PipeChat Digest #2649 - Saturday, January 12, 2002
 
ASCAP
  by "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu>
Re: Organist fees
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: fees
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
Re: Organist fees
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
Re: Organist fees
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
Re: Organist's Fees
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
Re: Organist fees
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: ASCAP
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
ASCAP and the British Performing Rights Society
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: ASCAP
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
RE: fees
  by "Alan Freed" <parishadmin@stlukesnyc.org>
Re: fees
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
OFF-TOPIC: Windows XP (grin) (X-posted)
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Sacraments enumerated?
  by "Alan Freed" <parishadmin@stlukesnyc.org>
Re: ASCAP and the British Performing Rights Society
  by "Stephen Barker" <steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk>
Re: PLEASE READ Re: Off topic - plain text
  by "Ed Steltzer" <steltzer@gwi.net>
Re: Organist's Fees (Correction)
  by <Wurlibird1@aol.com>
Re: OFF-TOPIC: Windows XP (grin) (X-posted)
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Unionized Musicians
  by <Wurlibird1@aol.com>
Re: Unionized Musicians
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re:  Unionized Musicians
  by <Wurlibird1@aol.com>
 

(back) Subject: ASCAP From: "Randolph Runyon" <runyonr@muohio.edu> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:18:23 -0400         TECHNICALLY you're not supposed to make video > or audio recordings of ANYTHING copyrighted without their permission. > Churches are a gray area, ....     Just how gray, I wonder? Do churches ever get in trouble for broadcasting their services on the radio without obtaining copyright permission?     Randy Runyon Music Director Zion Lutheran Church Hamilton, Ohio runyonr@muohio.edu      
(back) Subject: Re: Organist fees From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:19:55 EST   Hi Alan   There was a discussion here on the left coast recently and an organist from San Francisco reported that weddings there can go up to $375US So about 225=A3 UK. In the last 24 hours someone from the UK opined that the trained organists in the bigger churches and Cathedrals got bigger stipends. He also said the little outlying village churches the organists were relatively untrained and received much less. 40=A3 for a wedding and double for videod services denotes to me village organists. Could that involve the embarrassment factor, just curious? :)=20   I would imagine NYC churches which are mostly big, and the organists considerably well trained would require a much higher fee. I seriously doubt if say at St. Thomas Church, Smoky Mary's, St. Pat's, or St. J.the D. would pay the organists gratis or low fees. I would opine that fees in place= s=20   like this could go as high as $1,000US or 660=A3 or higher. During the 1920'= s a famous NYC organist got $10,000US or 6,660=A3 for a very high society wedding. I do think it matters who is playing and where. I believe fees are=20 based on supply and demand. This was a stellar organist! and a very high=20 profile wealthy couple. Charles Courboin was the organist in question. His private organ lessons could and did go for $1,000US. He also taught gratis for a=20 promising student. It was his call. Quality does count, repertoir, and=20 several other factors.   Regards,   Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re: fees From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:13:49 -0600     quilisma@socal.rr.com wrote:   > The Lutherans are less law-oriented than we are, but since SELLING > Indulgences was what set off the Reformation, I'd imagine that they'd > take a PRETTY dim view of SELLING the Sacraments (grin).   But, remember, that for a Lutheran, there are but _two_ sacraments (a sentiment shared by the Historic Anglican Communion, according to Article XXV, and the Chatechism of the 1928 [US] BCP): baptism, and Holy Communion. Lutherans do not consider marriage, or funerals, to be a sacrament, as Roman Catholics (and some Anglicans) do. <VBG>. I'm not = sure if it was my father, (though retired, still a Pastor on the ELCA Clergy Rolls) or another clergyman of my acquaintance from years ago, told of a wedding at which, with his knowledge and consent) the organist was paid nothing because of the "financial state" of the families of the people = being married. Because of the fact that when he arrived at the church for the wedding and found extensive and expensive commercially prepared floral tributes, he insisted thereafter that the organist be paid as much as the florist. I always thought that was a pretty good rule of thumb, = myself....   ns      
(back) Subject: Re: Organist fees From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:15:24 -0600       Alan Freed wrote:   > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Barker [mailto:steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk] > > Subject: Re: Organist fees > > It's to do with it being a recorded performance and therefore comes > under the performing rights society guidelines (I think!). Is there > such a society in the USA? > > Alan responds, leisurely: Gee, I don't know. Class?   Yes, there is a performing rights organization, and yes, the recording = would probably _technically_ come under the purview, but it tends not to get charged because of the fact that it is a religious service, which is = exempt in all other cases from performance royalties.   ns    
