FROM SINGING CAMPFIRE SONGS!" ASCAP may have had a case, but it also never had a chance. Without that kind of backing, we won't get the same kind of response.

In the end, we're probably stuck with the following.

1. Make sure we are in compliance with the law, and have full documentary proof of that fact. That's our best defense. Putting that proof together is going to take a tremendous amount of work on our part. But in the end, were not only going to have to be on the right side of the law to survive, were going to have to be able to prove it.

2. We have to find a way to get lawyers working for our side. And believe me that's going to take more money than we are likely to raise. We may even get enough to get started and to get an initial plan together, but unless we get some pro bono assistance or link up with other groups in some kind of defense coalition its not going to be enough.

3. We will have to take a long view. We might have to suffer through early retreats, or change the way we operate, but if were going to win in the long haul, we're going to have to have two objectives, a) Protect Max & Dick, and b) Keep the group/community intact.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 05:16 PM

Good points, JackwicJ, but I already posted numbers for lawyers who do pro bono and I wasn't talking about just the liberal press. Maybe it would have to start with folk press, but with Gates being declared the owner of a monopoly and the myriad of interestes there are in how the net operates these days, I feel it is already noteworthy, esp. if one does their research and makes a good share of the article about who HFA has already shut down and that they are not stopping in their reign of intimidation etc.

I agree with your points and options. I am just saying I've got a mouth and I am ready to use it to help if requested.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Ferrara
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 06:20 PM

Frank, publicity could be a two-edged sword. BTW, a headline such as "Who Controls the Internet" probably would draw yawns these days, because the copyright issue is already discussed a lot. Maybe "Does Folk Music Still belong to Folks?" would be better.

Jack WICJ has a *very* good point that the best defense may actually be compliance with the law. *This is probably NOT the same as compliance with HFA/NMPA!!!*

The DT database already has permission from several publishers and organizations (Dick has the details) to publish their material without royalties. THIS IS A GOOD THING.

Max, I agree too that we need a banner now, addressed to music publishers. It should link to a page where you invite them to comment on the copyright controversy (not likely!), state if the DT contains any of their songs, and indicate whether they will give you a royalty-free right to carry the songs or would rather have you take it off the DB.

I think having this mechanism for a publisher to protect their copyrighted material would help your legal position immensely. *I also think it's the right thing to do.* We aren't out to pirate copyrighted material, just to share songs.

You might replace any songs that are removed with a statement naming the publisher and stating that they have asked that the song be removed from the database for copyright reasons.

Maybe publicity should focus on this: On the one hand a substantial number of music publishers are willingly working with the DT, and on the other hand we have HFA/NMPA who ain't even willing to share the most basic information regarding what they're complaining about.

Best of luck with all this. - Rita F

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Roger in Baltimore
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 06:30 PM

Max and Dick,

If there is any way to help, I will.

It does seem perverse that HFA will not tell you what their specific complaint is until they file a suit. One way to document your conversation with them is to send them a letter outlining what you understand their requests to be and the response that you have offered and the stonewalling with which they have replied.

Telephone conversations, even taped ones, are less effective evidence in a court than are written conversations.

Of course, any advice I might offer has no legal validity other than I think it to be a good idea. I am not a lawyer and I am not giving you legal advice.

I just think they will be more wary of a paper trail and may temper their requests. Clearly, if they thought you were in violation, they could quickly check the thousands of songs on the DT and verify it. So your letter should give them the means of accessing the DT as a reply to what is on your web-site.

GG of course, is trying to make a point that echoes his own desires. I hope that GG is aware that if things have to go, the only thing that clearly stands up to legal review are the BS threads that contain no music content at all and the PD songs. But I'm sure GG has not thought that one through.

I suspect HFA is asking about both the Forum and the DT. They have one concern. They want to protect their publishers ownership rights (copy rights). The problem they have is this: If they allow violations of their copyrights, they, in effect, lose credibility that they can guarantee any protections. They cannot selectively press their rights. So they are going after internet sites, knowing they are shooting fish in a barrel, one at a time (saves on legal staff). That is why they won't go to the DT or the forum search and look up lyrics. With 20,000 publishers with 100's of songs each (maybe), they have more to protect than they know. They may have a list, but it probably is not easily searchable.

