Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used 
to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got some 
stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up with some 
nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been guitar player 
magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is the BT in public 
domain to do as you wish?

Cheers,
Luke

Lu R wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used 
> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? 
> 

Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .

"Lu R"  wrote in message 
news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used 
> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got 
> some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up 
> with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been 
> guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is 
> the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>
> Cheers,
> Luke

The answer is likely to be no, they aren't, just as Karaoke tracks aren't 
public domain.

But don't ask here, ask a copyright lawyer before you put yourself in a 
position where you *need one*.

HTH
-pk

"Lu R"  wrote in message 
news:4af0ed41$0$1779$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Fred"  wrote in message 
> news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
>> Lu R wrote:
>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be 
>>> used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright?
>>
>> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
>> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
>
> Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with 
> backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to buy the mag.

Your interpretation of common sense may not be shared by the copyright 
holder.

HTH
-pk

"Lu R"  wrote in message 
news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used 
> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got 
> some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up 
> with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been 
> guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is 
> the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>
> Cheers,
> Luke

I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can you 
do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners appear 
out of thin air with damages claims?

Lu R wrote:
> "Lu R"  wrote in message 
> news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used 
>> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got 
>> some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up 
>> with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been 
>> guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is 
>> the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Luke
> 
> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can you 
> do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners appear 
> out of thin air with damages claims? 
> 
> 


For live use, they should really be licensed through ASCAP. But
it'd still be a good idea to contact the copyright holder.

--
Les Cargill

"Les Cargill"  wrote in message 
news:hcqumo$ov2$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Lu R wrote:
>> "Lu R"  wrote in message 
>> news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be 
>>> used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've 
>>> got some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come 
>>> up with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have 
>>> been guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the 
>>> BT? Is the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>>
>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are 
>> only for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them 
>> to play a live gig let alone record over them for commercial 
>> purposes.What can you do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait 
>> until the owners appear out of thin air with damages claims?
>
> For live use, they should really be licensed through ASCAP. But
> it'd still be a good idea to contact the copyright holder.

ASCAP (or BMI or SESAC or foreign PROs in other countries) would be 
licensing the underlying song, not the recording of those tracks.  If you're 
using the tracks live, they'd be subject to any licensing on the recording, 
as well.  I really don't have a clue if there are any standards in that 
area.  On the one hand, I think of DJs who spin at discos and such, where 
they're playing recordings of all sorts in public.  On the other hand, I 
think of stuff like movies on DVDs that often explicitly carry warnings 
against showing them in public places.

As for the original question, though, there are two separate implied 
questions.  One is the copyright in the composition that comes from noodling 
over the tracks, and the other is the copyright in the recording produced by 
combining the noodling with the recorded tracks.

On the composition side, chord changes can't be copyrighted.  Thus, I'd 
think your noodling could be considered your original composition, for 
example were you to notate that along with the underlying chord changes or 
rerecord the backing tracks with your own original tracks.  In that sense, 
it's not all that different than if you took a 12 bar blues progression and 
wrote an original melody and original lyrics over those changes.  The melody 
and lyrics that emerged would be your original copyright once you put them 
down in some tangible medium (e.g. as musical notation or in an audio 
recording), though you'd have no claim to the underlying tracks if you were 
doing this from a recording or chord changes (which aren't copyrightable 
anyway).

On the recording side, you'd be creating a derivative copyright -- I.e. 
augmenting the copyright in the underlying tracks with your newly added 
noodling material.  However, only the owner of the original copyright can 
grant you permission to create a derivative copyright, so you'd have to 
locate the owner and seek permission to do that.

My suggestion on this sort of thing would be to simply replace the backing 
tracks with your own original tracks, or tracks you commission as work for 
hire.  Personally, I would not try to duplicate the original tracks as in a 
soundalike recording, as I'd think that might raise some questions on 
copyright in the arrangement of the original tracks, not to mention it's 
just not very original.  However, actual soundalike recordings do that sort 
of thing all the time, with the only permission they get on that being for 
use of the underlying composition, so perhaps even copying the tracks with 
new players might be legally okay.

