2 ms·
There is plenty of music which is only recorded in an audio form and cannot be encoded as sheet music, and is original work of the intellect. I don't see any d
by dharma1 12y ago
There is plenty of music which is only recorded in an audio form and cannot be encoded as sheet music, and is original work of the intellect.
I don't see any difference in a book and an original music recording in terms of why one should be subject to copyright and one not.
Whether recordings or books are protectable in practice is another matter, as it is very easy to make digital copies of both.
But if one takes the stand that an author of a book (be it an e-book or a printed one) has the right to set a price for a copy for her work, and benefit from protection by copyright if she so chooses to, I don't see how a recording of an original piece of music is any different.
- Zigurd 12y agoI would be happy to limit copyright protection to recordings of "music which is only recorded in an audio form and cannot be encoded as sheet music." Despite the fact that I've been published by several major book publishers and I'm a "real" author with representation and the whole nine yards, I have not defended the continuing copyright protection of the written word, either. One of my publishers uses no copy protection (except for Kindle where they have no choice), and they distribute a large part of their backlist for free. The whole notion of copyright and publishing needs a rethink. Some publishers are farther along this path than others.