Provider of Free Public Domain Music Shuts Down 242
Mark Rogers writes "The International Music Score Library Project has provided access to copies of many musical scores that are in the public domain. It has just been shut down due to a cease-and-desist letter sent to the site operator by a European Union music publisher (Universal Edition). A majority of the scores recently available at IMSLP were in the public domain worldwide. Other scores were not in the public domain in the United States or the EU (where copyright extends for 70 years after the composer's death), but were legal in Canada (where the site is hosted) and many other countries. The site's maintainers clearly labeled the copyright status of such scores and warned users to follow their respective country's copyright law. Apparently this wasn't enough for Universal Edition, who found it necessary to protect the interests of their (long-dead) composers and shut down a site that has proved useful to many students, professors, and other musicians worldwide."
Not again.... (Score:3, Insightful)
In whose name? (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess dead people don't put all that much emphasis on money loss due to copyright violation.
Which has been dead longer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Doing it wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
Modern global society is doing it wrong. The current regime of patents and copyrights is completely outdated and old-fashioned. Global digital communication has made copyright irrelevant, and it's absurd to think you can patent an idea.
I can only hope we'll look back on these early decades of the 21th century and laugh at how silly our laws were.
I'm going outside now to watch the Orionids. Good thing you can't copyright an experience.
Why take the site down? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't understand why the site is being taken down. The publisher's demands would be satisfied by removing the scores still under copyright in the EU. As I understand it, the copyright status of these scores is noted, so presumably it wouldn't be a difficult job to identify and remove those just those scores. And since, according to the article, most of the scores on the site are out of copyright everywhere, removing those still under copyright in the EU, while regrettable, would not destroy the utility of the site. The cease-and-desist letter is annoying, but I don't see that it should require taking down the site.
The power of choice... (Score:3, Insightful)
I fully intend to avoid shelling a single dime to any of these asshats for as long as I shall live. They're obviously not playing fair, so why should I?
Re:I feel better about this decision... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why take the site down? (Score:2, Insightful)
One Argument for Patents (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, is the patent system as presently constituted anywhere close to an ideal solution to this problem? Not on your life. The obviousness threshold for granting patents needs to be raised significantly and there are lots of things being patented that shouldn't be (eg genes).
Fixing those things, though, could we make it even better? That's the million dollar question.
Doing it wrong-patenting pandering to the audience (Score:1, Insightful)
Since that's not what patenting or copyright is. The rest of your sentence is useless. The basic ideas of copyright, patents, and trademark are even more relevant than in the past. The abuse on both sides is the problem. Not the ideas themselves.
Re:Seems like he caved to an empty threat (Score:2, Insightful)
That's how corporations usually coerce individuals. The best thing to do IMHO is to incorporate anything you do to protect yourself as an individual. An LLC is cheap and low maintenance, and if it gets sued, in the worst case you have to shut it down, but you as an individual are safe.
Re:Not again.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I never went to the site but depending on how it worked, the labels could have had a strong argument to take the owner to court in the U.S. They'd probably use the importing the works into the U.S., "targeting" consumers that in the U.S., etc. I'm sure Canada and the U.S. have agreements to enforce judgments over the borders.
You might be able to find a lower court judge stupid enough to rule that was initially (there are a lot of judges, and by definition, that means there are at least some really bad ones), but I can't imagine that it wouldn't be overturned on appeal.
I think the really sad thing here is that the operators of the site don't have either the will or the resources to fight this to its conclusion. So therefore, as usual, the case is not being decided on anything approaching the merits, but simply by the might of deep pockets.
The site took too much work to maintain (Score:5, Insightful)
I never heard of the site or the operator before this story, but a quick read of his forum makes it pretty clear the guy was already worn out from the workload of maintaining the site. He would have walked away sooner or later. The cease and desist letter merely hastened the inevitable.
Fan sites and other labors of love nearly always evolve into large and larger doses of labor with decreasing amounts of joy and love. The sites days were numbered long ago.
-DaveU
Re:Not again.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't use Freenet, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Whenever you've got changes/new scores, upload another version of the tarball. You could either create a private mailing list (prolly better cos that way you can keep track of who knows about it) or use a text file on Kad itself to notify safe people about the new file.
Freenet is unbelievably slow, and contains a lot of junk that I can well understand some people not wanting to be associated with. Not only that, it being so slow means that about the only thing it's really good for hosting is HTML, and not even that in most cases.
Re:One Argument for Patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly the real "schematics" of software are source code. If English could capture software's function as well, we'd all be out of a job. So to adequately do their job, software patents would need to include full source code and accompanying documentation. But since source code is indisputably covered under copyright law, the patent system would thus become more of a source code escrow system, mandatory for copyright protection. The real question is whether the trade secret nature of proprietary source code is a big enough problem to warrant the incredible added overhead of such a system. I don't think it is.
In short, copyright serves the industry well enough, with minimal overhead. Patents cause more problems than they fix, and their overhead excludes basement coders, the modern equivalent of garage inventors. The best way to fix the patent system is to push it back into physical realms where it can do some good. The tech industry can do just fine without them, thanks.
request seems reasonable (Score:4, Insightful)
The reason he shut down was because he considered that too much work. I'm sorry, but downloading a geolocation database and using it to filter requests is not a lot of work. In fact, from his remarks, it sounds like running the server was just becoming too much work in general and this was simply the final straw.
