Food porn crackdown

[Lord Jim]

Oldr, I sincerely hope that you're not going to allow that ignorant piece of crap to diminish your contributions to this board.

You are one of the best liked and respected posters here; (certainly far more respected than rube) and your perspectives are always appreciated. Rube speaks for no one but his own asshole self.

[Big RR]

Indeed oldr, your posts are always appreciated; keep them coming.

[MajGenl.Meade]

What those two said....

[Gob]

Ditto here!

[Sean]

Granted you may need different licenses if you want to perform multiple works, but I was talking about a single song, not an entire play or movie. If you want to present something not in the original play as part of it, you may well have to jump through legal hoops, but if you wanted to perform any single song, you could pay the statutory license fee and perform it, inclusing making some changes in it for your interpretation (which is why, e.g., Janis Joplin's "Me and Bobby Magee" differs from the original of Kris Kristofferson. There is a limit to how much you can change it without being termed a "Derivative Work", which is why many major performers will deal directly with the composers, but that's a different issue.

Okay... For a single song it goes like this: First of all, it depends on whether a score exists for the song. If it does, (as in a song from a musical) then any and all changes to that score must be cleared with the owner of the scored work. If there is no score, then an audio copy of the new version must be approved by the copyright holder before it is made public. Exceptions only exist if the copyright holder gives express permission for the covering artist to enjoy free artistic rein. It always comes down to those two words, "express permission" which are fundamental to any of this. A derivative work is something completely different and separate. That occurs when somebody uses a theme, melody etc in a separate piece of music without express permission (Bittersweet Symphony & Land Down Under are good examples).

There's plenty more in your post I want to respond to mate but it'll have to come later. There's a pool beckoning me right now...

[Big RR]

Sean--US copyright law (35 USC 115 (a)) provides for compulsory licensing of (non-dramatic) musical compositions previously released by the copyright holder to the public and specifically provides :

(2) A compulsory license includes the privilege of making a musical arrangement of the work to the extent necessary to conform it to the style or manner of interpretation of the performance involved, but the arrangement shall not change the basic melody or fundamental character of the work, and shall not be subject to protection as a derivative work under this title, except with the express consent of the copyright owner.

This clearly gives the performance some leeway in the interpretation of the composition so long as it is not fundamentally changed. Of course, the copyright owner may also give express permission for any changes. Of course, whether or not the basic melody or fundamental character of the work is changed is not a simple question, and can be the subject of costly litigation once the version is released; this is why performers will ordinarily run their versions by the owner before publicly performing/releasing it, but the statute does not require it. I have generally recommended it when I have worked with clients in this area.

As for derivative works, they are different, but things such as remixes of songs with very different tempos, etc., have often been seen as such; and the performers/composers usually first seek the copyright owners permission to create these works. They are entitled to separate copyright protection.

I hope the pool was nice. Looking out at the snow, it certainly sounds nice.

[MajGenl.Meade]

People photographing food - 63 replies (oh, whoops 64). WTF?

[Sue U]

I pray for you.

Hey oldr, I get the impression that's the expression you use in situations where I might say, "go fuck yourself"....

(Your terminology is much nicer... )

I believe the traditional formulation is, "Why, bless your heart."

[Lord Jim]

I believe the traditional formulation is, "Why, bless your heart."

LOL...

I have an aunt, ( who will turn 88 next Christmas Day; her birthday is Dec 25th...) who uses "Why, bless your his/her heart..."

exactly the same way as I would use, "go fuck yourself....."

A lovely old lady...