In article , Keith G
writes

"Bernard Hill" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
writes


snippage

If the church and Funeral Director concerned haven't already taken the
necessary steps to 'legitimise' this sort of thing (given its apparent
prevalence) then it's bloody time they did!

Agreed there. But they may not be aware of the issue. I know my church
isn't.


That's a bit of an admission isn't it? Don't you think it would be a
positive step if you put them in the picture?

It would be only if there were any call for recorded music to be played.
There has not been in the 10 years I've been assisting at funerals. The
day it is requested I will ring up the licencing authorities and add it
to the licence. Seems silly to pay for something which is not being
used.




more snippage


Really? You should know better then! - 'Music software'??? - You're a
tiny
part of the whole bloody problem yourself, aren't you?


Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland

Er, why is that? I create and sell a music publishing system - ie one in
which you put your own compositions on paper. And in the literature and
web site it clearly warns you to have permission to do any work on
anyone else's music.


OK, not involved in the 'digitisation' of music as such, but you can still
be numbered among those who are generally involved with music, computers and
the Internet for financial gain.

Certainly. It's my sole income. Is that wrong?

I behave quite honourably on this (I hope) - as you would expect since I
earn my living by creating copyrighted material. On the closing screen
of my software it says "Please ensure that all music printed with Music
Publisher is free of composer's or other copyright". Anyway it's my
experience that musicians are acutely aware of the problems and justice
of copyright and keep to the rules. But churches often are not and
that's the point at issue.


AFAIC the music for my partner's mum's
funeral (having been ordered and paid for and which may yet turn up in time,
according the Amazon's tracking information) is 'licensed'. Whether or not
the church and/or FD is licensed to broadcast it to a limited audience (and
whether or not either of them raise that issue) remains to be seen.

Where does this end? - Do I need a broadcast license to play a piece of
music to friends and members of my own family (for free) anywhere else other
than in a church?

Not normally. Unless you were charging for the event.

(Oil rigs and prisons, hopefully, not likely to be
included in the forseeable future....)

:-)

The terms of the licence you have for your CDs are usually printed on
the CD or notes somewhere. The problem is that a church is a public
place, not a private one.




Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland

Gee, this will be the first time anyone's done that before. Oh my,
what shall I do?

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:12:06 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:58:04 GMT, GS used
to say...

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:10:30 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

As I suspected, a brain dead troll. You must be a net newbie 'cos there
is no challenge in dealing with someone like you who seems to think a
string of invective is the ideal troll. I suggest you do some research
if you want to excel at your chosen pastime.

Well arsehole you just sealed your fate. You have no idea who you are
dealing with, butt you are about to find out. Your group is as good as
dead now. Care to lay a wager or two as to wether you'll still be in a
year? Do a search on Rec.Musicmakers.bagpipe, and go back about 4
years, count the number of daily posts (well over a hundred on a slow
day) and compare it to now. I guess it just goes to show you what a
dumbass you are Burnedhard

Thanks for showing your lack of prowess at trolling as well as your
admission of guilt.

You don't even seem to know who you are replying to. Is that due to your
lack of literacy skills?


Good luck, but only 2/10 for trying.


LOL, what a jerk.

What a rejoinder.


Either rein it in, or remove the UK groups from your follow-ups


I'm here to stay. Ask RMMB what those words mean.

You don't even seem to know what group I am posting into. What a rank
amateur.


Sorry buttnoid, I'm here to stay, your days of "polite" are over.

I've been accused of many things before but polite has never been one of
them.


You can't even read you limey pighead? It was said (not by me) that
this little group was polite. I'm here to tell you that's over now.
RIP.

Literacy problems again? You wouldn't perchance be from the deep south
would you?

It was said by you that "your days of "polite" are over". As you didn't
use 'newsgroup' between "your" and "days" your reply was taken as a
personal one. The fact that you don't seem to understand basic English
syntax is your problem, not mine.

So which "little group" are you referring to? I ask as you don't seem to
be able to understand what crossposting to multiple groups means.

Perhaps Verizon would be interested in your warning of your plans to
commit net abuse? I'm sure a lurker or two may want to mail
to ask.

Gee, this will be the first time anyone's done that before. Oh my,
what shall I do?

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:12:06 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:58:04 GMT, GS used
to say...

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:10:30 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

As I suspected, a brain dead troll. You must be a net newbie 'cos there
is no challenge in dealing with someone like you who seems to think a
string of invective is the ideal troll. I suggest you do some research
if you want to excel at your chosen pastime.

