Copyright for Exercises

[Scott Sutherland]

Can copyrights be extended to practice routines and/or exercises? For instance, can the Stamp exercises or Jacobs flow exercise be freely written out for students or used in a compliation warm-up book?

I have completed a version of the William Bell Scales for my students which is toned down (i.e. in only one octave and slower rhythmic values). Could this be something that I could freely distribute or include in a method book for students?

Thanks in advance for any help!
Scott

[Chuck(G)]

I think a work including scales and arpeggios talken as a whole can indeed be copyrighted. It comprises a method of study which is unique.

[Steve Oberheu]

Technically, anything written down can be considered copyrighted as an original work. If you write down random notes on a napkin and then write the words "copyright 2005...etc." and include your name, that would technically be a copyrighted work. A good lawyer would be able to argue and win a case if that exact pattern was duplicated somewhere else without any credit given to the original author.

That said...I don't think you have to worry much about copyright on warmup routines. People regularly compile warmup patterns from other people into their own books. Roger Bobo and Tony Clements are two examples I know of in the tuba world who have done so.

Three key points to avoid trouble...1) is to acknowledge the origin of each exercise. If it's not your own work, be sure and say whose it is. 2) Don't take too much from any one source. If you're using all of one person's method...you might as well give the student that person's book. 3) If you want to remove all doubt...contact the original author and ask permission to use their material. Some will say it's ok, go ahead and use it if it's just one exercise and just for educational purposes. Some will refuse. Using copyrighted material for educational purposes falls under the "fair use" rule. Only if you start making a lot of money, then that might raise concern.

Musicians are generally a very understanding bunch when it comes to this type of stuff. An original formal composition is totally different. But warmups...I think most musicians understand that these patterns are out there and anyone with an ear is able to think, "Hey...that would be a great warmup exercise." They're not too uptight, as long as you're not stealing their entire method without their permission. If the originator of the exercise is deceased...I'd guess you probably wouldn't have to worry about it.

[trop2000]

As mentioned above, Bobo has done this... if I recall he uses a Remington flexibility pattern in "Mastering the Tuba". It is an interesting question, however, of when a study/exercise/warmup becomes "musical enough" to warrant a copyright. Leonard Bernstein's Harvard lecture vol. II speaks to this in the section of musical "prose" (technical studies) vs. "poetry" ('real' music). These are worth listening to for those that haven't.

[Mark]

I'm not an attorney nor do I play one on T.V.

If you are only going to give these exercises to your students, you may be okay. If you are going to publish and sell these excercises, then you really need to consult an attorney who specializes in copyrights.

With legal matters, it's almost always cheaper to consult an attorney before the fact than after the fact.

[brianf]

If you are refering to the Jacobs studies in the Hal Leonard book from 1963, these are still covered by copyright and Hal Leonard can take action. When I did the Jacobs book, I had to pay Hal Leonard for permission to use them. I know of a project that will print all of those studies in the book so they will still be available.

There are many who have written material used by students and students of students and students of student's students. The Remington excercises are a prime example. It is only fair that the original author be given credit. It is to bad that there are a lot of people out there who take material like this and only put their name on it.

[Steve Oberheu]

I think it depends on the court as to what is considered infringement, obviously. I think that something like the Jacobs studies would definitely need to be cleared, something clearly attributable. I think writing out all major and minor scales in eighth-note patterns couldn't be touched.

There was an interesting case where a prominent rock band sampled part of a lesser-known jazz flutist's composition. It was a simple stepwise pattern, complete with jazz ornamentation and fluttertongue. The music was copied exactly the same way in the context of the rock song..

Yes, I studied this case last year. The case you speak of would be James Newton vs. The Beastie Boys. The song in question is The Beastie Boys' song "Pass the Mic" from the album "Check Your Head." The Beasties' version used a 6 second sample from a piece that Newton did on a previous album, which was basically solo flute (I'm not sure if there were other instruments or not on that piece).

The way things went, according to what I read on the article...the Beasties contacted Newton's label and requested permission to use the sample. Newton's label tried to contact Newton himself, but never got in touch because he had moved. The label decided to license the rights of the sound recording only to the Beasties for a one-time-only fee (probably because it was not that long of a sample and wasn't an entire composition). They did not license the rights of the underlying composition, which is separate from the rights of the specified sound recording. Newton never got any of the money for the licensing fee that his record label received. His claim was that the use of the sample violated the rights of the underlying composition. Eventually, the court ruled against Newton, basically saying that he didn't have enough of a case.

You are absolutely correct that anything that is clearly attributable to someone else should be cleared with whoever holds the rights to the printed music. Some companies are sticklers and will go after anyone who wants to use any material that is licensed only to themselves. Some companies (rather, individuals) are more open to granting permission, as long as educational purposes are the main reason.

Bottom line...check with the publishers and make sure what their position is. Declare that you are only interested in compiling for educational purposes and that proper credit will be given. Some will let you off the hook, others won't. If you are making money yourself, the original rights-holder is going to want a cut of what you make from sales.

At any rate...asking permission is the best way for sure. In the meantime...go ahead and tell the students to buy the method you are recommending. That they even get a printed copy of what you want them to learn is the main point anyway.

Steve "no clever nickname but studied a lot of copyright law stuff last year" Oberheu

[Steve Marcus]

Didn't the late former Beatle, George Harrison, lose a copyright court case because the harmonic structure and melody line of his song, "My Sweet Lord" was virtually identical to another song, "He's So Fine?"

[Gorilla Tuba]

I distribute a large collection of daily routines, warm-ups, scales, practice tips, fingering charts, etc. to all my students for no charge. Worried about my academic reputation and copyright issues, I contacted all the sources for the materials and simply asked permission. Given that this "book" is not being published commercially, none of the sources asked for any compensation and gave permission. The only requests that I had were to get a copy of the book and to be given credit for their work.

This sounds similar to the original posters project.... In my case, writing a few emails was all the permission needed. Most tuba and euphonium teachers are happy to help.