ScrapingtheBottom said:
I think bands should be able to produce copies of parts for their own use if they so desire. Originals can easily get damaged (or dropped into the pool of dribble that is under the kit percussionists stool) and cost a fari bit of money to replace - if you damage a photocopy it costs about 1 or 2p to replace. You've paid the money for the parts you should be allowed to take reasonable steps to ensure that they are protected from damage.
As a publisher, this thread has made interesting reading.
Firstly, on Chris's quote above, I would ask whether you apply this criteria to everything you buy? Audio Tapes, CD's, Videos, DVD's etc - because they too can easily get damaged but are also covered with a copyright protection? I presume the answer to that is no, but why should sheet music be any different?
As we know music is copyrighted and the arranger/publishers pays a fee to the copyright holder for permission to use the work. When a band buys a set of music the music is still 'owned' by the original copyright holder. So you have only paid for the time and materials used to produce that set of music. You have not paid any monies to the original copyright holder and therefore do not have permission to copy that music. Hence the copyright that appears on 99.99 . . . % of scores and parts.
Taken from our Copyright Fact Sheet: (It does make interesting reading!)
COMPOSERS are denied rightful revenue. They earn little enough as it is from exercising their craft and talent. Surely we should encourage composers to be creative and not deter them. It is also much more difficult now for young composers to find a publisher, because publishers are losing revenues as a result of photocopying; they cannot afford to risk investing in young talent as they once did.
MUSICIANS, both professional and amateur, also suffer the consequences of the illegal reproduction of music, since photocopying increases costs and so forces up retail prices. More and more works have to be deleted from catalogues and become difficult to obtain, thus limiting and reducing the repertoire.
MUSIC RETAILERS can no longer afford to carry as much music in stock as they once did. This means that more and more of the music you want is available only on special order. Each day retailers across the country are losing a significant amount of sales because of illegal photocopying. Many are also losing business and cutting back on staff and inventory. As a result, you no longer get the prompt and efficient service you once enjoyed.
The Future Is In Your Hands: If you have not been aware of the harmful effects of illegal photocopying, now is the time to act. It is so easy just to go on making copies of music without giving much thought to the consequences. Now that you have the facts, you can help the future of the printed music industry. You can help new composers, as well as those already established, to generate new music and be properly compensated.
You also state that
“Originals can easily get damaged and cost a fair bit of money to replace - if you damage a photocopy it costs about 1 or 2p to replace.”
Photocopying denies publishers important sales data, and the consequences are enormous. Publishers see sales of a particular work falling, and so reprint fewer copies; smaller print runs result in higher print costs, which means that retail prices go up. The increase in the retail price often causes a further drop in sales. Eventually, the publisher has no choice but to put the work permanently out of print. So the reason that replacement parts cost a ‘fair bit’ is caused by the dreaded photocopier in the first instance. I think it is also worth reminding people that Brass Band music is very reasonably priced compared to other genres. It's a good job this isn't a Concert/Wind Band forum!!
On the other issue of bands being allowed to photocopy parts at will. How on earth do you control this?
Let’s say for example, I’ve paid £400 for copyright permission to arrange a work and have worked out projected sales and priced that work at £15.00 per set. What is to stop Band ‘A’ buying the piece of music, and then Band ‘B’ asking for a copy? Band ‘C’ hears band ‘B’ playing it and so on and so forth. It’s hardly going to encourage me to apply for anymore copyrights if I am unable to recover my costs. So we either lose another publisher or the price goes up to £400 per set.
tubafran said:
We all need music but not if we are going to put our bands at risk. Lets make the copying of band parts from legally purchased copies legal
Unfortunately I don’t think we will ever be able to stop the illegal copying of sheet music - no matter how many original parts are sent out. But if this proposed method of allowing bands to photocopy at their leisure takes off I can see the cost of sheet music increasing to a degree that bands will not be able to afford the original set in the first instance. Not only will it put the future of publishers at risk it will also put the future of bands at risk. Let’s be honest it you ain’t got music you ain’t got now’t to perform.
Obviously I am against the photocopying of music - especially when it’s mine! - but what, as an indication, would band’s require as regards to additional parts. I’m not referring to International parts here ie: Euphoniums and Tubas in Bass Clef, just traditional ‘British’ band parts.
The normal set comprises of:
Soprano 1
Solo Cornet 4
Repiano 1
2nd Cornet 2
3rd Cornet 2
Flugal 1
Solo Horn 1
1st Horn 1
2nd Horn 1
1st Baritone 1
2nd Baritone 1
1st Trombone 1
2nd Trombone 1
Bass Trombone 1
Euphonium 2
Eb Bass 2
Bb Bass 2
Percussion (varies)
I appreciated the concerns of having to share parts etc - I have first-hand experience of this with my own band - So if the general response is saying for example we need an extra Eb Bass part, an extra 2nd Cornet or 2nd Horn part then I'm quite happy to make these alterations, especially if it will help minimise the use of the dreaded photocopier.
I look forward to you replies:
:wink:
