Home
About
Number Check
Licensing
Top 100
FAQ Disposals
Correspondence
In the Press
Limited Editions
Auction |
|
Correspondence
APRA Correspondence
Email
Correspondence
Letter to APRA Friday, 5 October 2001
APRA
6-12 Atchison St
St Leonards NSW 2065
Friday,
5 October 2001
Magnus-Opus copyright registration with APRA
Dear APRA,
We wish to draw your attention to the Magnus-Opus series of melodies
(as per enclosed CD-R and website www.magnus-opus.com) in which
the undersigned composers and APRA members (Mr Jon Drummond and
Dr Nigel Helyer) have published a major collection of compositions.
We wish to register these works with APRA and are seeking your
assistance with copyright collection. As you will gather from
the material enclosed and website, our Opus is relatively large,
being based upon an algorithmic process. We therefore suggest
that APRA register the 100,000,000,000 compositions as either
a series, or as the algorithm which is capable of generating the
series.
You might also note that the majority of our pieces are currently
being played and broadcast via telecommunications media rather
than in more conventional music venues. We trust that APRA will
be able to find an appropriate method for assessing and collecting
the royalties due to us.
Regards,
Jon Drummond Dr. Nigel Helyer
Letter from
APRA Thursday,
13 December 2001
Nigel
Helyer and Jon Drummond
Magnus Opus
PO Box 195
Balmain NSW 2041
Thursday 13 December 2001
Dear Nigel and Jon
MAGNUS-OPUS COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION with APRA
Thank you for your letter dated 5 October 2001 and first, please
accept our apologies for the delay in the provision of this response.
As you know, for APRA to register a musical work, it needs to be
satisfied that the work is
(a) in material form - we will assume in this instance that
if required, you would be able to commit each of the 100,000,000
combinations of notes/ numbers to a material form; and
(b) Original - we do have a problem with this aspect of what
you are attempting to register. It seems to us that if the combinations
are musical works, they are not works created by you - rather, what
you have done is create a formula for producing the maximum number
of combinations that may be generated by a particular "instrument'.
The works, or at least many of them, will have been in existence
for some time, and any written telephone number may be a notation
of the work.
For those reasons, we cannot accept registration of these works.
If you would like to discuss the matter with me, please do not hesitate
to call.
Yours sincerely
Milly Petriella
Manager - Wrister Services General
Letter to APRA
Wednesday,
27 March 2002
Milly Petriella
APRA Manager - Writer Services General
16-12 Atchison Street
St Leonards NSW 2065
Wednesday, 27 March 2002
Dear Milly,
MAGNUS-OPUS COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION with APRA
Thank you for your response dated 13th December 2001 in which you
raise the issues of material form and originality. We would like
to respond in the following manner.
Material Form
From the outset we consider the publication of the Magnus Opus web
site (October 2001) to be the substantive material form in that
it is capable of generating both the musical notation and musical
performance for each of our works. However we recognise that APRA
may require an additional mechanism for the purposes of registering
our works within its database. To this effect we would be happy
to provide APRA with a CD-ROM which is capable of producing both
the sheet music and audio reproduction for the entire Magnus Opus
collection which you may extract and transfer to your database at
your leisure. We have subsequently made a more accurate calculation
of the basic set of works covered by our copyright claim which currently
stands at - 18,446,744,070,000,000,000.
Originality
After thorough discussions with our copyright lawyer we whish to
raise the following points.
The concept of algorithmic composition (which you discount as a
"formula") is well recognised within western musical traditions
as a compositional practice for producing original works. One may
cite Guido's automated chant composition, Mozart's Musikalisches
W¸rfelspiel and Xenakis' stochastic composition.
Furthermore we claim that our approach is original in that our works
are based upon a specific selection of 8 frequencies used in 16
unique diads which do not conform with equal tempered tunings. When
combined with a flexible and arhythmic structure these form a unique
and constrained set of compositions which do not infringe upon the
copyright of pre-existing musical works. Our claim to originality
is also based upon the full knowledge that there is no pre-existing
concept of musical composition within the telecommunication systems,
neither are we aware of any such intentions.
