public domain guitar music (was:Justin Holland guitar music order)
Donald Sauter
me on an order of public domain guitar music upset several
people. If what I tried to do was injurious to the
International Guitar Research Archives (IGRA), I apologize
to them and anyone else who was offended.
At the risk of further drubbing, though, I have to say that
it's not obvious to me that my brainstorm was morally wrong.
(We agree there's no legality issue, right?) In fact, I
honestly believed that I was doing something good; that it
was a win-win-win proposition benefiting me, IGRA and
perhaps giving a few other guitarists a taste of something
"new" and fun.
I claim that what I tried to do was no different from
myself, or Matanya Ophee, or anybody, giving copies of a few
out-of-copyright Justin Holland guitar arrangements to a few
friends or colleagues. Who could possibly be shocked by
that? If some outraged soul shook you by the shoulders to
get a sympathetic reaction, you'd probably say, "So what?
That's what 'public domain' is all about." Or maybe you'd
say, "Gee, there's a generous fellow!" I've supplied
Soundboard magazine with a few pieces that came from the
Library of Congress, and there's been no hue and cry raised
over that.
In my original post I invited the reader to visit the IGRA
web site, which not only doesn't look like the typical mega-
buck commercial site, but actually pleads for restraint in
your orders. I took this as supporting evidence of my
impression that IGRA exists to a large extent, as other
archives and libraries do, for philanthropic reasons. It
sounded to me like, "We have something very precious here,
and we want to make it available to anyone who is
interested, from scholars to hobbyists, but we do not have
the resources to sell music like Mel Bay does, nor are we
trying to become another Mel Bay. (Heck, we can't even pay
our workers.)"
I've been accused of trying to rip off IGRA, but I claim they
would have gotten their full $50 for a $50 order. Be
realistic, what are the chances that anyone who took me up
on my offer was himself on the verge of submitting such an
order to IGRA? A chance in one-followed-by-there-aren't-
enough-zeros-in-the-universe. And maybe that person would
have become a regular IGRA customer - although I don't
pretend that was part of my guiding thoughts at the time.
If IGRA wishes that their unimproved, public domain copies
do not get copied further, I would have no problem
respecting and abiding by that. If that's their desire, I
suggest they make it clear right on the order form. That
would have prevented this misunderstanding.
In earlier drafts of this message there was an argument
(based on what I see at the Library of Congress) that, not
only are the revenues a music library receives from
photoduplication orders chicken feed in the overall
operating budget, but that the library must surely *lose* a
few dollars on every dollar received from an order. And
there are other obvious reasons why it would be a horrendous
idea for every single person who wants a piece of music from
the Library of Congress, say, to bug them directly (no
matter what Matanya Ophee would have you believe.) Ergo, by
taking on some of IGRA's workload, I should be viewed as
doing them a big favor.
The argument was a tour de force, but I gave it the axe
because, a) perhaps there are fundamental differences
between IGRA and LC that make the comparison shaky, and b)
none of that played any part in my thinking in trying to
pull together a single, fair and square, $50 order for IGRA.
I was wondering if I'd get any takers on my offer. I don't
detect too much interest in such music among guitar
players. When I placed some ads for guitar & piano music in
the Soundboard some years ago, Matanya chuckled and told me,
"You'll get *four* responses!" He was right on the button.
I checked some old Soundboards to confirm my memory of the
sales activity of the GFA archives. In four fiscal years
within the period 1988 to 1994, income from archive orders
were $88.70, $115.20, $68, and $90. To be honest, I would
have bet that IGRA gets maybe one 10- or 20-page order every
three weeks or so. Whether they would view a $50 "monster"
order with joy, for the loot, or with dread, for the labor
involved, I'm still not sure.
I'm guessing that most of the few guitarists who noticed my
deal and were curious enough to consider it for a moment
experienced a moral outrage somewhat different from
Matanya's; something more like, "What? Ten bucks for 3
bucks worth of junky old guitar music xeroxes? Who are you
trying kid, man? Fergit it!" I couldn't imagine getting
more than 2 or 3 interested parties. It never crossed my
mind that I was embarking on some publishing venture that
required permission from anybody. The people who got copies
of the music would have to know that IGRA deserves all the
credit. (Or, was it Vahdah? Or the people and publishers
from whom she got her music? Or the composers who supplied
those publishers? How far back do we have to push this
thing?)
Recently someone contacted me about buying some of my
public domain music from LC. I explained that if I
copied a large chunk without any picking and choosing, 22
cents a page would cover costs and leave a tip - generous
and much appreciated, but hardly a living wage - for me.
