Transcription is one of the primary ways jazz musicians learn. Nothing at all illegal about it unless you are publishing it for profit. Learning a transcribed solo helps with ear training, technique, and helps understand conceptually how that musician addresses certain types of chord progressions. I still transcribe at least something every week, and burned out several of those Marantz tape decks that could play half speed in the pre-digital days, LOL!
I don’t really have a need to sync audio with my transcriptions in Dorico so Jurg’s requests haven’t been an issue for me personally. Controlling Transcribe with my MIDI foot pedals so it doesn’t need to be in the foreground is still how I do it. (I think Leo originally gave me that tip a year or 2 year ago)
That’s not how copyright works. You are not allowed to share anything you come up with at all with anyone else even if obtained legally. It is only for your personal “library.” That’s just in the US.
"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
The use of jazz solo transcriptions has been established to be covered by the above. I can transcribe a solo to learn from it or to teach a student, but I can’t publish it commercially without permission of the copyright holder. That in itself is pretty complicated as a jazz solo typically is considered a derivative work and so not actually copyrightable itself. From Harvard Law Review, April 2005, “Jazz Has Copyright Law and That Ain’t Good.” pgs 1945-1946:
"For example, it is widespread practice in the sheet music industry to sell books containing transcribed jazz solos - sales from which the jazz artist receives no royalties. While a sheet music company would be required to pay the music publishers and owners of the composition copyright for use of Art Tatum’s transcribed arrangement and solo of “Cherokee” by Ray Noble, it would not be required to pay Art Tatum - even for a book entitled The Art Tatum Solo Book.
Even more troubling, classifying jazz pieces as derivative works deprives jazz musicians of valuable performance rights. … When the jazz rendition of a piece of music is played on the radio, the Act entitles the composition copyright holder to receive royalties, but the jazz musician receives nothing."
When Jamey Aebersold published the Charlie Parker Omnibook (probably the most famous solo transcription book) he only included solo transcriptions of Charlie Parker compositions. I assume it was much easier to track down the copyright holder(s) when it was all Bird’s music, rather than have to pay the Gershwin estate to publish Parker’s Embraceable You solos.
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
Notice that includes private enterprise. You misunderstand: You can’t share anything personally created with another, as that deprives the potential market for that copyrighted work, even if you obtained it legally, and even if you made the transcription yourself.
This is only commentary on the sharing of your transcription work. I’m not saying you aren’t allowed to transcribe and learn from sources legally. I’m only making commentary on the fact that sharing something with another individual is not covered under fair use.
Yes, you can. It is covered by the “fair use” doctrine I cited above. Using it for “criticism, comment, … teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.” Think of all the professors who use “course-paks” or photocopied chapters of books. The book may certainly still be in copyright, and if they photocopy them they are depriving “the potential market for that copyrighted work” as you pointed out, but it is still considered a fair use. As #3 above is a little ambiguous, many universities impose a 10% or 1 chapter limit to avoid exposure with this, but it is still legal.
in the UK, Fair Use covers individual research and private study, and has a 10% guideline. You can’t photocopy a whole book for a classroom. And printed music is excluded.
Right, so if you copy an entire transcription of a performance and give it to your student you are undermining the market value of that work, and thus it is a breach in copyright.
I understand fair use, and your point is taken, but copying entire charts and distributing them is not covered under copyright law (in the US).
This is really funny; I revived this topic because it went on a sidetrack, covered other topics and the real intention – namely the synchronization possibilities of external audio and video material in Dorico was no longer clear. But what is happening here again now is sidetrackin at its best ….
So please stay on the track or open your own topic …
