On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 11:58 pm, Frank Barknecht wrote: > Mark Constable hat gesagt: // Mark Constable wrote: > > But in this case Frank is not _necessarilly_ getting paid for the music > > itself but for his services as a DJ, so to me, this kind of usage is a > > lighter shade of grey and certainly not black or white commercial usage. > > Well, at least in the commercial audio work, you have to pay a musican > or composer for performing his/her music. I was playing dance music in > a band some years ago with a dedicated commercial approach, and we had > to list all music we played an evening for the GEMA and had pay for > being allowed to play them. Yeah but that's "old world" crud that helps keeps bookkeepers and lawyers in business. Perhaps in the days of expensive paper music manuscript and vinyl this auditing procedure had some vaildity but these days where the penny per beat ratio is so low it's obnoxious (to me) that these archaic payment restrictions still exist at all. > But this music had another license, which > explicitly wasn't intended to promote "commons". Exactly, and I would like to think part of the "new world" game is to spread the exposure of this musical commons, not to tie it up and inhibit it with an artifical non-musical bureaucracy of paper work shufflers that have nothing to do with either the creation or the presentation of said music. These days, creating music is so ubiquitous that it's more of a priviledge for the artist to get their music exposed, at all, rather than a priviledge for the listener to partake of the artists work, or at least it's becoming moreso (again, in my view). I still put "commercial use of music tracks" squarely in the realm of direct sales of the product itself and not the associated payment for any person or service that "performs" the work. If not then this conversation will drift towards alternate payment methods for music in the commons and that would be just as obnoxious as the current system. That "obnoxous bureaucratic system" already exists for those who want direct payment for their works of art... I don't see how these restrictions apply to music, or art in general, in the commons. I would like to think the point of music in the commons is that there are no inhibitions or restrictions to people hearing it ! --markc