It think it's stupid that they the publishers still hold the copyright, but that's an issue to be taken up with the legislatures. The fact that they have these rights in Europe is clear, and it's reasonable for them to try to enforce them.
Re:In whose name? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a bit fuzzy about the difference you're trying to make between composers and artists. For me a composer is a bona fide artist. Must be a weakness in my English language skills.
As to the distinction I'm trying to make, well, it's pretty simple.
I write music. A String Quartet or an Orchestra will (hopefully) perform it. It may even get recorded. When it's released, it will be titled something along the lines of "unfunk's second symphony. Performed by the Suchandsuch Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Whatshisname"
Britney Spears, on the other hand, performs music (and I use the term loosely) written by somebody else. It's always Britney's song though, and not the-person-who-wrote-it's. That person got paid their songwriting fee, and that's that (I think).
The point I'm trying to make is that the Classical Music world is like the reverse of the pop music world, and that Pop Artists aren't really 'artists'...
Having said all that though, I'd be pretty pissed off with a corporation making decisions on my dead behalf.. especially as I've been giving my scores away to anybody that will play them for as long as I've been writing music.
Re:Why take the site down? Model wrong for size. (Score:3, Insightful)
As has been noted, maintenance of the site became overwhelming and the second C&D was only the straw that broke an already overloaded camel back.
I see no reason for the site to not come back, but under a different maintenance model along with user agreements/registrations to access
works not worldwide public domain, effectively making reasonable effort to provide restrictions where needed.
Public domain is public domain..... there are no laws to circumvent this, only the exposure of wrong doings by those who oppose it.
Even if the person who created the site does not want to bring it back, he should be willing to transfer the resources to another willing to do so.
Unless of course he has intent on publishing for sale, such a collection.
It wouldn't be the first time someone took what was open and closed it up for a personal profit.
Re:Why take the site down? (Score:3, Insightful)
You think? Hmm, what would be the point... "Come to our site. It's down". "Now you know about our site... which you can't visit".
Dunno.
Re:In whose name? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, your kids (and grandkids) are lucky bastards, because I know of no other line of work where your kids are getting paid for something you did when you were alive, while the kids are doing nothing themselves to earn it (besides being your kids).
Re:In whose name? (Score:5, Insightful)
Too bad that, unless you're in the top
Re:Not again.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not again.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A few duties. (Score:4, Insightful)
You didn't RTFA, did you? They (or rather, he, as it was only one person (a student), running a non-commercial site out of his own pocket) were only providing music that was out of copyright... in Canada.
The problem here, and the thing that makes it outrageous, is that publisher (Universal Edition) threatened to obtain a "judgement" against the guy in Europe - which then (according to UE's version of Canadian law, which may or may not be entirely accurate) would be enforceable against the guy in Canada. I don't know about you, but I find that kinda fucked up.
The other part, however, is more simple (and more familiar) - a large organisation with effectively infinite resources launches a "legal" assault on a single person with none. The guy had absolutely no time, funds, or any other resources to fight this. The publisher could probably have threatened to sue him in Canada, where they'd (presumably) have absolutely no case at all, and he'd still pretty much have to give up.
So well done, Universal Edition - you fucknuts. Why don't you go find a few newborn puppies you can kick, if you really want to feel like big tough men.
Re:Not again.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't that the whole point with "harmonizing" copyright laws between nations - to make copyright law everywhere to be the superset of all copyright laws anywhere ?
Take the longest copyright duration anywhere, combine it with the widest scope, nastiest punishments, least consumer rights, etc. and you have the global copyright law the harmonizers are pushing for.
Re:In whose name? (Score:3, Insightful)
Life plus 70 is much too long (Score:3, Insightful)
Under copyright, these works belong to the public, that is, all of us. To lock them away for multiple lifetimes is, simply put, stealing
from the public. It is a corruption of the original intent, brought about by a few people beholden to industry negotiating international treaties
largely in secret. Unless the rot at the center of the current copyright system is fixed, eventually the public will turn away from copyright, which will be a shame.
Re:Not again.... (I'm so sick of this happening) (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:In whose name? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:In whose name? (Score:5, Insightful)
I write and perform music too. I normally do so for free because of the joy it gives me, but I often get offered free beer and sometimes money to perform.
I'm also part of a team who are building a railway and port (for iron ore). The port will be providing a service to the West Australian community and generating income for decades at least, and probably hundreds of years. It'd be nice if someone offered me part of the profits of the facilty for the next 70 years.
I don't expect it though, any more than I expect people to give me money for my music.
Re:In whose name? (Score:3, Insightful)
As far as they're concerned, it's no different from any other type of property. You may think it has deleterious effects on society, but that's a separate point (and some would argue that other forms of property are socially harmful, e.g. land ownership, ownership of companies etc).
Re:No good deed goes unpunished (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, what happened to sovereignty?
I would have been very disturbed had I been a Canadian... Hell, I find it disturbing as a citizen of a sovereign democracy.
Re:In whose name? (Score:3, Insightful)