OLGA offline

[smokindog]

I just downloaded "Crazy Momma" by JJ Cale, but lots of the links don't go through ( although that has always been a problem with OLGA to some extent. --the dog

[gadlaw]

Just thought I'd mention that I've found my first link from Slashdot to here, 30 remarks on the Slashdot article about OLGA being shut down. I saw all this coming and bought the last update to Guitar Pro 5 with the catalog of all their tabs available a few months before that official/nonofficial compilation became unavailable. Of course, there popped up a few sites with all the guitar pro tabs rather quickly and the OLGA shutdown doesn't really change the availability of tabs online. And this hasn't changed how many Mel Bay tab books I buy. Okay, that's it.

[teleroolz]

I am unclear as to the difference between the tab and playing a song live. Musician's don't pay for the right to play the song at a gig, but do have to pay for the sheet music. If I can transcribe by ear and then play the song live, have I just ripped someone off?

Actually, for gigs the onus is on the venue to pay the licensing fees, which are billed by the performance rights organizations.

Having said that, I always thought that tabs were a useful and beneficial educational tool. Whether or not they are the way the original songwriter played the song, they are a way for players to reach for new things and learn from other players.

[webcrush]

To preface what I am writing, I hate that OLGA and other tab sites are being pressured to shut down, but at the danger of being accused of thinking like a lawyer...

Here is the point of view from the other side of the fence.

Let us say you are in the roofing business. (Being in Florida it is an easy simile for me to make). You make money by installing roofs for people. You need a ladder to get up on the roofs. People do not pay you for the ladder. If you own the ladder there is no problem. What if you didn't own a ladder. You could buy one, you could rent one, or you could borrow one from another roofing company or you could steal one. On the surface borrowing and stealing seem the cheapest way to go. You don't have to pay for the ladder out of the fee charged to replace the roof, your profit is maximized. Your not giving the ladder to the customer and at the end of the day you can return the ladder from the company you borrowed it from. Of course the other roofing company is not going to just let you just borrow a ladder from them. If you don't have a ladder you can't do the work and maybe the company with the ladder can take your client, and make the money for doing the work themselves. Stealing the ladder is of course stealing and against the law.

SO WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TAB SITES??????

Tab sites sell advertising. They deliver you to advertisers on their sites. The advertising pays for the sites, for the bandwith, for the upkeep. At the end of the day, maybe something is left over for the site owner. The TAB is the ladder. It is the tool that brings people to the site where they see the advertising. You can't sell advertising without the tool that brings the people. This ladder (whether it is a good ladder or a rickety ladder) is being borrowed or stolen. The site owner is not paying for or renting the tool from its rightful owners. Some might argue that tab site owners don't make much money, probably lose money, and do it out of love and devotion to the guitar community. Go back to the roofer, whether or not he turns a profit, it is doubtful that he will get free use of a ladder, unless he steals it which I remind you is against the law.


Just my two cents.

Michael

Terrible analogy--tab sites are people who have built ladders of their own and give them away for free. They didn't steal or borrow the ladder. They built their own with their own time and effort.

The business model of giving away something you created in return for advertising revenue doesn't make it wrong or illegal.

[atomic]

I sent this to both organizations in protest.

BTW.
We have also stopped buying CD's as a protest of the RIAA. We now download and burn to disk music legally under the Audio Home recording Act of 1992. If the RIAA is allowed to profit from my purchase of blank CD's( my business uses about 100 CD-R's a week for data purposes) and from my purchase of digital recording devices( two five stack burners that have never seen a music file) them I going to make sure I get my monies worth from those worthless pups.

>>>
I dont play anything, tone deaf I guess, cant even sing, I was the one the music teacher told to fake it so I didnt draw the others off key. I do however have a SO who plays piano, flute, guitar, sax and accordian very well, music major and all that stuff, ex-band member and music lover. We buy sheet music, but not any more, due to your jack-booted attempt against guitar tab sites we will limit our purchases to rummage sales and goodwill as well as ebay and start trading with other friends. You have actually done the very artists you claim to represent a dis-service and are going to cost them money, not make them more. I am sure we are not the only people who feel this way.
>>>

Miffed in Michigan

[Ignar Hillström]

That's not entirely true. A more appropriate analogy would be that OLGA is reverse engineering blueprints of other people's ladder and distributing them, allowing everyone to create his or her own version of the ladder. If OLGA wanted it to be truly their own work they would have to write their own songs and then publish the tab of it.

[webcrush]

That's not entirely true. A more appropriate analogy would be that OLGA is reverse engineering blueprints of other people's ladder and distributing them, allowing everyone to create his or her own version of the ladder. If OLGA wanted it to be truly their own work they would have to write their own songs and then publish the tab of it.

Nope, for what is presented on OLGA is something the IP owners never produced either. They didn't copyright the tab.

I'm sure Coca-Cola has a copyright (maybe) on the recipe for its products, but they couldn't sue someone for presenting a recipe that creates a liquid that tastes 'just like' Coke.

Its not the same as 'real thing' and neither are the tabs available on OLGA

[slejhamer]

Nope, for what is presented on OLGA is something the IP owners never produced either.
They didn't copyright the tab.

There is no IP in a tab.

There is IP in a song, both its music and its lyrics, and its distribution (via tab or any other means) is governed by laws.

Generally speaking, the well-intentioned people who post tabs for free distribution do not have the right to do so.

[NoteBoat]

Webcrush, I think you have the wrong idea about what tab is...

It's clearly a representation of a song. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be any good.

The fact that the original artist did or didn't compose it in tab has nothing to do with the fact that they created the song, and the tab is a representation of it. Hemmingway wrote in English, but that doesn't mean I can translate his works into Spanish without permission.

Coca-Cola is an interesting twist. They do not have a copyright on the recipe (actually, it would be a patent - but they don't have one of those either). They never got a patent because patents expire - they'd rather keep the recipe a secret.

Oh, and a few people are facing charges right now for stealing the recipe.

[Misanthrope]

A ladder doesn't hold up as an analogy - it is a something tangable, whereas tab and music is not.

Webcrush's coke recipe analogy has it spot on as far as the creation is concerned - If I create a tab and share it, I'm just telling people that if you stick a bit of lemon, lime and phosphoric acid in a cup of water it will taste like coke. As long as I'm not stealing their secret recipe (ie, copying from a tab book), I'm happy I'm not doing anything immoral.

[NoteBoat]

The Coke analogy doesn't hold up... because the recipe for Coke is not protected intellectual property. If you create your own 'version' of it, there's no infringement - because there's no IP protection.

On the other hand, if Coke had a patent, you'd be in trouble for presenting your own version of it. Patents protect the IP rights the same way copyright does.

[Misanthrope]

Yeah, but the reason it's not protected in a legal sense is to protect it in a general sense. (Actually, I doubt even that's true now, I'm sure the technology and know-how exists to work out exactly how it's made.)

Maybe it still doesn't sit quite right, but the basis of the idea is there. Tasting like Coke is not the same as Coke. A 'fresh' tab is not the same as copying from a tab book. IMHO, of course

[webcrush]

related area, of which I know nothing about, but is the IMDB legally allowed to display 'memorable quotes' from films and such? They are submitted by individuals, just like olga, but are obviously illegal re-printing of copyrighted materials, right?

[NoteBoat]

Yeah, IMDB is allowed to use quotes. Incidental quotations fall under 'fair use' - you can quote from a movie, book, or even a song in a review (but your quote can't be 'substantial')

Songs are different from trade secrets or recipes. The point of recipes is to create a product; the point of sheet music (or tab) is to create an experience.

Sticking with that hamburger scenario, a Big Mac isn't covered under patents. But as you noted - you can't call your version a "Big Mac"... because that's trademarked (another form of intellectual property).

[webcrush]

Songs are different from trade secrets or recipes. The point of recipes is to create a product; the point of sheet music (or tab) is to create an experience.

And you think anyone can provide the same experience from sheet music as the experience performed by the original artist?