The fact is, at even 22 cents a page, a stack of music seems
to get pretty costly pretty fast, and he expressed mild
sticker shock. I asked if he knew a guitar friend who might
go in with him; they could make their own copy of the order
to reduce costs significantly. They'd each get a super
deal, and I'd get an order instead of no order. Jolly good.
In the end, he swallowed the full price by himself, but the
point is that this is the same situation as the one under
discussion here, but with me in the opposite role. If every
now and then how I would like to be treated turns out,
unknowingly to me, to be different from how others would
like to be treated, the best I can do is make a note of it
and apologize. Sorry.
Clearly, Matanya and I are on opposite ends of the spectrum
regarding our desire to see public domain guitar music made
as widely and readily available as possible. Matanya will
guard his collection to the death; I wish I could transport
any piece in my collection to anybody who wants it simply by
willing it.
Once I tried to interest a few people in obtaining copies of
the music I was getting from the Library of Congress for the
mere cost of recopying it plus postage - a plan that
wouldn't even defray my costs while adding significantly to
my workload. The idea was that the thousands of dollars
worth of work (if you're inclined to convert hours into
dollars) it takes to accumulate even a small stack of music
would be much more enjoyable and gratifying and worthwhile
if I knew I was doing it for the benefit of several people
rather than just myself. I proposed this benevolent idea on a
classical guitar list-serve, in the process getting several
people's dander up, including Matanya's. I even got myself
censured for the heinous deed.
My business idea of selling fully-restored and corrected,
performance-ready, public domain guitar & piano
music (which never went anywhere) was objected to in a
previous rmcg discussion - that time by someone who has a
large collection of copied, public domain, guitar & piano
music. (Dig the pattern emerging?)
So this is at least the third instance where I've stoked
righteous indignation when I thought I was doing something
good and valuable for the guitar community, while harming
nobody. What's going on? Does "public domain" *never* mean
public domain in the guitar world? In spite of the
opposition forces jumping out of the woodwork at every turn,
I can't help wondering how representative their views are.
Are they shared by the guitar community at large?
If there is any further discussion, I hope that it focuses
on this question: under what conditions is it acceptable for
a piece of public domain music to be copied and/or exchange
hands?
Now here are some specific responses...
Matanya Ophee wrote:
>Donald Sauter started getting on my
>nerves years ago when he, without permission and without even saying
>what he was doing, copied a piece of music out of the first volume of
>the Russian Collection, erased all my fingering from it, put in his
>own, and submitted the new "edition" to the GFA's commission on
>Notation which was organized by Frank Koonce.
I apologized in person to Matanya for this at the first
opportunity. Upsetting anyone is the last thing on earth I
want to do. Still, I have a hard time viewing what I did as
any sort of crime at all. For one thing, it wasn't a
complete piece of music. It was one page, and I doubt that
anyone on the fingering notation panel rubbed his hands
together in glee, cackling to himself, "Boy, oh boy, a
*free* page of music from Ophee's Russian Collection! I'm
gonna perform it and record it; who cares if the piece stops
half way through!" I chose that page because I figured most
panel members would have easy access to the original
(Matanya should feel honored) and could thereby easily
compare my notation with Matanya's. I emphasize the word
"notation"; the goal of the panel (at the start, at least)
was to come up with a manual of style for guitar fingering
notation. (I still believe this would be very beneficial.)
I did *not* put in any of my own fingerings; I *renotated*
Matanya's fingerings according to my own system. I used a
full page because I felt that the tiny, single-measure
samples put forth by others on the panel were worthless for
demonstrating how useful a proposed fingering notation
element was during an actual read-through of a piece of
music. If the panel members could have gathered in the same
room, I would have just passed around my original; since
they were spread out over the world, I sent a single copy to
the coordinator. Apparently he saw no great issue with
copyright in sending copies to the rest of the panel.
Matanya Ophee wrote:
>Should I do any of this PD material, I bet you it will be on Donald
>Sauter's web site in no time at all.
Now, now, Matanya, I believe you've overstepped a line
there. You make it sound like I reproduce public domain
guitar music on my web site. Anybody rushing to my site for
that will be sorely disappointed, although I hope they enjoy
the hundreds of pages of baroque guitar and vihuela and even
never-before-heard Mozart pieces, all in dreary (but
perfectly functional) ascii tablature. Nope, not a jpeg,
gif or pdf file in sight. There is a *list* of pieces I
copied from the Library of Congress, but I haven't the
slightest inclination to add pieces from modern facsimile
editions that are in my collection. What would be the point
of that? Who would want to see the complete works of
Fernando Sor, for example, mixed in?