(back) Subject: Re: Organist fees From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:21:09 -0600       Bud wrote:   > Sure is ... ASCAP ...   unless, of course, the performing rights organizations are the = competitors, BMI and SESAC, although recordings come under a different auspices, I think, Harry Fox?     ns    
(back) Subject: Re: Organist's Fees From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:28:03 EST   Hi   I got to stop this dead in it's tracks! I never play for free, or close to =   gratis. What's happened here is some one is quoting someone else and ascribing those comments to me. This is what happens when people quote whole letters and things can get twisted and messed up.   I for the record, play for money, big money! :)   Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: Re: Organist fees From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:33:29 EST     --part1_d3.4d21090.2971e989_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 1/12/02 2:13:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, parishadmin@stlukesnyc.org writes:     > But who on earth > would sell copies of their wedding video? There's a market for such? >   Funniest Home Videos!! ;-)     <A HREF=3D"mailto:Cremona502@cs.com">Bruce Cornely</A> with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Visit <A HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502">HowlingAcres</A> = and meet the Baskerbeagles: Duncan, Miles, Molly & Dewi   --part1_d3.4d21090.2971e989_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>In a message dated = 1/12/02 2:13:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, parishadmin@stlukesnyc.org = writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">But who on earth <BR>would sell copies of their wedding video? &nbsp;There's a market for = such? <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>Funniest Home Videos!! &nbsp;;-) <BR> <BR> <BR> &nbsp;<I><A HREF=3D"mailto:Cremona502@cs.com">Bruce Cornely</A> </I> <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR>Visit &nbsp;<I><A = HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502">HowlingAcres</A> </I>and meet = the Baskerbeagles: &nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly &amp; Dewi </FONT></HTML>   --part1_d3.4d21090.2971e989_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: ASCAP From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:36:15 -0800   I imagine the big ones like the Silica Basilica that broadcast every = Sunday on radio and TV have a long-term blanket contract with ASCAP, which prolly = costs them a pretty penny. I doubt that ASCAP pays much attention to the smaller ones that broacast occasionally, particularly on the public-access cable = TV channels. Also, they tend to use older music that would likely be in the public domain ... particularly the African-American churches ... whereas = SB would be singing the latest hot-off-the-press praze extravaganza with orchestra.   I think the presence of live instrumentalists also complicates things ... = a contribution has to be made to the recording trust fund as well, though I think that's written into the contract ... but it gets MORE complicated = when the performance is broadcast.   I'm all for orchestral musicians making a living wage, but unionization = has had (I think) unintended consequences.   George Szell was the last conductor in this country who fought off the Musicians' Union in regards to ARTISTIC decisions. The contrast between = how American orchestras and European orchestras are run couldn't be more = stark. A friend of mine is secretary to Maestro Ivan Fischer at the Budapest = Festival Orchestra. Fischer is no tyrant, by any means, but he has SOLE control = over auditions, hiring, firing, AND seating of the orchestra, something = virtually NO American conductor has today.   Cheers,   Bud   Randolph Runyon wrote:   > TECHNICALLY you're not supposed to make video > > or audio recordings of ANYTHING copyrighted without their permission. > > Churches are a gray area, > ... > > Just how gray, I wonder? Do churches ever get in trouble for = broadcasting > their services on the radio without obtaining copyright permission? > > Randy Runyon > Music Director > Zion Lutheran Church > Hamilton, Ohio > runyonr@muohio.edu > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org    
(back) Subject: ASCAP and the British Performing Rights Society From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:46:27 -0800   I THINK it extends to the videographer making multiple copies to sell to the wedding party, families, etc. That's why Father Marshall in the UK (over on Anglican-Music) insists that couples sign a very involved = contract absolving the Church of any legal responsibility if they DO get into trouble (grin).   Personally, I think videographers and photographers at weddings are an unmitigated NUISANCE. Our liturgy booket for weddings begins with a BOLD-FACE notice in very LARGE print on the FIRST page:   VIDEO-TAPING WITH LIGHTS AND FLASH PHOTOS ARE STRICTLY *FORBIDDEN* DURING THE LITURGY. THE WEDDING PARTY WILL BE HAPPY TO POSE FOR PICTURES *AFTER* THE SERVICE.   Father Scarlett actually had to STOP and shoo an amateur photographer OUT of the SANCTUARY during a Nuptial Mass. The dude (at peril of his LIFE, though he didn't realize it) had CLIMBED *over* the Communion Rail to get = a "shot."   Father S. allows pictures to be taken during the procession in and out, = but not during the actual service. And, for once, I AGREE with him (grin).   Cheers,   Bud   Alan Freed wrote:   > -----Original Message----- > From: quilisma@socal.rr.com [mailto:quilisma@socal.rr.com] > Subject: Re: Organist fees > > Sure is ... ASCAP ... and TECHNICALLY you're not supposed to make video > or audio recordings of ANYTHING copyrighted without their permission. > Churches are a gray area, but NOT if such recordings are to be SOLD, > even by a non-profit entity. > > Alan replies: Oh, yes, of course; how stupid of me. But who on earth > would sell copies of their wedding video? There's a market for such? > Gyakh! > > Alan > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org    
(back) Subject: Re: ASCAP From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:57:12 -0600       Randolph Runyon wrote:   > TECHNICALLY you're not supposed to make video > > or audio recordings of ANYTHING copyrighted without their permission. > > Churches are a gray area, > ... > > Just how gray, I wonder? Do churches ever get in trouble for = broadcasting > their services on the radio without obtaining copyright permission?   I don't think so, because the commercial radio station will have licenses = from ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. I suspect that the place where there may be a = problem with licensing is if a church is running a webcast entirely from its own server....   ns    
(back) Subject: RE: fees From: "Alan Freed" <parishadmin@stlukesnyc.org> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 16:04:36 -0500   -----Original Message----- From: Noel Stoutenburg [mailto:mjolnir@ticnet.com]=20 Subject: Re: fees   But, remember, that for a Lutheran, there are but _two_ sacraments (a sentiment shared by the Historic Anglican Communion, according to Article XXV, and the Chatechism of the 1928 [US] BCP): baptism, and Holy Communion. =20   Alan demurs: Well . . . Lutheranism expressly grants the term "sacrament" to Holy Orders and even more emphatically to Absolution. =20   Lutherans do not consider marriage, or funerals, to be a sacrament, as Roman Catholics (and some Anglicans) do. =20   Alan rambles on: I can't find the quote, but hope to do so, in which with less enthusiasm, Lutherans "concede" the term "sacrament" to Matrimony and to Anointing at approach of death. I think the only rite that Romans call "sacrament" and Lutherans utterly disagree is Confirmation. As for "funerals," I don't think ANY denomination grants them sacramental status.   extensive and expensive commercially prepared floral tributes, he insisted thereafter that the organist be paid as much as the florist. I always thought that was a pretty good rule of thumb, myself....   Alan agrees.    
(back) Subject: Re: fees From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:18:09 -0600       Alan Freed wrote, in part:   > Alan rambles on: I can't find the quote, but hope to do so, in which > with less enthusiasm, Lutherans "concede" the term "sacrament" to > Matrimony and to Anointing at approach of death.   There is a quote from Luther, or perhaps one of the reformers, about matrimony, orders, &c, as being good reasonable and proper, but denying = them to be "sacraments", reserving that term, as in the Small Chatechism, to Baptism and Communion....   ns    
(back) Subject: OFF-TOPIC: Windows XP (grin) (X-posted) From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:45:07 -0800   I thought this was worth repeating (grin):       Recently one of my friends, a computer wizard, paid me a visit. As we were talking I mentioned that I had recently installed Windows XP on my PC. I   told him how happy I was with this operating system and showed him the Windows XP CD. To my surprise he threw it into my microwave oven and turned it on.   Instantly I got very upset, because the CD had become precious to me, but he said: 'Do not worry, it is unharmed.'   After a few minutes he took the CD out, gave it to me and said: 'Take a close look at it.'   To my surprise the CD was quite cold to hold and it seemed to be heavier   than before. At first I could not see anything, but on the inner edge of   the central hole I saw an inscription, an inscription finer than anything I had ever seen before. The inscription shone piercingly bright, and yet   remote, as if out of a great depth:   12413AEB2ED4FA5E6F7D78E78BEDE820945092OF923A40EElOE5IOCC98D444AA08E324   'I cannot understand the fiery letters,' I said in a timid voice.   'No but I can,' he said. 'The letters are Hex, of an ancient mode, but the language is that of Microsoft, which I shall not utter here. But in common English this is what it says:   One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them, One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.   It is only two lines from a verse long known in System lore:   "Three OS's from corporate kings in their towers of glass, Seven from valley lords where orchards used to grow, Nine from dotcoms doomed to die, One from the Dark Lord Gates on his dark throne In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie. One OS to rule them all, one OS to find them, One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them, In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie."    
