Round the Horn
Written by Jay Ungar
From the Portland Collection I (book & CD)
Page 170 ~ a direct note-for-note rip off
It is not a general practice on site to rip off tunes from already existing collections. While the tune is under copyright by Jay Unger, 1978, Swinging Door Music/BMI, the collection is also under copyright.
Most of us have enough respect of other collectors that we don’t rip off from them, unless it is a collection no longer under copyright or where the collector is long gone. Even then we do our best to show respect by stating our sources. That isn’t the case here, aside from a rough job of ABCs, this is a direct rip off, note-for-note, from Susan Songer & Clyde Curleys work, "The Porltand Colleciton"… It is inconsiderate…
If you actually had and had offered your own take on this tune, that would be different. That isn’t the case here… As it is, note-for-note from this collection, that’s hardly proof you actually play it yourself…
Susan Songer is also a member of this site…
First time posting for me. Thanks for the info. Won’t happen again.
Fare comment ~
It’s you bravoq, sorry I’m a bit of a grouch on things like this even when I’m not being a woos about being ill. That was a considerate response, appreciated. Maybe Jeremy, our webmaster, out of respect, will delete this. When you’ve had it under your guidance long enough to put your own stamp on it, then you can come back here and give us a transcription of how you play it, or how it is played in your local session, or amongst your mates…
“Round The Horn” ~ clearing up your ABCs
I’ll email this to you as well, in case the whole thing goes "POOF!"
T: Round The Horn
C: Jay Unger
| (3DEF |\
|: G2 G2 BAGA | Bd-de d4 | cdef e2 g2 | a6 ga |
b2 g2 a2 f2 | gfed BAGB | A2 d2 BA G2 |[1 E4- EDEF :|[2 E8 ||
|: e3 f e2 d2 | B6 B2 | A3 A G2 A2| B2 d2 d4 |
g3 a g2 e2 | dedc BAGB | A2 d2 BA G2 |[1 E4- EGBd :|[2 E6 |]
ABC’s - Rip Off
Thanks for your reply, Ceolachan, and for the ABC’s. Much appreciated. This is all a learning for me at this point. For the record, I hope you will have noticed that in the Comments section I attributed this tune (which I love) to Jay Ungar and also the Portland Collection. I think a rip-off is when you take somebody else’s work and pretend it’s your own. That was never my intention. That said, I can see (now) that it’s not okay to post copyrighted tunes. I genuinely appreciate your help, and hope that Jeremy will delete the tune.
Copy rights and wrongs
Do we really have to exclude tunes under copyright? I have collections from the likes of Paddy O’Brien and Sean Ryan etc., and I wouldn’t just copy them note-for-note and post them here; is that what you’re objecting to, ceol? But if one of those tunes showed up on a YouTube for example I might post the version being played and link to the video. Is that acceptable?
Copy Rights and Wrongs
I think the tunes under copyright is a grey area, but there have been many posted over the years here. Maybe the "own take" on the tunes makes it more acceptable but the only really safe way is to send an email to the author notifying them of the posting and offering to get it taken down if they object. I have done this with a Liz Carroll tune and got a very supportive reply back.
"~ and I wouldn’t just copy them note-for-note and post them here; is that what you’re objecting to, ceol?"
"But if one of those tunes showed up on a YouTube for example I might post the version being played and link to the video. Is that acceptable?"
Yes! ~ you did the work. The same would be if it were transcribed from a session or another player or your own way with the tune, but not coped out of someone else’s hard work, like "The Portland Collection". Mentioning that ‘another version’ can be found there, yeah, I do that all the time, but not taking someone else’s transcription, whether or not it is a tune under copyright or not…
Donough ~ Jay too, he doesn’t mind his tunes being circulated as long as he is credited. We’ve been there before. There was one submitted without credit that got deleted, then it was submitted with credit and Jay was contacted. As you’ve said, most composers just want credit. Now, recording it would mean another level of consideration…
Some people on this site think more about copyright than anything else. Every time with the "But it’s under copyright"! Who really cares if someone walks down the street whistling a tune that’s under copyright, or writes out the music, or posts it somewhere. Does anyone really bother about sites having transcriptions of lyrics so that fans can sing along to their favourite artists. This is just the same. We’re not trying to close the corporations or put musicians in the poor-house. Some of us just want to learn the damn tune for our own amusement. So why not Chill Out! Seriously, have you nothing more important to worry about?
neddiescotus, obviously you haven’t bothered to read what went before. It wasn’t about copyright… But go ahead and have your tantrum. We all need them now and then… :-/
"Some people on this site think more about copyright than anything else." ~ neddiescotus
Go on, tell us who? In my experience there are few if any…
The short answer to this situation is to contact Susan Songer and Jay Ungar and request their permission. Susan did just that in order to publish the tune in the Portland Collection.
