Subject: Re: Hmmmmm
From: KEVIN AUSTIN (KAUSTIN@vax2.concordia.ca)
Date: Sun May 16 1999 - 09:04:44 EDT
>>The following may be of interest, particularly from the point of view of
>Yes, indeed. Peter and I talked about the topic very briefly several months
>ago when he was setting it up, but gave it no attention then.
>The violation may seem obvious, but the question is very subtle. When a
>recomposition is done in real time, essentially viewing an existing website
>through a window of software manipulation, it appears that it's being
>retransmitted and translated.
I would imagine that the domain being entered here is that of performance
rights then. By removing the web-based terms, one can suddenly be talking
> Indeed, if the original plan was carried out
>(to do this all in real time, rather than delayed, as it appears to be in
>Peter's current version),
This is part of the issue that performing rights organizations are
already starting to get on to. If the system is a "demand"
re-transmission, then (in older Canadian parlance), the presentation is
"narrowcasting" rather than broadcasting.
[I've taken a few liberties with the original text to carry the analogy
> how far is it from the performers who [computers which] are >already
>responsible for carrying the musical [digital] ideas [information] from
>the composer [original website itself]?
>The toon is called [Headers
>get appended,] the verse and choruses are played [packets are
>re-transmitted,] soloists blow over the changes [errors >are corrected,
>sometimes], the drummer is allowed to take a solo to let the band find
>the beat [(as with streaming technologies) distortions are >allowed to be
>introduced to keep the stream going.]
>To get back to Peter's work ... I think it will have to be a much
>higher-profile site (or simply get noticed but an intellectual property
>robber baron) before it triggers the intellectual property police, and
>creates any sort of legal test of the compulsive "it's mine" reaction.
Sorry, I wasn't concerned about an "it's mine reaction". I was
considering obtaining permission / acknowledging the source, in this
circumstance. Does each sound used come with permission for use /
citation of source?
If this were to be, for example, a university level academic work, a
thesis (eg), the composer would be cited for plagiarism, but since its
only elactroacoustic art, once again, who cares?
In university circles, this project would well surpass the "threshold" to
trigger plagiarism concerns. Universities have a primary interest in
"intellectual property", and, IMV, woebetide the academic institution that
does not take flagrant, public violation of these rights seriously.
Fulltime faculty have been fired for Code of Conduct violations more
subtle than this, not to mention suspension and dismissal of students,
particularly at the graduate level (post-modernism aside).
By the way, if it would happen that this project were to take use any of
the sounds from the CEC cite, it would be in violation of agreements
between the CEC and the composers, which would cause problems for the
CEC, not the person who is transforming the materials.
Where is John Owsald when we need him!
Off to the falls (Niagara that is).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:08:57 EDT