CJ Cherryh and Firebird...

7 views
Skip to first unread message

Eli Brian Goldberg

unread,
Jan 8, 1992, 9:37:29 PM1/8/92
to
Wilson:

Horse-Tamer's Daughter is out of print. You CAN'T BUY IT. How
can you criticize someone who copied a tape that he CAN'T BUY? I
spent _TWO YEARS_ hunting down an original copy of it. Regardless
of copyright rules, filkers consider all of the "no way in hell you'll
get your hands on it" filk tapes (i.e. Wolfrider, Finity's End,
HORSE-TAMER'S DAUGHTER) public domain. As I posted in E-mail, I've
made dozens of copies of OCP tapes at no charge to people - and these
people enjoyed it so much that they bought several thousand $$$ of
tapes.
I don't think you completely understand the attitudes of those in
filkdom too well; I'm sure you know Andrea much better than I do, and
likewise with Teri Lee (etc). BUT...Leslie Fish has decreed that ANYONE
can post ANY of her stuff without permission ANYWHERE if it's not for
profit (which means I COULD post the music to Signy Mallory without
problems since Leslie Fish, just like almost every other incredible
filk song, wrote it.) Carnegie Mellon has its own songbook that I helped
work on - 200 pages of filk material. All copyrighted and none of which
we have permission to use. Do you think we care? We don't sell it -
we just have it on-line and make copies for student use. For the same
students who like what they've read so much that they go out and give their
$$$ to the releasing companies.

How's this: call up Andrea and ask their opinion on...


1. Should you threaten legal action to someone who copied an out of print
tape that generally can't be found for under $20?

2. Should someone be threatened for posting the lyrics to a song Firebird
sells in exclamation of how much they ENJOYED it and when they RECOMMENDED
hearing the song.

If you don't, *I* will. I'd almost BET that Firebird would be HAPPY to know thtpeople liked their material enough to discuss it over internet. It's
not like there's an in-print tape that's being pirated...

*END OF FLAME*

"Filk and politics don't mix"

Wilson Heydt

unread,
Jan 9, 1992, 1:03:10 PM1/9/92
to
In article <cdOvJdW00...@andrew.cmu.edu> eg...@andrew.cmu.edu (Eli Brian Goldberg) writes:
> Horse-Tamer's Daughter is out of print. You CAN'T BUY IT. How
>can you criticize someone who copied a tape that he CAN'T BUY? I
>spent _TWO YEARS_ hunting down an original copy of it. Regardless
>of copyright rules, filkers consider all of the "no way in hell you'll
>get your hands on it" filk tapes (i.e. Wolfrider, Finity's End,
>HORSE-TAMER'S DAUGHTER) public domain. As I posted in E-mail, I've
>made dozens of copies of OCP tapes at no charge to people - and these
>people enjoyed it so much that they bought several thousand $$$ of
>tapes.

Out of Print is *not*--repeat *not*--equivalent to public domain. It
is simply out of print.

I'm relly sorry you can't get the tapes . . . That doesn't make
copying them either morally right or legal. You are asserting rights
to material that you don't have.

Do folks want the material? Sure. Does wanting gives them rights to
steal it? Hell no.

What it *should* do is cause folks to write letters asking that the
stuff they like be re-released. As you are very well aware, some very
short-sighted people have made that financially and legally impossible
for Firebird to do. If you want to find the artists and contract with
them, find, rent or build a studio and the relevant equipment and hire
the technicians to run it ( or learn how yourself) and in general fork
out the money to produce tapes--go ahead. In the mean time don't
expect sympathy from me if you wish to claim pride in being a thief.

> I don't think you completely understand the attitudes of those in
>filkdom too well; I'm sure you know Andrea much better than I do, and
>likewise with Teri Lee (etc). BUT...Leslie Fish has decreed that ANYONE
>can post ANY of her stuff without permission ANYWHERE if it's not for
>profit (which means I COULD post the music to Signy Mallory without
>problems since Leslie Fish, just like almost every other incredible
>filk song, wrote it.)