You've called my behavior relative to public domain guitar
music "predatory", but I assure you that I view modern
editions of public domain music like the copyrighted works
they are. I would *never* copy a piece from such an edition
to give to somebody else, figuring, "Hey, the music is
public domain!"
(There is one skeleton in my closet, although even that was
the result of naivete, not conscious theft. Once I had the
"great" idea to edit some music copied from a facsimile
edition - not of guitar music - for performance on the
guitar, and market it. Somewhat later, when I began
preparing raw copies of guitar & piano music from LC for
publication, I discovered what a staggering amount of work
is involved in preparing a facsimile edition. I figure I
put an average of 3 hours into each page. I still cringe at
the thought of copying that facsimile edition. I hope the
couple of "review copies" of my edited guitar version I sent
out were trashed immediately and have long since been
forgotten.)
Moreover, if you wanted to sell unimproved photocopies of
public domain music in your collection I would have
absolutely no problem abiding by your wish that they not be
copied further. I know what your position is, but, as I
suggested to IGRA above, you could make it very clear to
everybody right on the order form that the buyer agrees to
such a condition. A simplistic, naive solution? I don't
think so. How is it that any publisher has ever managed to
sell more than one copy of a book, or musical composition,
etc.? There must be *some* honesty out there.
There were comments in this thread indicating that some
people would like to see certain items in your collection.
If you view me as the worst-case guitar music publisher's
nightmare, then you truly have nothing to worry about.
My advice: kick out the jambs.
Also, since I've been accused of being predatory, allow me
to share my thoughts on copyright. I believe that copyright
should last as long as the copyright holder is willing to
pay for copyright protection, whether that be a few decades,
centuries, or forever. I believe "Romeo and Juliet" should
still be protected if there was an unbroken procession of
copyrighted owners who wished to retain control. At the same
time, I would like to see a compulsory license fee implemented
(which, for instance, allows a recording artist to cover
somebody else's pop song) where you could go ahead and copy
the pages you need and send the appropriate payment to the
copyright owner or a collection agency.
Matanya Ophee wrote:
>He is simply
>looking for other people to finance his own library purchases, and
>doing it by cheating the library out of their regular copying fees. It
>stinks and I rather doubt the IGRA archives will be providing mr.
>Donald Sauter with copies of anything, at any price.
My desire to see *everybody* interested in old guitar music
get it as easily and as inexpensively as possible has been
public for years. Check my web site, or search the rmcg
archives. Getting a piece of music from a library involves
tremendous time, effort and expense. Witness how few people
reading this message have any such music in their collection,
in spite of declared interests in Ferrer or Holland, for just
two examples. I believe that once the hurdle of acquiring a
piece of music from the library has been crossed, getting it
to interested parties becomes tremendously easier and less
expensive. I believe that if agreement with my way of thinking
on this became widespread, music libraries would not be capable
of handling the demand for copies from their collections. I know
that if I were the owner of the LC music division, or of IGRA,
nothing on earth would give me more satisfaction than knowing
that everybody who wants a copy of a piece from my collection
has gotten it. In fact, until that goal is reached, I would
consider myself as having failed.
Matanya Ophee wrote:
>s.w...@ntlworld.com (SW) wrote:
>>I haven't a clue who Donald Sauter is apart from his website. I'd be
>>very happy to be in his company.
>
>I know who Donald Sauter is, and I rather suspect that once you made
>his personal acquaintance, you might change your mind quickly.
Same goes for Matanya Ophee. He's caustic and crude on the
internet and in print, but in person he's a great guy -
along with his amazing knowledge, he's friendly and funny,
to boot. To tell you the truth, Matanya's just a big, ol'
teddy bear - and I guess now I'm *really* gonna get it for
spilling the beans and smearing his reputation.
Lutester wrote:
>So instead of paying them about $50, I, and others like me, can pay
>you only $10 and be doing them a favor since they don't have to do all
>that work? That's awfully nice of you.
>
>How 'bout instead, you get the stuff for $50 and tell me/us if it is
>worth getting? Then I/we can each send them $50 and let them handle
>the work load as best they can? Maybe they could even get it down to
>$0.20 a page like you, eh?
Nowhere in the Justin Holland oeuvre can be found a single
measure that dips to the worthlessness of the 20th century's
greatest guitar pieces, Britten's Nocturnal or Falla's
Homenaje. Don't stop at $50 - you(singular)/you(plural)
should order every Justin Holland arrangement in the VOB
catalog. Today. You(singular) asked.
