Bard performance ToS to include Public Domain?

[Yew_the_Bard]

Hello,

The way it is written, I am not sure if I would get banned for playing Mozart, Beethoven, or another musician that has been dead for hundreds of years and no longer has copyright. I'm hoping not, but it would be nice if the warning for bards included this information.

Thanks kindly,

Yew

[Easayia]

I would like more info on this as well.

Personally if the devs give you tools to make music and your not claiming any credit for
the music your playing and its not harming anyone its no different then someone playing someone elses music at a restaurant in town in my eyes. People have concerts and such all the time in this game I see know reason why you would not be able to.

[Rongway]

if ... your not claiming any credit for the music your playing and its not harming anyone its no different then someone playing someone elses music at a restaurant in town in my eyes.

Just because it's unusual for someone to discover your local performance and sue you doesn't mean your performance isn't illegal. In the US, if the music in question is not public domain,

• It's illegal for you to perform someone else's music in a live venue unless you have a performance license.
• It's illegal to arrange your own cover of someone else's music unless you have a permission to arrange license.
• It's illegal to record or stream video of someone else's music unless you have a sync license.
• It's illegal to create an audio recording of your performance of someone else's music without a mechanical license.
• It's illegal to use a backing track that someone else recorded unless you have a master recording use license.

And that's just US copyright laws.

[Imora]

And all that requires enforcement.

I know of one band that encourages you to bootleg their shows and releases the feeds online so you can mix and remix their stuff to your heart's content.

But most really old classical is public domain.

And US copyright law needs major reform.

[Valmaxian]

Just because it's unusual for someone to discover your local performance and sue you doesn't mean your performance isn't illegal. In the US, if the music in question is not public domain,

• It's illegal for you to perform someone else's music in a live venue unless you have a performance license.
• It's illegal to arrange your own cover of someone else's music unless you have a permission to arrange license.
• It's illegal to record or stream video of someone else's music unless you have a sync license.
• It's illegal to create an audio recording of your performance of someone else's music without a mechanical license.
• It's illegal to use a backing track that someone else recorded unless you have a master recording use license.

And that's just US copyright laws.

Basically this (composer here!). Technically, if you’re performing non-public domain music in a not-for-profit setting, and it’s a cover of the original, it may still fall under Fair Use, but as Rongway has stated, this is vast and complex legal territory. But some of the composers mentioned (Mozart and Beethoven) would fall under the public domain. Typically the rule is 70 years after the composers’ death (assuming they have no heirs or publishers claiming rights).

[Easayia]

Just because it's unusual for someone to discover your local performance and sue you doesn't mean your performance isn't illegal. In the US, if the music in question is not public domain,

• It's illegal for you to perform someone else's music in a live venue unless you have a performance license.
• It's illegal to arrange your own cover of someone else's music unless you have a permission to arrange license.
• It's illegal to record or stream video of someone else's music unless you have a sync license.
• It's illegal to create an audio recording of your performance of someone else's music without a mechanical license.
• It's illegal to use a backing track that someone else recorded unless you have a master recording use license.

And that's just US copyright laws.

I mean this is a video game not a live venue
no ones making a cover
streamers dont have the music turned off thats on them not the bards.
so just dont make videos of it.

so basically its fair use as long as people dont stream it or record it.
Also its player modified songs in a video game the same rules should not apply if they do the system is a joke.

[wereotter]

Square has stated their rule is just don't do it unless it's a track specifically from Final Fantasy XIV (not even Final Fantasy at large, only this one title)

They did this because then they can say if any lawsuit ever comes up that you violated the terms of service of the game, and the issue, if any person who owns rights to the song, can go after you specifically as opposed to SquareEnix. They're not going to give us a broader, more involved or complex list of "this is also okay if..." because they don't want any ambiguity or deniability on the part of the player that can pass the responsibility back onto them as a company.

Not only that, though, but it's possible even then that Square could still be held liable as they're collecting a fee that could be argued to be making money off the protected work of others. They want to make it absolutely clear that they want zero responsibility for anyone violating any usage rights out there, and there's no benefit for them to say that one thing is okay because it then can become ambiguous unless they make a list of literally every single song that is okay from what is currently public domain and what is still held in copyright by a company or composer's estate. They don't want to be a part of all that legal stuff, nor do they want to have to have every person in the game understand it all. It's better for them to keep the rules simple.

[MistakeNot]

Basically this (composer here!). Technically, if you’re performing non-public domain music in a not-for-profit setting, and it’s a cover of the original, it may still fall under Fair Use, but as Rongway has stated, this is vast and complex legal territory. But some of the composers mentioned (Mozart and Beethoven) would fall under the public domain. Typically the rule is 70 years after the composers’ death (assuming they have no heirs or publishers claiming rights).

All true, but everyone should keep in mind that copyright laws vary between different countries, so a work that is in the public domain in one country may still be covered by copyright in another.

[SaberMaxwell]

Just because it's unusual for someone to discover your local performance and sue you doesn't mean your performance isn't illegal. In the US, if the music in question is not public domain,

• It's illegal for you to perform someone else's music in a live venue unless you have a performance license.
• It's illegal to arrange your own cover of someone else's music unless you have a permission to arrange license.
• It's illegal to record or stream video of someone else's music unless you have a sync license.
• It's illegal to create an audio recording of your performance of someone else's music without a mechanical license.
• It's illegal to use a backing track that someone else recorded unless you have a master recording use license.

And that's just US copyright laws.

Ey you got one o' dem dere performance licenses if'n yer gonna play that on yer lute?

[Taranok]

Basically this (composer here!). Technically, if you’re performing non-public domain music in a not-for-profit setting, and it’s a cover of the original, it may still fall under Fair Use, but as Rongway has stated, this is vast and complex legal territory. But some of the composers mentioned (Mozart and Beethoven) would fall under the public domain. Typically the rule is 70 years after the composers’ death (assuming they have no heirs or publishers claiming rights).

If you want to simplify it, it's the Mickey Mouse rule. If it's older than Mickey Mouse, it's public domain. If it's newer, it might be, but you would need to explicitly look it up. And it's called the Mickey Mouse rule because Disney is the primary motivator for extending the years on what is copyrighted specifically to protect their money makers, which started explicitly with Mickey Mouse. This is specifically for America and anyone with strong ties to America though, and international copyright laws might heavily complicate matters.