Neal Pomea

Does anyone here know how to create 30-40 second mp3s that fade out at the end? Preferably, is there a software I can use to edit 3 minute mp3s I already have and get them down to 30-40 seconds? I have a license from 2 of the top record companies producing Cajun music to post such clips for educational/promotional purposes at my Web site: http://npmusic.org I currently use MusicMatch Jukebox version 9. Thanks.

From the Hinkley you are in easy reaching distance of the following restaurants Citronelle, maybe DC's best world class restaurant Galileo, one of DC's best, a four star restaurant. Obelisk Pesce Johnny's Half Shell Sorry I don't know more about Adams Morgan, only that locals go there more than Georgetown.

I agree, Johnny E. I would try the Hinkley Hilton. It's actually the Washington Hilton on Connecticut Avenue, but that's where Reagan got shot, so it goes by that name. Walking distance to Dupont Circle with some of DC's best restaurants, and Adams Morgan down Florida Avenue. Metro at Dupont Circle.

Don Rich and Buck Owens, together again. One of the best collaborations in country music history. Thank you, Buckaroo!!

Can't find reliable info on what long term affects my medicines have, but I'll sleep well knowing what Charlene Darling did. That's what the free Web is good for. Can we name the Darling brothers? Didn't the daddy say Ohther had the most personality?

From the world of country music, I like Iris Dement's song There's a Wall in Washington. None finer, though, than Hazel Dickens. See Hard Hitting Songs for Hard Hit People, It's Hard to Tell the Singer from the Song, and Coal Mining Women, which includes Florence Reece's Which Side Are You On? Come all you good workers, Good news to you I'll tell Of how the good old union Has come in here to dwell. CHORUS: Which side are you on? Which side are you on? Which side are you on? Which side are you on? My dady was a miner, And I'm a miner's son, And I'll stick with the union 'Til every battle's won. They say in Harlan County There are no neutrals there. You'll either be a union man Or a thug for J. H. Blair. Oh workers can you stand it? Oh tell me how you can? Will you be a lousy scab Or will you be a man? Don't scab for the bosses, Don't listen to their lies. Us poor folks haven't got a chance Unless we organize

Washington Nationals fan here, waiting everyday to hear if we get an owner and start making some deals. Hope both Vidro and Soriano are healthy and we can trade one of them for some starting pitching. Non-season tickets go on sale tomorrow, I believe. Also, if we lose our trademark dispute over our name, maybe we will get to vote again on a better one.

That helps explain why Cassie Johnson was wearing one white shoe and one black! A little bit! What does the sweeping do to the ice? Does it mess it up, like a baseball batter digging in when he comes to the batter's box?

I am pretty sure the Supreme Court of the the United States and Congress don't, either! They've been whack about copyright for years.

The text of RIAA's statement is at http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2006/reply/11metalitz_AAP.pdf. Page 31 of 54 is the section on format shifting. I believe the crux of this particular argument goes something like this: 1. The Register asked for people to propose classes of works that should be exempt from the prohibition on ciricumventing copyright protection systems. Someone proposed that fair uses of works should be exempt, but that is not what the Register asked for, so it is moot. Not which types of uses, which types of works. Technically, I think that is correct. Poor wording of the question by the Register lets this squeak through. 2. The parties promoting format shifting have not shown that copyright protection systems have an adverse affect on non-infringing uses. The RIAA is relying on the Register's earlier comments that it is doubtful whether a fair use claim that format shifting is non-infringing would hold up in court. Why don't we find out? I would dread the outcome of such an attempt! Some conservative activist judge who's a registered Whig or some kind of throwback like that is liable to conclude that all those cassette tapes we made for our cars before CDs were absolutely illegal!

Great! I will look for it in your archives.

Music is whatever the RIAA tells me it is. Never mind. Good question! Can a cheer at a ballgame be music?

I bet if you contact Joe directly, he might have some copies for sale: Contact information at http://www.bluesworld.com/BussardTapes.html Write joe@vintage78.com and his son-in-law will reply.

The track list is at http://dust-digital.com/fonotone-tracklisting.htm It's heavy on bluegrass (Joe's strength) and old-time country music. There are also some guitarists (Backward Sam Firk, Bob Coltman, Birmingham Bill). Hope that helps. I haven't heard of many of these groups.

The U.S. Copyright Office has issued a report with its recommendations for handling "orphaned" works. Report at http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/ I am still trying to digest it. Librarians and archivists' initial reaction is negative since they subject to infringement lawsuits should, after diligent search, copyright holders later surface.

George Wallington was born Giacinto Figlia

Thanks for the link, Groundskeeper! I read it with great interest. I used to work in publishing and am familiar with issues from that angle, and now I am an academic librarian looking at things from yet another angle. Then I am an enthusiast for old, "obsolete" music, too, and concerned for the survival of my ethnic culture. The more hats we wear to the table, the more complex the issue becomes. I chuckled at the comments after the article, particularly the one recommending a 5 year copyright term, and the one that tried to argue that the arts like music and literature would have been better served NOT to hop on board the copyright regime (copyright will expire) but instead to stick with state piracy laws and such, which do not let their protection expire. It was a boneheaded history of judicial activism under nearly all our administrations that stretched the original copyright clause, "To promote the progress of science and the useful arts" (think patents for inventions) to make it cover popular entertainment and folk music alike, even recipes! Think of the founding fathers and then of our esteemed members of Congress and our courts. We mustn't bother their pretty little heads with complex issues like this! Another of my two cents

