|
作者
|
內容
|
|
CECIL
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 02:55:42
|
|
|
如果有朝一日一首很HIT的聖歌留行到有人抄,而又加上了粗俗的歌詞,但版權所有者(可能是原創者的合法繼承人,也不一定是教徒)不願意告,教會豈不好監介?
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 04:14:53
|
|
|
Josemaria & Cecilia,
問題當然是出於版權法例本身的複雜性,但我不贊成因為問題複雜就要"犧牲"創作者應有的權益.
教會要保護自己的權益,也不代表可以剝奪他人的權利.
"泰潭的故仔"我聽過,但我不明白的地方就是,為何泰澤的歌曲在美國可以無問題地運作,香港就不可以?是甚麼原因?
施施姐的問題是不成立的,現時有很多經典聖歌已是"public domain"的,他們要改我們都是無辦法的,尷尬也無符.有人要出版"平安夜,失身夜"你可以做甚麼?
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 04:36:29
|
|
|
噢,平安夜當然沒辦法,that's over 50 years old and in the public domain.如果原創者保留版權,又容許這樣的'失身'事件發生,那又怎樣看? 否則的話,要保留版權作啥?(除非 - 又是 - 錢的問題 - 或許,教會應該給錢,如果真的要講'權利').長遠的看,自己保留版權,是對教會好嗎?
再者,如果要成為聖樂,首先的條件是'為創作給主'才創作的,才可以是受聖神的引發而作的'聖樂',保留給自家唱,神父說'自私',是不好聽,卻也不是全錯的.
在'失身夜'的情況下,的確,要就是全捐出版權,不然就全然保留給自己,想落想落,我也覺得C神父已想得很透徹哩!
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 04:37:42
|
|
|
這是從泰澤網站轉錄的版權聲明:
Music © Copyright
For years now, parishes and Churches have been using the "songs from Taizé" and have included some of them in their worship books. The brothers of the Community are happy about this because it creates links between what the young people experience in Taizé and the life of the Churches.
It is important to sing the songs with the same simplicity as in Taizé, so that groups and parishes can discover both the song and the prayer it expresses.
There is a profound relation between the musical phrase and these few words that are sung "to infinity". This long repetition of the same song is linked to a very ancient manner of praying, to which belong, for example, the Ave Maria in the West and the Jesus Prayer in the Oriental Churches. This is specifically what the Community wishes to preserve.
Formulated in many different ways, the numerous requests for permissions to reproduce the songs have led the brothers to consider in some depth as to how the songs can best retain their true character and their reference to the commitment of the Community, with which they are generally associated.
The final version of each song is published only at the end of a long period of work by the composers and the authors, based on the experience of the prayer in Taizé. Through this, each song has its unity and its style. This joint effort is closely linked to the Community’s ministry among the young and the ongoing search for a form of prayer that is accessible to a large number of people in the meetings, both in Taizé and elsewhere.
Some people ask the Community to accept modifications: adaptations, arrangements, new instrumental accompaniments, new words or new translations. However justified these changes may be in the eyes of their authors, if they were accepted, we would soon see the emergence of multiple versions of most of the songs, some of them pretty far from the original. This is exactly what the Community wishes to avoid. It seems essential to let the Taizé songs live "as they are", in their simplicity and their original authenticity, as bearers of a prayer that is very simple and meditative.
These are the reasons why the Community authorises only the reproduction of the original versions of the songs, as they appear in the books published by Taizé, or by the authorised publishers in each country.
If you wish to make non-commercial reproductions of the songs on paper – loose leaf printouts for the use of particular liturgical assemblies, parishes, schools, choirs, or reproductions of individual pieces in liturgical song books for local use only – please request permission beforehand in the various countries as listed below, or otherwise contact Taizé directly.
For all other projects for reproduction or use of the songs – commercial or otherwise – it is important to contact Taizé.
Australia and New Zealand:
Word Of Life International
P.O.Box 345
Mirboo North,
Victoria, 3871.
Tel: (03) 5668 2723
Fax: (03) 5668 2724
Email: freelink@sympac.com.au
United States and Canada:
G.I.A. Publications,
7404 S Mason Avenue,
Chicago, Ill 60638.