I'll take your word for what you claim Fish has said--it's quite in
keeping with some of her philosophy.

The attitude I take exception to is similar to the one that got a kid
(near adult by age--child by attitude) killed in the Portland, OR area
recently. To wit--that minor theft is OK. You're espousing an
attitude taht says "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine if I
can get away with it." I find that attitude indefensible. Copying
those tapes--*does* damage the authors and artists. It reduces their
market should they wish to have the material produced again. It
*does* harm the producers by reducing an already small market.
And--while there isn't likely to be any action taken--it *is* illegal.

If you want to be considered a petty criminal, that's up to you. But
the actions you admitted to make that the case.

> How's this: call up Andrea and ask their opinion on...

You're days late. I didn't ask her opinion, and I don't especially
care what it is. I can guess that no action will be taken. If I were
the in her postion, you'd get a politely worded cease-and-desist
letter. Anything more would cost more than it's worth.

>1. Should you threaten legal action to someone who copied an out of print
> tape that generally can't be found for under $20?

I haven't *threatened* anyone. I have simply pointed out that the
actions claimed violate laws. If you feel threatened, perhaps you
should read up on copyright law.

>2. Should someone be threatened for posting the lyrics to a song Firebird
> sells in exclamation of how much they ENJOYED it and when they RECOMMENDED
> hearing the song.

I've recommended there works from time to time. One can do that quite
easily without posting the lyrics. Do you also think it appropriate
to post entire written works (say--short stories) just to prove how
much you like them? Think man, think! There are some really good
reasons why intellectual property rights are protected. One of those
reasons is so that there will be more of them in the future.

>If you don't, *I* will. I'd almost BET that Firebird would be HAPPY to know thtpeople liked their material enough to discuss it over internet. It's
>not like there's an in-print tape that's being pirated...

For the song in question there *is* a tape available. I cited it.
Your excuse is thin and even fails your own test.

As for discussion--I'm sure they're delighted, but what does
discussion have to do with posting chunks of the actual text of the
song? You didn't see a couple of chapters of _Downbelow Station_
posted. What makes you think posting the song is any different?

>"Filk and politics don't mix"

Then why is there so much political filk?

--Hal
--
=======================================================================
Hal Heydt | David Duke is to Patrick Buchannan
Analyst, Pacific*Bell | as
510-823-5447 | Dan Quayle is to George Bush.

Jennifer Hawthorne

unread,
Jan 10, 1992, 1:31:53 PM1/10/92
to
In article <1992Jan9.1...@pbhya.PacBell.COM> whh...@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:

[In a discussion of the filksong "SIgny Mallory"]

>For the song in question there *is* a tape available. I cited it.
>Your excuse is thin and even fails your own test.

I'm not even going to try to comment on all of the various
pseudo-legal flamage going on here, but this bit I have to comment on.

Where music is concerned, and filk music much, MUCH more so than in
other types of music, two recordings of the same song are far from
equivalent. In this particular case, IMHO the version of Signy
Mallory on _Horsetamer's Daughter_ is infinitely better done and more
enjoyable than the version on _FInity's End_; thus, owning a
copy of _Finity's End_ is not functionally equivalent to owning a copy
of _Horsetamer's Daughter_, even if one were only interested in that
one song.

Her excuse is not thin and does not fail her own test.

In addition, your comment about bootleg tapes reducing the resale
value of the real tapes when they are reissued falls somewhat short of
what my real experiences with filk tapes and filkers has been. In
general, my experience has been that once a filker receives a bootleg
copy of a tape, usually of much poorer quality than the true tape, and
gets attached to the songs, he or she then almost always goes out and
acquires a real, good quality copy of the tape, if it's available.
Perhaps this is only true for the circle of people I've filked with,
but if it's a more general phenomenon than that, I could make a case
for bootleg tapes actually _boosting_ the sales of a real tape when it
is re-released. Also, the more a piece of music is spread through
filkdom, and the more familiar with it people get, the more likely
they are to want to own a good recording of it.

