[Nettime-bold] Look at the Score

[Randall Packer <rpacker@zakros.com>]

John Cage indicated in the score of 4'33" that the composition is to 
be performed by "any combination of instruments for any duration of 
time."

One can simply indicate, if one chooses, that a "musical performance" 
of silence, whether it be live or recorded, is a performance of 
Cage's 4'33". John Cage never suggested that he "owns" silence, but 
rather his piece is an acknowledgement of silence - and the noises 
that occur in that duration - as occupying musical time.

Randall

>Table of Contents:
>
>    Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, 
>scotartt]                    
>      "Michael Benson" 
><michael.benson@pristop.si>                                   
>
>    Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, 
>scotartt]                    
>      "porculus" 
><porculus@wanadoo.fr>                                               
>
>    Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, 
>scotartt]                    
>      scotartt 
><scot@systemx.autonomous.org>                                         
>
>    Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, 
>scotartt]                    
>      scotartt 
><scot@systemx.autonomous.org>                                         
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 17:03:29 +0200
>From: "Michael Benson" <michael.benson@pristop.si>
>Subject: Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, scotartt]
>
>Scott, much of what you wrote in your posting just doesn't compute. Or if it
>does, I've been living in a parallel universe. And maybe both statements are
>true. Where did you get your information? Cover versions can't be released
>(certainly in the film world -- and it must be so in recordings-land as
>well) without clearance from the holder of the rights to the song. Not
>necessarily the song-writer. I'm currently petitioning an outfit called Rolf
>Budde Musikverlage for the right to do a very "off" cover version of a
>vintage Allman Brothers song for a film I'm making. I'm asking for the
>so-called synchronization rights -- not the master use rights, which have to
>do with using the actual original recording concerned. The former cost less
>than the latter, but they cost. (For me, both are way too expensive, but
>that's another story.)
>
>>  Strictly speaking though, if a work has previously been released as a
>>  recording, then the composer can't control who else can record and release
>>  the composition.
>
>The holder of the rights to the tune can. Certainly when it comes to use in
>a film. Would releasing a CD be any different?
>
>>  If you wanted to perform or record a Beatles cover, or a John Cage
>>  composition, they can't stop you.
>
>Again, where did you get this info? Technically, the above may be right: you
>can sing it from the stage, and you can record it -- but you can't release
>it without approval. Why do you think the Cage estate would be wasting its
>time if that was true?
>
>>  Seems to me people often confuse compositional rights with the rights on
>>  the master tape (i.e. a specific performance of a composition). You can't
>>  use a sample of the Beatles, but you can re-record their songs without
>>  asking.
>
>Under US law, and again my information has to do with film, the only time
>this is true is if it is a satirical version of the song. Satire is
>protected under the first amendment. But satire is narrowly defined in the
>law.
>
>Which raises the interesting question of if this shorter dub version of
>Cage's silence, complete with a total absence of any sound at all from the
>beginning to end, a complete absence of sound, but less of it, can qualify
>as satire... Satire of the silent kind.
>
>Best, MB
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 18:03:12 +0200
>From: "porculus" <porculus@wanadoo.fr>
>Subject: Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, scotartt]
>
>
>
>>  The album was finally released with
>>  an opening track of several minutes of silence instead, entitled "The
>>  Sound of Free Speech". I wonder which of the two came first, Cage or
>>  Crass, and who should now sue whom.
>
>give it up it's wellknown it's this aphone wittgenstein who win the kitty
>noisy habitus &corpus were killed in the back by polar tractatus, it'z an
>old sergio's
>beside give it all, as the silence is in gold, one kill for less
>zilenzio iz long time ago copyrighted by god
>impossible to be more zilenz
>except the death
>'hear even a small fart in zome zilenz and suddenly the hope increase' it's
>a famous holderlins' one
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:02:10 +1000
>From: scotartt <scot@systemx.autonomous.org>
>Subject: Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, scotartt]
>
>Michael
>
>Yes it appears my info about cover versions is out of date. It used to be
>the system that only the first public release was subject to a strict
>prior approval. But what usually goes on here, is that if your record
