Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:01:07 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:

I dont think anyone was suggesting that artists be asked to
*perform* for free, It was merely said that most would not object to
their work being played (legally or otherwise) at a funeral.

I can't really see the difference between a funeral and anything else.
If the deceased was poor and those paying for the funeral also, then
maybe. But otherwise things have to be paid for in life or death.

Strictly yes.

But what happened to pride and honour?

I'd be *thrilled* if someone saw fit to play a composition of mine at a
friend / loved ones funeral. Money would not come into it.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 09:10:30 +0100
Bernard Hill wrote:

Profanity aside, I think that any decent musician would be HAPPY that
you played their work at a funeral, and wouldnt try to rob the
bereaved
blind either.


We are literally talking pennies per playing here. And in fact the
cost of the licence is borne by the church so the bereaved are not
even aware of any cost.

arguably.

But is it robbery when I am paid for my services in playing the organ
at a funeral in my church? Is the undertaker's fee "robbery"?

Undertakers earn their living from funerals, most musicians earn it
elsewhere, and can almost certainly afford to turn a blind eye.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 09:10:30 +0100
Bernard Hill wrote:

Profanity aside, I think that any decent musician would be HAPPY that
you played their work at a funeral, and wouldnt try to rob the
bereaved
blind either.


We are literally talking pennies per playing here. And in fact the
cost of the licence is borne by the church so the bereaved are not
even aware of any cost.

arguably.

But is it robbery when I am paid for my services in playing the organ
at a funeral in my church? Is the undertaker's fee "robbery"?

Undertakers earn their living from funerals, most musicians earn it
elsewhere, and can almost certainly afford to turn a blind eye.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:19:10 GMT
Zipper wrote:

We are literally talking pennies per playing here.

EXACTLY! It just illustrates what a petty arsehole you are.

You do realise you are weakening 'our' side of the argument with your
attitude?

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:19:10 GMT
Zipper wrote:

We are literally talking pennies per playing here.

EXACTLY! It just illustrates what a petty arsehole you are.

You do realise you are weakening 'our' side of the argument with your
attitude?

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Urgent request
 

Zipper wrote:
I Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:37:37 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Zipper wrote:
Look you jerkoff, if it looks like an arsehole, and smells like an
arsehole, then it is an an arsehole. You look, smell, and act like
an arsehole. We were talking about funerals, nobody has to pay
royalties to play a tune at a funeral, and only a low-life piece of
**** would question that, or exopect them too.
Arsehole.

Wrong, you ignorant ****, funerals are not exempt from copyright law.


I didn't say they were you flaming dingleberry! Only that a PETTY
ARESHOLE would consider harassing the family to get their 5 cent
royalty check.

If the church were a member of PRS the money would be collected and
distributed by them. No-one would hassle the family for a royalty cheque

Urgent request
 

Zipper wrote:
I Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:37:37 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Zipper wrote:
Look you jerkoff, if it looks like an arsehole, and smells like an
arsehole, then it is an an arsehole. You look, smell, and act like
an arsehole. We were talking about funerals, nobody has to pay
royalties to play a tune at a funeral, and only a low-life piece of
**** would question that, or exopect them too.
Arsehole.

Wrong, you ignorant ****, funerals are not exempt from copyright law.


I didn't say they were you flaming dingleberry! Only that a PETTY
ARESHOLE would consider harassing the family to get their 5 cent
royalty check.

If the church were a member of PRS the money would be collected and
distributed by them. No-one would hassle the family for a royalty cheque

Urgent request
 

"Zipper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:39:01 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Baggy wrote:

The whole point is, nobodys playing for profit or making any money
over playing the tune, yet this jerk tells us we should be very
careful or we might get in trouble. Only a gr1 arsehole would post
something like that over a funeral. It's not enough someones loved one
is being laid to rest, but now the family is supposed to worry about
the cops showing up ands arresting them for playing a tune. What a sad
jerkoff he is...

You really are a **** aren't you? The OP was merely expressing a
reluctance to break copyright law by playing a commercial recording at a
funeral. Given that copyright law still applies and the church is
unlikely
to hold a PRS licence, it seems a reasonable concern.

Petty arsehole.

Hehehehe this thread is cracking me up. In one corner - the pious fine
citizen of society strictly adhering to the letter of the law; on the other
side - a dude who stands up for the "ordinary guy's" point of view, not so
worked-up over such matters. It's a wonderful tussle. Gotta love Usenet! :)

Urgent request
 

"Zipper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:39:01 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Baggy wrote:

The whole point is, nobodys playing for profit or making any money
over playing the tune, yet this jerk tells us we should be very
careful or we might get in trouble. Only a gr1 arsehole would post
something like that over a funeral. It's not enough someones loved one
is being laid to rest, but now the family is supposed to worry about
the cops showing up ands arresting them for playing a tune. What a sad
jerkoff he is...

You really are a **** aren't you? The OP was merely expressing a
reluctance to break copyright law by playing a commercial recording at a
funeral. Given that copyright law still applies and the church is
unlikely
to hold a PRS licence, it seems a reasonable concern.

Petty arsehole.

Hehehehe this thread is cracking me up. In one corner - the pious fine
citizen of society strictly adhering to the letter of the law; on the other
side - a dude who stands up for the "ordinary guy's" point of view, not so
worked-up over such matters. It's a wonderful tussle. Gotta love Usenet! :)

Urgent request
 

"Lebowski" wrote in

Hehehehe this thread is cracking me up. In one corner -
the pious fine
citizen of society strictly adhering to the letter of the
law; on the other
side - a dude who stands up for the "ordinary guy's" point
of view, not so
worked-up over such matters. It's a wonderful tussle.
Gotta love Usenet! :)

Your right, it is a pretty humorous thread!

Can't get excited or worked up over a few pennies of
copyright royalties!

On usenet, you survive by your wits only, nothing else
matters! ;-)