Donald Sauter
donald...@email.com
http://www.geocities.com/donaldsauter/
Lutester
wrote:
>Lutester wrote:
>>So instead of paying them about $50, I, and others like me, can pay
>>you only $10 and be doing them a favor since they don't have to do all
>>that work? That's awfully nice of you.
>>
>>How 'bout instead, you get the stuff for $50 and tell me/us if it is
>>worth getting? Then I/we can each send them $50 and let them handle
>>the work load as best they can? Maybe they could even get it down to
>>$0.20 a page like you, eh?
>
>Nowhere in the Justin Holland oeuvre can be found a single
>measure that dips to the worthlessness of the 20th century's
>greatest guitar pieces, Britten's Nocturnal or Falla's
>Homenaje.
Is that true? Or is you just joshin' us unwashed folks? Justin
Holland's work is really better than the worthlessness of Britten or
Falla? Wow! No wonder you want to steal it so badly that you try to
enlist all these accomplices in your plan.
>Don't stop at $50 - you(singular)/you(plural)
>should order every Justin Holland arrangement in the VOB
>catalog. Today.
No thanks, if it is as good as you say then I'm sure Matanya will be
publishing it as soon as he can the legal rights to do so. Of course,
if it isn't really that good and you were just being a liar as well as
a thief, then we could just chalk it up to more of your bullshit.
Either way, I'd rather deal with the people that own the stuff than a
crook.
>You(singular) asked.
And you answered.
Robert
SW
Bizarre. Very bizarre. The hyperbolist and the toady. Bizarre.
Matanya Ophee
>It seems that my attempt to get several people to go in with
>me on an order of public domain guitar music upset several
>people. If what I tried to do was injurious to the
>International Guitar Research Archives (IGRA), I apologize
>to them and anyone else who was offended.
>
>At the risk of further drubbing, though, I have to say that
>it's not obvious to me that my brainstorm was morally wrong.
So far, you have not told us what the responsible parties at IGRA have
told you about your idea. If _they_ would have approved of it, you've
got something going for you. But if _they_ considered it as a rip-off,
then all this moralistic onanism is not going to get you off the hook.
>I claim that what I tried to do was no different from
>myself, or Matanya Ophee, or anybody, giving copies of a few
>out-of-copyright Justin Holland guitar arrangements to a few
>friends or colleagues.
I can't believe that you are really so thick in the head as to not see
the difference. I give copies of my PD music all the time. But these
are copies of first generation material that I personally own. I also
give copies of material which belong to libraries who have given me
specific permission to do so, or those that do not have any such
restrictions placed, such as LoC. But in the event of material which
belong to others, and specifically to libraries who insist on limiting
the free distribution of their holdings _as a condition of supplying
the copy in the first place_, I will not make you a copy unless I have
permission from the owner to do so. To do otherwise, is to invite a
boycott by the owner on future copies.
> Who could possibly be shocked by
>that? If some outraged soul shook you by the shoulders to
>get a sympathetic reaction, you'd probably say, "So what?
>That's what 'public domain' is all about."
PD is not the issue. Private ownership of the original material is.
> Or maybe you'd
>say, "Gee, there's a generous fellow!" I've supplied
>Soundboard magazine with a few pieces that came from the
>Library of Congress, and there's been no hue and cry raised
>over that.
Because the Library of Congress is one a the few libraries in the
world that do not have a restriction on distribution of their
materials. Once IGRA became supported by the taxpayers, it might also
adopt this policy. Until then, keep your hands off.
[snip]
>I've been accused of trying to rip off IGRA, but I claim they
>would have gotten their full $50 for a $50 order.
I flunked math in the 8th grade, but even so, I can see how mendacious
your self righteousness can be.
> Be
>realistic, what are the chances that anyone who took me up
>on my offer was himself on the verge of submitting such an
>order to IGRA? A chance in one-followed-by-there-aren't-
>enough-zeros-in-the-universe.
You might have something there. Who else would have this hair-brained
idea of looking for the music of Justin Holland?
>Clearly, Matanya and I are on opposite ends of the spectrum
>regarding our desire to see public domain guitar music made
>as widely and readily available as possible. Matanya will guard his collection to the death;
Which is why I have been publishing so much PD material over the last
25 years?
The spectrum we are at opposite ends of is different. I mean to do so
as ethically as I can, respecting the rights, and the conditions
imposed on me, by the owners of the material. You seem to think that
if the music is in the public domain, than you can steal it to your
heart's contents.