Two other caveats:

First, I am saying this without knowledge of what is actually in those 
tracks.  If they have a melodic hook that you would be copying in a 
soundalike recording, that could well be (probably would be) infringing on 
the composition embodied in the tracks.  My comments on lack of copyright on 
chord changes are really just that -- I.e. they do not include any melodies 
that may be embodied in the tracks.  For example, if the tracks were the 
accompanying tracks from the Rolling Stones' version of "Satisfaction", and 
you made a soundalike recording that included the signature guitar riff, or 
even a non-soundalike recording that included that same riff, you can bet 
you'd be infringing on the copyright in the underlying song.  That melodic 
riff is an integral part of the composition, not just a random lick in the 
accompaniment to the song.

Second, I am by no means a lawyer of any sort.  The comments above are just 
my personal interpretations of the laws in these areas based on my 
understanding of your questions, not legal advice.  As someone elsewhere in 
this thread suggested, if you are going to do something with these tracks 
that might subject you to infringement actions, you'd be best off consulting 
a copyright attorney for a more informed view on the particulars of your 
situation.

Rick

-- 
=======================================
Rick Paul
Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP)
Web: www.RickPaul.info
MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic
=======================================

On Nov 4, 2:24 am, "Lu R"  wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used
> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got some
> stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up with some
> nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been guitar player
> magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is the BT in public
> domain to do as you wish?

You'd probably need to check with each individual provider. With the
ones I'm involved in making (http://www.bluesjamtracks.com) it all
depends on the eventual usage of the track. If there's no commercial
gain (a track on someone's Myspace, for instance) we're happy for
people to use our stuff as much as they want. But if they're intending
to earn money from their tune, we have a range of licenses, depending
on whether it's a small independent release, a major release, film,
etc.


adrian

On Nov 4, 3:33 am, "Lu R"  wrote:
> "Lu R"  wrote in message

> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only
> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play
> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can you
> do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners appear
> out of thin air with damages claims?

But in that case, you do know who the BT was made by... or at least,
you know that the first port of call is the site where you bought it
from.

Unless you got it from one of those free BT sites, in which case...
it's up to you to calculate the risk.


adrian

Patrick Keenan wrote:

> "Lu R"  wrote in message 
> news:4af0ed41$0$1779$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Fred"  wrote in message 
>> news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
>>> Lu R wrote:
>>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be 
>>>> used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright?
>>>
>>> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
>>> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
>>
>> Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with 
>> backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to buy the mag.
>
> Your interpretation of common sense may not be shared by the copyright 
> holder.

Or their legal team.

-- 
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
XPN 1.2.6 | Leafnode 1.11.7.rc1 | kernel 2.6.28-15-generic

Lu R wrote:

> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.

What the...

Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?

-- 
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
XPN 1.2.6 | Leafnode 1.11.7.rc1 | kernel 2.6.28-15-generic

"Lu R"  wrote in message 
news:4af0ed41$0$1779$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Fred"  wrote in message 
> news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
>> Lu R wrote:
>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be 
>>> used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright?
>>
>> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
>> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
>
> Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with 
> backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to buy the mag.


"my" common sense says something like "I did not play on these tracks, I did 
not make these tracks, therefore I would need permission to use them 
publicly".

Besides, usually you get something like "No part of this CD may be 
reproduced in any form without the written consent of the copyright owners", 
or words to that effect in small print on teh cover of teh CD, or in teh 
magazine itself...

I don't know where you get that the tracks are for you to use as you wish. 
Yes, they're for you to use, but not "as you wish", if you wish to include 
it into something you'll pass as being yours. You need permission if it's 
not your own stuff. Does that surprise you???