It’s usually not that difficult—I’ve posted tunes here written by John McCusker and Conor McCarthy, to name but two, and it was very easy to email them and ask their permission. Both graciously gave it. Mr. McCarthy wanted to make sure that no recorded version was going to be posted—to protect his cd sales. So it’s not just the corporations who are concerned about copyright—the artists themselves often want to protect their property and have all right to do so.
In another case, I wrote to Win Horan asking permission to post a tune of hers. She has not yet replied. So I emailed the tune to the one person who asked me for it. For private use, this meets the letter and spirit of copyright law.
Yes, I also have chased up permission in the past when I knew there was a composer…but, I don’t think more about ‘copyright’ than ‘anything else’. It is just a consideration I try to pursue if I can… I happen to know that Jay Unger doesn’t mind, from past experiences, as long as he is credited. As said, this wasn’t about copyright. I also suspect that what Sue added to the book may have been likely the way they play it in her area, rather than from some copyrighted score.
Jeremy has never had a problem removing a contribution when the composer has contacted him with that request… It has been done in the past, but he also has other things to concern himself with and this is just a small fraction of it all, on site and in the real world…
solution - if you know who the composer is, put composer unknown in the comments and leave it for someone else to slag you off.
NOTE-FOR-NOTE RIP OFF!!! ~ or someone else’s work ~ :-/
PHEW! ~ come on folks, it isn’t about it being a ‘modern copyrighted composition’ ~ it is about ripping off a tune from a currently in print collection by living collectors, literally ~ NOTE-FOR-NOTE! (ABC mistakes aside) ~ and about the thing we keep raising as a topic on this site ~ RESPECT! :-/
Besides, there are so many fine tunes out there that if a composer was really shirty about it all, which isn’t the usual case from my experience, respect given, then why bother, eh? Play something else.
I choose to respect the work of others…
On a story basis, and personal, I was involved in the past in funding projects to further tradition. Someone came to us wanting us to fund their collection of tunes. (this happened more than once) Everyone was in a "YES!" mood except me. I explained why. The manuscript was literally a cut-and-paste, this was pre-computer. The ‘JERK’ had photocopied pages from half a dozen then in print collections, but particularly from one other person’s work, and had cut them up and rearranged them into his collection, put his title and name on it and was expecing us to pay for it. This was a ‘folk idol’ for some, not including me. Our bursary didn’t require a return, it was a grant without strings. So he’d print it out, sell it on, without crediting any of his sources, and he’d profit from the sales. I fought hard not to have our hard fought funds wasted on massaging the ego of this twit…
So, pardon me if I’m don’t think kindly on such things ~ ripping off something from a currently available collection ~ note-for-note… At least bravoq seems to have understood graciously…
Note: on that just mentioned submission of a collection, the example given, it was ‘supposed’ to represent our local community, and yes, it was the tunes we played, but no, it wasn’t really the versions that were currently in circulation in that community, at sessions and dances… At the time the Bulmer & Sharpley books were in print and readily available. More than half of this colleciton was ripped off directly from those works, and a considerable amount was taken from the work of one other collector’s publication…
So there were two lies being presented to us ~ 1.) that it was their hard work… & 2.) that it represented the local community of musicians… But, hey, I was outvoted. He got his grant, but the collection never saw light of day… C’est la vie, eh? :-/
I also knew some of those compilers of the collections this person was photocopying to claim as their own work…
"But go ahead and have your tantrum. We all need them now and then…"
(Passive aggressive…) But don’t you go all Sonny Bono every time any copyright related issue arises. You frequently go off on one and accuse peolple of being thieves if they breach legal copyright. For instance, you seem to put those who share music files in the same category as people who mug old ladies. Always concerned about playing tunes in concert if they are under copyright… Remember the whole Fake-Book problem in Jazz? Again relax! and perhaps you shouldn’t accuse people of throwing tantrums given your record to date!
