|
29 Jun 01 - 01:39 AM (#494524) Subject: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Mrrzy This is the case the freelancers just won. As I understand it, the basic idea is that online databases were reproducing material from newspapers, with the papers' blessing, that contained articles by freelancers (usually predating the online services or) who just hadn't agreed to have their work disseminated in this fashio, resulting in no royalty payments. The Supreme Court just ruled that the freelancers own the copyright, not the papers, so a) the papers had no right to sell those articles and b) the online services have to remove them or pay royalties. So I was wondering about the implications for music. I'm sure there are freelance songwriters/lyricists/performers, what about their work? Interested in the implications as you all see them, I don't know enough about the industry to comment personally. Stuff that's read v. stuff that's listened to... same law, or not? ---Jeff (PA)--- |
|
29 Jun 01 - 04:29 PM (#494999) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: McGrath of Harlow Tasini?Isn't that something like peanut butter only not made from peanuts?
I get uncomfortable with anything that gets in the way of open access via the internet. It can start as defending the interest of little people, the creative people - but it seems to end up with fat cats skimming off the cream, and the people who create things get screwed even worse. |
|
29 Jun 01 - 04:33 PM (#495003) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Mrrzy Tahini, right, and I thought THAT was a Caribbean isle, so we're ok! I know that the cats at this point are all looking as if their milk just spoiled - I work for a publisher and suddenly some of our stuff isn't OK to publish any more, even if it was already published and OK then, and even though WE did what WE were supposed to do, our SOURCES didn't... and so on... And jeffclone, did I do a booboo? Sorry! ---Jeff (PA)--- |
|
29 Jun 01 - 10:21 PM (#495167) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: katlaughing Tasini is the name of the lawyer who won the case for the National Writers Union. It will be intersting to see what phoaks think, Mrrzy. I posted the info from NWU in the Freelance Writers Protect Your Material thread. I personally expect to be paid for anything which I write for a commerical, i.e. wage-earing purpose. If I see it on a website without my permission, except for short quotes, I consider it a violation of my copyright. In fact I've just successfully negotiated with a publisher who wanted to include one of my pieces in their database. Because the Internet is content driven there is a constant need to more of it. If freelancers let their stuff be put up for free and, in the future, there is less and less print media, they could potentially lose in a tremendous way. The simple fact of it is if they paid for the piece the first time, they must have felt it would help them to sell newspapers, magazine, books, etc. If they want to use it a second time, in a new media, they certainly aren't offering that media for altruisitc reasons, therefore the same logic applies, they want to use it because they think it will help them with revenues, in some way. If that is the case, they need to pay for the content used. I have a friend who has just started out in professional photography. A couple of his pix were up on a regular photo website. When he found out that anyone could purchase repints of his photos, with or without his permission, he took his photos off of that site. Just because it is the internet is no reason to expect people to give away their livelihood. Respectfully, kat |
|
29 Jun 01 - 11:27 PM (#495201) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Alice This is a victory for all freelance creatives. Our livelihood depends on being able to control the rights to our work. The Tasini case was being watched by artists, writers, and photographers, to see if we will be able to continue to negotiate fair contracts for what we do. The Illustrators Conference in Santa Fe was going on when the decision was announced, and participants had been involved in ongoing discussions on the net regarding this case. Graphic Artists Guild The songs written for unions that fought for workers in earlier years, can be written in a new form to reflect the fight for the rights of writers and artists to be able to make a livable income from their work. |
|
02 Jul 01 - 07:15 PM (#497001) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Burke What this really affects in products like that huge CD set of National Geographic back to v.1. Lots of their articles were done by free lance writers & photographers way before digitizing was any kind of possibility. For years the issues were also microfilmed & sold to libraries, but no one really cared because there was no color, people really hated using microfilm, & the market was really pretty small. I'm pretty sure National Geographic was sued over their CD ROM set, but don't know the outcome. Going back & getting the necessary permissions so long after the original sales will be a real nightmare. I'd think the most likely application of Tasini would be in the area of reissues of 78's on CD that come from many sources that Yazoo, Document, etc. are doing. |
|
06 Jul 01 - 11:06 AM (#499809) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Mrrzy I'm surprised this hasn't generated more traffic, here... how many of you do freelance work? How many of the enterprises for which you freelance re-sell their works? Of those, how many ensure that the people to whom they sell them will actually remunerate the freelancers? Note that in defense of at least my enterprise, we definitely require our sources to affirm that they own the material we are buying, but we don't (and can't) ensure that such affirmations are TRUE. But we do require the affirmation, in writing, putting the onus on the content provider to make sure they aren't ripping off their freelancers. |
|
06 Jul 01 - 12:28 PM (#499882) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Geoff the Duck Perhaps a different thread title might provoke more response! I have arrived here because of the Blicky from STIFFED BY RECORD COMPANIES. The word Tasini means nothing to me, so I would probably not have otherwise have clicked upon this thread. I agree that the subject is one which deserves serious debate, and also that it is one which should be of direct interest to many mudcatters. Unfortunately, if they do not realise that the thread title is aimed at them, it may just disappear off the bottom of the list, without them reading it. It might be worthwhile either posting as a new thread, with a more eyecatching title, or as the originator of the thread, asking Joe Offer to alter the title displayed. Meaning Well, GtD! |
|
06 Jul 01 - 02:09 PM (#499965) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: Mrrzy Thanks, O Duckful One! That's exactly why I put the blicky in. I'm gonna do one on the Sign On The Dotted Line one, too. I'm in the legal field, so I'm used to cases being referred to by one party's name, hadn't thought that it might be obstruse. Joeclone, feel free to change Tasini to Freelance Case, if that will make this make more sense... but the blickies might do the trick. |
|
06 Jul 01 - 02:12 PM (#499970) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: GUEST You might also use in your title "Recent Supreme Court Ruling on Freelance Copyrights" or some such, so that the title gives a good idea of the subject matter. |
|
08 Jul 01 - 05:29 PM (#501359) Subject: RE: BS: Implications of Tasini for Music From: katlaughing Mrzzy, I had started THIS THREAD about it, too, which, as you can see, didn't garner a lot of interest, either. |