Jose
-- 
www.mcnach.com

Richt Hoat Chillis:
http://www.myspace.com/rhcpscot  - Bass: OLP MM2
http://www.freakmusic.co.uk/scotland/bands/the_richt_hoat_chillis

www.myspace.com/purplenoise68
-
Current favourite guitar: Fender 'Sambora' Stratocaster
Current favourite bass: Warwick Corvette $$

>>> Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with 
>>> backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to buy the mag.

Yebut, you can't  do what you like with the contents of the mag. Even that
is under copyright.


>> Your interpretation of common sense may not be shared by the copyright 
>> holder.
> 
> Or their legal team.


-- 
Tim C.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:07:51 -0500, Les Cargill
 wrote:

>Lu R wrote:
>> "Lu R"  wrote in message 
>> news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used 
>>> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got 
>>> some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up 
>>> with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been 
>>> guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is 
>>> the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Luke
>> 
>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can you 
>> do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners appear 
>> out of thin air with damages claims? 
>> 
>> 
>
>
>For live use, they should really be licensed through ASCAP. But
>it'd still be a good idea to contact the copyright holder.

If you're playing copyright material live whether as a band, a DJ or
as a solo artist using backing tracks the promoter of the gig (which
may be yourself or the owner of the venue, or the people hiring the
vene) should have paid the appropriate fee to the PRS.

Not a cheap business - they wanted £450 a year from me when I was
running a pub and that was just for the TV and a jukebox. It would
have been double that if I'd admitted having solo acts on, and more if
I had a full music licence.

Thankfully the boozer was in the back streets of Bath - a full
performing licence and PRS fees anywhere within the remit of
Westminster City Council was £50k at the time.

If you're playing covers or a backing track in a pub (where most of us
end up) the copyright issues are the landlord's responsibility. If you
put out CD's for general sale, it's either your or your publisher's
responsibility. You will find that if you are doing a production run
of less than 500 that ASCAP are pretty lenient and have a sliding
scale for permissions - if you don't go through the copyright holder
for permission (particularly in the USA), they will bancrupt you
without care or conscience.

Pete

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:33:39 +1100, "Lu R"  wrote:

>I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
>for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
>a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can you 
>do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners appear 
>out of thin air with damages claims? 

Yes, or risk a lawsuit. Doesn't seem like there is much of a chance of
that with a backing track that people are unlikely to recognize. But if
you don't know the copyright status it is best to avoid the risk.

Just look for royalty free backing tracks. But read the fine print.
Royalty free doesn't necessarily mean they are free for any use. You may
be able to use them live, but you can't record with them, etc.

In article ,
 Spender  wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:33:39 +1100, "Lu R"  wrote:
> 
> >I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
> >for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
> >a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can you 
> >do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners appear 
> >out of thin air with damages claims? 
> 
> Yes, or risk a lawsuit. Doesn't seem like there is much of a chance of
> that with a backing track that people are unlikely to recognize. But if
> you don't know the copyright status it is best to avoid the risk.
> 
> Just look for royalty free backing tracks. But read the fine print.
> Royalty free doesn't necessarily mean they are free for any use. You may
> be able to use them live, but you can't record with them, etc.

NOT what PEDOSHINE says...u need to remove u'r head from that fat ass 
and update the fat stupid retard
-- 
"Scott Lifshine is the biggest joke on the Internet" -Desk Rabbit
(R)o|o(R)

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 +1000, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:

>Lu R wrote:
>
>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
>
>What the...
>
>Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?

Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.

Spender wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 +1000, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Lu R wrote:
>>
>>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
>>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
>>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
>> What the...
>>
>> Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?
> 
> Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.

Neither do they hump gear or help you set up.



-- 
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of 
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat 
single handed with a quarterstaff.

