Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:55 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20645
Location: Somewhere in time
joefc wrote:
i dont see a comparison between a form of art and land. completely different things, completely different sets of laws. you cant get shot for trespassing on a recording.


If your shooting someone for trespassing I reccomend you drag the body in the house if you don't want to go to jail...as to private property, copyright law makes it intellectually yours, again to do with or not to do with as you please.

:smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:14 pm
Posts: 117
Location: nyc
i dunno. well how come there are so many covers in music? how many times have you been to a show and the band is jammin, and they rip into some old tune from another band or something? it all seems to go off okay doesnt it?

its just like what killugly said


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20645
Location: Somewhere in time
Isn't there one forum member who is a Copyright lawyer or knows one, because I have to agree that it happens all the time, but it is also well known about the Beatle stuff and others who could or couldn't get permission to play a song...maybe it is just proffessional courtasy, I am not sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 3:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:22 pm
Posts: 2270
Yeah, Plook. You bring up an interesting question about Beatle music. The Beatle covers that FZ did on the '88 tour have never been released supposedly because Michael Jackson owned the Beatles catalog (or a part of it) and he didn't like that FZ was dissing him (He's so bad). Also the original Make A Jazz Noise had I believe Ravel's Bolero which the Ravel Estate made FZ remove from subsequent pressings. I'm not an entertainment lawyer, and like I said if you throw money at lawyers they'll argue anything for you, but there does seem to be some contradictory examples out there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 3:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:00 pm
Posts: 273
Hi,

The only thing I know is that I have to renew the copyright on my screenplay which is gonna cost me a few bux ... nothing to worry about. It's first copyright was 29 years ago when I filled out the form and mailed a copy of it. I'm due for sending in the next bunch of dollars, I think.

There are some rules that are really nebulous with the way that copyrights anything is being done right now, and music is one of those. In writing, the first public appearance of that work, for example, becomes the driving force. I showed this poem in here and there, and voila, it is proof that I wrote it. Those places can not claim the copyright over someone else's property and work -- there is a case on that going on right now, because some places, that are doing some of that family bullshit are trying to steal the movies and the pictures and claim they own the copyrights since "they" published it -- but they are not the "ORIGINAL owners" of work, what rights can they have? ... well ... they published it! ... and the law has always been on the side of the publishers and lawyers and guess who has been screwed the most? ... the artist ... and Frank can tell you that all day long! (now you know why facebook, youshit and all those can be so bad!) ... Photographers and Film companies have used this for 75 years to claim the ownership of all the work! ... and the music studios and companies did the same thing! If I take a photo of Frank, I own the film. I may have to cut a deal with Gail, but I own the picture! Now you know why Warner Brothers (or whomever) won't allow the release of 200 Motels or anything else ... they want Gail out of the way so they can claim more money ... they are still ripping off money off Judy Garland and many other names ... and Congress STILL supports the rip off! Congress needs to say that after x number of years after the death of the person/author, you can not "own" it and becomes public domain. Not even the family ... but go try to say that to the royals and the rich that "own" the country and do whatever they want, and create the laws to support them and make sure they get the money they want ... fuck, we're still slaves!

Now you know where it all comes from!

But you wanna know something? ... I haven't gotten any money from all my work in 20 years, so what makes you think that I will get any 20 years from now, or after I'm dead? ... and you know what that says? ... that anyone writing for the money is a moron! Or a commercial stooge doing nothing but feeding the big beast even more ... you heard me Harry Potter! Makes everyone think that the big beast is good to us! And a Frank Zappa has no chance! Lady Gaga is great ... Frank has no chance! ... yet another half nuddie singer is great ... ZPZ? ... who's that?

Gail's and FZT's plight is a major drag ... and scary and something that has no peace of mind, because there is always a fuckhead that doesn't care what Gail thinks and wants to do whatever he wants ... and sadly, that is a by-product of creativity ... just like pine tar is the by-product of every color photograph you have ever seen in your life!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 6:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 2340
Plook wrote:
This is what I don't get, they own it, it is theirs to do as they see fit...how would you like your neighbor telling you what to do with your property?


But.... when playing a cover version in a live concert it's not as if you are telling the original owner of the music what to do with his/her musical property. It's more like making a painting of someone else's property and then showing it in a public exhibition. You're not telling the owner what to do. It's no threat to the property.