(back) Subject: Sacraments enumerated? From: "Alan Freed" <parishadmin@stlukesnyc.org> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 16:44:07 -0500   -----Original Message----- From: Noel Stoutenburg [mailto:mjolnir@ticnet.com]=20 Subject: Re: fees   Alan Freed wrote, in part:   > Alan rambles on: I can't find the quote, but hope to do so, in which > with less enthusiasm, Lutherans "concede" the term "sacrament" to > Matrimony and to Anointing at approach of death.   There is a quote from Luther, or perhaps one of the reformers, about matrimony, orders, &c, as being good reasonable and proper, but denying them to be "sacraments", reserving that term, as in the Small Chatechism, to Baptism and Communion....   Alan sez:   I can easily agree that such a quote exists (and others even less compelling), but what is definitive for Lutherans are the Confessions in the Book of Concord. A couple of quotes from Art. XIII of the Apology of the Augsburg Confession:   "The genuine sacraments, therefore, are Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and absolution (which is the sacraments of penitence). . . . "=20   "If ordination is interpreted in relation to the ministry of the Word, we have no objection to calling ordination a sacrament. . . ."   "If anybody . . . wants to call [Matrimony] a sacrament, he should distinguish it from the preceding ones [pretty much all the rest], which are, in the strict sense, "signs of the New Testament. . . ."   And not from the Confessions, but only from a footnote: "In the ancient church the term 'sacrament' was applied loosely to a great variety of sacred teachings or acts. The enumeration of seven sacraments, proposed by Peter Lombard in the twelfth century, finally prevailed in the late medieval church." =20   In short, we're very UNDEFINITIVE about the "number" of sacraments, and put our emphasis rather on their right use. =20   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: ASCAP and the British Performing Rights Society From: "Stephen Barker" <steve@ststephenscanterbury.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:51:32 -0000   > Father Scarlett actually had to STOP and shoo an amateur photographer = OUT > of the SANCTUARY during a Nuptial Mass. The dude (at peril of his LIFE, > though he didn't realize it) had CLIMBED *over* the Communion Rail to = get a > "shot."   I have the problem that photographers seem to set themselves up in the = choir stalls...   I just get my choir to walk at them in a VERY determined fashion!!! they move eventually!!   Steve Canterbury   P.S. I wouldn't class myself as an amateur - I have a music degree which included a large amount of organ performance and I teach music for a = living. I still only get =A340 for a wedding in a City church. I think we have = the biggest church choir in the diocese now... just not a very big building! They just weren't very forward thinking when they built it nearly 1000 = years ago!!      
(back) Subject: Re: PLEASE READ Re: Off topic - plain text From: "Ed Steltzer" <steltzer@gwi.net> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 17:06:04 -0500   .....hoping to help, and not further confuse.....   I looked up "Plain text" in Outlook Express Help; under HTML I noticed = the following:   >>>"When you use HTML formatting and the recipient's mail or news program does not read HTML, the message appears as plain text with an HTML file attached"<<<<   .....which reinforces the need to send in plain text, and may explain why "attachments" are sometimes appearing unbidden. Ed, in Maine   ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenda" <gksjd85@access.aic-fl.com> To: "'PipeChat'" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 2:00 PM Subject: RE: PLEASE READ Re: Off topic - plain text     > On the newer versions of Outlook, you have to do a little more than what > Malcolm said to correct the malady. Under "Tools" you have to select........... > > Glenda Sutton      
(back) Subject: Re: Organist's Fees (Correction) From: <Wurlibird1@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 17:38:57 EST   Ron Severin writes:     >I got to stop this dead in it's tracks! I never play for free, or close = to >gratis. >What's happened here is some one is quoting someone else and ascribing >those comments to me. This is what happens when people quote whole >letters and things can get twisted and messed up. <<   Thanks for clearing that up, Ron. It was I who posted about my gratis services for my own parishioner's funerals.   On another point, don't be too sure that churches are exempt from = copyright fees. I just paid over $100 for a blanket fee to cover us for 2002. = Anyone who copies copyrighted materials (music, verse, text, etc) in church bulletins, flyers or any other medium falls subject to the fees. I'll get =   the full facts and post a reference URL for any interested to explore. = Its far too lengthy to waste bandwidth.   On still another point. Priests making $45,000 plus house and travel? = Are vows of poverty getting a little lax or does that apply only to certain of =   the RC clergy?   This is now pointless. <g>   Best wishes, Jim Pitts  