"Rick Paul"  wrote in message 
news:usWdnSxIUvj7g2zXnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> "Les Cargill"  wrote in message 
> news:hcqumo$ov2$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Lu R wrote:
>>> "Lu R"  wrote in message 
>>> news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be 
>>>> used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've 
>>>> got some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have 
>>>> come up with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may 
>>>> have been guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works 
>>>> with the BT? Is the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>>>
>>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are 
>>> only for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them 
>>> to play a live gig let alone record over them for commercial 
>>> purposes.What can you do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? 
>>> Wait until the owners appear out of thin air with damages claims?
>>
>> For live use, they should really be licensed through ASCAP. But
>> it'd still be a good idea to contact the copyright holder.
>
> ASCAP (or BMI or SESAC or foreign PROs in other countries) would be 
> licensing the underlying song, not the recording of those tracks.  If 
> you're using the tracks live, they'd be subject to any licensing on the 
> recording, as well.  I really don't have a clue if there are any standards 
> in that area.  On the one hand, I think of DJs who spin at discos and 
> such, where they're playing recordings of all sorts in public.  On the 
> other hand, I think of stuff like movies on DVDs that often explicitly 
> carry warnings against showing them in public places.
>
> As for the original question, though, there are two separate implied 
> questions.  One is the copyright in the composition that comes from 
> noodling over the tracks, and the other is the copyright in the recording 
> produced by combining the noodling with the recorded tracks.
>
> On the composition side, chord changes can't be copyrighted.  Thus, I'd 
> think your noodling could be considered your original composition, for 
> example were you to notate that along with the underlying chord changes or 
> rerecord the backing tracks with your own original tracks.  In that sense, 
> it's not all that different than if you took a 12 bar blues progression 
> and wrote an original melody and original lyrics over those changes.  The 
> melody and lyrics that emerged would be your original copyright once you 
> put them down in some tangible medium (e.g. as musical notation or in an 
> audio recording), though you'd have no claim to the underlying tracks if 
> you were doing this from a recording or chord changes (which aren't 
> copyrightable anyway).
>
> On the recording side, you'd be creating a derivative copyright -- I.e. 
> augmenting the copyright in the underlying tracks with your newly added 
> noodling material.  However, only the owner of the original copyright can 
> grant you permission to create a derivative copyright, so you'd have to 
> locate the owner and seek permission to do that.
>
> My suggestion on this sort of thing would be to simply replace the backing 
> tracks with your own original tracks, or tracks you commission as work for 
> hire.  Personally, I would not try to duplicate the original tracks as in 
> a soundalike recording, as I'd think that might raise some questions on 
> copyright in the arrangement of the original tracks, not to mention it's 
> just not very original.  However, actual soundalike recordings do that 
> sort of thing all the time, with the only permission they get on that 
> being for use of the underlying composition, so perhaps even copying the 
> tracks with new players might be legally okay.
>
> Two other caveats:
>
> First, I am saying this without knowledge of what is actually in those 
> tracks.  If they have a melodic hook that you would be copying in a 
> soundalike recording, that could well be (probably would be) infringing on 
> the composition embodied in the tracks.  My comments on lack of copyright 
> on chord changes are really just that -- I.e. they do not include any 
> melodies that may be embodied in the tracks.  For example, if the tracks 
> were the accompanying tracks from the Rolling Stones' version of 
> "Satisfaction", and you made a soundalike recording that included the 
> signature guitar riff, or even a non-soundalike recording that included 
> that same riff, you can bet you'd be infringing on the copyright in the 
> underlying song.  That melodic riff is an integral part of the 
> composition, not just a random lick in the accompaniment to the song.
>
> Second, I am by no means a lawyer of any sort.  The comments above are 
> just my personal interpretations of the laws in these areas based on my 
> understanding of your questions, not legal advice.  As someone elsewhere 
> in this thread suggested, if you are going to do something with these 
> tracks that might subject you to infringement actions, you'd be best off 
> consulting a copyright attorney for a more informed view on the 
> particulars of your situation.
>
> Rick
>
> -- 
> =======================================
> Rick Paul
> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP)
> Web: www.RickPaul.info
> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic
> =======================================

