******* READ THIS BEFORE POSTING *******

This forum is for suggesting works to other members. Your thread title should be in the format of "Composer: Name of the Work". In your post, be sure to provide at least some basic information about the work, and state why you believe it is worthy of others' attention.

In order to be safe with copyright laws, please embed a Youtube video displaying the work as Youtube deals with copyright infringement as necessary. You must use the [ youtube ] youtube url here [ /youtube ] tags like so.

I really don't understand why this needs to be so stringent.. It bugs me. :laugh: Providing links to (sometimes copyrighted) material can help raise awareness of good music and it doesnt necessarily have to equal to us condoning piracy.

It should be the members' responsibility what they do with the links that are provided.

Read my posts in this thread for some background: http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/prokofievs-2nd-piano-sonata-7489.html

Yeah, I agree. I've found out about some great music from this section, and I actually have gone out and bought a few of the songs that have been suggested here.

It is the members responsibility, but bottom line is that:

A. Not all members are mature or know what's legal and what's not

B. The forum could be frowned upon for hosting illegal material somehow (even in form of links).

C. It is in the end illegal (not that I agree with it and I certainly agree that it helps bring awarness, just for the record, so no Saiming will come on my back again)

Read my posts in this thread for some background: http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/prokofievs-2nd-piano-sonata-7489.html

I read those, but I still think it's much too stringent. These should be much more lax - unless you are planning on turning this place into a major commercial music publisher (wasn't that Chopin's megalomaniac intent? :laugh: ) it's really not that necessary to play Mr. Law enforcer.. -Lax is better for a forum of this size.

These arguments are thin as hell, I know. I'm just trying to appeal to your open-mindedness.

I'm open-minded, but when I put my admin hat on, I have to make objective decisions that are in the best interests of the site, regardless of whether those decisions may upset a few people.

Like I said, if we're lax on people linking to copyrighted recordings/videos, what's to stop them linking to pirated software as well? Outside of possible monetary issues, I find it impossible to differentiate between these two acts.

Anyway, like Nikolas showed us, it's perfectly possible to find legal recordings on YouTube, for one. Also check out Classic Cat - the free classical mp3 directory (a site I had previously forgotten about, and one that is going to go back into my bookmarks). This too: CLASSICAL MUSIC ARCHIVES - CLASSICAL MUSIC I think I'll add these into the opening post as suggested resources.

Legal recordings? yes. Legal, good recordings? Usually not.. :pinch:

Like I said, if we're lax on people linking to copyrighted recordings/videos, what's to stop them linking to pirated software as well? Outside of possible monetary issues, I find it impossible to differentiate between these two acts.

Really? I find it pretty simple. Music is art and should be shared. It exists only to be shared. I think we as a composition website should.. go by this.. at least consider it.

Legal recordings? yes. Legal, good recordings? Usually not..

A lot of them are fairly good, actually. At least for "demonstration purposes". :pinch:

Music is art and should be shared. It was made to be shared.

Tell that to a lawyer. ;)

And I'm sure these decisions aren't in the best interest of this site at all... You'll keep Michael out of jail, though... :pinch:

Tell that to a lawyer.

I'm not communicating my idea of the musical utopia - that all artists should be provided for by the state, ;) but it's not necessary for a site of this site to be so anal about laws. At all. To worry about lawsuits is paranoid at best..

But whatever :P I know I'm not going to get anywhere with this. :laugh:

Why not?

The crux of the matter is: it's illegal.

We cannot be held responsible for hosting links to illegal material, as it puts the whole site at jeopardy.

It's not that we don't want to share music.

The crux of the matter is: it's illegal.

We cannot be held responsible for hosting links to illegal material, as it puts the whole site at jeopardy.

Naturally. Your patronizing absolutism is not needed.

And Mike, what did you respond to? :pinch: I edited the post a bit.

I was responding to this:

And I'm sure these decisions aren't in the best interest of this site at all.

Also, I never said the issue was specifically about lawsuits. It's also about preserving reputation - making it clear that we respect and uphold copyright law.

And as far as I am aware, there is no legal distinction to be had between musical copyright infringement and software copyright infringement, for example, thus unfortunately your "art is to be shared" argument has no legal basis.

You didn't elaborate on your reasoning. I was curious to know what it was.

Look to my ''art is to be shared'' statement. Encouraging the attitude that art is to be shared is more important than making it clear that we respect and uphold the copyright law, surely?

