Jump to content

Talk:Robert Fripp: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by Kiefer.Wolfowitz - "→‎April Fool Spoof: testing sign bot"
→‎Copyright concerns regarding Discipline Global Mobile (DGM): {{harvtxt|Bruford|2009|p=[http://books.google.se/books?hl=sv&id=R4iW0tsxLqQC&dq=Bill+Bruford&q=EG%2C%20Virgin%2C%20EMI%2C%20Fripp&f=false#v=snippet&q=EG%2C%20Virgin%2C%20EMI%2C%20Fripp
(8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 106: Line 106:


:::The problem was worse at [[New Standard Tuning]], which linked directly to two individual interviews that lack copyright information. Even here, the link to all the interviews at Elephant Talk seemed to violate policy, so I replaced the interview-board link with a reference to Tamm. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">&nbsp;'''Kiefer'''</font>]].[[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|Wolfowitz]]</span></small> 15:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
:::The problem was worse at [[New Standard Tuning]], which linked directly to two individual interviews that lack copyright information. Even here, the link to all the interviews at Elephant Talk seemed to violate policy, so I replaced the interview-board link with a reference to Tamm. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">&nbsp;'''Kiefer'''</font>]].[[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|Wolfowitz]]</span></small> 15:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

== Copyright concerns regarding Discipline Global Mobile (DGM) ==

Hi WP (team?),

Unless [[Discipline Global Mobile]] (DGM) has granted permission to link to specific pages, Wikipedia is violating the Terms of Service of DGM Live!:
<blockquote>"
'''1.2. Copyright.'''

The Site Content and Site Code are owned by DGM and/or the associated music publishers and are protected by applicable domestic and international copyright laws. Copyright © 1983-2012 DGM. All Rights Reserved. ''Unless expressly permitted elsewhere in the Site by DGM, you shall not'' copy, distribute, publish, perform, modify, download, transmit, transfer, sell, license, reproduce, create derivative works from or based upon, distribute, post, publicly display, frame, '''link''', or in any other way exploit'' any of the Site Content or Code, in whole or in part''.
<p>
'''Links to the Site, other than to the Home Page, are only permitted upon express permission from and arrangement with DGM.''' Any rights not expressly granted to you herein are reserved. Any violation of copyright laws may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible." (Emboldening and italics added)
</blockquote>

Would somebody (for example with good relations with DGM Live!) please ask for permission to link to specific DGM pages, for example for the WP articles currently listed on the King Crimson footer template?

In the interim, we should begin removing the DGM page references.

Thanks!

<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">&nbsp;'''Kiefer'''</font>]].[[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|Wolfowitz]]</span></small> 13:32, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
:I removed ToS violations from this article and [[Guitar Craft]], for legality and respect of the ToS at DGM. (I suppose that having links only to DGM's frontpage provides newbies with more information about Robert and perhaps increases sales of DGM merchandise and music, so DGM's rules are understandable.) Sincerely, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">&nbsp;'''Kiefer'''</font>]].[[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|Wolfowitz]]</span></small> 20:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

::I am not a lawyer, but I doubt DGM has any legal (or moral) right to prohibit linking to its web pages or copying parts of them. In my opinion, it falls under [[fair use]]. The "Any rights not expressly granted to you herein are reserved" sentence sounds particularly misleading to me, as there are implicit rights granted to us by the law, and no licensing agreement can override the law.&mdash;[[User:J. M.|J. M.]] ([[User talk:J. M.|talk]]) 19:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

:::Hi J. M.!
:::I [[Ramsey test|would bet that]] Fripp or DGM's lawyer reviewed the terms of service, given the frequency with which legal headaches and legal meetings are recounted in Fripp's diary. You may wish to read [[Bill Bruford]]'s autobiography recounting the ease with which he obtained rights to some music by writing a letter with the keywords "Robert Fripp" and "copyright"!<ref>
:::{{harvtxt|Bruford|2009|p=[http://books.google.se/books?hl=sv&id=R4iW0tsxLqQC&dq=Bill+Bruford&q=EG%2C%20Virgin%2C%20EMI%2C%20Fripp&f=false#v=snippet&q=EG%2C%20Virgin%2C%20EMI%2C%20Fripp&f=false 142]}}:<p>
:::{{cite book|title=Bill&nbsp;Bruford: The autobiography: Yes, King&nbsp;Crimson, Earthworks, and more|first=Bill|last=Bruford|authorlink=Bill Bruford|publisher=Jawbone Press|year=2009|isbn=9781906002237, ISBN 1906002231|ref=harv}}
</ref>
<references/>
:::I am not a lawyer either.
:::Seriously, we may link the DGM main page and have our link include the full title of the page, as I have done when I have removed links to DGM subpages---this which should ease the reader's search, indeed making it trivial; such informative linking to the DGM main page also respects a reasonable request.
:::Sincerely, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">&nbsp;'''Kiefer'''</font>]].[[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|Wolfowitz]]</span></small> 19:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