For the publicity hounds, I should note that OLGA had a little publicity, I think it made the AP. Its public cause sank like a stone. Everyone says that they are closed. On the face of it they are, but I search there regularly and go to their shadow sites and get whatever I would have gotten before. Some kind of closing. But the notice that they have closed goes on and on.

Keep it in writing. Keep it friendly (on the face of it) just as they are.

Good luck, Max.

Roger in Baltimore

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 08:08 PM

Given that you have agreed to remove from the data base any songs which Harry the Fox and Co can plausibly identify as being copyrighted to anybody whom he represents, and that a complete copy of the data base has been made available to them, I find it hard to believe that any court would give time of day to a bid to use it to harass the MC or the DT at this point.

Of course courts are funny places, and the law is an ass, and America is another country. But I would have thought that this would be the kind of thing that is meant by legal terms such as "abuse of process".

So at this point it sounds like bluff. Where it could get trickier is if they move to a stage of trying to claim that various traditional songs are covered by copyright, or that the people who may have granted permission for them to be included do not own the copyright (for example, where the person who wrote the song doesn't own the copyright.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Malcolm Douglas
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 08:42 PM

Max

It really isn't safe to talk to them on the 'phone. Make sure that everythingis in writing. These are clearly not honourable people.

Malcolm

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 09:02 PM

Roger and Malcolm brought up good points! Paraphrase them, in your letter, reiterating what you heard them say to you. Send it certified, return receipt requested. Then you can produce that as proof.

Rita, excellent post. Nice to see you here.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Lyle
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 09:33 PM

I hate to look at worst case scenarios until it is absolutely necessary, so this is (I hope) premature. But possibly the worst case is not as bad as it seems. The only thing that they could make mudcat do is remove the lyric archive from the current format of mudcat. That could be inconvenient, but not fatal. Most of us who use the mudcat have large enough machines to download all of the archived lyrics, and still have lots of room to spare. Then if someone wants the lyrics to a particular song, all that person has to do is start a thread asking if anyone knows the lyrics, and those of us who have downloaded the file could email it to the person requesting it. There is NOTHING wrong with sending lyrics to a friend! We could even simplify that by having one person be responsible for the AÕs, one for the BÕs, etc. Is it ideal? No, but it is certainly better than no mudcat at all.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: kendall
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 10:56 PM

seems to me that this sort of crap happened before back in the 50's. Then it all blew over. I remember it produced some pretty awful songs because no one dared to sing copy righted material. I'm not about to offer legal advice, but, I do know that the 5th amendment forbids them from forcing you to give evidence against your self.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From:
Date: 08 Nov 99 - 11:50 PM

Actauly there are more non musical threads than other so it would not make any difference if the database was not there, the bs threads and Mudcat Tavern would still be there.

Re the Songs and copyright, seems to me nobody cares a hoot any more as radio/audio is a serious declining media, and video is taking over. If Harry Fox and friends do manage to gag all the lyric sites, people will make their own entertainment just like they used to do way back in the 1800's. Harry can have all the old c/r stuff since most of it is crap and irrelevant to todays society.

In fact releveancy to today is almost certainly not copyright for obvious reasons. It used to be possible to push a release on radio, not anymore!

A folksinger today is some ole guy with 2 strings on a beat up guitar sitting on a porch playing the wildwoodflower.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jack (Who is called Jack)
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 12:39 PM

Lyle hit the nail on the head. Its usually better to duck, and in spite of the old saying, sometimes the best defense isn't a good offense. A partial retreat to a good defensive position can be the turning point of a war (see Gettysburg, also Napoleon v. Russia and Hitler v. Soviet Union, among others). There's a difference between surrender and retreat; between cowardice and just keeping your head down. Sure the time may come when you have to charge up the hill, but you'd better be right about the time, and be sure that you have the men, resources and strategy to take it and hold it.