Thanks Rick and all for your answers. Nice music btw Rick...Cheers, Luke

wrote in message 
news:8vu2f5lkqqava17m55b8mtp56oiqels42n@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:07:51 -0500, Les Cargill
>  wrote:
>
>>Lu R wrote:
>>> "Lu R"  wrote in message
>>> news:4af0e5df$0$6092$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be 
>>>> used
>>>> to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got
>>>> some stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up
>>>> with some nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been
>>>> guitar player magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? 
>>>> Is
>>>> the BT in public domain to do as you wish?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Luke
>>>
>>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are 
>>> only
>>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to 
>>> play
>>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.What can 
>>> you
>>> do if you have no idea who the BT was made by? Wait until the owners 
>>> appear
>>> out of thin air with damages claims?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>For live use, they should really be licensed through ASCAP. But
>>it'd still be a good idea to contact the copyright holder.
>
> If you're playing copyright material live whether as a band, a DJ or
> as a solo artist using backing tracks the promoter of the gig (which
> may be yourself or the owner of the venue, or the people hiring the
> vene) should have paid the appropriate fee to the PRS.
>
> Not a cheap business - they wanted £450 a year from me when I was
> running a pub and that was just for the TV and a jukebox. It would
> have been double that if I'd admitted having solo acts on, and more if
> I had a full music licence.
>
> Thankfully the boozer was in the back streets of Bath - a full
> performing licence and PRS fees anywhere within the remit of
> Westminster City Council was £50k at the time.
>
> If you're playing covers or a backing track in a pub (where most of us
> end up) the copyright issues are the landlord's responsibility. If you
> put out CD's for general sale, it's either your or your publisher's
> responsibility. You will find that if you are doing a production run
> of less than 500 that ASCAP are pretty lenient and have a sliding
> scale for permissions - if you don't go through the copyright holder
> for permission (particularly in the USA), they will bancrupt you
> without care or conscience.
>
> Pete

Thanks Pete..good advice there
Cheers, Luke

William Black wrote:

> Spender wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 +1000, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Lu R wrote:
> >>
> >>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only
> >>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play
> >>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
> >> What the...
> >>
> >> Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?
> >
> > Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.
>
> Neither do they hump gear or help you set up.

Yeah, but they don't hit on someone's old lady and get the shit beat out of 'em in
the parking lot, nor do they get busted for smoking weed in the alley and hauled off
to the Greyrock Hotel just prior to the third set...

Lord Valve
BTDT

Lord Valve wrote:
> William Black wrote:
> 
>> Spender wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 +1000, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lu R wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only
>>>>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play
>>>>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
>>>> What the...
>>>>
>>>> Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?
>>> Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.
>> Neither do they hump gear or help you set up.
> 
> Yeah, but they don't hit on someone's old lady and get the shit beat out of 'em in
> the parking lot,

There's nothing you can do about lead guitarists and chicks.

  nor do they get busted for smoking weed in the alley and hauled off
> to the Greyrock Hotel just prior to the third set...

Or bass players...

And don't get me started on bloody drummers...

-- 
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of 
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat 
single handed with a quarterstaff.

"Lu R"  wrote in
news:4af0ed41$0$1779$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au: 

> 
> "Fred"  wrote in message 
> news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
>> Lu R wrote:
>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to
>>> be used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of
>>> copyright? 
>>
>> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
>> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
> 
>  Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with
> backing tracks for you to use as you wish,

Err no they are not. They are for you to use solely in the privacy
of your own home. That's all. Check the copyright notice that comes 
with them.

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:09:16 +0000, William Black
 wrote:

>Spender wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 +1000, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Lu R wrote:
>>>
>>>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only 
>>>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play 
>>>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
>>> What the...
>>>
>>> Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?
>> 
>> Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.
>
>Neither do they hump gear or help you set up.

Setting up what? An iPod?