== [[Discipline&nbsp;Global&nbsp;Mobile]] DYK nomination ==

I nominated the following hook for DYK. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">&nbsp;'''Kiefer'''</font>]].[[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|Wolfowitz]]</span></small> 17:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
<div style="float:right;margin-left:0.5em;">
[[Image:Robert Fripp.jpg|100x100px|Roger Fripp plays guitar.]]
</div>'''Did you know'''
<!--
-->
{{*mp}}... music was called "an industry founded on exploitation, oiled by deceit, riven with theft and fueled by greed" by [[Robert&nbsp;Fripp]] ''(pictured)'', [[King&nbsp;Crimson]] guitarist and founder of '''[[Discipline&nbsp;Global&nbsp;Mobile]]'''?
<!--
-->

Revision as of 19:57, 21 February 2012

Chronology

The article says he worked with Bowie on "Heroes" and then went on to work on Peter Gabriel 2 and Sacred Songs. According to this interview it was the other way around. http://www.elephant-talk.com/wiki/Interview_with_Robert_Fripp_in_Melody_Maker_%281979%29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.0.194 (talk) 10:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elephant Talk displays no permission for its republication of the Melody Maker interview. If their republication infringes on copyright, this link should not be posted.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:07, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Innovations

I'd like to see a section about his innovations, with sub-sections for 1) frippertronics, 2) the crafty guitarists, 3) special tunings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.17.38 (talkcontribs)

Tone deaf?

Really? I find it hard to believe... Anyway - Any source for that? 89.1.182.59

I found it hard to believe as well, so I originally tagged it as needing a citation for verification. Quite honestly, even with the rewording that someone did recently ("was at first" wasn't in the original statement), it seems spurious at best and disingenuous at worst. I think I'm going to go ahead and remove it actually since it seems unfounded. Charles M. Reed 20:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fripp has repeatedly said he was tone-deaf with no sense of rhythm when he started playing the guitar. As it's actually pretty interesting, I re-added it to the article, with links to the interviews. J. M. 05:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what do you know? There's hope for us all! Thanks for the sources. Charles M. Reed 19:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Affiliations

At the moment it is just Crim and David Sylvian - that seems odd. Should we include everyone he's worked with ? Or just his group memberships ? Or what ? -- Beardo 02:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fripp & holding meetings?

I'm not sure where I heard this, but I read somewhere that Robert Fripp will actually hold meetings about songs for KC/solo albums. I'm not sure if it can be colloborated.

Accuracy

'Fripp toured with Gabriel to support the album, but remained in the wings and was introduced to audiences as "Dusty Rhodes".'

Can this comment be verified? If not, isn't it possible that may not have been a reference to Fripp at all, but to DAVID Rhodes, another guitarist who has toured extensively as a member of Peter Gabriel's band? Furry Canary 06:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, its a Fripp reference given that the tour in question predates David Rhodes involvement with Peter Gabriel. Its been mentioned in numerous sources over the years, such as p.208 of Sid Smith's In The Court of King Crimson. Gabriel introduced "Rhodes" to the audience on the '77 tour even though he played offstage.
Tim gueguen 05:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a bootleg of a Peter Gabriel show where he introduces "Dusty Rhodes", which I first assumed was a reference to David Rhodes, but it's very obviously Fripp playing-- just my two cents.

Yesyouam 00:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Robert Fripp-Exposure (album cover).jpg

Image:Robert Fripp-Exposure (album cover).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pershore

