Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Found this off of /. today:

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2094/125

The vid for the impatient:

MPAA/RIAA

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

---

Quote:

---

"Bitter Sweet Symphony" is a song by the rock band The Verve, and is the lead track on their third album Urban Hymns. The song is famous for the legal controversy surrounding its use of a sample. It was released 16 June 1997 as the first single from the album, charting at #2 in the UK Singles Chart, having been beaten to the #1 spot by "I'll Be Missing You" by Puff Daddy and Faith Evans. The single was released in the U.S. in early 1998. It was performed by lead singer Richard Ashcroft and Coldplay at the Live 8 concert. The song has been noted for having a famous orchestral rhythym that is apparent in many of their songs.
Rolling Stone ranked "Bitter Sweet Symphony" as the 382nd best song of all time.[1] In May 2007, NME magazine placed "Bitter Sweet Symphony" at number 18 in its list of the "50 Greatest Indie Anthems Ever."[2]


Although the song's lyrics were written by Verve vocalist Richard Ashcroft, it has been credited to Keith Richards and Mick Jagger because the song uses the Andrew Oldham Orchestra recording of The Rolling Stones' 1965 song "The Last Time" as its foundation.
Originally, The Verve had negotiated a license to use a sample from the Oldham recording, but it was successfully argued that the Verve had used 'too much' of the sample.[3] Despite having original lyrics, the music of "Bitter Sweet Symphony" was arguably largely based on the Oldham track (the song uses the sample as its foundation and then builds upon, though the continuous riff is Ashcroft's creation), which led to a lawsuit with ABKCO Records, Allen Klein's company that owns the rights to the Rolling Stones material of the 1960s. The matter was eventually settled, with copyright of the song reverting to ABKCO and songwriting credits to Jagger and Richards.
“ "We were told it was going to be a 50/50 split, and then they saw how well the record was doing," says Jones. "They rung up and said 'we want 100 per cent or take it out of the shops', you don't have much choice."[4] ”
After losing the composer credits to the song, Richard Ashcroft commented, "This is the best song [Mick] Jagger and [Keith] Richards have written in 20 years."[5]
The song was later used, against the will of the band, by Nike in a shoe commercial. As a result, it was on the Illegal Art CD from the magazine Stay Free!. The song was also used in a Vauxhall Motors commercial, prompting Ashcroft to declare onstage, "Don't buy Vauxhall cars, they're shit". However the band was able to stop further use of the song by employing the European legal concept of moral rights.
Ashcroft and the band's reaction to the loss of control and financial rewards from what was their most popular song was not positive; and it has been argued long after that the issue contributed to Ashcroft's depression. The band split not long afterwards.
On Ashcroft's return to touring, the song traditionally ended the set list. Ashcroft also reworked the single for 'VH2 Live' for the music channel VH1, stripping the song of its strings. Ashcroft is quoted as saying during the show: "Despite all the legal angles and the bullshit, strip down to the chords and the lyrics and the melody and you realize there is such a good song there."
He also dedicated the song to Mick Jagger and Keith Richards at a gig at the Sage Gateshead in Gateshead. After an audience member booed, Ashcroft exclaimed, "Don't boo, man. As long as I can play this song I'm happy to pay a few of those guys' bills."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Approval rating falls to 29%
Plunges further, to 29%
Falls for the third straight week... to 29%

Gimme a break, you could fit the Astrodome in that credibility gap right now, it's just pathetic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
He also dedicated the song to Mick Jagger and Keith Richards at a gig at the Sage Gateshead in Gateshead. After an audience member booed, Ashcroft exclaimed, "Don't boo, man. As long as I can play this song I'm happy to pay a few of those guys' bills."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
You've probably heard about this too, and I won't go into great detail about it again here, but you can Google it and there's tons of info....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Except that it's very hard to find sources for sheet music of none copyrighted work. Couple of years ago I was trying to put together a Firefly fan film and I looked into the idea of using Civil War era folk songs to get rifts for music from. It is very hard to find the public domain version of tunes anywhere.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Canada can't possibly be full of pirates. It doesn't exist!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Yah, 14 yrs sounds reasonable. What is it currently? Last I heard the US was 75 yrs for some things. Other countries?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Lemmings was a cool game, don'tcha think RWEDers?