Jen H.

--
*******************************************************************************
Jennifer Hawthorne * Just because you're paranoid doesn't
j...@athena.mit.edu * mean that they aren't going to get you.
j...@conan.rose.brandeis.edu *

Joachim Schrod

unread,
Jan 16, 1992, 3:26:04 PM1/16/92
to
In article <1992Jan9.1...@pbhya.PacBell.COM>, whh...@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>
> Out of Print is *not*--repeat *not*--equivalent to public domain. It
> is simply out of print.

Pardon me, but is this really the original question?

There was somebody posting text from a tape she posseses. You said
it's a pirated tape, you said she is conflicting copyright law in
possessing the tape. Why? Since she will not sell this tape the copy
is allowed (at least, to the Berne Convention.) It's a copy for
personal usage. She had paid dues with every empty tape she bought.
Why is this tape called `pirated' after all?

Or is in the US really a complete other copyright law than in Germany
in effect? I doubt it, to my knowledge you (now) conform to the Berne
convention.

--
Joachim
Darmstadt, Germany
<sch...@iti.informatik.th-darmstadt.de>

Wilson Heydt

unread,
Jan 17, 1992, 4:40:49 PM1/17/92
to
In article <1992Jan16.2...@infoserver.th-darmstadt.de> sch...@iti.informatik.th-darmstadt.de (Joachim Schrod) writes:
>There was somebody posting text from a tape she posseses. You said
>it's a pirated tape, you said she is conflicting copyright law in
>possessing the tape. Why? Since she will not sell this tape the copy
>is allowed (at least, to the Berne Convention.) It's a copy for
>personal usage. She had paid dues with every empty tape she bought.
>Why is this tape called `pirated' after all?

In the Us, there is no general fee added to balnk tapes. Taht was
proposed for blank DAT tapes--but I don't think it happened. It
*certainly* doesn't apply to normal, blank audio or video tape.

By your criteria--the orignial artist(s)/author(s) receive *nothing*
from the copy.

(I wasn't aware that Germany had 'pseudo-royalty fees' on tape.)

Chad Lundgren

unread,
Jan 21, 1992, 1:48:25 PM1/21/92
to
I just finished reading _When Gravity Fails_. Didn't bore me as I read it, but
I found the violence revolting and the ending unsatisfying, to say the least. I
yelled "I read all that for this?" The ending, the statement, about laws or lack thereof, totally failed to satisfy me. I hear George Alec Effinger has some sort of disease, maybe this explains it. This book also had a misleading title: gravity has nothing to do with the story. Gets my vote for coolest title, dumbest book. Enough to make you run back to story stories.

Kent Williams

unread,
Jan 22, 1992, 12:05:54 PM1/22/92
to
From article <chpg5c#@lynx.unm.edu>, by lund...@vesta.unm.edu (Chad Lundgren):

>This book also had a misleading title: gravity
>has nothing to do with the story. Gets my vote for coolest title,
>dumbest book. Enough to make you run back to story stories.

The title is a quote from a Bob Dylan song, off of 'John Wesley
Harding'. I believe the offending verse is given as the epigraph.

"When Gravity fails/and negativity can't pull you through"

"I started out on burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff/All my
friends said they'd be behind me when the going got rough/but the joke
was on me, there was no one even left there to bluff/I'm going back to
New York City/I do believe I've had enough"

Bob Dylan must be a little before your time. The reference was
instantly obvious to me, and most of us 60's/70's relics.
--
Kent Williams --- will...@cs.uiowa.edu
"Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it" - P.K. Dick

K. W. WELCH

unread,
Jan 22, 1992, 1:32:00 PM1/22/92
to
In article <10...@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>, will...@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Kent Williams) writes...