Well arsehole you just sealed your fate. You have no idea who you are
dealing with, butt you are about to find out. Your group is as good as
dead now. Care to lay a wager or two as to wether you'll still be in a
year? Do a search on Rec.Musicmakers.bagpipe, and go back about 4
years, count the number of daily posts (well over a hundred on a slow
day) and compare it to now. I guess it just goes to show you what a
dumbass you are Burnedhard

Thanks for showing your lack of prowess at trolling as well as your
admission of guilt.

You don't even seem to know who you are replying to. Is that due to your
lack of literacy skills?


Good luck, but only 2/10 for trying.


LOL, what a jerk.

What a rejoinder.


Either rein it in, or remove the UK groups from your follow-ups


I'm here to stay. Ask RMMB what those words mean.

You don't even seem to know what group I am posting into. What a rank
amateur.


Sorry buttnoid, I'm here to stay, your days of "polite" are over.

I've been accused of many things before but polite has never been one of
them.


You can't even read you limey pighead? It was said (not by me) that
this little group was polite. I'm here to tell you that's over now.
RIP.

Literacy problems again? You wouldn't perchance be from the deep south
would you?

It was said by you that "your days of "polite" are over". As you didn't
use 'newsgroup' between "your" and "days" your reply was taken as a
personal one. The fact that you don't seem to understand basic English
syntax is your problem, not mine.

So which "little group" are you referring to? I ask as you don't seem to
be able to understand what crossposting to multiple groups means.

Perhaps Verizon would be interested in your warning of your plans to
commit net abuse? I'm sure a lurker or two may want to mail
to ask.

Let him go, it's just getting interesting. He and Hamsterbutt are
digging themselves in.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:12:39 GMT, "-=ô;ö=-"
wrote:

Drop it Bernard...you are being "Trolled" quite effectively here..


"Bernard Hill" wrote in message
...
| In article , Zipper
| writes
| On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:27:04 +0100, "Stimpy"
| wrote:
|
| Zipper wrote:
| 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
|
|
| And if not? What would you do about it? N-O-T-H-I-N-G! You're just
| spouting BS to line your pockets.
|
| Certainly nothing: but the point is that the church would want to be
| aware of these issues and they may well not be.
|
|
| Bernard Hill
| Braeburn Software
| Author of Music Publisher system
| Music Software written by musicians for musicians
| http://www.braeburn.co.uk
| Selkirk, Scotland
|

Let him go, it's just getting interesting. He and Hamsterbutt are
digging themselves in.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:12:39 GMT, "-=ô;ö=-"
wrote:

Drop it Bernard...you are being "Trolled" quite effectively here..


"Bernard Hill" wrote in message
...
| In article , Zipper
| writes
| On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:27:04 +0100, "Stimpy"
| wrote:
|
| Zipper wrote:
| 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
|
|
| And if not? What would you do about it? N-O-T-H-I-N-G! You're just
| spouting BS to line your pockets.
|
| Certainly nothing: but the point is that the church would want to be
| aware of these issues and they may well not be.
|
|
| Bernard Hill
| Braeburn Software
| Author of Music Publisher system
| Music Software written by musicians for musicians
| http://www.braeburn.co.uk
| Selkirk, Scotland
|

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 17:37:15 +0000, Bernard Hill
wrote:

In article , -=ô;ö=-
writes
Drop it Bernard...you are being "Trolled" quite effectively here..


Why tell him? I mean really, let me play for awhile.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 17:37:15 +0000, Bernard Hill
wrote:

In article , -=ô;ö=-
writes
Drop it Bernard...you are being "Trolled" quite effectively here..


Why tell him? I mean really, let me play for awhile.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 17:04:29 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Agreed there. But they may not be aware of the issue. I know my church
isn't.


That's a bit of an admission isn't it? Don't you think it would be a
positive step if you put them in the picture?


Of course it is, I told you he was a jerk. He's brave to warn others
over the internet, but doesn't have the balls to approch his own
church and demand they cough up their .5 cents.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 17:04:29 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Agreed there. But they may not be aware of the issue. I know my church
isn't.


That's a bit of an admission isn't it? Don't you think it would be a
positive step if you put them in the picture?


Of course it is, I told you he was a jerk. He's brave to warn others
over the internet, but doesn't have the balls to approch his own
church and demand they cough up their .5 cents.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 17:12:08 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:


Just so people know - despite anything else in this thread, Im
*definately* not on whatever side of the 'argument' this guys on...

Coming from a registered sex offender that's a laugh!