>company is a member of the relevant collection agency, eg AMCOS for me, I
>think ASCAP or BMI in the USA, it will be done as a fairly automatic
>process by their registering the mechanical rights present in the
>recording before release. I don't know if in this system the publisher or
>songwriter gets a right-of-refusal before it's actually approved or if it
>just goes down the pipeline fairly automatically as in the end its about
>payment of royalties.
>
>When you write a song, there are three rights you generally worry about;
>performance, mechanicals, and synchronisation. Performance is about
>performing the song in or to the public (on stage, over the radio or
>internet); mechanicals is about releasing recordings and is related to
>record sales, synchronisation right is about the right to control when
>where or if your music is 'synchronised' to images. There are agencies for
>collecting performance and mechnical royalties (they send me royalty
>cheques each quarter) but none typically for synchronisation rights.
>
>As no-one is suggesting that the composer actually published a Cage-owned
>*performance* of 4'33" then there is no suggestion he is breaching master
>tape copyrights (which anyway are usually owned by your record company;
>that's what a recording contract is), so it has to be a dispute over the
>mechanicals; these are typically resolved through a fairly automatic
>system run via the mechanical collection agencies.
>
>So unless his record company wasn't ASCAP registered or didn't follow the
>correct procedure or never paid the mechanicals, I can't see it would be a
>big deal. Either that or its a matter of control over the alteration of
>the work (remember it's co-credited).
>
>Synchronisation rights are completely different to the mechanicals and not
>usually handled by universal collection society procedures.
>
>Samplists (and mp3 swappers) breach the master tape rights as well as
>sometimes the mechanical and performance rights. Master tape rights are
>usually controlled by the record company which is why there's always
>such a big fuss over them.
>
>regs
>scot.
>
>
>On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 05:03:29PM +0200, Michael Benson wrote:
>>  Scott, much of what you wrote in your posting just doesn't compute. Or if it
>>  does, I've been living in a parallel universe. And maybe both statements are
>>  true. Where did you get your information? Cover versions can't be released
>
><snip/nettime>
>
>
>                                                   F
>    [[ From: scot@autonomous.org ]]                |
>+--[[ NERVE AGENT AUDIO SYSTEMS ]]--+--(CH3)2CH-O-P=O--+
>    [[ http://mp3.com/nerveagent ]]                |
>                                                   CH3
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:08:23 +1000
>From: scotartt <scot@systemx.autonomous.org>
>Subject: Re: <nettime> resounds of silence digest [pieter, scotartt]
>
>Here's the information I was thinking of;
>
>A. Compulsory Mechanical License
>
>If you determine that the song is protected by copyright law, you will
>need a mechanical license in order to cover it. This license can be a
>compulsory mechanical license or a negotiated license. The compulsory
>mechanical license allows you to make your own recording of a song that
>has been commercially released provided that you give certain notices and
>accountings, and pay the license fee set by law. The compulsory mechanical
>license fee - also called the statutory rate - is currently 7.55¢ per song
>per record distributed for recordings of up to five minutes. If the
>recording is more than five minutes, the statutory rate is 1.45¢ per
>minute per record.
>
>A compulsory mechanical license allows you to make another musical
>arrangement as necessary to conform the song to your style and
>interpretation. However, you cannot change the basic melody, the lyrics or
>the fundamental character of the song without permission from the song̀s
>owner.
>
>
>
>On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 05:03:29PM +0200, Michael Benson wrote:
>>  Scott, much of what you wrote in your posting just doesn't compute. Or if it
>>  does, I've been living in a parallel universe. And maybe both statements are
>>  true. Where did you get your information? Cover versions can't be released
>>  (certainly in the film world -- and it must be so in recordings-land as
>
><snip/nettime>
>
>
>
>- --
>                                                   F
>    [[ From: scot@autonomous.org ]]                |
>+--[[ NERVE AGENT AUDIO SYSTEMS ]]--+--(CH3)2CH-O-P=O--+
>    [[ http://mp3.com/nerveagent ]]                |
>                                                   CH3
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
>#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
>#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
>#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
>#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net

_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold