Less West Side Story in the future?

[84BDsop]

Im saying, Would you prefer an canned arrangment being played poorly? Or a custom fun, entertaing, in tune arrangment?

The latter, of course....but that wasn't the point of the statement.

[MoonHill]

Im saying, Would you prefer an canned arrangment being played poorly? Or a custom fun, entertaing, in tune arrangment?

Why couldn't a canned arrangement be played both entertainingly and in tune?

(not that I'm for All Canned All The Time or anything, just seems like the "entertaining, in-tune" part vastly outweighs the "canned/custom arrangement" part)

[scottgordon]

Im saying, Would you prefer an canned arrangment being played poorly? Or a custom fun, entertaing, in tune arrangment?

So you're saying, drumcorps is so awesome it shouldn't be bound by copyright law?

[3rd_Star_Brigade]

Speak for yourself. My music is intended to be interpreted as music, no more, no less. It is never intended to be interpreted as a painting or a video or a ceramic ashtray fresh from an elementary school art class.

You seem to be trying to speak for a whole bunch of people without having any standing to do so.

No, I merely speak as one touched by music, as you were surely done when you touched pen to paper.

Perhaps an arrangement of a classical piece had truly inspired your work. Imagine it never was now, because in some alternate universe, the estate took that right to arrangement away. Your piece would have never been the same.

And, in turn your music (stemming from the Greek word muse meaning "to inspire") would have never touched anyone's soul who experienced it.

Do you really own the rights to something so pure and intangible as to turn the heart of someone, to make them forget their life problems, if only for a second, to make a sick, lonely person, who never hears music that often, feel? Truly feel...

If you do, then ascend into heaven and take your rightful place along with Jesus, Buddha, and Mohamed.

If you feel that this is how you feel, then please visit:

www.sinfonia.org

or PM me about it.

[whitedawn]

I think this is all correct. As before, if someone else has more/correct information, I apologize. Please correct me and don't hold me to these words. If you honestly have legal questions, consult an attorney.

second year or third?

[euponitone]

Do you really own the rights to something so pure and intangible as to turn the heart of someone, to make them forget their life problems, if only for a second, to make a sick, lonely person, who never hears music that often, feel? Truly feel...

Yes.

[jmdigmon]

second year or third?

2L - on Law Review and writing my note on music arranging, education, and fair use. What I've researched thus far fit somewhat timely into this thread. Also, trying to find a gig for the summer. The economy sucks for everyone. I guess I knew that before I left my former career to do this.

[year1buick]

No, I merely speak as one touched by music, as you were surely done when you touched pen to paper.

Perhaps an arrangement of a classical piece had truly inspired your work. Imagine it never was now, because in some alternate universe, the estate took that right to arrangement away. Your piece would have never been the same.

And, in turn your music (stemming from the Greek word muse meaning "to inspire") would have never touched anyone's soul who experienced it.

Do you really own the rights to something so pure and intangible as to turn the heart of someone, to make them forget their life problems, if only for a second, to make a sick, lonely person, who never hears music that often, feel? Truly feel...

If you do, then ascend into heaven and take your rightful place along with Jesus, Buddha, and Mohamed.

If you feel that this is how you feel, then please visit:

www.sinfonia.org

or PM me about it.

Saccharine soaked hyperbole, IMO. The composition didn't float out of the ether (or down from Jesus et al). Composers/writers/inventors, etc. should have a reasonable expectation of protection for their intellectual or artistic creations, whether they're a unique musical phrase or the designs for a new Lexus. How we react to them doesn't really change this.

Edited September 19, 2009 by year1buick

[MoonHill]

No, I merely speak as one touched by music, as you were surely done when you touched pen to paper.

Perhaps an arrangement of a classical piece had truly inspired your work. Imagine it never was now, because in some alternate universe, the estate took that right to arrangement away. Your piece would have never been the same.

There's a rather large and tangible difference between "arrangement" and "inspiration"

And, in turn your music (stemming from the Greek word muse meaning "to inspire") would have never touched anyone's soul who experienced it.

Do you really own the rights to something so pure and intangible as to turn the heart of someone, to make them forget their life problems, if only for a second, to make a sick, lonely person, who never hears music that often, feel? Truly feel...

Yes, as that is the basis of creative freedom and creative morality. It is your choice to do with your composition what you wish to do. Scrupulously and stringently control it, or give it away for free, your choice. Anyone who takes that choice away from you without your consent, including those who would argue that the composition doesn't truly belong to you because all music comes from magical sunshine gumdrop fairies that live in the purple wiffle-willow trees, are in the wrong.

Without inspiration, the composer can make no music. But without the composer, there is no music at all.

And please don't confabulate the Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia with your statements. The brotherhood understands copyright law very well, and has utilized it and the very concept of paying for the rights to utilize a composition to great monetary(and thus, charitable) benefit over many a'year.

[3rd_Star_Brigade]

There's a rather large and tangible difference between "arrangement" and "inspiration"

Yes, as that is the basis of creative freedom and creative morality. It is your choice to do with your composition what you wish to do. Scrupulously and stringently control it, or give it away for free, your choice. Anyone who takes that choice away from you without your consent, including those who would argue that the composition doesn't truly belong to you because all music comes from magical sunshine gumdrop fairies that live in the purple wiffle-willow trees, are in the wrong.

Without inspiration, the composer can make no music. But without the composer, there is no music at all.

And please don't confabulate the Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia with your statements. The brotherhood understands copyright law very well, and has utilized it and the very concept of paying for the rights to utilize a composition to great monetary(and thus, charitable) benefit over many a'year.

Of course it has. However, the basis of my argument deals in the realm of the intangible. Does a composer have the rights to own something which touches more than himself? Does he own that which he truly can not understand himself? A better question: does anyone?

The answer is no. The true composer is a philosopher which understands that that which is so spiritual and pure can not be possessed by worldly matters.

Edited September 19, 2009 by 3rd_Star_Brigade