Music publisher claims copyright on silence

rikardgrankvist · Joined: Jul 07, 2007 Posts: 6 Location: Stockholm

It is obviously not meant as a way to "capitalize on the name John Cage". I think that whole idea is laughable. The name John Cage isn't a big seller by any standards, if you were in it for capitalism and shameless promotion, credit it to Bach... And that's still nothing compared to a pop artist. However, as I understand it, he only wrote Cage as a composer credit in the booklet. That's not marketing. That's a joke. Putting a sticker on the album saying "New music by John Cage from his secret vault of recordings, never before heard!", starts to get close. That was not the case here.

Also, it's shameless of the Cage estate to start claiming copyright in a case like this. The whole idea of 4'33'' was that the listener should realize that there is no such thing as silence to the human perception. A human can not experience silence until death. Claiming copyright on silence is spitting on his whole intent.

Wout Blommers · Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:14 pm Post subject:

Of course it's a laugh and is it ridicules!
But it is Mr Batt who is the joke, not the John Cage estate.
If Batt called it 'tribute to John Cage' there was no problem at all if he used only his own name for composer.
Everybody would laugh about me when I was telling that constructor build my house, although I did it myself. Surely the builder would bill me at once. Moral? Never lie about these things...

BTW John Cage is well known in music land.
What would be the use to make a joke like that if nobody, at least the buyers of the CD, wouldn't know Cage?

Once I made some photographs for a CD about the concept 'telephones'. In The Netherlands the telephone company used special colors in a specific lay out in the designs of the telephone guides. The graphic designer used these colors in a likewise lay out, so the connection with telephones would be very clear.
The publisher send a copy to the telephone company and the next day, soon after the CD arrived there, the legal department phoned already. Gladly the music wasn't yet in the stores and we were able to do the design again... If not a law suit was there!

Is it allowed to release a synth commercially, proclaiming 'designed by Dr Robert Moog'?

Wout

EdisonRex · Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:36 pm Post subject:

KarmanHardon · Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:34 am Post subject:

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.

[/img]

kijjaz · Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:54 pm Post subject:

KarmanHardon: a sperm observing the staffsheet-for-sperm.

jksuperstar · Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:41 pm Post subject:

I have this old pair of dead amplifiers that plays 4'33" much better than my good hifi! At least, it sounds good next to my furnace. To me. Did someone copyright my furnace sounds? Since, that was the sound Cage intended for me to hear when I play it.

mosc · Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:45 pm Post subject:

EdisonRex · Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:11 pm Post subject:

rikardgrankvist · Joined: Jul 07, 2007 Posts: 6 Location: Stockholm

Wout, you obviously don't understand the difference between a subtle joke and a marketing ploy. "Proclaiming" that a synth you made is "Designed by Bob Moog" is different from printing a name as a joke in the liner notes. Do you look at every CD before you buy it to see who wrote every track, and then if it's a person you like on one of the tracks, you buy it? If a brand new CD came out by an artist, don't you assume the tracks are by the artist (unless it's an artist known for derivative works or performances of other composers material)?

I hate intellectual property for this reason. The fact that someone would even think to make this copyright claim really shows how warped todays music business is.

Wout Blommers · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:15 am Post subject:

Yes, I read mostly which songs are on a CD to avoid as much doubles as I can and when I know a certain title, I always check the composer in case to find out if it is worthwhile to purchase the item, don't you?

Anyway, what is the joke giving Cage credits of something someone else did? It must be very subtle, indeed Smile

It's like scoring in own goal and telling the referee it is just a joke...

I wonder if it is a tribute at all. Could be a smear towards Cage to make a statement about the fact Cage was composing a piece of silence and no music at all. Anyway, the guy wasn't very serious, the Cage estate is Very Happy

And they are doing it in the right proportions. They don't want any credits when during a funeral one minute of silence is held, do they?
Books about jokes are published in a serious way! Even stand up comedians are very serious. And indeed, that's very subtle.

Wout