oce222 — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 14:29:48 +0000

Including music on a page is kind of annoying though... well if you're going to do it at least make a frame for the music to stay in so it plays thoughout your entire site... cause if it had to reload every single page that would really suck... big time.

Suzanne — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 21:51:58 +0000

For the record, I think it would be really nice if record companies and independent artists licenced the use of their music as a standard -- you pay them $.0001 per page view or something. That'd be great. You may be interested in the efforts of a place called creativecommons.org that is trying to work within copyright laws to allow creators to license derivative works and other exceptions to full-out copyright in ways that make sense to people like you and me.

Of course, you can also make your own music!

DaveyBoy — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:04:49 +0000

Sorry, you're right then.

Suzanne — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:17:24 +0000

... not quite. You need permission to DISTRIBUTE IT. If you record it and give it away, it is the same as if you record it and sell it. The issue is DISTRIBUTION, not profit.

DaveyBoy — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:13:42 +0000

You don't need permission to record a cover version, you need permission to sell it though. You aren't allowed to change the lyrics or anything however.

Thats why i'm saying you should be able to make a MIDI file yourself, from your own composition.

Suzanne — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:01:53 +0000

No... lol... You can make your own unique composition and distribute it however you wish. If you use the music or lyrics et cetera created by someone else, you need permission to use it, whether in its original format, or as a derivative creation. That is why musicians need to get permission to record "cover" songs. In fact, they also need permission (and need to pay royalties) if they play those songs WITHOUT recording them.

The rule is really very simple -- if you didn't create it (from scratch), it's best to get written permission to use it.

DaveyBoy — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 16:49:54 +0000

thats stupid though, basically you can't make a midi version or someone else's recording but you're allowed to record your own version and distribute it however you want.

Suzanne — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 16:35:42 +0000

Quote: Originally posted by DaveyBoy
Oh right Still a load of sites use MIDI files so that wouldn't be a problem i don't think, and well who would own the copyright to a MIDI? The original song writer? Who knows....

Well, I know, actually. The person who owns the copyright to a MIDI is the person who owns the copyright to the song itself, unless that person has granted derivative rights to the person who created/composed the MIDI.

A lot of people do a lot of things, that doesn't make those things legal.

Megan — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 16:06:13 +0000

Quote: Originally posted by Eskater05
not true...i have recieved permission from multiple people to use their music in a video...i also have gotten the same response on images for other things

Really! Wow, that's very interesting. So big famous people have allowed you to re-distribute their stuff? And they have the authority to grant that permission? Makes sense for pictures and stuff but re-distributing music is another thing altogher. I thought the record company was the one that had authority over that. I also thought that the recording industry in general was really against mp3's and would be very unlikely to allow them to be distributed in general. So I guess it couldn't hurt to ask then.

DaveyBoy — Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:02:12 +0000

Oh right Still a load of sites use MIDI files so that wouldn't be a problem i don't think, and well who would own the copyright to a MIDI? The original song writer? Who knows....