Re: [LAU] (no subject) - Linux-audio-user

10 Jul 2009

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 11:12 AM, drew Roberts&lt;zotz(a)100jamz.com&gt; wrote:
...
  On Friday 10 July 2009 13:24:57 you wrote:
  2009/7/10 Burkhard Wölfel
&lt;versuchsanstalt(a)gmx.de&gt;de>:
  Am 10.07.2009 um 16:28 schrieb drew Roberts
&lt;zotz(a)100jamz.com&gt;om>:
  Just for fun:

 http://classicalconvert.com/2007/07/the-stupidest-music-lawsuit-ever-inf
ringing-on-cages-433/
 http://archives.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Music/09/23/uk.silence/ 
 Thanks for the links. I am sure Cage would have laughed about the
 lawsuit. Who knows if Ed. Peters would have sued if he were still alive.

 What the articles are missing, and I think that is an important aspect
 of the work, is the various reactions of the audience when 4'33 is
 performed. If you have the chance to listen (sic!) to such a
 performance, don't miss it. Bear in mind that modern audiences are
 usually informed about the nature of the piece and you are not likely
 to witness very angry reactions. The grotesque aspect of it gets far
 more attention today.

 By the way, did you know that all four movements are available on
 iTunes? 0,99€ each, as you would expect.

 Again, I am sure he'd have laughed about it, happy about the discussion.

 Oh yes, and did you know also that Cage did not listen to recorded
 music at all?

 - Burkhard

  drew

 On Friday 10 July 2009 02:13:46 Arnold Krille wrote:
> On Thursday 09 July 2009 23:12:09 drew Roberts wrote:
>> On Thursday 09 July 2009 13:10:08 you wrote:
>>> We could call it  4'33"
>>
>> Yeah but there could well be copyright issues if one person quotes
>> another person's nothing.
>
> No, until now citations are allowed if they stay within reasonable
> size
> compared to the original. So you aren't allowed to quote the full
> silence
> but quoting short extracts from empty mails is okay... (*)
>
> Arnold
>
> (*) Of course, german newspapers are working towards making citations
> non-free of charge. :-/

 _______________________________________________
 Linux-audio-user mailing list
 Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
 http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user 
 _______________________________________________
 Linux-audio-user mailing list
 Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
 http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user 
 The lawsuit was not stupid. They credited Cage as a composer, and
 seeing as he had nothing to do with making the piece, they could have
 at least gotten permission to use the composition they were
 referencing if they were going to use his name on their work. 
 Seems the proper thing to do might have been to demand that the credit be
 removed unless the actual silence was indeed sampled... ~;-) Rather than to
 demand payment as if he was involved with the making of the piece. Or???

 all the best,

 drew

IIRC, they did demand the removal of the Cage credit. The damages were
for the albums sold where Cage was falsely credited / his composition
was used without prior permission (which of the two occurred is of
course ambiguous). At no point was the idea of "sampling" an issue.

If I did a track where I played ten consecutive notes from a Jimi
Hendrix solo, nobody would notice or care. If I co-credited Jimi
Hendrix as a composer on the liner notes without arranging (and most
likely paying for) prior permission, you should expect his estate's
lawyers would want to talk to me about this. And if people were buying
the album because Jimi Hendrix's name was on it, the Hendrix estate
would have every right to sue for damages. How is this case any
different?