"William Black"  wrote in message 
news:hcsegc$6os$2@news.eternal-september.org...
> Lord Valve wrote:
>> William Black wrote:
>>
>>> Spender wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 +1000, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lu R wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's 
>>>>>> are only
>>>>>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them 
>>>>>> to play
>>>>>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
>>>>> What the...
>>>>>
>>>>> Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?
>>>> Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.
>>> Neither do they hump gear or help you set up.
>>
>> Yeah, but they don't hit on someone's old lady and get the shit beat out 
>> of 'em in
>> the parking lot,
>
> There's nothing you can do about lead guitarists and chicks.
>
>  nor do they get busted for smoking weed in the alley and hauled off
>> to the Greyrock Hotel just prior to the third set...
>
> Or bass players...
>
> And don't get me started on bloody drummers...
>
> -- 
> William Black

Hey , wait a minute here..let's keep the discussion to just 
"musicians"...lol
Luke

On Nov 4, 12:53 am, Adrian Clark  wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2:24 am, "Lu R"  wrote:
>
> > Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used
> > to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got some
> > stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up with some
> > nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been guitar player
> > magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is the BT in public
> > domain to do as you wish?
>
> You'd probably need to check with each individual provider. With the
> ones I'm involved in making (http://www.bluesjamtracks.com) it all
> depends on the eventual usage of the track. If there's no commercial
> gain (a track on someone's Myspace, for instance) we're happy for
> people to use our stuff as much as they want. But if they're intending
> to earn money from their tune, we have a range of licenses, depending
> on whether it's a small independent release, a major release, film,
> etc.
>
> adrian

Correct Answer. A.

On Nov 4, 8:42 am, Lord Valve  wrote:
> William Black wrote:
> > Spender wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:31:15 흍, Andy <no@invalid> wrote:
>
> > >> Lu R wrote:
>
> > >>> I checked out some BT sites and their legals and it seems some BT's are only
> > >>> for personal non-commercial use! That means you can't even use them to play
> > >>> a live gig let alone record over them for commercial purposes.
> > >> What the...
>
> > >> Why the hell would you *want* to do either of those things?
>
> > > Backing tracks drink nowhere near as much beer as real band members.
>
> > Neither do they hump gear or help you set up.
>
> Yeah, but they don't hit on someone's old lady and get the shit beat out of 'em in
> the parking lot, nor do they get busted for smoking weed in the alley and hauled off
> to the Greyrock Hotel just prior to the third set...
>
> Lord Valve
> BTDT

... ;-) ...

"Your (Vastly) Superior" wrote:

> On Nov 4, 12:53 am, Adrian Clark  wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 2:24 am, "Lu R"  wrote:
> >
> > > Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to be used
> > > to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of copyright? I've got some
> > > stuff I dl'd that I have no idea who the band was and have come up with some
> > > nice lead work over it.If I recall, some of it may have been guitar player
> > > magazine stuff? Can I legally publish works with the BT? Is the BT in public
> > > domain to do as you wish?
> >
> > You'd probably need to check with each individual provider. With the
> > ones I'm involved in making (http://www.bluesjamtracks.com) it all
> > depends on the eventual usage of the track. If there's no commercial
> > gain (a track on someone's Myspace, for instance) we're happy for
> > people to use our stuff as much as they want. But if they're intending
> > to earn money from their tune, we have a range of licenses, depending
> > on whether it's a small independent release, a major release, film,
> > etc.
> >
> > adrian
>
> Correct Answer. A+.

Yeah, he needs confirmation from a plagiarist.

LV

Good luck with all that [-], toxic, energy fella.

There's no % in it, no dog in the fight. RS has
your sandwich and as time winds on, you'll
wind down, witness to the irrelevence of anyone
bothering to defend themselves from your baseless
allegations, taunts, harangues, whose a "blower,
who's a no blower", etc. Your concern _should_ be
with you and your surroundings. If you're *truly*
a GOP Conservative at heart, you should understand
that pretty well, as well as the widely held
knowledge that in the final analysis, all politics
are local:

Denver's 5 Points neighborhood...

http://neighborhoods.realtor.com/CO/Denver/Five-Points/477486/Summary

That's pretty small turf to support all the "colorful
characters" surrounding your home-

All anyone has to do is search the Colorado Bureau
of Investigation (CBI) Offender listing for zip
code 80202.