Discuss...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Kirby Dick better watch out though. He's going to get sued for looking and sounding too much like Ted Danson from "3 Men and a Baby".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Aw shucks!...it's a real damn crying shame that today's kids actually have to purchase entertainment. In my day we listened to the radio for free, watched TV for free, and went to the movies for $0.75. We only occasionally bought a 45 or LP...now kids expect they have a human right to amass mega-collections of every song or movie ever made by just copying it to their little phone-camera-computer-MP3/movie player. I really don't care personally if they do or don't, but I learned a long time ago growing up that nothing is free in this world unless you want to live in a socialist world where everybody is reduced to the lowest common demoninator of low-life filth and trash, smelly, disgusting, un-washed lemmings with bad oral hygiene and greasy hair.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Lemmings was a cool game, don'tcha think RWEDers?

Discuss...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leadb:
[I was happy to buy my copy of MIB II; now I'd like to copy it from VHS to DVD, and I cannot using the equipment I purchased to do it, because folks like the MPAA have 'forced' copy protection down the manufacturer's throat. Are you saying I shouldn't be able to?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leadb:
[I was happy to buy my copy of MIB II; now I'd like to copy it from VHS to DVD, and I cannot using the equipment I purchased to do it, because folks like the MPAA have 'forced' copy protection down the manufacturer's throat. Are you saying I shouldn't be able to?

---

In theory you only licence the movie, you don't own it. Since the copyright owner only gave you a licence for the VHS copy he expects you to pay again for a DVD licence.

If it's a song the publisher expects you to pay for lyrics, if you work out the cords yourself you cant post them on the internet because he claims copyright on those too.

When he was 8 years old Mozart would listen to a concert then run home and write out the entire score from memory..... the dirty pirate!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leadb:
Can you provide a reference to the prohibition to my doing as I've indicated?

---

Quote:

---

Sima manufactures, markets, and sells several hardware products, most under the monikers “CopyThis!” and “GoDVD,” that eliminate Macrovision's [Analog Copy Protection (“ACP”)] from an analog signal. The consumer can then make a suitable recording of the analog signal on videotape or other recording device.


.
.
.








Furthermore, Sima cites no authority, and this Court is aware of none, for the proposition that “fair use” includes the making of a backup copy.

---

Quote:

---

The MPAA maintains it has every right to limit copying of movies, comparing DVDs to pay-per-view where the consumer is allowed to view the movie in question but nothing more. Many are concerned that the organization is attempting to quash fair use by disallowing consumers to make personal copies.

On the other hand the ease with which Macrovision and other copy-prevention measures can be defeated has prompted a steadily growing number of DVD releases that do not have protection of any kind, CSS or Macrovision.

United States fair use law, as interpreted in the decision over Betamax (Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios), dictates that consumers are fully within their legal rights to copy videos they own. However, the legality has changed somewhat with the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act. After April 26, 2002, no VCR may be manufactured or imported without Automatic Gain Control circuitry (which renders VCRs vulnerable to Macrovision). This is contained in title 17, section 1201(k) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. However, there are a number of mostly older VCR models on the market that are not affected by Macrovision.

On October 26, 2001, the sale, purchase, or manufacture of any device that has no commercial purpose other than disabling Macrovision copy prevention was made illegal under section 1201(a) of the same controversial act.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leadb:
Can you provide a reference to the prohibition to my doing as I've indicated?

---

Quote:

---

Originally poste by Fletch:
Entire post

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
That's an interesting interpretation.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[B]@Fletch2:

As far as I know in Canada we do. In the US most certainly this is different.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[B]@Fletch2:

As far as I know in Canada we do. In the US most certainly this is different.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Actually you don't have a right to make a backup copy of a movie at all. There is a right to make backups of audio at home and the betamax decision allows you to "timeshift" ie record something for viewing later. However, part of that rulling was based on the fact that TV shows were free to air anyway (so in effect had you been in you could have watched it.)

People assume that either the audio act covers them (since it predates video but essentially talks about backing up stuff you own) or that Betamax does (it doesnt, it says you can record TV shows that are "free to air." In fact most DVR's a have a chip that allows premium cable channels to turn off your ability to record the shows on their channels.

There isn't and has never been a rule that says you can back up your video collection.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leadb:
Ok, I 'give'. I spent a moderate amount of time trying to find a substantive reference to refute that, but I cannot. At this point, I'll just say there's a lot of perception that it is permissible; and that many folks feel they should be able to preserve a copy of that which they have paid for (albeit perhaps mistakenly).

---