That is close to what I would say! My main concern is "abandoned" works that languish in a limbo of unavailability and cannot be utilized, even for free. Your comments about fair use are interesting. I am not familiar with the ring tone issue, but I do see some problems with fair use as usually interpreted by our courts. You probably know that I operate a "rogue" Web site on preserving Cajun music. Some here would probably say illegal, pirate and immoral. Actually, I have enjoyed good relations with copyright holders and have been offered moral support as well as permission from a surprising number of artists who wish to have their works available and appreciated. My relations with two Cajun record companies are cordial, and I have a license from them to provide 30 second clips of all their works, for educational purposes. Where the limit of 30 seconds came from, I have no idea. If you know anything about a 3 minute Cajun single 45 recorded in the 1950s and 60s and long out of print, the typical pattern is a melody and bridge played on the French accordion or melodeon, followed by a sung verse, then a lead by a pedal steel guitar, a fiddle, then the melody and bridge again by a French accordion, another sung verse, and another chorus of melody and bridge by the accordion. In 30 seconds you would not even reach the bridge, most likely, much less the remarks of the steel guitar and fiddle. In any case...it's rather hard to preserve our cultural memory with these kinds of restrictions by record companies hoping someday to enter the digital age and collect a windfall should an unexpected surge of interest in Cajun music create a demand and yield a return on investments they made 40+ years ago (sic) I would like to see some relaxation of what we understand to be educational institutions and missions. Frankly, at my own expense and with no gain, my Web site has practically operated as a digital archive and library for rare Cajun music, going far beyond what the universities and cultural associations of Louisiana are doing. But I have no license to be a library or archive, and no state court would recognize me as such. I would appreciate the meager protections and exemptions those institutions enjoy. Someone more imaginative than I can come up with a model for non-profit digitization and distribution, I am sure. Cajun music is not jazz. It is a modest genre of interest to few. It is not taught in schools. No one ever said it is America's great cultural contribution to the world. It is handed down orally from musician to musician, and its small catalog of recordings on 78s, 45s and lps may not seem like much, but they are important elements of the cultural memory of Cajuns. Woefully monopolized by record companies originating in the late 40s and 50s.

Thanks, RT! This seems like a reasonable proposal. However, I think Claude's suggestion for required licensing of material would make it stronger. I can foresee frivolous re-registration for out of print material in the 28th year of the term based on the claim that there conceivably MIGHT be a time in the future when the work can be commercially exploited again. Instead of the public getting a shot at abandoned works only after 28 years, I can think of scenarios in which this length of time would be too entirely too much and result in loss of cultural memory and identity. Public rights may have to be more specifically defined, as well. I like the idea of required licensing for some uses, but these uses would need to include more than the ones we currently mean to be covered by fair use (a scholar's or journalist's right to quote, a parodist's right to make comments, etc., reproduction of small portions of works, etc.) I can cite examples but they would not relate to the general interests of this board.

Thanks for your suggested compromise but wouldn't this actually lengthen the term of copyright? If I am an author who creates a work this year, and I die this year, under the current law my work would be copyrighted for 70 years after my death. Under your suggested renewal terms, my work could actually remain in copyright an additional 14 years, 84 total. Cheers (but NOT to my death!)

Extreme pirate bait?

When the copyright office called for responses on what to do about orphaned copyright works (in my terms, withheld from the public), this was one reply about how the copyright law as now stated hurts us: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/archives/STM%...han%20Works.pdf I would never have been as generous as this article. I voted that a total of 14 years' unavailability sends it to the public domain.

On the subject of incentives to be creative, I posted something on this topic on another board discussing food and recipes, and the copyright ownership of recipes. It's as if the law assumes that I am so DISINCLINED to be creative, I won't so much as write down my recipe for 3 minute eggs unless I can be assured that it is copyrighted by me for the rest of my life plus 70 more years, covering my children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. It also assumes that my offspring are so disinclined to be creative (or even fend for themselves!), they must be beneficiaries of my creativity for generations. Wouldn't that make them less likely to be creative (or fend for themselves?) I hope not to offend anyone here, but who are Disney's descendants who are so creative as the old man, for example? Disney himself benefitted from public domain stories like Snow White, etc. It stretches things quite a bit to speak of copyright and compensation as the incentive for creativity. I want to see artists and creative people make a living, too, but we pay a very high price with these long copyright terms.

Do you think copyright holders should hold copyright for out of print material for the term of the life of the author plus 70 years? Or does this seem unfair to you? If material is out of print, it cannot be acquired or copied by the public save through institutions like libraries and archives (and in the case of music, through radio. Radio?? How foreign to many of our young people today!). The public cannot enjoy the benefits of copyrighted works while they remain unavailable. Why should copyright holders be allowed to hold onto these rights for such long terms? The very phrasing of an earlier poll question on piracy certainly tended to lend itself to accusations of theft and immorality by the downloading music fan. But what about the practice of hoarding one's copyright for very long terms and leaving so much music unavailable? Isn't that something like theft from the public? Ok, this was worded in a pointed way, but I am curious to know whether in this copyright war, how many of you see ONLY the side of the musicians and music companies (copyright holders) to the exclusion of the right of the public to these creations (public domain).

I am more worked up by another issue, which is the hoarding of our heritage by copyright holders of old works that would have gone into the public domain were it not for the various extensions of the term of copyright in the U.S. The original term was 14 years, then 28, then now it's the lifetime of an author plus 70 years. That's quite a stretch. Only one major company, Edison, has donated its rights to the public. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5139522 They say that's not criminal? I figured that out. Someone mentioned fair use. We should look closer at the law. Fair use is meant to cover the likes of journalists quoting public figures for the purpose of reporting and criticism, etc. One of the factors used in determining fair use is the effect on the market, and another is the amount of material appropriated. Making an archival copy is one thing but giving a copy to someone, substituting for a sale, is likely not considered fair use.