Minor board reorganization and Songcrafters' philosophy/direction.

[T.C. Elliott]

In the U.S. if you follow the youtube rule of thumb you are safe. Submitters are responsible, but it's the sites responsibility to remove any content that is objected to. What does this mean? If a video is posted and someone complains about copyright infringement, it is taken down/removed/temporarily disabled until a decision is made about the copyright. If the poster cannot show they have the rights to the song it must be permanently removed. They key is if you are requested to take down a song by the copyright owner and you don't do it you are then held financially liable.

And a backing track (of a popular or work with a registered copyright) with a guitar solo over it is no different than a cover song posted. Or stated another way, it doesn't matter who made the music rather it is the posters responsibility to prove their right to disseminate it.

I understand the worry. It could potentially be a big one. But all of the music industry books I've read (and my knowledge is from books) use examples of no liability for the host as long as disputed works are removed at the time such a request is made. (Again U.S. examples only.)

[Bluesberry]

sometimes on U-tube, to get around copyright, they will post the video reversed, like the Cowbell SNL skit I posted a few pages ago...............so, maybe we could do something similar here, post the covers in reverse............and then all we have to do is listen backwards.............Just trying to think outside the box here........

[Tony W]

I think you are right to be aware of that.  But I'm surprised that the focus is on the backers and samples rather than the tons of copyrighted cover songs stored on this site without the authors permission.  It sure looks to me like that is where the biggest exposure is.

Was just wondering about that, in a Platonical way...  
You know, I love cover songs.

Appreciate you, dude!

Hooper
 

The easy answer is,  backing tracks make a great example without upsetting very many folks. There's like 4 backing track posts within the last 2 months. Mention "cover" legality in the same thread, and it will generate an extra 150 to 300 posts.  Way to go hooper and Alfredo!!! (joking of course)

The admin staff have clearly stated that they will continue to support all members of this site, to utilize it how they see fit. This level of commitment includes the members ability to upload music, regardless of the legality (Mikey Mike and the funky bunch, that takes huge balls btw). If my site were open to the public, I'd torture myself with this decision, and eventually cave, and become LEGAL.

[Geir]

sometimes on U-tube, to get around copyright, they will post the video reversed, like the Cowbell SNL skit I posted a few pages ago...............so, maybe we could do something similar here, post the covers in reverse............and then all we have to do is listen backwards.............Just trying to think outside the box here........

put on yer tinfoil hats ...... and hit the cowbell

[Tony W]

?evaD oot esrever ni tnemmoc ot evah ew dluoW

[Bluesberry]

?evaD oot esrever ni tnemmoc ot evah ew dluoW

ahahahahahah tnaillirb (damn thats harder to do than it looks)

[Tony W]

I hate to type it out normally on notepad, then read it backwards. Impossible to spell check!

[Geir]

flesruoy stnemmoc eht esrever ot yzal oot er'uoy fi og ot ecalp doog a si siht

[alfstone]

...em ot egnarts demees ti...

 

Alfredo

[Ferryman]

So back OT, I just read through all 9 pages of this and wasn't going to comment but felt I ought to as this is an important issue that keeps surfacing from time to time.

My overall view is the big problem here is that the site is a victim of its own success in two ways:

1. It has attracted a wide range of people with very different interests. It didn't focus specifically on guitarists, songwriters whatever, the only common theme was Boss recorders, which is why we all originally found it. Many other sites are much more oriented around specific musical activities or musical genres, this one was not, meaning the site gained people with a wide range of different musical interests and skill levels. This means we are bound to have some differences of opinion as to what kinds of music people want to make and listen to.

2. The increasing success of the site meant that the large number of new posts made it impossible to listen to every post and comment on it, so people would naturally gravitate towards material they find closer to their own personal interests. Which means that however the board is organized, some types of posts will attract more comments than others based on the make up of the membership. This leads to parts of the community feeling a bit ignored, which is understandable. 

My own situation is as follows:

- I prefer original music. I find it more interesting to listen to and I can't deny that given the choice that's what I always prefer to listen to. Even by stating that it is implying that I therefore "look down" on other types of musical activity and in some way I have to say that is true. The reasons for that are complex and to do with my own personal musical history (mainly my punk background). I know in the past I have upset some people on this site because of my focus on that type of music and the implication that I don't value guitar solos over backers or covers as much as original songs.

- I am aware of that preference so what I have tried to do on the site is to make sure I spread my comments around and I have tried to devote at least some of my time on here commenting on backer-based works and covers. But the challenge is that as the site has grown and the number of posts increases, it is impossible for me to do that. I simply don't have the time.

- The other challenge is commenting. I like to actually listen to something and give feedback rather than just quickly skim it and just say "great track". I can do that with original songs because that's what I do when I create music. I'm not a guitarist and don't know much (well anything) about technique so when commenting on guitar played over backer, I'm struggling to find stuff to say apart from "great track", so that kind of puts me off commenting a bit.

All of that brings me to where I am today. I have become a bit of a background member because I feel overwhelmed by the number of new posts. I feel that if I only comment on a few tracks I am implicitly singling out those people/that style and adding to this air of favouritism that is creating the undercurrent here. So unless I have time to comment properly on a good number of tracks from a range of boards, I don't bother commenting at all and then this kind of backlog builds up and I feel bad commenting on anything so I just don't.

I guess I don't have any answers. I must typify some of the problems inherent with a broad community. I prefer original material, no denying that, but I have tried to listen to and participate in things that in the past I definitely did look down my nose at. Jazz, blues and country are all musical genres that I had a low opinion of in the past (I was incredibly musically "fashion conscious" in the 70s and 80s). Yet since being on here I have tried my hand at blues and come to appreciate blues guitar playing a lot more than I ever did, had my ears opened to some very alternative jazz and really enjoyed a lot of country-tinged music that has been posted here.

In reality I don't think it will make a lot of difference whether the boards are reorganized or not. The fundamental issues of having such a diverse community will remain a challenge for us. I would like to keep this community broad rather than narrow, so I would suggest any reorganization should be aimed at streamlining the board (ie make it easier to use) and minimizing the sense of alienation it may create among any part of the community. But I really don't know the best way to do this.

Cheers,

Nigel