I believe Lyle is also right about the worst case scenario, i.e.that most of the Mudcat won't be effected, and we can work around the rest through the excercise of our free speech rights.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Bert
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 12:45 PM

Anon, the last time I sat on my front porch playing the guitar and singing the police came by and stopped me.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: MMario
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 12:56 PM

What worries me, is that HFA/NMPA are the ones that threatened and sued the ILS (Internatinal Lyric Server) and NOW the NMPA claims the ILS as "a subsidiary of HFA, Int." My, my, my, isn't THAT a coincidence.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Ferrara
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 01:35 PM

McGrath of Harlow said, "Given that you have agreed to remove from the data base any songs which Harry the Fox and Co can plausibly identify as being copyrighted to anybody whom he represents, and that a complete copy of the data base has been made available to them, I find it hard to believe that any court would give time of day to a bid to use it to harass the MC or the DT at this point."

Max, there's much value to this point of view BUT MAKE SURE YOU CAN PROVE that you've done the above. Send a registered letter *and* a certified one with proof of receipt if necessary.

A lot of the posts here have made similar points: Bolster your case in any way possible, document everything, keep it in writing, avoid being overtly adversarial, don't converse with them over the phone or face to face without a lawyer present etc. Sounds like good advice to me.

And for us recipients of the Mudcat bounty, "try to find ways to support the financial drain on Max" is also good advice. - Rita F

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 02:09 PM

The one thing nobody has pointed out, if we were to take the DT out of commission, is how Dick and Susan, who've spent their lives compiling and maintaining it, would feel. I understand the points made, I just think it sounds kind of crass or casual about their commitment and, after all, their property. They should NOT be forced off. Neither should HFA be able to assimilate their efforts' result into their site, as has been done with ILS.

I guess what I am trying to say is let's be a little sensitive and try not to sound so casual about dumping someone's life work.

kat

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Charlie Baum
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 02:41 PM

I had this strange dream last night: Max sent HFA the ENTIRE Mudcat database as a 20 gigaterabyte e-mail attachment. (Actually it's probably bigger than that!)

--Charlie Baum

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Bert
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 02:51 PM

Or how about one email message per song. That should keep them out of our hair for years.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 04:03 PM

Whatever happens - and I mean WHATEVER - the Digital Tradition will survive. It was around for quite a while before it ever found a place on the web. I don't know if there are facts or figures on how many people have downloaded it, but it's far too many for Harry Fox to do anything about, even if they legally could.

In the worst case, as Lyle suggested, if the database had to temporarily go down, we could post lyrics from our own copies to threads, and the threads are searchable. This isn't any different from what goes on in Usenet newsgroup discussions all the time, other than Max providing a place for the discussion.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: A Publisher
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 09:35 PM

Hello everyone. I am not a regular here, and am, in fact employed by one of the very publishing companies that HFA/NMPA represents.

Judging from your posts, this is mostly a reasonable group of people, and this is a reasonable site dedicated to a distinct niche of the music market.

After reading this thread, I hoped that I might be able to shed some light on this situation for all of you. Roger in Baltimore has pretty much nailed the situation on the head.

You see, your site is only one of literally THOUSANDS that we publishers send HFA/NMPA to on a DAILY basis. The truth is, what NMPA is doing is at the request of the publishers that own the vast majority of copyrights in the U.S. and they have a very small staff and little funding to accomplish this. However, this is a very serious matter that cannot be ignored. This is probably why they come across as more heavy-handed than this site, in particlar, may warrant.

They've dealt with an enormous number of downright abusive and angry people who are willfully and blatantly seeking to thumb their noses at copyright law - and who post extensive databases of current, money-making lyrics. I do not see that as being the case here, but no-one at NMPA has the time necessary to do the searching which I have just done at this site. In fact, it is extremely rare that I have this much time.

The publishing community is overwhelmed right now - and make no mistake about it MOST OF THE PRESSURE IS COMING FROM THE WRITERS THEMSELVES. Picture this, if you will. You are the person who designed this site, and in it, you designed a number of distinct pieces of art as well as a database method that has not been done before. Let's even up the stakes - the site's owners paid you to do this. Designing websites is how you make your living and feed your family. Someone comes along and copies all your artwork and your code and freely distributes it on the web. Several potential customers download the freebie and cancel their contract with you. How would you feel?