We refute your argument that we have created "a formula for producing
the maximum number of combinations that may be generated be a particular
instrument" on the basis that your argument bears no relationship
to originality. In fact it would be quite conceivable (though unlikely)
to compose all possible original works for the flute. In reality
our copyright claim is for a limited (although large) set of compositions
and not (as has been incorrectly reported) a universal or exhaustive
copyright claim on composition per se.
We look forward to being able to register our works with APRA.
Yours Sincerely,
Nigel Helyer and Jon Drummond
Letter from APRA
Wednesday,
28 August 2002
BANKI HADDOCK FIORA
LAWYERS
Level 10, 179 Elizabeth Street Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Telephone 61 2 9266 3400 Facsimile 61 2 9266 3455 email@bhf.com.au
ABN 32 057 052 600
28 August 2002
Mr Nigel Helyer and Mr Jon Drummond
Magnus Opus
PO Box 195
BALMAIN NSW 2041
BY EXPRESS POST
Dear Helyer and Mr Drummond
MAGNUS OPUS - APRA COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION
We act for Australasian Performing Right Association Limited (APRA).
We refer to APRA's letter to you dated 13 December 2001 and to
your letter of 27 March 2002.
It is our understanding that you have developed an algorithm that
generates combinations of telephone tone sequences (Sequences).
We assume form your correspondence that it is your intention to
register all of the Sequences as musical works, so that when the
Sequences are played (for example, by a person dialling a telephone
number which reproduces one of the Sequences) as the owner of
the copyright in the work you would be entitled to remuneration
under an APRA licence scheme yet to be developed. We have advised
APRA that it cannot accept registration of the Sequences as musical
works in which copyright subsists. From this, you should infer
no disrespect on APRA's part for your work in developing the relevant
algorithm.
As you are no doubt aware, copyright in Australia is governed
by the Copyright Act (1968) Cth (Act). Section 32(1)(a)
of the Act provides that "copyright subsists in an original
literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work- that is unpublished
and of which the author was a qualified person at the time when
the work was made".
We have advised APRA that the Sequences are not sufficiently original
to be recognised as copyright works; and that even if they are
original works, you are not their respective authors.
For a work to be original, the author must expend sufficient independent
skill and effort in order to distinguish the work from others.
Whether the degree of originality is sufficient is measured by
whether or not the skill and labour supplied by the author is
more than immaterial in each instance.
On your website http: //www.magnus-opus.com you identify the Sequences
as a series based on "pairings of eight notes used to create
sixteen different diads ... this sequence when expressed through
the operation of a simple algorithmic generator produces some
18,446,744,070,000,000,000 melodies". We note that you also
acknowledge that "these compositions correspond to the tonal
sequences transmitted in contemporary telecommunication".
Unless we have misunderstood your material, it would seem that
the Sequences or at least some of them coincide with tonal sequences
previously in existence. Your particular role has been to develop
an algorithm that generates all possible combinations of the particular
tones (that is, the Sequences), not to create the Sequences themselves.
We do not know whether it is possible for you to identify which
of the Sequences has previously been captured in a material form,
although it is obvious that many will have been. We suspect that
no natural person is the author of the Sequences. In any event
we do not see, with respect, how you can be the authors of Sequences
that you did not create. We respectfully suggest that once your
Sequences were determined ("based on a specific selection of 8
frequencies used in 16 unique diads"), that the algorithmic generations
are results of little or no intervention by yourselves.
We draw your attention to Donoghue v Allied Newspapers Ltd
[193811 Ch 106 at 109-110; Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill
(Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 27; and Telstra Corporation Ltd v
Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 112 (15 May 2002).
In any event, it is APRA's view that even if it were to take place,
the registration of the Sequences by APRA would not yield the
results you may anticipate. In particular, it is unclear precisely
what communications or performances of the Sequences you would
intend APRA to license. However, it would seem likely that many
of the performances would not be in public under the Act, and
would therefore not be able to be licensed by APRA.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any queries,
or if you would like to discuss this further.
Yours sincerely
Kate Haddock
Partner
Direct line: 9266 3412
email: haddock@bhf.com.au
Liability limited by the Solicitors Scheme, approved under the
Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW)
Subject:
Copyright
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001
From: Kathy
Dear Nigel
Love the site. Very elegant. I have posted it to all the copyright
teachers I know.
Kathy
Subject:
Illegal reproduction of some of your creations.
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001
From: Andy Carroll
Sirs,
I am an Australian computer programmer living in the United States.
It has come to my attention that some American direct marketing
companies are illegally reproducing some of your work, for commerical
purposes.
My telephone number in the United States is (781) 648 4358, it is
dialled by placing a 1 in front of it. I frequently receive calls
from direct marketing companies who in an effort to sell me good
and services have reproduced your Opus 17816484358 I suspect they
are doing so illegally, and that you, the struggling artists, are
not being justly rewarded.
What should I do to help you to not only bring these miscreants
to justice, but to also ensure the punishment is sufficiently severe
to ensure that other potential profiteers are suitably discouraged,
bringing an end to the illegal reproduction of Opus 17816484358
for commerical purposes ?
Would you be interested in discussing possible terms for assigning
the copyright on this specific work to me in an effort to move this
action forward ?
Yours sincrely,
Andy Carroll
Arlington, MA, USA.
Subject:
Re: Illegal reproduction of some of your creations.
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001
From: Dr Sonique
To: Andy Carroll
Dear Andy;
Might I suggest that you consider purchasing a Magnus opus licence
agreement for at least a one year period (via the pro-formas on
the website). Then armed as the bona-fide copyright owner of the
melody associated with your telephone number, you would be able
to pursue these annoying tele-marketers for copyright infringement.
If I recall the NYC subway adverts with any clarity, there are plenty
of lawyers happy to drum up business on a commission basis!!!
Hope to hear from you soon.
Yours, Nigel Helyer
Subject:
Well Done!!
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001
From: Teabag Gabab
Well done guys, I read the article in the age newspaper.
I think your concept is abosolutely brilliant!!
Dont neccessarly agree with all your points, none the less and absolutely
ingenious idea!!
Love it!! and good luck.
teej
Subject:
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001
From: David Rudnick
This is a good joke! My rather gullible friend will actually dispose
of all his cellphone equipment.
How did you come up with this?
David Rudnick
Subject:
licence for RIAA phone number
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001
From: Nick Archer
How much would it cost to buy a permanent licence for the phone
number of the RIAA headquarters?
Thank you
Nick Archer
Nashville, TN USA
Subject:
your music
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001
From: Sharon Rosner
hi
i think what you are doing is absolutely fantastic. do you sell
CDs of your music, or even better, do you publish scores of your
music? i would like to perform some of it and even record it (I'll
of course ask your permission before).
regards
sharon
http://www.superjew.org
Subject:
Pulse Dialing is Fun
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001
From: Kris Asick
What if I decided to dial my number using pulse dialing? You've
copyrighted your music in the sense that if my phone number as a
set of tones was in your composition I would be breaching copyright
if I played any set of identical tones, but if I'm pulse dialing,
I'm not dialing that tone, thus am not breaching the copyright you
hold.
Heh heh. Slipped that one by you, hunh?
Well, I just want to ask you something now that we've got that out
of the way. Why go after everyone? You own the copyright, you decide
how to let it out. You should allow free residential usage of the
copyright and then concentrate on going after the businesses. I
mean, you'd grab a LOT more positive feedback that way than negative.
(Because lets face it, the bulk of feedback is from single people
with stuff on their minds, not big giant companies. Target businesses,
leave the home user out of it, you'd be really popular.)
Just sharing my thoughts. I haven't actually checked my number because
I'm too scared to try, but either way I can just dial pulse, no
big deal :P
Kris
Subject:
licence to call emergency services
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001
From: Matt Connors
Dear Dr Sonique
I'd like to be prepared for emergencies when your amnesty period
expires. I would threrefore like to know whether I need your permission
to call 000. I'm inclined to purchase a single use licence, as with
up to 35 000 people on campus, we are bound to have use for it eventually.
Of course, if we have two emergencies, well, someone has to go without,
I suppose.