NOTE: Under NO circumstances am I intimating that you
personally are a felon, have done these things, etc. What
I suspect however, is that you have probably been routinely
sickened, angered and repulsed by your own local news, etc.
and as a result have become phenomenally sensitive about it
all, to the point of becoming a hammer who sees virtually
everything as a nail. Once you got on line, perhaps you
began to make your problem -everyone's.

No wonder you're always bellowing about all "creeps"- there
are so many in your own _neighborhood_ (45+), *this* is there:

The Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) and the
International ... Training Site: Denver Convention Center,
Room 303, 700 14th Street, Denver, CO 80202 ...
www.csom.org/calendar/calendar.html

So you go right ahead and call names, hurl antagonism, H88,
get your Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly etc. on- What
you really ought do is relocate at some point, because the world
isn't going to change to suit someone incessantly screeching
about it, and the overwhelmingly high % of us typing at AG or
AGA who don't live in creep infested "'hoods", aren't nearly
as sensitive to the whole disgusting scene. That makes it
a YP not an MP.

"Merely my opinion"  wrote in message 
news:a04deb04-b5c6-43c2-a3f8-82b4fb1a581f@12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> Good luck with all that [-], toxic, energy fella.
>
> There's no % in it, no dog in the fight. RS has
> your sandwich and as time winds on, you'll
> wind down, witness to the irrelevence of anyone
> bothering to defend themselves from your baseless
> allegations, taunts, harangues, whose a "blower,
> who's a no blower", etc. Your concern _should_ be
> with you and your surroundings. If you're *truly*
> a GOP Conservative at heart, you should understand
> that pretty well, as well as the widely held
> knowledge that in the final analysis, all politics
> are local:
>
> Denver's 5 Points neighborhood...
>
> http://neighborhoods.realtor.com/CO/Denver/Five-Points/477486/Summary
>
> That's pretty small turf to support all the "colorful
> characters" surrounding your home-
>
> All anyone has to do is search the Colorado Bureau
> of Investigation (CBI) Offender listing for zip
> code 80202.
>
> NOTE: Under NO circumstances am I intimating that you
> personally are a felon, have done these things, etc. What
> I suspect however, is that you have probably been routinely
> sickened, angered and repulsed by your own local news, etc.
> and as a result have become phenomenally sensitive about it
> all, to the point of becoming a hammer who sees virtually
> everything as a nail. Once you got on line, perhaps you
> began to make your problem -everyone's.
>
> No wonder you're always bellowing about all "creeps"- there
> are so many in your own _neighborhood_ (45+), *this* is there:
>
> The Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) and the
> International ... Training Site: Denver Convention Center,
> Room 303, 700 14th Street, Denver, CO 80202 ...
> www.csom.org/calendar/calendar.html
>
> So you go right ahead and call names, hurl antagonism, H88,
> get your Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly etc. on- What
> you really ought do is relocate at some point, because the world
> isn't going to change to suit someone incessantly screeching
> about it, and the overwhelmingly high % of us typing at AG or
> AGA who don't live in creep infested "'hoods", aren't nearly
> as sensitive to the whole disgusting scene. That makes it
> a YP not an MP.

The above is probably the best illustration yet of why cross-posting should 
be avoided.

George

Carl (crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net) wrote:
: Lu R wrote:
: > "Fred"  wrote in message
: > news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
: >> Lu R wrote:
: >>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to
: >>> be used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of
: >>> copyright?
: >>
: >> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
: >> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
: >
: > Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with
: > backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to buy the
: > mag.
: It's the "use as you wish" part of what you wrote that's questionable to me, 
: and, by the way, belies "common sense". Where did you infer the idea that 
: you may "use them as you wish"?

: Can you give it to other people or does the licensing agreement say you must 
: use it only for yourself? Can you add a vocal track to it with your own 
: lyrics and sell the record you made using their backing track? Can you make 
: a CD with other people's backing tracks called "My Favorite Backing Tracks" 
: and sell it for a profit?

