Hacker News Reader

Comment by hackuser | Hacker News Reader

The MusicCares speech is great; thanks. An interesting excerpt:

I learned lyrics and how to write them from listening to folk songs. And I played them, and I met other people that played them, back when nobody was doing it. Sang nothing but these folk songs, and they gave me the code for everything that's fair game, that everything belongs to everyone.

Does Dylan allow bootlegging? Are his songs libre? Does he limit their use or charge royalties? Can I sample one without his permission?

View on HN

I think hes talking mostly about the folk song tradition. If you look in both blues/folk there are a lot of songs that are very similar, with almost interchangeable lyrics by many different artists.

The song Little Sadie is one example - its been known under a variety of names, with variations of lyrics. All the John Henry songs - they have been sung by blues and country players alike for almost a century.

> I think hes talking mostly about the folk song tradition.

He says he's part of that tradition, and at length talks about how he benefited from it. Does he give back?

Yes, he goes into length explaining how he created his own versions of Ballad of John Henry and "Key to the highway". You are missing the point.

"Hey Joe" is thought to be inspired by Little Sadie. Its not about ripping off, its about telling the same story in a different way - story telling.

Based on what I know about folk music - at one time I listened to a bunch of it and learned about its traditions, but I'm hardly an expert - that's not true.

By that tradition, folk songs are for everyone to play and sing, not only for a professional to perform for you. There's a communal, shared, DIY philosophy behind it; it's art by and for regular people (folk art), to be shared; it's not about profit, and intellectual property is almost an opposed concept. To a degree, it's like free/libre software and makers.

IIRC, folk music legend Woody Guthrie kept his songs simple so that anyone could play them. And a more recent folk singer printed (maybe still prints) on all her recordings, where the copyright info usually appears, Unauthorized reproduction, while sometimes necessary, is never as good as the real thing.

>> There's a communal, shared, DIY philosophy behind it; it's art by and for regular people (folk art), to be shared;

Yes, I agree. I guess I dont see the conflict. If you play any of these songs, change a few verses, some melody and some chords, then you can claim the copyright just like Bob Dylan did. That is what I think he is trying to get at in that speech.

Notice how is says the following in his copyright claim:

"Basis of Claim: New Matter: rev. melody & new music." [1]

There are many artists that have copyright claims for the same essential song title. Search for Walking Blues, John Hardy or any old fiddle tune like Shady Grove, Blackberry blossom, man of constant sorrow etc. There are a ton of these songs out there where anybody can make their own mark and claim the copyright because literally everybody does it.

Try doing that with 'Times are a changin' and I can guarantee you its not the same unspoken code because its not one of those tunes that have been passed down by generations of musicians and told and retold. The bar will likely be much higher for you to claim your artistic expression on that copyright.

That was the point I was trying to make here. I mainly objected to your 'Can I sample one without his permission?' since I don't think its the same thing.

[1] http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=14&ti=1,14...

Thanks for your thoughtful response

> I mainly objected to your 'Can I sample one without his permission?' since I don't think its the same thing.

I understand your point and I agree that's the reality of it, but I'm saying that isn't how it has to be. It isn't the same thing in some qualitative ways, as you say, but mainly because Dylan chooses to make it different. Like all the FOSS developers, all those Grateful Dead bootlegs, and all those traditional folk tunes, and some folk singers (and other musicians) in the recorded era, he could have made his libre. My guess is that like Tim Berners-Lee, Linus Torvalds, and many others, he wouldn't be homeless, that is unless he prefers to keep traveling.

Thats a good point, I agree completely. The whole music business has become very dog-eat-dog :(

It's not a debate about giving music rights out.

If someone makes a song that sounds a lot like a Dylan song, it would be telling how he would react. He's taking about musical evolution, not free streaming.

> Does Dylan allow bootlegging? Are his songs libre? Does he limit their use or charge royalties? Can I sample one without his permission?

I'm not sure of the legal rights involved, but he spent nearly the first half of his speech thanking individual artists for covering his songs, so I'd say it's fair game in his eyes.

Musical covers are allowed under mechanical copyrights.

For live performances, the venue carries an ASCAP license, I believe on an annual rate. I don't know how royalties are attributed to individual songwriters.

For recordings, the recording company is, as I understand, responsible for paying royalties to the songwriter.

Note that songwriters and composers get royalties, but recording artists are typically only compensated for their studio time. This bit of legal context for revenues is a reason for the difference between recording artists (much better deal for the studio) and singer-songwriters (much savvier for the artist).

His representatives are generally very lenient on unreleased material and very strict on material that's commercially available.

The labels that distribute his works control that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com