Another Tab Site Threatened

I know i'm not going to make any friends, but here I go anyways. IMO this whole issue revolves around intullectural property rights, i.e. a man has ownership over the things he creates. If you want to argue that there is no such right, then so be it: argue that point. But this buisness of finding a loop-hole in the "fair-use" clause/law (whatever it is) to steal another man's work is only confusing legality with morality.
I know many of you have argued that you are just giving your interpretation of the work in question, does this mean that if I read the "DaVinci Code" over and over till I memeorize it that i can then reprint it on my web site as my Interpertation. I could even type it out in pig latin so that i'm changing the format. Stealing is stealing. Right is right. Legal is up to 12 people's opinion maybe a judge's desire and possibly some charismatic activist's agenda. In Short (too late), Most of us learned right and wrong a long time ago, technology/availablity does not change which is which.

A novel's supposed to be read as text though, Uno - that's how it's experienced. You can't hear a song from reading a tab. If you posted a synopsis or some art to illustrate The Da Vinci Code, that would be an interpretation similar to a guitar tab.

Music downloaders (myself included :oops: ) make dubious excuses to justify what they're doing but in this case I can totally see the artist's case for calling it theft. But tabs are used mostly for educational purposes. Tab isn't sheet music - it's useless unless you know what the original song sounds like. By playing another artist's song, you aren't ripping off the artist. Even if you play some covers for a local gig, you're hardly likely to get rich or famous relying on someone else's work. I don't buy the argument that having tab in written form makes it easier to plagiarise the song, either.

I'm sure a lot of younger up-coming bands learned their craft from using tabs, too.

So you are saying you NEVER looked at ANY tab on the internet? Art in ANY form is subject to interpretation. The Bible is the best example I can give. Do you think the Bible you by at the store today is the original work? FAR from it. It has been re-written and interpreted so many times. There has been a constant struggle regarding laws and technology. It's constantly in the news and is always being debated. Our laws were not written with technology in mind as I'm sure the laws of other countries as well. Only as these laws are challenged by citizens and interpreted by the judicial system do they get re-written.

Stardust- You can't "hear" a song from sheet music either. I don't see anyone defending the theft of copyrighted sheet music.The diference between the two is minimal - you could create Tab from standard notation and vice versa so why should one be treated differently than the other.You mention not getting rich and famous as justification, however I doubt I would become rich and famous for nipping a pack of cigs from my local Qwik-E-Mart but I would still be a criminal.
Mikespe- Yes I have looked at internet Tab, In my younger days I even stole music on Napster. Once I realized I was doing wrong, I stopped and destroyed the ill-gotten goods . I have also sped but that dosn't mean I shouldn't speak out against motorist driving recklessly.Your "Bible argument" isn't relevent here since no one owns the publishing rights to the bible. If your arguement is that creative works can't be owned by their authors, that copywrite laws, patents and the like are obsolete, I disagree. Certainly laws must be challenged/changed to reflect the times and technology. Technology dosn't change what is inhernetly right or wrong. The digital age has made it easier to do many things, our abilty to do something isn't the only criterion for whether it should be done.

By playing another artist's song, you aren't ripping off the artist. Even if you play some covers for a local gig, you're hardly likely to get rich or famous relying on someone else's work.

In order to have a properly functioning legal system you must minimize the ammount of interpretation a judge or jury has to do. To prevent musicians from ripping off composers we have laws that forbid the performance of other people's songs without permission. We can't have laws saying you are allowed to play other people's songs as long as the crowd is under a certain size or if your income is below a certain number: results of such laws would either be too inconsistent or too detailled, resulting in randomness or lame loopholes. The only functioning solution is to forbid *all* perfomances of work you don't have permission to play yet only prosecute when there is a good reason to do so. Which is the current situation. And yes, that's fairly inconsistent as well but atleast not as bizarre as the alternatives. Plus it puts the inconsistent behaviour on account of the prosecutor and not the judge, which means the laws itself are still consistent.

It's not that they care if you play the songs in bars and such (every bar that plays covers has to have a license to do so).

They care that you are “learning” the song for free.

You can buy sheet music online. They (in all likelihood) want the same done for tab.

My hard drive crapped the bed on me and I lost EVERYTHING. All my theory information, pictures, tabs…. everything. Ya know what? I could care less about the tabs. I've been working on all original stuff lately and I find it more fun (and easier) than learning someone else's song anyway.

All this stuff is pushing me away from tab and I for one, can't thank them enough. Sure, I enjoy playing covers just as much as the next person but, all good things must come to an end. It WILL hurt them in the end because people (major bands) won't have their stuff being played in bars and such. Heck, that's free advertising. I know the last time I heard a cover of Locomotive Breath I said to myself, I want to learn that song. So, I bought the CD and learned the song (yes, from tab) and put my own spin on it. I doubt I'll being doing that any more unless, I can buy the tab that has an MP3 with it. I spent $15 on that CD and I only wanted the one song. If you ask me, I got ripped off doing things, “legally”.

If you think about it, maybe tabs are the reason we don't have the bands we use to have back in the day, that were always pushing the envelope trying to do new things. Technology makes people lazy. Why get out of your car and open the garage door when you can have a motor with a chain hooked up to it that does it for you?

No, they don't care if you're learning the song for free.

If I teach a student 'Purple Haze' from memory, and they remember each phrase as I teachit, there is no infringement (as long as I don't write it down in tab or notation).

Hendrix the artist isn't entitled to royalties, because he's not performing it. Hendrix the songwriter isn't entitled to royalties, because I haven't published it.

They care when you're publishing and distributing the song for free. And in my view, it's the distribution aspect that is the problem with online tab. It's not one teacher showing one student in a non-permanent way, as in teaching by ear... it's one webstie making millions of downloads available.

Oh, and Uno - you sure can 'hear' a song from standard notation. I do it all the time, and it's just like reading text: see it on the page, hear it in your head. Because standard notation follows the sound, rather than the fingering, it's harder to do that with tab - but it's possible as well. I can view a tab, picture myself playing it, and 'hear' the sound that results.

That makes either notation a representation of the sound. (If it didn't, I'm not sure what use they would be!) And the publishing royalty comes from reproducing representations of works, not random ink on a page or pixels on a screen.

I think were focusing on the wrong thing here.

The musicians work is their own, and any tablature that's derived from that is essentially a recreation of the original work, and therefore belongs to the musician. I think we all understand that.

The issue that has arisen from tablature is complicated because the sites that distribute tab don't usually make any profit, and therefore must be operating as an educational source.

Uno Pulgar, if I buy a reprint of a painting, and try to paint my interpretation of it, without any intent to sell it, merely as an attempt to improve my painting skill, then pass my interpretation on to another friend to try to paint, maybe because mine is simpler and easier to gain the fundamentals from, and he uses mine for solely educational purposes, is that considered stealing?

It's a little different from swiping a pack of cigarettes, isn't it.

Essentially copyright laws were created to protect commercial use, and I think we all understand their importance. We aren't trying to say "Screw copyright laws and the concept of ownership." Well, some of us might be. But most of us are trying to argue that non-profit education should be, and to some extant is, legally exempt from standard copyright laws.

No, they don't care if you're learning the song for free.

If I teach a student 'Purple Haze' from memory, and they remember each phrase as I teachit, there is no infringement (as long as I don't write it down in tab or notation).

Hendrix the artist isn't entitled to royalties, because he's not performing it. Hendrix the songwriter isn't entitled to royalties, because I haven't published it.

They care when you're publishing and distributing the song for free. And in my view, it's the distribution aspect that is the problem with online tab. It's not one teacher showing one student in a non-permanent way, as in teaching by ear... it's one webstie making millions of downloads available.
I think you can even write down the tab and hand it to a student and that wouldn't qualify as publishing. I think the meaning of the word 'publish' implies that you will be distributing the material publicly (hmm.. I just noticed how similar publish and public are, publish must be a deriviative). So writing it down and handing it to one student who then uses it for his/her private use and does not go on to distribute it wouldn't be publishing.

As for the subject on the whole, I agree that the artist owns any form of his/her song, and tab is just a physical form of the song. Much of the legal system is built around being able to protect your property. However, whether it is legally right or wrong, I am going to use it anyway. Just like with Napster, I doubt this battle is going to kill on-line tabs. If I come up with some great new guitar technique, could I copyright it and make it an infringement any time someone else uses it publicly?

No, they don't care if you're learning the song for free.

The meaning and end result is still the same.......
They care when you're publishing and distributing the song for free.

So, in turn, you are learning the song for free. You are receiving an "un-official" copy of the authors work. They (the author) are not receiving any money for the work they have done.

So to me, yes, they do care you are learning the song for free because you are not giving them any money.

I think the main reason this is all happening is because people are buying the books and then they turn around and tab it out for “the masses” and distribute said material via the dot net. Now all these people know your song and you don't have a dime to show for it.

I've been wrong thousands of times before and I've misunderstood things thousands of times before but, you mean to tell me, if I learn a song (for free) from you...... it's o.k.?

Ah, poor misquoted me :)

Yeah, Mike, the end result is the same. But it's not the result that matters... let's say I build a garage using materials I didn't pay for. If I got them free because somebody donated them, that's one thing; if I stole the materials from a construction site, that's another.

Uno Pulgar, if I buy a reprint of a painting, and try to paint my interpretation of it, without any intent to sell it, merely as an attempt to improve my painting skill, then pass my interpretation on to another friend to try to paint, maybe because mine is simpler and easier to gain the fundamentals from, and he uses mine for solely educational purposes, is that considered stealing?

It's a little different from swiping a pack of cigarettes, isn't it.

What's this fascination with "educational purposes", I've noticed it in a number of posts, I stand by my original post; stealing is stealing. suppose I'm treaching my buddy, let's call him Timmy, how to smoke or how to count to 20, or how to get thrown out of a cineplex. I guess I could then justify "Yoinking" that pack of smokes.

NoteBoat- I was responding to a post that said you can't "hear" Tab, I took this to mean actually hear, vibrations bouncing of your eardrum kinda thing. I agree that you can "hear" tab or standard notation in your head.

I think this will resolve the same way downloaded music has. You will pay a small yearly membership fee, or perhaps a "per song" fee and be able to download tab from the publishers.

I wouldn't mind paying a small fee like $0.50 per tab for a song I really wanted. The artist and publisher would make their money, everybody would be happy. It's better than paying $20 for a book of tab for one single song.

Ditto, but I'd have to see a sample of each one first - there are some truly appalling tabs out there :)