Zappa was not exactly respectful to all the musical sources he would sponge up and wring out. He tortured 'jazz' and'pop' and 'surf' and 'Latino-doo wop' and 'classical' etc. He's done some cover songs that could be called spoofs. Is he above someone spoofing him? Would Gail allow it? Dweezil has some pretty "wretched" covers of Zappa tunes. Why not let others try? Particularly if they don't plan on releasing it. They seem to be hoarding a valuable thing (Zappa's music).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 6:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20645
Location: Somewhere in time
downer mydnyte wrote:
Plook wrote:
This is what I don't get, they own it, it is theirs to do as they see fit...how would you like your neighbor telling you what to do with your property?


But.... when playing a cover version in a live concert it's not as if you are telling the original owner of the music what to do with his/her musical property. It's more like making a painting of someone else's property and then showing it in a public exhibition. You're not telling the owner what to do. It's no threat to the property.

Zappa was not exactly respectful to all the musical sources he would sponge up and wring out. He tortured 'jazz' and'pop' and 'surf' and 'Latino-doo wop' and 'classical' etc. He's done some cover songs that could be called spoofs. Is he above someone spoofing him? Would Gail allow it? Dweezil has some pretty "wretched" covers of Zappa tunes. Why not let others try? Particularly if they don't plan on releasing it. They seem to be hoarding a valuable thing (Zappa's music).



I am an artist and if I copied someones work and it showed up in public I would be liable... :smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 2340
Yeah. Who wants to play Zappa music in public, anyway? It's a big hassle. Better to just cop his ideas and twist 'em up and call it your own. That's what Zappa often did. He was a musical sponge. Playing funk and jazz and classical, none of it his own. Copping someone else's culture and commercializing it for pop culture consumption. Sponging it all up. But he should have been held liable for all of those musical quotes he tossed out during performance. Hell, Peter Frampton should have sued him for I Have Been In You. I'm starting to see the genius of Gail Z. I think she might be more talented than Frank. She's a hero for making sure no one plays a "wretched" version of the oh - so pure and original music of the untouchable Frank Zappa.
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20645
Location: Somewhere in time
downer mydnyte wrote:
Yeah. Who wants to play Zappa music in public, anyway? It's a big hassle. Better to just cop his ideas and twist 'em up and call it your own. That's what Zappa often did. He was a musical sponge. Playing funk and jazz and classical, none of it his own. Copping someone else's culture and commercializing it for pop culture consumption. Sponging it all up. But he should have been held liable for all of those musical quotes he tossed out during performance. Hell, Peter Frampton should have sued him for I Have Been In You. I'm starting to see the genius of Gail Z. I think she might be more talented than Frank. She's a hero for making sure no one plays a "wretched" version of the oh - so pure and original music of the untouchable Frank Zappa.
:lol:



Week position...even for sarcasim...personally I wish everyone was playing his stuff and more musicians we're qouting him, but it is what it is...privitly owned... :smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:41 am
Posts: 1180
Plook wrote:
downer mydnyte wrote:
Yeah. Who wants to play Zappa music in public, anyway? It's a big hassle. Better to just cop his ideas and twist 'em up and call it your own. That's what Zappa often did. He was a musical sponge. Playing funk and jazz and classical, none of it his own. Copping someone else's culture and commercializing it for pop culture consumption. Sponging it all up. But he should have been held liable for all of those musical quotes he tossed out during performance. Hell, Peter Frampton should have sued him for I Have Been In You. I'm starting to see the genius of Gail Z. I think she might be more talented than Frank. She's a hero for making sure no one plays a "wretched" version of the oh - so pure and original music of the untouchable Frank Zappa.
:lol:



Week position...even for sarcasim...personally I wish everyone was playing his stuff and more musicians we're qouting him, but it is what it is...privitly owned... :smoke:


The bottom line for me, Plook, is that I suspect that FZ's legacy (the music) would be better served by GZ adopting a more relaxed stance. Irrespective of the dubious legal position that she claims to have. :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2011 6:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20645
Location: Somewhere in time
Quilt wrote:
Plook wrote:
downer mydnyte wrote:
Yeah. Who wants to play Zappa music in public, anyway? It's a big hassle. Better to just cop his ideas and twist 'em up and call it your own. That's what Zappa often did. He was a musical sponge. Playing funk and jazz and classical, none of it his own. Copping someone else's culture and commercializing it for pop culture consumption. Sponging it all up. But he should have been held liable for all of those musical quotes he tossed out during performance. Hell, Peter Frampton should have sued him for I Have Been In You. I'm starting to see the genius of Gail Z. I think she might be more talented than Frank. She's a hero for making sure no one plays a "wretched" version of the oh - so pure and original music of the untouchable Frank Zappa.
:lol:



Week position...even for sarcasim...personally I wish everyone was playing his stuff and more musicians we're qouting him, but it is what it is...privitly owned... :smoke:


The bottom line for me, Plook, is that I suspect that FZ's legacy (the music) would be better served by GZ adopting a more relaxed stance. Irrespective of the dubious legal position that she claims to have. :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:



I agree 100%!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2011 1:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 2340
downer mydnyte wrote:
it is what it is...privitly owned.

Can't argue with that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2011 5:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:00 pm
Posts: 273
Plook wrote:
Quilt wrote:
...
The bottom line for me, Plook, is that I suspect that FZ's legacy (the music) would be better served by GZ adopting a more relaxed stance. Irrespective of the dubious legal position that she claims to have. :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:


I agree 100%!!!


I'm not sure that it is measurable, and only time will tell. Give it 50 years and we will know better. You have to trust that Gail and Dweezil are doing what they feel is best at this time, and sadly, she can't win, because there is more of us than there is Gail! ... and not enough of us are happy with it all.

I do think that the legal this and that is getting a bit over used and abused and it is getting to be a bit disturbing. I find it sad when a kid is learning film or that, and he/she is inspired by Frank's work in one way or another and does something ... and he/she is turned down cold and removed. I suppose that one could say that it was really bad, but then, like the same thing has not happened to any other major/famous person out there?

In the end, the more you incite and scream, the worse it is, and the more you get hurt, and people think you are just mean.

I did have a screenplay that had a lot of music, and it was all in the writing, there was no real "live image" or any "rushes" shot with the music, but it was the visual I saw in my head when I wrote it, and it did have some pieces of music in it and they are listed through out the piece ... I seriously doubt that Gismonti (early stuff), Pink Floyd (Saucerful of Secrets piece), Frank Zappa (not listing it), Klaus Schulze, Tangerine Dream, Amon Duul 2 ... will all allow me the pleasure of seeing my original vision come to life as I saw it ... and it doesn't matter to me anymoe that Gail and Dweezil don't even reply, or check out what the screenplay is all about ... and if they are not interested, I decided to rewrite what I wrote WITHOUT the work from those people that have been mean and non-responsive ... and I know a lot of people in the music business that have been far nicer and creative ... that I can use, and they will be glad for it ...

The arts have to stick together and help each other. I do not think that Gail and Dweezil do not see/understand this at all ... and they may make a dollar more, but in the end, they will hurt themselves more. They are still way too stuck on the rock idol image of things and selling of the image ... so they can sell more, and in zome ways, ZPZ is a bit of that ... a cool and hip and with ... same thing! Doesn't bite for me, sorry ... too much rock'n'roll, Dweezil!

You have to be a part of the people and the scene around you. Myself, the kid, or others, all of a sudden, one day, are famous and big ... you think I'm gonna call Gail or Dweezil after they told me off when I was inspired and young? ... It's their loss, not mine! ... I still have the vision and the creativity and the ability! I probably would have given Dweezil the chance to write something totally different ... totally ... experimental and what not ... but, it appears they are shutting down. And I say the same thing for RM, that to this day is the most offensive reply I have ever gotten in my life ... and that's when you know the difference between a shit-face and a true artist. A true artist can see between the lines and "love" and "know" ... the rest? ... just birds and peckers grabbing at the crumbs.

I will submit the 2nd edition of that screenplay, and in it, there will be a listing of the original pieces envisioned. In the back as an Addon for the Screenplay for the sake of any "purists" out there that wondered where the music might have come from. I don't want to embarass anyone, but it is my vision that they are denying, and in that vision, they have no rights! Ever.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Gail vs. NPR
PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2011 6:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:22 pm
Posts: 2270
There are alot (probably hundreds) of zappa tribute bands worldwide who will play for a pittance (or for nothing at all) because they love the music. Sometimes different entities (governments, religious leaders, fat female african-american talk show hosts, rock widows, etc.) have crazy ass opinions that are best ignored. End of story. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group