Tel: (708) 496-3800 or 800 442-1358
Fax: (708) 496-3828
Email: custserv@giamusic.com
http://www.giamusic.com/taize/
UK and Ireland:
Calamus,
Oak House,
70 High Street
Brandon
Suffolk IP27 0AU
Tel: 01842 819 830
Fax: 01842 819 832
E-mail: sue@decanimusic.co.uk
Update: 31 July 02
小弟結婚時的小冊子,印了一首泰澤的歌.
修士們也很樂意讓我刊印.
只叫我問台灣光啟拿複印的授權.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 04:44:57
|
|
|
施施姐:
但反過來說,如我是原創人,我創作了一首聖樂,版權給了教區.但教區的音樂大師要重新編曲,要做一個jazz版,我覺得有違我的創作原意,就好像泰澤修士們的表述那樣,但到時我不想也不行啊.這又是對的嗎?
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 04:49:28
|
|
|
泰澤好像初期很闊綽,任唱唔嬲。於是，出了不同語言的版本。泰澤本來不是COPYRIGHTED;他們的歌是gregorian chant的變調,那用領copyright? 於是新教團體們紛紛出版類似的東西來賣錢(他們要錢來運作,那也不能說他們錯).他們發了大財,又拿了copyright,泰澤才知道 - 蠢了.但他們遲了.在美國,人家取版權快過泰澤,泰澤那有得eeh?他們只能claim prior usage.
在美國以外,泰澤沒那麼善了 - I am copyrighted HERE. If I did not permit, you could not sing it, even if it WAS a Gregorian Chant.(Because once I got the copyright, you could not sing it).
I guess we could not sing any similar Gregorian tune to Taze's other than the original Gregorian setting any more now.
Copyright by itself is evil.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 05:04:16
|
|
|
這就是了 － ｊａｚｚ版可能不好聽，但教區用來賣錢的話，也至多益教區．
唉，我們律師不過是凡夫俗子，想來想去也只是俗念，泰澤的故事也只是從ｐｅｃｕｎｉａｒｙ 利益去想．
如果教區的ｍｕｓｉｃａｌ ｓｅｔｔｉｎｇ不合原作者口胃，這的確是個大問題咯．
不如，賣的是一個特定的ｃｈｕｒｃｈ ａｒｒａｎｇｅｍｅｎｔ版，如果有其他的ａｒｒａｎｇｅｍｅｎｔ，作者可以追究；作者自己也不可有ａｎｏｔｈｅｒ ａｒｒａｎｇｅｍｅｎｔ，否則教區可以追究．得唔得的呢？真系要問下ｉｐ ｅｘｐｅｒｔ們．
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/9/24 下午 05:46:34
|
|
|
>I guess we could not sing any similar Gregorian
>tune to Taze's other than the original Gregorian
>setting any more now.
I don't think so. 他們何以證明我的similar Gregorian tune 是抄襲他們的?
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/29 上午 11:31:43
|
|
|
Yea, it is not that easy, but it is possible. The point is, would anyone like to take such risk? Especially that the Taize tune's are so popular - I dare say, much more so than the original Gregorian.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/30 上午 10:57:32
|
|
|
Then, of course, the law recognises the rights of any thing legally established as being protected.
So if the TAIZE tune is copyrighted, anything resembling it would need to prove DISSIMILARITY or prior usage. If the tune is only similar to the Gregorian and not exactly so, it is difficult to establish that it has prior usage or that it is NOT copying from TAiZE's tune.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2003/9/30 上午 11:24:20
|
|
|
我的問題是個"tune"要有多相似才會被告?
您懂"rap"歌嗎?您"rap"他又"rap",他們的"tune"似嗎?
您問我,我會話似,但是否我作一首rap歌,其他已rap過,又出過唱片的都可告我抄襲?不會吧,又是律師們是靠嚇搵食的.
您知道xx集團曾周圍發律師信要和他同名的公司改名嗎?
很多小公司也怕了,改名了事,但有一間覺得不合理,上到法庭,xx集團輸了.商鋪不用改名.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/10/13 下午 05:57:11
|
|
|
說的是 - 但如果我是客戶的法律顧問,我的責任則是告訴他們風險是甚麼,有多大,和後果可能是哪.
到底是否一定會給人告,告不告得入,則要看實際的情況到底如何了.
我只是指出,在這樣的情況下,可能給人起訴.
|
|