Matt Connors
Coordinator
Copyright and Digital Asset Management
Macquarie University
Subject:
follow up
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001
From: Matt Connors
Thinking about my last email a bit further, it occurs to me that,
if you have copyrighted 16 tone pairs (which I interpret to mean
a 32-tone performance), we may be able to reproduce '000' (ie, less
that 10% of the original piece) under our current licencing agreement
with APRA/AMCOS and the Copyright Council. Of course, this does
not extend to the non-higher education sector, unless they were
dialing emergency services for the purpose of criticism or review
in the media.
Am I interpreting the duration of your performances correctly? BTW,
do we have to transmit rights management information with the performance?
Matt Connors
Coordinator
Copyright and Digital Asset Management
Macquarie University
Subject:
This is the funniest site I've ever visited
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001
From: Joe Death
You have got to be joking - right ?
Lets all take a giant leap back to the dark ages of telecommuncations
because a bunch of capitalist were granted one of the stupidest
copyrights is history.
Are all your friends and family using rotary dial telephones and
CB radios now ? Didn't think so !
P.S. I hold the copyright on the sound your keyboard makes at each
keypress so if you choose to reply this mail you will be in violation
of International Copyright Law :)
(how stupid does that sound )
Signed
~The Plague~
Subject: bravo! encore! encore!
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001
From: Rob Ray
hey guys!
Rob here from deadtech.
I run and art and technology artspace in Chicago IL USA.
You guys rock! Thank you!
We last year released a CD of music tracks based on the DeCSS source
showing that art could be created out of what a federal judge here
said had no artistic or free speech merit.
I know you're probably be inundated with email.
Just wanted to drop ya'll a line saying thanks!!!!!!!!!
Rob
Subject:
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001
From: benjy80
You dickheads!
No dont just delete this email without reading it. Well If you think
that you are showing the worlds big companys where to go you are
wrong!!! You are very selfish. You are just going to make it worse
for the average person. Big companys are not going to play your
game they are going to use you as an example and copyright bloody
everything they can! Well maybe I should jump on the band wagon
too! I have just copywrited the english language. Please pay me
$1 million by tomorrow. Oh and I patented breathing yesterday, so
if you havn't paid you better stop breathing NOW or I will take
you to court!
I dont mean to be offensive, however your actions outrage me immensly!
Yours Sincerely
Ben King
Subject:
Copyright violations
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001
From: Daniel Rose
Do you intend to try and use this as a test case?
I would LOVE to see that...
Also, the public phones and some other phones which "disguise" the
beeps for security, is this a form of copyright protection?
Can we weave the DMCA into this somehow?
Can you see any way that this worthwhile project will ever have
some semi-serious ramifications and will not be taken solely as
a joke?
Regards,
Daniel Rose
IT Client Support
National Library of Australia
Subject: Good job!
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001
From: Josh Garfield
Gentlemen,
I must congratulate you on an excellent job in combining computer
programming and musical talent to create such a comprehensive database
and an otherwise metaphorical 'slap' to the 'big business' companies
that would otherwise abuse copyright laws.
My name is Josh Garfield and I am a senior (4th year) at the University
of Pennsylvania studying computer science and international relations.
As an aspiring law student in the field of intellectual property,
I feel that too many big business companies have used their extensive
resources (monetary and human capital) to force artists, home businesses,
and others to conform to their (the b-b companies) needs.
I wish the best of luck in your endeavors and hope that your future
will be bright and everlasting.
Just of note: I found your webpage through an article on http://www.slashdot.com
and http://www.theage.com.au.
Sincerely,
Josh Garfield
Subject:
Well Done!
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001
From: Olivia
Dear Dr Sonique and Jon Drummond,
Hello.
I am currently studying my final year of law at the University of
New South Wales. One of the final subjects I am studying is Intellectual
Property, of which copyright forms the bulk of the syllabus.
Part of our assessment is to keep track of newspaper articles that
report on this area of law and I noted an article on your work in
the Sydney Morning Herald on 1 October 2001 and visited your website.
I just want to applaud you for contextualising my studies and giving
the copyright topic some life!
