Fritz Brun - copyright issues

[adriano]

On Spotify you cannot get everything for free. They have a "Free Service" and a "Paid Subscrition" option. And you need to open an account. Which means that it's a controlled thing - and for a Paid Subscrition you get a code. YouTube is not of all this: everybody can access without registration. Spotify say that "The Unlimited Service may not be available to all users. We will explain which services are available to you when you are signing up for the services."
In their terms of use, Spotify writes, among other:
1. The following is not permitted for any reason whatsoever:
Copying, redistributing, reproducing, "ripping," recording, transferring, performing or displaying to the public, broadcasting, or making available to the public any part of the Spotify Service or the Content, or otherwise making any use of the Spotify Service or the Content which is not expressly permitted under the Agreements or applicable law or which otherwise infringes the intellectual property rights (such as copyright) in the Spotify Service or the Content or any part of it;
2. using the Spotify Service to import or copy any local files that you do not have the legal right to import or copy in this way;
3. transferring copies of cached Content from an authorized Device to any other Device via any means;
4. reverse-engineering, decompiling, disassembling, modifying, or creating derivative works of the Spotify Service, Content or any part thereof except to the extent permitted by applicable law. [If applicable law allows you to decompile any part of the Spotify Service or the Content where required in order to obtain the information necessary to create an independent program that can be operated with the Spotify Service or with another program, the information you obtain from such activities (a) may only be used for the foregoing objective, (b) may not be disclosed or communicated without Spotify's prior written consent to any third party to whom it is not necessary to disclose or communicate in order to achieve that objective, and (c) may not be used to create any software or service that is substantially similar in its expression to any part of the Spotify Service or the Content];
5. circumventing any technology used by Spotify, its licensors, or any third party to protect the Content or the Service;
6. selling, renting, sublicensing, or leasing of any part of the Spotify Service or the Content;
7. circumventing any territorial restrictions applied by Spotify or its licensors;
etc.

These rules are, of course, a sort of mockery: Who does respect them and how is it possible to detect transgressors? But, at least, it looks more serious than Youtube.

As far as "copyrighted material" is concerned, today we artists also have rights. Which means that if one is a member of a "interpreter's society" like I am (both in Switzerland and in the USA), it's not always so easy to just use this and that without asking permission first - or without paying royalties. Brilliant did not inform us that they were also using their files for free download. We supposed, since they are a serious company, that they would only allow paid downloads and streamings. A contract between Brilliant and me as an "artists" does not exist. They only agreed of making a licensing contract with the Brun Estate, who is the owner of the CD masters. In there, of course they had to agree to assign the "Neigbouring rights" to the Company for a period of 10 years (Naxos, who wants to control the musical world, always wants perpetual rights!).
Last but not least, I am just the artist...

Yesterday, after I submitted to YouTube a complaint regarding the copyright situation of Fritz Brun (this in connection with other illcit Brun postings), they were not even able to understand. They answer that my complaint is suspicious and that they may delete my YouTube account! I don't even have one! They are totally dumb.

I think we artists should fight for our rights. The internet is taking advantage of us - but the money which is being made out of it goes into the wrong pockets...

[Alan Howe]

...which still leaves us with this YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/JAMESLEVEE

[adriano]

Exactly!
Even if the Brun Estate renounced to "neighbouring rights", allowing Brilliant to re-use the files on other media, this does not mean that Brun's music is no more under copyright.
Officially, only (double-morale) "copies for private use" are being allowed, not a world-spreading free of charge "copying" action like this. Over here, if I want to make a conference on Brun and distribute free audio samples on CDR, I have to pay a copyright fee, even if the conference is not a paying-fee one.

In my own yearly composer's (and arranger's) rights statement, It happens sometimes that am being paid for an "authorised private CD copy". This ifs fair - and may be in connection with a broadcast or with a public conference.

It is the same, for example, with photocopies: Over here, every copy shop or library has to pay an annual fee for potential copies of copyrighted material. I get some little money every year for a book I have written (which is registered at ISBN), even though it is not 100% sure if any pages of it have been photocopied. This goes on as long as my authors right's are running. In other words, the writer's union are collecting a yearly lumpsum to be distributed amongst authors - according to the quantity of titles they have registered at ISBN.
We Swiss had to fight for years until this became a law. Now we musicians/composers are on the move as far as internet rights are concerned!

In the USA, there is Soundexchange, protecting us performers. They control internet streamings etc.. Every 4 months I get some (very) little money for my recordings. And in Eurore there are companies controlling musician's Radio and TV performances. If you become a member, you are getting paid. But you have to fill in a complicate form for each separate track (not work!) you have recorded. You can imagine all single tracks of my 49 CD's. My CD with the music of "Jane Eyre" has 21 tracks... But I did - and I am being now rewarded.

[Mark Thomas]

...which leaves us with YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/JAMESLEVEE

The internet service where I am at present doesn't allow connection to streaming services, but I assume that this YouTube channel carries copyright material without the copyright holders permission. If so, it's reprehensible that any long-time member here should do such a thing, especially remembering the number of times the practice has been condemned here.

[Alan Howe]

This is the 'disclaimer':

It is my sincere and heartfelt wish that any and all remuneration that may be directed to me for this presentation be instead diverted to all holders of copyright. Should any party deem its removal necessary, I hereby request immediate notification prior to the filing of a claim with YouTube and I will not hesitate to delete it with all due haste.

