Blue Stars

[Hrothgar15]

I would like to arrange Portnoy's Complaint, Return of the King, and Gravity's Rainbow into a book called The Pain of the Universe is in my Cellar Door: A Wordsmith's Dream, Part Dos. In other words, I want to take somebody else's intellectual property, alter it, and mix it in ways of my choosing with other works, and I don't care if they hate what I do with it. Furthermore, they shouldn't have a say about what I do to it before publishing it and presenting it as an arrangement of my own creation.

After all, Roth, Tolkien, and Pynchon still have the originals, and they can enjoy them. In fact, they can probably enjoy my arrangement of their pieces most by going and buying it.

I don't see why this shouldn't be allowed. It's not like the original authors or their estates lose money from customers buying your book instead of theirs. And it's not like you'll gain money unfairly from customers buying your book, since they'll realize it's a ripoff.

[Lance]

I don't see why this shouldn't be allowed. It's not like the original authors or their estates lose money from customers buying your book instead of theirs. And it's not like you'll gain money unfairly from customers buying your book, since they'll realize it's a ripoff.

Oh.

[Threats]

Oh.

Aren't they just precious when they're that age?

[Michael Boo]

No...but I would never claim to "own" my girlfriend, either. People are not things.

And to composers, their compositions aren't just "things" but a part of their soul, something special to them because they created it. And that's why we have intellectual property and music copyright laws.

In addition, go Blue Stars!

[Michael Boo]

...I'm not a big "property" or "ownership" guy. I live in a house with 5 of my friends, and we don't do the whole "this food is mine, don't touch it, and I won't touch your food" thing for the fridge. It's everyone's food. If you think the house should be stocked with something, you buy it. If something's run out, and you haven't bought it in a while, pick it up when you're at the store. If you like a food and want to share it with others, get some of that, too. Ownership in this case just creates divisiveness where there doesn't need to be any. Food is food, meant to be enjoyed. Just like music.

If David Maslanka stops by your house, I'm guessing you'll invite him to share enjoyment in Twinkies and Dr. Pepper.

[Hrothgar15]

If David Maslanka stops by your house, I'm guessing you'll invite him to share enjoyment in Twinkies and Dr. Pepper.

I don't usually buy that stuff but...sure, why not?

[TAFL]

Arrangement rights aren't the issue. Those are easy to get and are fair priced.

It's the mechanical (recording) rights that are expensive. The Beatles, Led Zepplin, Pink Floyd, among others, charge in the thousands for those rights.

I wouldn't go so far as to say the arranging rights are necessarily priced fairly....

[Wadep66]

To anyone attempting to argue with Hrothgar: You are arguing with an ivy league undergrad at the peak of his idealism. What's more, given his affection for Apple products, he is probably a hipster. Attempting to change his mind with rational argument is as futile as trying to get the Troopers DM to make funny animal balloons for your kids. It ain't gonna happen!

I know this because I was once like him. But don't worry, reality will crush his spirit soon enough.

My apologies to the OP. But this needs to be said if this thread is to have any chance of getting back on topic.

Bwahahaha

You are so right. Ah the days when you thought your ideas were how the world works. Or at least SHOULD work.

[TAFL]

Thoughts?

I don't see any problem. Using the Old 100th (the Doxology) as a main melody and pairing it with a countermelody may be what underlies both. However, without the Blue Stars having lifted the exact variations that Maslanka used and pairing those with a closely similar countermelody, I don't see anything more sinister than a vague resemblance. (Not that I'm familiar enough with either to make close comparisons from memory.)

The idea underlying the approach isn't Maslanka's IP--only what he did with the idea. The Blue Stars are free to use the same approach and create their own rendition. The underlying idea is free, only the expression isn't.

I used the Old 100th with another hymn last year for our closer. I'm reworking that for future use and am looking to layer the one over the other for one section. If you were to offer that I'm ripping off Maslanka for layering the Old 100th over a countermelody, I'd simply giggle at you.

[luvs me sum mello!]

I don't see any problem. Using the Old 100th (the Doxology) as a main melody and pairing it with a countermelody may be what underlies both. However, without the Blue Stars having lifted the exact variations that Maslanka used and pairing those with a closely similar countermelody, I don't see anything more sinister than a vague resemblance. (Not that I'm familiar enough with either to make close comparisons from memory.)

The idea underlying the approach isn't Maslanka's IP--only what he did with the idea. The Blue Stars are free to use the same approach and create their own rendition. The underlying idea is free, only the expression isn't.

I used the Old 100th with another hymn last year for our closer. I'm reworking that for future use and am looking to layer the one over the other for one section. If you were to offer that I'm ripping off Maslanka for layering the Old 100th over a countermelody, I'd simply giggle at you.

I wasn't at all implying something sinister. I think it's brilliant. I was just wondering if perhaps Maslanka's 4th was the inspiration for that section.