Round the Horn - and copyright considerations
One short little tune which is still in copyright and will remain so until 2030 is, to most people’s surprise, none other than "Happy Birthday". The copyright in HB is now owned by a subsidiary of AOL-Warner (they don’t come much bigger than that) and is believed to bring in about $2M annually in royalties.
A detailed account of HB’s copyright history is in http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/birthday.asp.
This extract from that website usefully sets out some of the general principles underlying copyright infringement of musical works:
“Does this mean that everyone who warbles "Happy Birthday to You" to family members at birthday parties is engaging in copyright infringement if they fail to obtain permission from or pay royalties to the song’s publisher? No. Royalties are due, of course, for commercial uses of the song, such as playing or singing it for profit, using it in movies, television programs, and stage shows, or incorporating it into musical products such as watches and greeting cards; as well, royalties are due for public performance, defined by copyright law as performances which occur "at a place open to the public, or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered." So, crooning "Happy Birthday to You" to family members and friends at home is fine, but performing a copyrighted work in a public setting such as a restaurant or a sports arena technically requires a license from ASCAP or the Harry Fox Agency (although such infringements are rarely prosecuted).”
needie’s gross exaggeration repeated ~
"But don’t you go all Sonny Bono every time any copyright related issue arises. You frequently go off on one and accuse peolple of being thieves if they breach legal copyright. For instance, you seem to put those who share music files in the same category as people who mug old ladies." ~ neddiescotus
~ not exactly, or even near, but yes, I have said and do consider it theft when someone pirates the work of a living artist whose recordings are readily available for sale. Yeah, I’ve heard all the excuses. And you’d be right to think, I don’t give them any credit or respect. However, I have friends that do it all the time. I haven’t disowned them, it is a subject they don’t involve me in. As far as the unavailable and no longer in circulation, I’ve said a ‘few’ times, I don’t see the harm, or a single tune to learn.
Sorry you feel the need for gross exaggeration neddiescotus, in regards to what I do and say, it seems obvious you’ve taken a strong dislike to who I am, fine. The feeling isn’t mutual. If you were to actually check my history instead of flying off the handle, out of all the contributions I’ve made since being a member here, the only mentions of actual copyright are maybe 3. The argument of another side to the issue of pirating, I can only remember one thread, but there might have been a couple. So I’m hardly obsessive about it. Again, this was not about copyright, but you believe what you choose and read things as you like. When someone takes a dislike of a person there isn’t any amount of defense they’ll listen to, or reason. So I’m not sure why I have bothered. You’ll do and think as you please anyway…
However, for others, please read from the top. It was mentioned, but this wasn’t a complaint or an issue of ‘copyright’, it was about lifting a tune from a currently available and in circulation collection that someone else had put time and effort into. Personally, I’d welcome ‘another’ take on this tune. If we were to just lift every tune in print and add it here, somehow, personally, I don’t think that is what this site or the music is about, and I have respect for those that have bothered to collect, transcribe and produce a collection for us all to make use of, good on them. They have my vote, and I own this particular collection. It isn’t just words with me…
You’re right lazyhound, as far as copyright infringements it is mostly larger institutions that risk initial threats and possible litigation, like a website, not usually the small folk, an individual. Some cases have been taken out against churches and educational establishments, who it seems are amongst the biggest infringers of copyright where printed music is concerned. That is one of the many things that keeps university legal eagles busy…
Round The Horn
After all that, I’ve got this tune on a Tony Hall album ("Mr. Universe") and it’s a bloody good one. I couldn’t place it, to listen to, but being told it’s a Jay Ungar one solves that mystery.
Quick nicholas, I know you can do it, transcribe it and send it to bravoq before Jeremy gets back… ;-)
Copying printed sources ~ a few points from the past
Way after the fact…
i don’t know if anyone will see this, as the thread has been dormant for a while, but i’ll ask anyway:
was this tune actually composed by jay unger, or is it an earlier, traditional tune, that jay then included in a collection that he copyrighted?
and has anyone found a youtube rendition of it?
Here’s a link to a terrific performance by III Tyme Out: http://youtu.be/31UjKMzAabI . Enjoy.