I assume the fine print of a magazine with a backing track CD would
specify the details.

I don't see this is as obvious as it seems, though.  Consider a digital
piano that uses recorded sounds for each note.  Did you ever read or sign
any copyright or licensing notices about when you were allowed to
re-record the pre-recorded sounds in the piano?  Do you think it "obvious"
you get to record those sounds for your own use?  How about if you
recorded each note and used them as the sounds for your own brand of
digital piano (not so unlikely if you write software and wanted to create
a digital piano plugin), you could certainly do that if it was a
mechanical iano, why not the electronic equivalent.  One note at a time
might sound pretty extreme, but what of pre-recorded sound effects in the
keyboard, e.g. the sweep of a wind chime, that's a whole series of notes,
is that recording copyright protected?

Also consider, in a song the notes are not copyright protected except the
melody and a few other elements (like a distinctive guitar solo).  Things
like the bass line or drum pattern would not normally be protected by
copyright, only the specific recording of them would be protected.  But if
you record a series of notes that are not themselves copyright protected,
in a format designed to be used as backing for a musician, is that
fundamentally different than any other pre-recorded sounds (like in the
piano) that are intended to be used by musicians as part of their own
music?

Like I said, I would find and read the fine print of the recording.

$0.10

Lu R wrote:
> "Fred"  wrote in message
> news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
>> Lu R wrote:
>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to
>>> be used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of
>>> copyright?
>>
>> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
>> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
>
> Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd with
> backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to buy the
> mag.
It's the "use as you wish" part of what you wrote that's questionable to me, 
and, by the way, belies "common sense". Where did you infer the idea that 
you may "use them as you wish"?

Can you give it to other people or does the licensing agreement say you must 
use it only for yourself? Can you add a vocal track to it with your own 
lyrics and sell the record you made using their backing track? Can you make 
a CD with other people's backing tracks called "My Favorite Backing Tracks" 
and sell it for a profit?

Malcolm Dew-Jones  wrote:
> Carl (crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net) wrote:
>> Lu R wrote:
>>> "Fred"  wrote in message
>>> news:4af0eb4d$0$5339$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net...
>>>> Lu R wrote:
>>>>> Just wondering if anyone knows how backing tracks that are made to
>>>>> be used to practice over, noodle to etc..stand in terms of
>>>>> copyright?
>>>>
>>>> Use some common sense ... they are not yours are they ?
>>>> They belong to someone ...  at least at one time ;-/ .
>>>
>>> Common sense can go like this..you buy the magazine, it has a cd
>>> with backing tracks for you to use as you wish, as a sweetener to
>>> buy the mag.
>> It's the "use as you wish" part of what you wrote that's
>> questionable to me, and, by the way, belies "common sense". Where
>> did you infer the idea that you may "use them as you wish"?
>
>> Can you give it to other people or does the licensing agreement say
>> you must use it only for yourself? Can you add a vocal track to it
>> with your own lyrics and sell the record you made using their
>> backing track? Can you make a CD with other people's backing tracks
>> called "My Favorite Backing Tracks" and sell it for a profit?
>
> I assume the fine print of a magazine with a backing track CD would
> specify the details.
>
> I don't see this is as obvious as it seems, though.  Consider a
> digital piano that uses recorded sounds for each note.  Did you ever
> read or sign any copyright or licensing notices about when you were
> allowed to re-record the pre-recorded sounds in the piano?  Do you
> think it "obvious" you get to record those sounds for your own use?
> How about if you recorded each note and used them as the sounds for
> your own brand of digital piano (not so unlikely if you write
> software and wanted to create a digital piano plugin), you could
> certainly do that if it was a mechanical iano, why not the electronic
> equivalent.  One note at a time might sound pretty extreme, but what
> of pre-recorded sound effects in the keyboard, e.g. the sweep of a
> wind chime, that's a whole series of notes, is that recording
> copyright protected?

If it's pre-recorded sounds that came with the instrument, I'd assume
that the manufacturer took care of the royalty issue, if there were one.