Cheers
Olivia
Subject: 867-5309 Jonny, Don't lose my #
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001
From: AMetamorphosis
Dear Dr. Suess & all the little who's in Whoville,
Thank you so kindly for todays amusing website. I fould a link to
your website @ www.fark.net and generally like to check out strange
and unusual articles. I am going to use your website tonight in
a business ethics class as a catylist for discussion on how corporate
entities abuse the legal system.
A lot of the students use a phrase of " Are you on Crack ? ! ? "
when they are told something unbelieveable ... I'm sure I will hear
that phrase repeatedly tonight.
PS. Feel free to sue me for making all calls via touchtones. I will
be happy to provide my name , address, & frequently dialed numbers
so that you will have excellent proof for your attornies.
Amused,
AMetamorphosis ... aka ... Randy
Subject: Get a Lawyer (or Hum to One?)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001
From: Jim Maule
I'm fascinated, guys, but no one violates copyright by humming your
tune or dialing a phone number. There are other elements that must
be satisfied for copyright violations, which are not present.
Moreover, when I use my telephone I do not dial my own number. Therefore,
your statement that by using my telephone I am "copying" your composition
is incorrect. Your alleged claim would need to being when *someone
else* dials MY number.
And, of course, someone else is doing something.... I'm not (when
I answer my phone I don't hear a melody). And, of course, a person
who tries to copyright every combination of letters of the alphabet
and who therefore claims to own copyright in all words, sentences,
and paragraphs will meet the same result as that encountered by
the person who already tried it.
Good try. Rather amusing. I enjoy the satire.
Jim Maule
Professor of Law
Villanova University School of Law
Subject:
Better than Bach, nearly as good at Kylie...
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001
From: Bernstein
Great work, maestro. I find your startling compositions very soothing.
Any word on a CD? It would be great if it were out in time for
Christmas.
Cheers
Yaniv Bernstein
Subject:
As you like it!
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001
From: G Denoncourt
Thanks for the beauty!
You were perhaps unaware that you have stumbled upon a way for
microprocessors to be coupled in a way which is likened to a "series"
rather than "parallel" processing configuration. You are using
an octave and our OCTAVEAN product is similar to your program.
Conceptually, the numbers and alphabet are represented by dual
tones in octaves to get 0 through 9 and a through z which allows
programing of inbedded 8088 instruction set devices. We do not
copyright and our input is yours to use and incorporate as you
like it.
Again,
Thanks for the beauty!
G Denoncourt
President/CEO
MARSPEC Corp
Subject:
Magnus v. Magnum
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001
From: W. Keith Percival
Dear Magnus-Opus,
Is there any particular reason why it was decided to call your
group Magnus-Opus rather than Magnum-Opus? As I'm sure you're
aware, the Latin word 'opus' is neuter and would normally take
the neuter form of the accompanying adjective: hence 'magnum,'
not 'magnus.'
Second question: have you ever been asked this question before?
(I expect so!)
I heard about you from National Public Radio, and that happened
shortly after my wife and I had returned from a month-long vacation
in Australia, during which we more than once strolled around Hyde
Park in Sydney, a city which is now one of our favourites! We
envy you people!
With every good wish.
Keith Percival W. Keith Percival
Professor Emeritus of Linguistics
Seattle, WA 98115
Subject:
Re: Magnus-Opus
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001
From: Terre Thaemlitz
brilliant idea!
i've been really upset about people copyrighting human genomes.
do you know about this issue? the fucking u.s. patent office says
they first allowed corporations to copyright genomes so that the
companies will continue doing research out of the possibility of
future profits and recouping research costs. however, the result
is that medical research (which relies on shared information) is
getting shut down at universities and hospitals because corporations
are starting to enforce their copyrights. for example, one university
was running tests that can tell if you are at high risk for breast
cancer, but the company who owns the genome holding such information
insists on $2500 for each test performed, which means people go
untested, and are unable to freely find information related to a
genome they may carry in their own body. truly evil stuff.
so, it is my duty to inform you that i shall not pay you one red
cent of royalties for any phone call ever ever ever. you an have
your attorneys try to make me pay, but we'll both go bankrupt in
the process.
>:O
;)
love, terre
TERRE THAEMLITZ
COMATONSE RECORDINGS
http://www.comatonse.com
JAPAN
© Dr.Sonique and Jon Drummond
|
|