There has been a lot of bad blood built up on both sides of this digital uses issue, but the clear fact is that THE LAW CLEARLY STATES THAT COPYING COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER IS ILLEGAL. You DO have such copyrighted material on this site and what my company pays NMPA to do is gain a list of those titles which we may own so that we can work on finding mutually acceptable solutions. We ARE NOT HERE TO SPOIL ANYONE'S fun. We are here to PROTECT THE SONGWRITER who makes his/her living from royalties paid on uses of their songs. Even in the case where a songwriter may be deceased, very often their heirs are making their livings promoting and maintaining the works of their parent.

We are all music lovers here. What we need to keep in sight is that, without the ability to earn a living writing songs, we would be so much the poorer culturally. We need to protect the individual's right to claim ownership of their works. Please, I would like to request sanely that you simply provide NMPA with the list of titles on your site. I will be in touch them personally to discuss this site and make clear that I do not see it as being equivalent to an ILS.

Thank you for listening!

P.S. - I won't give my name here simply because my e-mail can handle no more hate mail than I already receive.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: annamill
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 10:14 PM

Interesting....

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Barry Finn
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 11:18 PM

Dear Publisher
My copyrighted material is here on this site with my written permission (I refuse to tell you what they are as well as refuse to allow any to send along my material to an agency that makes it's own profit from copyrighted material) as well as some of the material of a few others that I sing with, they have also given permission. You do not represent me nor does any other agency. I have yet to see any material posted to this site be used in any way to gain profit. It's a crime & a shame that an agency spouts to be the avenging angel of the music world while trying at the same time to censor the thing that it claims to be saving. In the best of worlds you would die unnoticed & broke, in the worst of worlds you'd live forever, powerful, rich & beautiful in an artless vacuum, without song. You need to restructure your logic, approach, the means you use, your priorities & what you're really after. Basically do a reality check & then come back without your school yard bulling ways & ask for our lunch money instead of our wallets. It is the songwriter that supports you & gives you a lively hood. It was once us that fed you when you first came to our watering hole, now it's you who feed off us in this frenzy where the waters are now soiled & no longer draw or support life, "You'll miss your water when the well run dry", sue me. Barry

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Max
Date: 09 Nov 99 - 11:47 PM

There will be no list, but that is not to say there are no other options for amicably resolving this issue. Let me repeat, there will be no list!

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: SeanM
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 12:28 AM

Good for you, Max!

May I also point out that someone purporting to be a representative of one of HFA's vassals signing on would mean that they should know full well that they have already accessed the list that they request?

"Publisher"'s letter creeps me out. It sounds very much like "You are doing this to yourselves. Stop being fussy and knuckle under already." Notice also the unsubtantiated claim that "You DO have such copyrighted material on this site", yet also the refusal to state WHAT material is found to be offensive... only the repeated absurd demand that a full list be submitted to them. They've obviously decided to pursue escalation through pure intimidation.

Max, though I'm unable to financially help at the moment (soon, though...), best thoughts and wishes for this. You are an intelligent man, and I know that whatever course is chosen will be the best. May the muse that guides us all protect.

M

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 12:38 AM

Since coming to the Mudcat, my whole perspective on the music industry has changed. My brother writes classical symphonies,piano concertos, solo piano pieces and romantic pop songs. All are copyrighted. I was his manager for over 20 years, on a part time, volunteer basis. With no money, we accomplished much, in my opinion. We shunned publishers because they were too high and mighty to notice the person who wasn't already well-known. So, we published our own music and produced our own tapes. All copyrighted. It was to be his living. For reasons of his own and others it has not provided him with a living, yet. In that world, copyrights are guarded fiercely. We were very careful of who we provided scores to. Those scores usually represented many, many hours of laborious torture of beautifully calligraphed fully orchestrated symphonic scores of glorious music.

So, when I came here, even though my dad and mom played for dances and we sang around the campfire, I had never known artists who gave their works so freely as folkies. I have come to understand and admired that as the "folk process". At the same time, I understand and respect my brother's right to retain control over his music and to expect compensation from its performance. I would also understand that of any folkies who want to make their living as songwriters.

I think HFA and the publishers need to learn the difference between the way the classical, pop/rock, top 40 worlds operate and the way the folk world operates. And, they need to honour and respect the folk process.