(back) Subject: Re: OFF-TOPIC: Windows XP (grin) (X-posted) From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 17:40:50 EST     --part1_14.20bc8b2b.29721572_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   In a message dated 1/12/02 4:46:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, quilisma@socal.rr.com writes:     > > <<Recently one of my friends, a computer wizard, paid me a visit. As we > were talking I mentioned that I had recently installed Windows XP on my = PC. > yada, yada, snip     > The inscription shone piercingly bright, and yet remote, as if out of a =   > great depth: > > snip, yada, snip > the > language is that of Microsoft, which I shall not utter here. But in = common > English this is what it says: > > One OS to rule them all, > One OS to find them, > One OS to bring them all > and in the darkness bind them. >   um.... Does this make Bill Gates the Wizard of Os?? ;-)   <A HREF=3D"mailto:Cremona502@cs.com">Bruce Cornely</A> with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" Visit <A HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502">HowlingAcres</A> = and meet the Baskerbeagles: Duncan, Miles, Molly & Dewi   --part1_14.20bc8b2b.29721572_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2>In a message dated = 1/12/02 4:46:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, quilisma@socal.rr.com writes: <BR> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> <BR>&lt;&lt;Recently one of my friends, a computer wizard, paid me a = visit. As we <BR>were talking I mentioned that I had recently installed Windows XP on = my PC. </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;yada, yada, snip <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR> <BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> The inscription = shone piercingly bright, and yet remote, as if out of a great depth: <BR> <BR>snip, yada, snip</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 = FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> = &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT><FONT = COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" = LANG=3D"0">The letters are Hex, of an ancient mode, but <BLOCKQUOTE = TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">the <BR>language is that of Microsoft, which I shall not utter here. But in = common <BR>English this is what it says: <BR> <BR>One OS to rule them all, <BR>One OS to find them, <BR>One OS to bring them all <BR>and in the darkness bind them. <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR>um.... &nbsp;Does this make Bill Gates the Wizard of Os?? &nbsp;;-) <BR> <BR> &nbsp;<I><A HREF=3D"mailto:Cremona502@cs.com">Bruce Cornely</A> </I> <BR>with the Baskerbeagles in the Beagle's Nest ~ ""Haruffaroo, Bohawow!" <BR>Visit &nbsp;<I><A = HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/Brucon502">HowlingAcres</A> </I>and meet = the Baskerbeagles: &nbsp;Duncan, Miles, Molly &amp; Dewi </FONT></HTML>   --part1_14.20bc8b2b.29721572_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Unionized Musicians From: <Wurlibird1@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 17:56:41 EST   Bud writes (from another topic)   >I'm all for orchestral musicians making a living wage, but unionization = has >had (I think) unintended consequences. <<   It would be interesting to know just how many musicians have been STIFFED = by churches. I am still waiting, 35 years later, for a Dallas area church to =   send the check which is still owed me for a week-long revival I played. I =   was just dumb enough then to trust. I soon got wiser, especially when churches are involved.   Were it not for the American Federation of Musicians, there would be a lot = of abused musicians - and there were before it was formed. A lot of people played for free, and that was in itself an unintended consequence.   Best wishes, Jim Pitts Local 147, AFM        
(back) Subject: Re: Unionized Musicians From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:01:46 -0800   I'm curious, Jim ... I've always been told that the union rules stop at = the church door, and that the union didn't feel they could effectively = unionize church musicians, or I would have joined YEARS ago.   Is that not the case?   Bud   Wurlibird1@aol.com wrote:   > Bud writes (from another topic) > > >I'm all for orchestral musicians making a living wage, but unionization = has > >had (I think) unintended consequences. << > > It would be interesting to know just how many musicians have been = STIFFED by > churches. I am still waiting, 35 years later, for a Dallas area church = to > send the check which is still owed me for a week-long revival I played. = I > was just dumb enough then to trust. I soon got wiser, especially when > churches are involved. > > Were it not for the American Federation of Musicians, there would be a = lot of > abused musicians - and there were before it was formed. A lot of people > played for free, and that was in itself an unintended consequence. > > Best wishes, > Jim Pitts > Local 147, AFM > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org    
(back) Subject: Re: Unionized Musicians From: <Wurlibird1@aol.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:32:02 EST   Bud asks:   >I'm curious, Jim ... I've always been told that the union rules stop at = the >church door, and that the union didn't feel they could effectively = unionize >church musicians, or I would have joined YEARS ago. <<   You are correct, Bud. If church organists were AFM members we probably = would not have these occasional groanings over stipends. But a broad brush application of union musicians resulting in unintended consequences is unsettling to me. The original purpose of AFM was a fair wage for = services performed, where ever they may be performed. Its object was realized and musicians today benefit from that effort.   Best wishes, Jim