Also, I never said the issue was specifically about lawsuits. It's also about preserving reputation - making it clear that we respect and uphold copyright law.

Yes, I know what you meant. The proper terminology escaped me so I fell back on 2nd grade english. :pinch: Sleep is good for me - I should get more of it!

Anyway, I can't really argue with you here. If it's reputation you're worried about, then yes, what you're doing is in the best interest of the site. Otherwise..

Yes, I know. Your patronizing absolutism is not needed.

Short lesson in legal issues:

you have a car and you're driving. you don't have a license!

somebody comes from your back and hits you really hard while you're in front of a red light, everything legal with the car. Who pays? YOU! Why? Cause you didn't have a license. No doubt about that!

Reason <> Laws. Laws are not always reasoning or make much sense, further more most people know little about laws and their reasoning behind them.

something is illegal. nothing patronising, or absolute. P2P is here to stay, but don't ask a public forum who is doing SUCH A GREAT SERVICE to all of you to support something illegal, even the slightest... There are many things that are gray area and need discussing (like youtube for example), but still posting a direct link to a copyrighted material is illegal all the way, no matter how fair we find it, how nice nad educating it is, and so on.

Also, btw, if you want to make a piece known to the general audience, post 3 minute clip (for example, for a large work). This should suffice for anyone to get a very good idea of the work. Why post the WHOLE thing? And this CAN happen under copyright laws, regarding education... As well as making photocopies of 5% or 5 pages (which ever smaller) from published books.

But me posting a link, to Karajans' recocding from Detuche Gramophone Beethoven the 9th ALL is illegal, seems illegal, sounds illegal and the tolerance that YC forum is giving is illegal as well.

Sadly! Cause I do find that music sharing is really difficult, stupid, and moronic to be treated this way...

BTW, for example: MUSE (not classical but ok), have ALL their songs ontheir site. no need to be illegal, go to their site and listen to them. same goes for manyu other groups. Classical recordings can be found in youtube, most of hte time legally...

*sigh* you misunderstand. I know what Daniel said is entirely correct, I just didn't like the way he said it - it was made entirely clear (by me ;) ) that my arguments held no water beyond appealing to open-mindedness.

Oh, and I understand legal issues fine. You patronizing bastard. :pinch:

Look to my ''art is to be shared'' statement. Encouraging the attitude that art is to be shared is more important than making it clear that we respect and uphold the copyright law, surely?

Again, why do you believe this? Is it because you believe unpopular law is automatically "bad" law? ("Law" meaning either a law on YC or US copyright law)

Philosophising over whether or not art should be shared is irrelevant in a legal context. It isn't our place to philosophise - we don't have a choice. If we allow copyrighted recordings from YouTube and other sites to slip through the net, why not allow the same thing to happen with cracked software? It would be ridiculous to have someone "recommending" Finale and at the same time providing a link to an illegal copy of it.

lol :pinch:

okie...

Sorry for patronisssssssing you... (I'm a ssssssssssssssssssnake... ;) a legal one :laugh::P)

Nikolas, I was joking... Sorry if that somehow didn't come across.

Again, why do you believe this? Is it because you believe unpopular law is automatically "bad" law? ("Law" meaning either a law on YC or US copyright law)

OH RIGHT! Yes! Unpopular law is bad law! That's what I think! How VERY rational! ;)

I'm sorry that you think I'm ''philosophising''. :pinch:

Don't flip out on me. I got the impression you were appealing to enforcement of this rule as being a possible source of restricting people unnecessarily, thus getting them riled up. I apologise if I misconstrued you.

You are philosophising, though. Your argument has no basis in (legal) reality. Whether or not it is of interest to me personally or on an intellectual level is irrelevant.

Oh well... from my first post in this thread I knew we'd end up here. :pinch:

I'm going to go remove the links i've posted now. ;)

I'm going to go remove the links i've posted now. :pinch:

I'll do that too, save you a little time. (to Mike)

It's really not necessary to go back through old posts, guys, but I appreciate the gesture. :)

I value your opinion, Anders, just as I value the opinion of every other contributing member on here, it's just that in this case I don't believe what you proposed is applicable to the matter at hand.

I apreciate that. Your apreciation, that is.

Was just wondering.. Does a CD constitue a full work? Would a track from a CD, then, be a sample? :)