Asking for the list is rude, lazy, and like asking the accused to produce evidence for the prosecution. I am proud of and agree with your convictions Max.

Anonymous Publisher: most of us do not give our email addys out on this forum; any kind of nickname would have sufficed. You needn't have feared hate email, but perhaps you should think about why you do receive so much.

kat

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 09:31 AM

I appreciate the guts it took for A Publisher to post here, and I appreciate him/her poviding a view from the other side. Demonizing is something that both sides have been doing. They think we're intentionally ripping off their artists, we think they're money hungry corporate bullies. The truth of the matter for both sides is somewhat (or much) less sinister.

The problem seems to be one that could have been avoided had the HFA/NMPA not come in here loaded for bear. The threat of legal action may have worked if the folks on this side been aware of wrongdoing. "Ooh, they caught us. Better play nice and suck up." Instead, they managed to rile up a bunch of righteous folks.

If the HFA/NMPA lawyers choose to go after not-for-profit sites where the focus is on public domain material, and threaten someone with legal action and jail time, they're going to have to be willing to look for their own 'evidence.' It's very easy to get the information, and demanding Max provide it on a silver platter is nothing more than a test of how much of an effect their scare tactics have had. Either that, or the lawyers haven't actually been to this site, which is the simpler and more reasonable explanation.

I wonder if anyone's ever been held liable for information shared by other people in an unmoderated forum. I suspect they'd have to go after each individual poster of lyrics. I wonder how much a songwriter makes royalty-wise from having his/her lyrics published at the HFA/NMPA site. I wonder if any of the green clickies promote the music of HFA/NMPA artists...

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Jack (Who is called Jack)
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 09:38 AM

Kat, I wonder if Henry Aaron would agree with your implication that volume of hate mail is a good barometer of whether a person is doing the right thing?

Also, with regards to your other post. I am very sensitive to Dick and Susan's feelings, particularly how they'd feel if, they and Max were devastated financially, AND forced to shut down the Mudcat and DT by a legal ruling that could have been avoided by sensible courses of action. You don't avoid telling someone that they might need surgery just because it would upset them. Sometimes you have to be frank.

And one last thing, for Max, Dick, and the whole gang that actually put this thing together. I will presume to speak for the community when I say, you have our unqualified support. We will stand by you to the best of our ability until you tell us to stop, and perhaps not even then. We believe in the Mudcat, the DT, and the Music. Whats more, you have given us every reason to believe in you. Know that we do.

Your's

Jack (who in this instance won't mind being called Frank)

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Max
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 10:10 AM

I'm already financially devastated. What will they sue me for, 2 buttons and some lint?

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Bert
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 10:40 AM

And all those empty 'Black & Tan' cans.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: Bert
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 10:49 AM

Seriously 'Publisher', why can't they just give or sell us a license? BMA gave us one, Max is getting one from ASCAP for a reasonable fee. What's wrong with HFA? Why are they making things so difficult?

And what about you? May we use your stuff?

Bert.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 10:59 AM

Sorry, JackwhoisbeingFranktoday, I meant no personal offense. As for Henry Aaron, sorry, I miss the reference?

Good questions, Bert.

Subject: RE: Serious BS: HFA/NMPA Round 2
From: MTM
Date: 10 Nov 99 - 11:02 AM

Max I wonder if it would be helpful for Mudcatters to scour the DT for songs that may be published by HFA clients. If indeed they continue to harass and threaten litigation, we would then know exactly what offensive material would need to be expunged. I can volunteer my services for that or any other concerted Mudcat effort to lighten your load in this fiasco. From another perspective, despite the claims of "A Publisher", I've found in my dealings with publishers and rights clearinghouses that although they claim to act as a proxy for composers and lyricists, their interests are not always in line with their clients. For instance, copyright term that extends well beyond the life of the composer benefits these agencies far more than it does the estates. As laborious as it may sound, seeking the permission of like-minded artists represented in the database may at least up the ante in your favor. The express permission of at least the regular Mudcatters represented in the database could be a good start. Barry Finn has the right idea here and his letter might be a good place to start a new thread.

Anyhoo, are you indeed seeking contributions to offset legal fees and whatnot? If so, I'd like to fedd the kitty.

MTM