Is Copyright Necessary To Keep Liturgical Discipline?

[zunshynn]

[url="http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2010/04/is-copyright-necessary-for-liturgical.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheNewLiturgicalMovement+%28The+New+Liturgical+Movement%29&utm_content=Google+Reader"]Here[/url]

[quote]At the website of the Oregon Catholic Press, we read the following:

[quote] If we like the current musical settings of the Mass, what’s going to happen if we just keep using them and simply ignore the new texts?

Once the revised translation of the Mass is promulgated (declared approved for official use), there is usually a timeline announced relative to its applicable date of official use. Since the translations are copyrighted and the US bishops’ conference is charged with administration of the texts we use in worship, it is the bishops’ conference that declares the exact translation that is approved for use in the US.[/quote]

It all seems sound and unobjectionable but for the invocation of the word copyright here. The implication is that somehow copyright adds teeth to the mandate, making it enforceable.

This is a common confusion. Copyright policies have nothing to do with adding weight to use a particular text. If anything, the opposite is true, since conventional copyright policies usually involve the requirement of some sort of payment, and this payment alone - to say nothing of the book keeping and hassle - is what often discourages publishers and composers from using official texts.

[b]In this sense, conventional copyright imposes a kind of tax on using the official text, which is why the most widely used English Mass setting in this country (Mass of Creation) actually departs from the official text: whether intended or not, the royalty payment requires are inapplicable for this particular Mass setting. One does not need to look hard for other examples. Conventional copyright policy actually restricts use and discourages compliance.[/b]

More people are beginning to realize this. In this period of transition from old texts to new ones, many people have begun to realize that there is a serious problem with imposing restrictions and payments on the use of required texts. This problem affects not only the Missal texts but also the Psalms that have been recently approved for use in the United States. All of these texts are headed straight for the copyright prison - which would be a problem in any age but is all-the-more objectionable in a digital age. Christians need to use the new media to evangelize. We need to use the new media to inspire more composers and more typesetters and publishers. The policies of the old world (20th century) have no place in a digital age.

The protests against these policies are growing and know no bound of the usual left-right/liberal-conservative divide. One problem is that the decision-making apparatus on these questions is so diffuse and decentralized that one doesn't entirely know where to go to object. This is very frustrating.

I'll say again what I've said many times to the point of tedium: [b]liturgical texts should be part of the commons of the faith, available to anyone to use without charge. The integrity of the text is nonetheless protected simply by the authority of the Bishops. The irony here is that by making the texts part of the commons, which can happen with a simple phrase in the front matter, the Bishops thereby remove the tax on the texts and encourage compliance and widespread use.[/b] [/quote]

Emphasis mine

What do you think? I think he raises a good point. The idea of sacred music and texts being copyrighted has always bothered me a little bit... it shouldn't be a business. I can see why it could be a deterrence in using them. I don't think that's the ONLY reason why people dissent and do their own thing... but it could add a spark to the coal.

Edited April 20, 2010 by zunshynn

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='20 April 2010 - 04:44 PM' timestamp='1271799863' post='2096970']
[url="http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2010/04/is-copyright-necessary-for-liturgical.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheNewLiturgicalMovement+%28The+New+Liturgical+Movement%29&utm_content=Google+Reader"]Here[/url]



Emphasis mine

What do you think? I think he raises a good point. The idea of sacred music and texts being copyrighted has always bothered me a little bit... it shouldn't be a business. I can see why it could be a deterrence in using them. I don't think that's the ONLY reason why people dissent and do their own thing... but it could add a spark to the coal.
[/quote]
Mr. Tucker presents extremely good arguments for the elimination of intellectual property, patents, and copyright law. These days I'm inclined to agree with him.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='20 April 2010 - 04:44 PM' timestamp='1271799863' post='2096970']
Emphasis mine

What do you think? I think he raises a good point. The idea of sacred music and texts being copyrighted has always bothered me a little bit... it shouldn't be a business. I can see why it could be a deterrence in using them. I don't think that's the ONLY reason why people dissent and do their own thing... but it could add a spark to the coal.
[/quote]

I think the idea of liturgical texts being copyrighted is quite ridiculous, especially since the copyrights are given to companies who promote the use of profane and irreligious music in the liturgy.

[CatherineM]

What's the other side of the equation? No copyright means someone like Dawkins could take a text and re-print it in a profane way.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='20 April 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1271803884' post='2097022']
What's the other side of the equation? No copyright means someone like Dawkins could take a text and re-print it in a profane way.
[/quote]

There are plenty of public domain Christian texts that such people can do that with.

Getting rid of copyright restrictions would allow smaller publishing houses to publish much higher quality texts than those currently on the market.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='20 April 2010 - 05:54 PM' timestamp='1271804063' post='2097024']
There are plenty of public domain Christian texts that such people can do that with.

Getting rid of copyright restrictions would allow smaller publishing houses to publish much higher quality texts than those currently on the market.
[/quote]
When you have a copyright in your name, that helps pay for your kids' schooling or medical bills, you may look at copyrights differently.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='20 April 2010 - 04:57 PM' timestamp='1271804232' post='2097025']
When you have a copyright in your name, that helps pay for your kids' schooling or medical bills, you may look at copyrights differently.
[/quote]
I thought that this discussion was centered on copyrights related to liturgical texts, and not simply to copyrights in general. I see no need for copyrights on liturgical texts, which should be as widely available as possible.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 April 2010 - 05:59 PM' timestamp='1271804382' post='2097026']
I thought that this discussion was centered on copyrights related to liturgical texts, and not simply to copyrights in general. I see no need for copyrights on liturgical texts, which should be as widely available as possible.
[/quote]

Indeed, Apotheoun. As on most matters that do not relate to the number of ecumenical councils, the saintly status of those whom the Eastern Orthodox venerate, and the authority and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, we are in agreement.

[CatherineM]

Okay, I thought this was about copyrights in general. I see you guys are just talking about liturgical texts produced by the church. I'll have to think about that a bit.

[Sternhauser]

Nobody can own an intangible idea.

~Sternhauser

[Winchester]

We're not talking about ideas, we're talking about written material.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' date='20 April 2010 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1271822895' post='2097193']
We're not talking about ideas, we're talking about written material.
[/quote]

Keep all the books you want.

~Sternhauser

[Winchester]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='22 April 2010 - 08:23 PM' timestamp='1271982185' post='2098292']
Keep all the books you want.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
Okay.

[SoonerCatholic]

Copyright has its place in the business world. But I think that the liturgical texts of the Church of should not be copyrighted, since no one is meant to make a profit from them. In addition I suspect the GIA and OCP of allowing the wording of traditional hymns to have inclusive language, so that they can have a copyright. For example changing, "Sing with all the [b]sons[/b] of glory" to "Sing with all the [b]saints in[/b] glory". I am looking forward to seeing the LOTH updated along with the missal. But even more distracting is the way they cut and pasted some of the more "offensive" psalms......

[mommas_boy]

I see where some of the above points are coming from, but who writes the text of liturgy? How are they compensated for their work? Our Church has a poor history of fairly compensating their lay employees; Catholic school teachers come to mind. This of course is a localized, rather than systemic problem, but most laity that I know who work for the Church have shared, either in public or in private, that their compensation has been left wanting.

EDIT: On the other hand, I completely understand -- and yes, agree -- that access to the Sacred Liturgy, as being necessary to salvation, should be free.

Edited April 23, 2010 by mommas_boy