>From article <chpg5c#@lynx.unm.edu>, by lund...@vesta.unm.edu (Chad Lundgren):
>The title is a quote from a Bob Dylan song, off of 'John Wesley
>Harding'. I believe the offending verse is given as the epigraph.
>
>"When Gravity fails/and negativity can't pull you through"
>
>"I started out on burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff/All my
>friends said they'd be behind me when the going got rough/but the joke
>was on me, there was no one even left there to bluff/I'm going back to
>New York City/I do believe I've had enough"
>

Actually the song is "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues", and it is on the
album _Highway 61 Revisited_.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin W. Welch riaw...@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu

It is questionable whether Ted Williams, the $25,000 youngster
optioned to the Kels by the Boston Red Sox, can make us forget
about Dusty Cooke in right field.
--Dick Hackenberg
Minneapolis Star, April 15, 1938

James Davis Nicoll

unread,
Jan 22, 1992, 2:35:19 PM1/22/92
to

Hit your return key more often. Aim for 80 character lines, please.

Dunno about Effinger being sick, but parts of the book were
inspired by the murder of a friend which (if memory serves) went more-or-less
uninvestigated as the victim was only a transvestite. I imagine his faith
in law-n-order might have been a tad weakened by that. One has to admire
Effinger's zeal in screwing characters' over.

The title is from Bob Dylan, who recorded music way back in history,
before Milli Vanilli even. Worth listening, even thouh his voice is not the
best I've ever heard (mild understatement).

They still teach Dylan Thomas in school? I always block on Zimmerman's
name, and have to reconstruct it, starting in Wales....

James Nicoll

Janice Gelb

unread,
Jan 22, 1992, 4:22:00 PM1/22/92
to
In article 17...@watdragon.waterloo.edu, jdni...@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
>In article <chpg5c#@lynx.unm.edu> lund...@vesta.unm.edu writes:
>>I just finished reading _When Gravity Fails_. Didn't bore me as I read it,
>>but I found the violence revolting and the ending unsatisfying, to say the
>>least. I yelled "I read all that for this?" The ending, the statement,
>>about laws or lack thereof, totally failed to satisfy me. I hear George
>>Alec Effinger has some sort of disease, maybe this explains it.

George Alec Effinger has had major medical problems since he was a teenager.
Mostly, the more ill he's feeling, the funnier his stuff is -- his illness
doesn't account for the somewhat depressing tone of GRAVITY.

>
> Dunno about Effinger being sick, but parts of the book were
>inspired by the murder of a friend which (if memory serves) went more-or-less
>uninvestigated as the victim was only a transvestite. I imagine his faith
>in law-n-order might have been a tad weakened by that. One has to admire
>Effinger's zeal in screwing characters' over.
>

This is a lot closer to the reason for the book's tone. The book was
indeed inspired by the murder of a friend which was not investigated
due to a double whammy: the victim was "only a transvestite" and was
also the son of a prominent civic leader (maybe even the chief of police;
I don't remember for sure).

********************************************************************************
Janice Gelb | (415) 336-7075
jan...@marvin.eng.sun.com | CompuServe ID 71570,3403
"A silly message, but mine own" (not Sun's!) | "Wherever you go, there you are"
********************************************************************************

Bart L. McJunkin

unread,
Jan 23, 1992, 3:56:43 PM1/23/92
to
> I just finished reading _When Gravity Fails_. Didn't
> bore me as I read it, but
> I found the violence revolting and the ending
> unsatisfying, to say the least. I
> yelled "I read all that for this?" The ending, the
> statement, about laws or lack thereof, totally failed to
> satisfy me. I hear George Alec Effinger has some sort of
###########################################################################

I felt the exact same way. This book was so dark and
depressing it left in me in a depressed and PO'd mode. But
READ ON. His second and third books lighten up so that you
can enjoy the story.

I am sure there are people that would prefer the first book.
But I'm glad I'm not one of them.

Bart.


###########################################################################
mcju...@hpspkla.spk.hp.com

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages