Illegal Trading

[hotbeats645]

why? there is still a discussion going on.

[xmenbass]

i fully agree. i would be pissed if i were in Murray Gusseks situation. i'm all for sharing music but not from the people that get paid to write this amazing stuff.

[AWA]

For the last time, just because this is still being misrepresented, no one is questioning the morality (or legal standing) of trading readily available music. The main argument is about transcriptions of arrangements that are not available at all, and which would be used only for educational purposes.

[Drumtech69]

I feel that this is not a problem if it not music that TAPSPACE has on there SPACE.....music like rcc and other places would not be found because NO ONE SALES them so people would never learn them unless they transcribe the music and there is nothing wrong with that I buy what music I see that I like thats for sale and that's only BD, SCV and CAVs you can find for sale so whats the big deal here.....can you say Chill

[doublebassheeltoe]

Drumtech69, can YOU say chill?

There is nothing wrong with transcribing music. The problem is sharing it. Don't like it? Get over it. Nobody cares if you like to follow the law, we just care that you follow it. And just because you don't like the law, doesn't give you a reason not to follow it.

[nathanfrazier]

This website has blessed us will FREE transcriptions. I thank them for the challenging music but it is up to us to act responsibly. Whether it is a show exerpt or RAM that someone wrote and wants our opinion about their work, we must see that it is not our work but someone elses. This is a privilage not a right people! If drummers are going to post their work they should be able to trust this website and the viewers to honor their efforts.

For me, I am not going to ask for permission to use transcribed music or music that someone has written, but what I will do my part and only use the music for myself. If I use the music at my high school I WILL contact them and ask them for permission. If I do not get a response, I might use their music, but I WILL give them credit for their work.

In closing, I love this website and I will applaud the honest people for their efforts. To the lazy copycats, I will say that you need to grow up and put yourselves in the shoes of the person you stole from.

[KennaSnare2009]

Knowing many of the cats in the activity that might fall into that boat, they'd be all too happy to say, "Sure, go ahead!"

Sincerely,
Murray Gusseck
Tapspace Publications—Co-founder

i know this discussion should be over. and i think it is fair that you should ask permission before transcribing, but what I don't really understand is how Gusseck can say that they'd be all too happy to say, sure go ahead...and he brought this huge issue up, yet he still won't allow anyone to post transcriptions of his own work...to me..that just doesn't make sense if it is more of a moral thing of asking permission, yet he would still say no.

[Timartin]

you don't need permission to transcribe, you just can't post it up for others to have.

[KennaSnare2009]

well i know you dont to transcribe, but i meant to post it.

[Tenorsarefun]

I think Transcribing should be fine as long as you give credit to whom it's due. Anyone disagree?

[LaKings2012]

I think Transcribing should be fine as long as you give credit to whom it's due. Anyone disagree?

me

[Tenorsarefun]

I think Transcribing should be fine as long as you give credit to whom it's due. Anyone disagree?

me

please explain why...

[awakentosleep]

Because some composers wish for their music to not be transcribed.

[LaKings2012]

I think Transcribing should be fine as long as you give credit to whom it's due. Anyone disagree?

me

please explain why...

because if there is someone who worked to write it, i think they should get paid to do so. and i think that if someone asks you to do something, you should do it

[Tenorsarefun]

me

please explain why...

because if there is someone who worked to write it, i think they should get paid to do so. and i think that if someone asks you to do something, you should do it

I disagree with you, specifically regarding the money aspect. There are people who get paid to write the books & exercises for the battery. They get paid to write, not to sell what they write. If they choose to sell that music for $ after writing it, then by all means that's their choice. But in my mind, selling their work isn't how they're initially making money..They're making money by being apart of a world class staff, and writing the music. Selling the work is a way to make extra $...So if the argument turns into composers being angry with people transcribing their work because it hinders their ability to make a decent living, then maybe they shouldn't be writing music after all (or at least have a side or back up means to making $)...Agree?

[LaKings2012]

please explain why...

because if there is someone who worked to write it, i think they should get paid to do so. and i think that if someone asks you to do something, you should do it

I disagree with you, specifically regarding the money aspect. There are people who get paid to write the books & exercises for the battery. They get paid to write, not to sell what they write. If they choose to sell that music for $ after writing it, then by all means that's their choice. But in my mind, selling their work isn't how they're initially making money..They're making money by being apart of a world class staff, and writing the music. Selling the work is a way to make extra $...So if the argument turns into composers being angry with people transcribing their work because it hinders their ability to make a decent living, then maybe they shouldn't be writing music after all (or at least have a side or back up means to making $)...Agree?

not at all.

[Tenorsarefun]

because if there is someone who worked to write it, i think they should get paid to do so. and i think that if someone asks you to do something, you should do it

I disagree with you, specifically regarding the money aspect. There are people who get paid to write the books & exercises for the battery. They get paid to write, not to sell what they write. If they choose to sell that music for $ after writing it, then by all means that's their choice. But in my mind, selling their work isn't how they're initially making money..They're making money by being apart of a world class staff, and writing the music. Selling the work is a way to make extra $...So if the argument turns into composers being angry with people transcribing their work because it hinders their ability to make a decent living, then maybe they shouldn't be writing music after all (or at least have a side or back up means to making $)...Agree?

not at all.

yay! way to listen...-_-

[billc36]

So by that logic, an author could write a book and I could transcribe it all I want then? I mean he got paid to write the book, not to sell it.

Just because someone writes a piece of music doesn't mean that they give up all rights to sales after that. How many SCV exercises are now available for sale? Those were written for SCV, then released for sale.

What a composer chooses to do with their music is entirely their decision and should be respected.

[AWA]

Tenorsarefun, you're misrepresenting the problem. You seem to think that the issue is completely monetary; while this is an underlying cause, it isn't the entire argument. More at stake here is the concept of intellectual property, and the respective value of intellectual property versus the educational potential of acquiring music (which would be otherwise unavailable).

Once and for all, I reiterate: No one is questioning that music that can be bought should not be traded illegally. However, the music which can't be bought, in my eyes, is fair game.

[awakentosleep]

please explain why...

because if there is someone who worked to write it, i think they should get paid to do so. and i think that if someone asks you to do something, you should do it

I disagree with you, specifically regarding the money aspect. There are people who get paid to write the books & exercises for the battery. They get paid to write, not to sell what they write. If they choose to sell that music for $ after writing it, then by all means that's their choice. But in my mind, selling their work isn't how they're initially making money..They're making money by being apart of a world class staff, and writing the music. Selling the work is a way to make extra $...So if the argument turns into composers being angry with people transcribing their work because it hinders their ability to make a decent living, then maybe they shouldn't be writing music after all (or at least have a side or back up means to making $)...Agree?

How much money do you think DCI percussion arrangers make? Cause let me tell you, it ain't that much... They pretty much all have to make money in other ways in addition to writing for the corps.

[Tenorsarefun]

because if there is someone who worked to write it, i think they should get paid to do so. and i think that if someone asks you to do something, you should do it

I disagree with you, specifically regarding the money aspect. There are people who get paid to write the books & exercises for the battery. They get paid to write, not to sell what they write. If they choose to sell that music for $ after writing it, then by all means that's their choice. But in my mind, selling their work isn't how they're initially making money..They're making money by being apart of a world class staff, and writing the music. Selling the work is a way to make extra $...So if the argument turns into composers being angry with people transcribing their work because it hinders their ability to make a decent living, then maybe they shouldn't be writing music after all (or at least have a side or back up means to making $)...Agree?

How much money do you think DCI percussion arrangers make? Cause let me tell you, it ain't that much... They pretty much all have to make money in other ways in addition to writing for the corps.

that's exactly my point. I bet even the big guys like Scojo, Murray, Lee Beddis, all have to find means other than writing to make a decent living...

[Tenorsarefun]

Tenorsarefun, you're misrepresenting the problem. You seem to think that the issue is completely monetary; while this is an underlying cause, it isn't the entire argument. More at stake here is the concept of intellectual property, and the respective value of intellectual property versus the educational potential of acquiring music (which would be otherwise unavailable).

Once and for all, I reiterate: No one is questioning that music that can be bought should not be traded illegally. However, the music which can't be bought, in my eyes, is fair game.

That's funny Glenn Dawson. If I recall correctly, YOU're the one who transcribed the majority of the Rhythm X 2009 Tenor book I learned & posted videos of on my youtube channel...I wouldn't expect you to be the type of person to care about this "issue" at all, considering you obviously partake in it...

[tommyservo7]

Tenorsarefun, you're misrepresenting the problem. You seem to think that the issue is completely monetary; while this is an underlying cause, it isn't the entire argument. More at stake here is the concept of intellectual property, and the respective value of intellectual property versus the educational potential of acquiring music (which would be otherwise unavailable).

Once and for all, I reiterate: No one is questioning that music that can be bought should not be traded illegally. However, the music which can't be bought, in my eyes, is fair game.

That's funny Glenn Dawson. If I recall correctly, YOU're the one who transcribed the majority of the Rhythm X 2009 Tenor book I learned & posted videos of on my youtube channel...I wouldn't expect you to be the type of person to care about this "issue" at all, considering you obviously partake in it...

Only funny because you obviously didn't read his post. The Rhythm X 2009 book is not for sale, so he finds it morally acceptable to transcribe it, as do I.

Also, those instructors you named make their living at least partially by selling their works. They wrote it. Its theirs. Is there more to be discussed?

[AWA]

Tenorsarefun, you're misrepresenting the problem. You seem to think that the issue is completely monetary; while this is an underlying cause, it isn't the entire argument. More at stake here is the concept of intellectual property, and the respective value of intellectual property versus the educational potential of acquiring music (which would be otherwise unavailable).

Once and for all, I reiterate: No one is questioning that music that can be bought should not be traded illegally. However, the music which can't be bought, in my eyes, is fair game.

That's funny Glenn Dawson. If I recall correctly, YOU're the one who transcribed the majority of the Rhythm X 2009 Tenor book I learned & posted videos of on my youtube channel...I wouldn't expect you to be the type of person to care about this "issue" at all, considering you obviously partake in it...

Correct. That said, Dan Somerville, I have not come across any method other than transcription to obtain this music. Where music is available, I will attempt to abstain from sharing any transcriptions.

The activity of transcribing is not the issue in question. Yet again, you show profound misunderstanding of the situation.

[Tenorsarefun]

It's all good guys! I understand, I just don't agree. As far as transcriptions go, I'm still down like a clown. For the respect of those easily butthurt over this, I will refrain from asking, and posting music that is transcribed from a composer who wishes to keep their work private.