Jon Boyes -> RE: Free Accurate Transcriptions (Pdl, tomatito,.....) by Alain Foucher (Feb. 10 2004 17:36:30)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Billyboy Ah but I heard that if the transcriber makes an alteration then the transcription is not a copy of someone else's piece but an interpretation, Then you heard wrong, otherwise all I would have to do is change one note in each one of Faucher's transcriptions, photocopy the book and sell it myself, and be within the law. This would make copyright law a complete farce and no artists would be able to securely protect their rights to anything. A transcription, or a cover version of someone else's song to use my other example, is always going to be an interpretation to some extent, that is unavoidable. The key concept in the law is whether *a substantial part of the original work has been copied*. Of course, cases *do* go to court to determine exactly this point, particularly in modern dance music, for example, that uses samples. For a transcription to meet this citeria - be merely an interpretation - it would have to be so significantly altered from the original that it would be a useless transcription for anyone hoping to learn the original, thus defeating the object. As a point of interest, "substantial" in copyright law does not necessaily relate to quantity. Jon
|
|
|
|