[DECtalk] Vocal Writer

[Tony Baechler]

Hi.  That's all very interesting, but that doesn't change the law.  I 
have no special "tune" here.  Really, I don't.  I agree with 
you.  However, the US law doesn't look at it that way.  I can tell 
you a story too.  There was a country music star who wrote a 
book.  She wanted the book up in Braille.  She was refused because it 
was against US copyright law.  Unfortunately, and here is where we 
get into things like Creative Commons and the new music revolution 
gradually taking place, it isn't up to the stars.  Often stars have 
no say.  They have to do what agents tell them.  Often they report to 
RIAA which is very controling.  There are musicians unions and 
recording artist unions, all of which want their piece of the 
pie.  Therefore, it makes no difference what you think, what I think, 
or what the stars think.  I understand that you aren't selling songs 
on the CD, however it is still public performance so it still falls 
under the law.  As I said before, find the actual code to contradict 
me in USC Title 17 and I'll apologize and shut up, but I'm 99% sure 
that I'm right.

Now, I'll address your other points.  About singing in public bars, 
etc.  They probably pay ASCAP fees.  I'm almost sure of 
it.  Obviously if you go to someone's house and sing, they aren't 
going to pay royalties.  However, that isn't a public performance 
since it is a private person's house.  Even though say 20 people are 
invited over for a party, it isn't a public establishment that anyone 
can walk into and sing.  Therefore, while you have a fine argument, 
it doesn't really apply.  Look at most Internet broadcasters.  Yep, 
they have to pay ASCAP and BMI fees also.  Ask restaurants.  I bet 
they do or maybe there is a provision I'm overlooking but 
doubtful.  Heck, they have to pay to play recorded music so I don't 
see why letting the public sing should be different.

For your third point, I would say that you're mixing apples and 
oranges.  You say that people who can't speak use synthesized speech 
as their voice.  OK, granted.  I have two arguments on that.  First, 
even at that, it is you who wrote the files, not the person who 
doesn't speak.  that's no different than saying that I can share a 
book by Tolkien with the world because I can't read.  Sorry, the law 
doesn't work that way.  Second, you're right in that it might be 
overlooked since the person couldn't sing otherwise, but how many 
people on this list and who download from the archive or buy your CD 
really fall into that classification?  I know there are deaf people 
who are blind but they can generally speak.  If there are people here 
who don't speak except with a synthesized voice, please don't be 
offended.  My point is not at all to pick on you, but rather to show 
that the law still applies to everyone else.  I suppose if you had a 
disclaimer that your CD was only for people who can't speak that 
might work, but how would you enforce it?  Sorry, but most of your 
arguments don't hold water.  For the final time, please look up 
U.S.C. Title 17 and read the law for yourself.  Show me where I'm 
wrong.  I will not discuss this further on list, it's off topic and 
only results in people being upset.  I'll leave you with one final 
link.  http://www.copyright.gov/

At 01:08 PM 3/5/2006, you wrote:
>Oh really?  Maybe this will change your tune.
>
>Sandi Patty, Donny and Maurie Ozmond, Tim Mchraw, Cher, and Leanne 
>Rhymes all have heard their own songs coming out of Dectalk, even 
>Joni Erickson.  Plus I personally sang in a Sandi Patty 
>concert.  Not one of these people has had an issue with their songs 
>being converted and shared among the disabled.  Sandi thought I was 
>nuts for making a computer voice sing like her, but didn't have a 
>problem with what I was doing.  Come to think of it a 9 year old 
>sang the Anthem for President Bush at the White House with no 
>problem.  Donny and Maurie ended up buying a device for a hospital 
>after it sang Paper Roses as part of the dedication.  Joni Erickson 
>was excited when I personally met and told her I had some of her 
>stuff in Dectalk.  Shoot, there's a guy in Nashville who sings for 
>every big star he meets.
>The point is, if there was a legal issue, don't you think one of 
>these big stars would have said something?  Not one ever has!  They 
>all understand that this is how the disabled community sings and 
>that Dectalk is not a recording of any kind.
>
>I have 2 CD's out and I paid royalties because that is recorded stuff.
>
>But look at karaoke and how big that is.  Karaoke is done publicly 
>and no one pays royalties.  Well, some of my songs are karaoke 
>compatible so the disabled can sing karaoke just like any other 
>person.  I'm sorry but this is not an copy right issue, it's simply 
>equal access.
>
>I think the problem with bluegrasspals is you all view Dectalk as a 
>fun toy.  But for people who can't talk, this is their voice.  There 
>is a Minsing quire, a group of adults that all sing in harmoney with 
>Dectalk.  Lots of people go Christmas Caroling using Dectalk.  Kids 
>who can't talk are able to take part in music class because of Dectalk.
>
>You guys are making me mad because by suggesting that we are all 
>breaking the law by programming Dectalk to sing, is like saying you 
>want to vanish singing from the entire disabled community.  So you 
>may as well put the [:phone off] command right into the speak button 
>so no one can ever sing ever sing again?
>
>Make your mark in the world by taking away people's only way of 
>singing.  (SICK)