Now: JAMES LEVEE - delete all your copyright-breaking uploads. IMMEDIATELY. Or face the consequences.

[JimL]

 :-\It will actually take some time,  but it can be done. Can't do anything about the other channels that have duplicated my uploads, some of whose owners may also be anonymous members here. I can get started tomorrow. Remember, I will only delete those uploads where I have received copyright claims from YouTube. You can kick me off this forum any time you like, but it is kind of defeating the purpose of the forum to delete these presentations. I and my anonymous colleagues have done more to reveal unsung composers to the general public than this forum alone ever will, keeping in mind that I have only been compiling into whole works what separated movements I've already found there on YT. And I have indeed gotten express permission from some of the parties involved, so I can't delete those either. Not to mention the work I do on Facebook, to which you are not privy. As I recall, the president of Nestle saying that the people of the world had no right to free drinkable water, I say that if they want to start putting clear mountain streams under surveillance and billing or arresting those hikers who drink from them, do any of us want to live in that world?  I actually have some ideas that would be beneficial to all concerned, but it bears discussion. Keep in mind also, I receive no compensation from any party for my efforts, and always strive to see that those who have a claim get their due.

[Alan Howe]

That response is a complete and utter disgrace. As for your claim that you and your 'anonymous colleagues have done more to reveal unsung composers to the general public than this forum alone ever will' - you would never have known about the works in the first place, or have had access to our downloads, so we reject that argument outright.

I'm afraid that's the end of the line for you at UC, Jim. Your lack of contrition here has sealed your fate.   

[matesic]

This is all very fascinating and I quite agree that UC's tacit position as regards youtube itself (not just those who post copyright material for diverse reasons not including personal gain) should be one of deprecation. Now, unfortunately, a tacit stance has become explicit and Pandora's box has been opened.  Personally, I try not to take too strong a moral stance on anything because on the one hand that would probably leave me open to the accusation of hypocrisy and on the other I realise that others (including many of my friends) live by a different moral code. Only think of climate change...

[Alan Howe]

There's no question of a Pandora's Box being opened here. Our decision is a narrow one because it relates solely to the actions of one of our members. If we find that any other member has infringed in the same way, we will take the same action. Beyond that, all we can do is deplore the wholesale breaking of copyright on YouTube.

[der79sebas]

I am not sure why UC should just recently be a court of justice for what our members do outside UC. Where should this start and end? Anyway, I assume JimL has had enough already and won't bother with UC any longer.

[adriano]

But I hope, der79sebas - if you have read what happened on YouTube to my Fritz Brun CDs 
and, over many years now, to many other CDs which I conduct - that you approve my position!
I am sick and tired of this arrogant and ruthless attitude by illegal uploaders of commercial recordings - mostly also containing music by copyrighted composers! Those guys have no idea what it needs to realize recordings. Producers, composers and artists are in right to get a little something back!
No problems with Spotify, this is a controlled thing, but Google/YouTube should really be careful. I know of many legal complaints against them already. And in Germany, there is a new law being issued enabling YouTube postings to be put stronger under control - and claims.
I have nothing against excerpts/samples being posted on YouTube by CD labels for commercial purposes - but no complete CDs posted by some music lovers with a sharing mania!

[Gareth Vaughan]

Exactly so, Adriano. And I would hope that members of this forum would have a proper respect for the musicians who give us so much pleasure.

[Alan Howe]

I am not sure why UC should just recently be a court of justice for what our members do outside UC.

Well, that particular individual has in effect exploited UC (e.g. constantly asking for information on movement tempi, etc.) for his own ends. His activities outside UC would not have been possible had it not been for his membership in UC. We are therefore perfectly entitled to put a stop to his abuse of this site. After all, members here contribute, don't they? Why should we put up with exploitation?

In addition, this individual has history - known only to the moderators.

[cypressdome]

that particular individual has in effect exploited UC (e.g. constantly asking for information on movement tempi, etc.) for his own ends.

I always found it odd that the member(s) who would upload to Youtube audio made available to this site by its members would never direct their Youtube audience to unsungcomposers.com (at least in the video descriptions and comments that I've seen).  And there always seems to be someone commenting about how great this unknown piece is, how they've never heard of this composer before, about why isn't this work heard more, etc.  What a great source this site would be for such people.  And yet the Youtube uploader claims to be promoting the music of little-known and forgotten composers.

[adriano]

Thanks, Alan - and yes, cypressdome.
I think many of those guys have similar loneliness problems like most Facebook and Instragram addicts sharing pictures and little films. They show up with something rare they have found in the net and spread it around to make them feel "interesting" and therefore get "friends" communicating with them. In my weekly correspondence I have to deal with quite a few such cases calling themselves "friends" - which I have never met personally. They write me all kind of nice things, but also give me advice what I should do. That I should promote myself better, to become an international star, that I should conduct this and not that, that I should use this or that booklet cover or put a big cover photo of myself instead of silly old paintings - or write my liner notes differently. I also had to deal with stalkers, or "friends" who were just standing in my door, wanting to make my acquaintance and become "friends". There was once a guy from Buenos Arires who, apparently, had flown to Zurich only to meet me - he had received my private address from a Swiss acquaintance.  After all, he had all my CDs in his collection, so he felt in right that I became his "friend". Not to speak of some SMS messages I get sometimes on my mobile...