>So this is at least the third instance where I've stoked
>righteous indignation when I thought I was doing something
>good and valuable for the guitar community, while harming
>nobody. What's going on? Does "public domain" *never* mean
>public domain in the guitar world?
Let me draw you a picture, since simple words do not seem to penetrate
your thick hide. The question is not public domain, but who owns the
piece of paper on which this PD music exists, and how _they_ wish to
protect _their_ investment. When you go next month to the Sotheby's
auction in London and buy all the Segovia material offered, much of it
in the public domain, then you can do whatever you want with it. But
if _I_ will decide to go and buy it, which I just might, you can rest
assured the material will only be available to qualified individuals
who have a bona fide interest in its research value. The same will
happen, I am sure, if the material will end up in the possession of
any other responsible collector or library. Nobody is going to cough
up the couple hundred grand it will take to buy it and then piss it
away on nincompoops.
>If there is any further discussion, I hope that it focuses
>on this question: under what conditions is it acceptable for
>a piece of public domain music to be copied and/or exchange
>hands?
I'll say it again: you can do whatever you want when you own yourself
the actual original material, or when you have permission from the
owner to duplicate it, or when the owner does not specifically object
to you doing so. Any other time, you are stealing someone else's
property.
>
>Now here are some specific responses...
>
>Matanya Ophee wrote:
>>Donald Sauter started getting on my
>>nerves years ago when he, without permission and without even saying
>>what he was doing, copied a piece of music out of the first volume of
>>the Russian Collection, erased all my fingering from it, put in his
>>own, and submitted the new "edition" to the GFA's commission on
>>Notation which was organized by Frank Koonce.
>
>I apologized in person to Matanya for this at the first
>opportunity. Upsetting anyone is the last thing on earth I
>want to do.
Why then, you haven't learned your lesson?
> Still, I have a hard time viewing what I did as
>any sort of crime at all. For one thing, it wasn't a
>complete piece of music. It was one page, and I doubt that
>anyone on the fingering notation panel rubbed his hands
>together in glee, cackling to himself, "Boy, oh boy, a
>*free* page of music from Ophee's Russian Collection! I'm
>gonna perform it and record it; who cares if the piece stops
>half way through!" I chose that page because I figured most
>panel members would have easy access to the original
>(Matanya should feel honored) and could thereby easily
>compare my notation with Matanya's. I emphasize the word
>"notation"; the goal of the panel (at the start, at least)
>was to come up with a manual of style for guitar fingering
>notation.
Wrong. The goal of the panel was to come up with a manual of style for
notating guitar music in general, not only fingering. There was
nothing to prevent you from obtaining the original piano music and
doing your own transcription from scratch. But taking _my_
transcription and modifying it in order to show the world that your
ideas are better than mine is like the guy who pushed his
mother-in-law down the stairs and asked here why she was running so
fast. That's predatory.
> (I still believe this would be very beneficial.)
>I did *not* put in any of my own fingerings; I *renotated*
>Matanya's fingerings according to my own system.
May I have your permission to post on my web site the original page,
and what you have done to it?
[snip]
>Nowhere in the Justin Holland oeuvre can be found a single
>measure that dips to the worthlessness of the 20th century's
>greatest guitar pieces, Britten's Nocturnal or Falla's
>Homenaje. Don't stop at $50 - you(singular)/you(plural)
>should order every Justin Holland arrangement in the VOB
>catalog. Today.
Indeed. If your aim is to support IGRA, then you should order as much
music from them as you can afford. If your aim is to learn about the
guitar in America in the 19th century, indeed you should buy the music
of Justin Holland, among others. If your aim is to find music by a
black guitarist, one generation after being freed from slavery, then
you should by all means look into Justin Holland. But if you aim is to
find good music which you might enjoy playing in public, I would
humbly suggest you look elsewhere.
Matanya Ophee
Editions Orphe'e, Inc.,
1240 Clubview Blvd. N.
Columbus, OH 43235-1226
614-846-9517
fax: 614-846-9794
http://www.orphee.com
Matanya Ophee
>> No thanks, if it is as good as you say then I'm sure Matanya will be
>> publishing it as soon as he can the legal rights to do so.
As I said, not any time soon. I own original copies, not xeroxes but
the actual original editions, of all that stuff. If I do anything with
it at all, it will probably be to sell it to the fishmonger down the
street for wrapping up herrings. There is enough material there to
make up a nice American Collection, and some such things were already
published over the years. But if I had time or inclination to do
anything like that, a collection of American guitar music, it will
have first to pass the smell test. Some of it will pass. Some of it is
pretty damn good. But not that...