In his diary Fripp affirms he resides in Bredonborough, a fake name. In the photos he posts in the same diary you can recognize Pershore. I could give you the address but it's better not to encourage stalkers ;) Marco bisello 09:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, Wikipedia requires that everything in the articles must be attributable to a reputable published source. So I'm going to remove Pershore from the article, since it's not backed up by a reputable source. When you or anyone else find a reputable published source that says he lives in Pershore, feel free to add it again. Yes, I know you posted the links to the Google photos, but that violates yet another Wikipedia rule – no original research. That is, you cannot do your private investigation and publish your own findings in Wikipedia articles, you can only quote what someone else has said, in a reputable source (serious magazine, book, trustworthy website). —J. M. 14:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm - does Wikipedia count as "reputable" then, since Toyah's page also says they live in Pershore? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.235.243 (talk) 17:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are (or should be) just summaries of information that's available elsewhere. So when you want a reliable proof for something that's written in a Wikipedia article, you should ask if the fact is verifiable or not, that's the only thing that matters. You don't verify something by pointing to a sentence in (some other) Wikipedia article, because every sentence in a Wikipedia article should just be a "link" to an external source. So in the end, you have to see the external source. So, if the authors of the Toyah page can back it up by citing a reliable source, then it's reputable and trustworthy (but the citation should point to the original source, not to the Toyah page). If they cannot, then the claim can be challenged (by requesting a citation) and eventually removed. That's the standard process in Wikipedia. After all, that's also what makes Wikipedia a fairly good source of information – even though you cannot trust it blindly, errors happen in Wikipedia articles, too. That's why citations are needed, so that everyone can verify the facts for themselves. —J. M. (talk) 18:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(hearty applause) Next time, you could just say something like this : "No." Get out much? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.235.243 (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia entry for Pershore also includes a reference to Fripp & Willcox living there :-) R. sparts (talk) 21:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but again, the same old problem (so I hope to receive another hearty applause): it is unsourced. Unsourced claims in Wikipedia can be challenged and eventually removed. It does not matter how many Wikipedia articles say Fripp lives in Pershore, if they don't provide the source – it could all be added by the same person, or someone might see the unsourced claim in the Toyah article (that she and Robert live in Pershore) and therefore add it to the Pershore article, too (without having any other proof)... A single person can cause a lot of confusion and misinformation in Wikipedia. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Fripp doesn't live in Pershore, in fact I believe it's true, but Wikipedia does not care what we believe in. To quote the official Wikipedia policy: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". —J. M. (talk) 21:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So I added a citation request for the Pershore claim on the Toyah page and a reference was immediately added. So it is now safe, as far as Wikipedia requirements are concerned. :-) —J. M. (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this discussion about Fripp & Pershore after I added a note to the article. Perhaps I should have done this before the change. With those comments in mind, I'll just add that, for some years already, there are sources for the residency of Fripp in Pershore that stand up entirely on their own merit; one I decided to not use is inescapably in the public domain and provides his complete address. It does seem strange that there has been so much difficulty providing a verifiable source. For future reference, the source I gave (192.com) has a broad appeal for several reasons: it gives enough information without being too invasive to the subject, and with a slight modification can be altered to work, not only for Toyah but also for almost anybody else who has a form of residency in Gt Britain.Twistlethrop (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

King Crimson 1970-1980

There is no mention at all of the different King Crimson lineups between 1970-1980. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.180.147.183 (talk) 23:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April Fool Spoof

On 1st April 2011 there was a spoof item on the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 about the development of 3D radio. Robert Fripp was named as one of the inventors of this alleged system and a person purporting to be him was interviewed about it. EricPolymath (talk) 08:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tell us more! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talkcontribs) 12:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guitar Craft: References

Hi Side!

I expanded the references for Guitar Craft, using Tamm's book. These may be useful here.

Elephant Talk contains texts of old interviews---e.g. for Mulhorn (which is cited here)---but lacks statements of permission from the copyright holder. Please clarify why Elephant Talk may be linked here?

Thanks,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly acceptable for us to link to sites when they contain information that could not otherwise be added to the article, per WP:EL. It is not a our prerogative to investigate the copyright legitimacy of that website; that is their issue. There's absolutely no reason it can't be linked here. Its an online version of what I assume would otherwise be an offline reference (or one that has since been taken down), or else you would link to the original interview. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 14:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, please review WP:External links, which states
"For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following, without exception:
  1. Material that violates the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations should not be linked. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website has licensed the work, or uses the work in a way compliant with fair use. Knowingly directing others to material that violates copyright may be considered contributory copyright infringement. If you know that an external website is carrying a work in violation of the work's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work casts a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates copyright."
"NEVER" and "without exception" are strong prohibitions against such linking, imho.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem was worse at New Standard Tuning, which linked directly to two individual interviews that lack copyright information. Even here, the link to all the interviews at Elephant Talk seemed to violate policy, so I replaced the interview-board link with a reference to Tamm.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WP (team?),

Unless Discipline Global Mobile (DGM) has granted permission to link to specific pages, Wikipedia is violating the Terms of Service of DGM Live!:

"

1.2. Copyright.

The Site Content and Site Code are owned by DGM and/or the associated music publishers and are protected by applicable domestic and international copyright laws. Copyright © 1983-2012 DGM. All Rights Reserved. Unless expressly permitted elsewhere in the Site by DGM, you shall not copy, distribute, publish, perform, modify, download, transmit, transfer, sell, license, reproduce, create derivative works from or based upon, distribute, post, publicly display, frame, link, or in any other way exploit any of the Site Content or Code, in whole or in part.

Links to the Site, other than to the Home Page, are only permitted upon express permission from and arrangement with DGM. Any rights not expressly granted to you herein are reserved. Any violation of copyright laws may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible." (Emboldening and italics added)

Would somebody (for example with good relations with DGM Live!) please ask for permission to link to specific DGM pages, for example for the WP articles currently listed on the King Crimson footer template?

In the interim, we should begin removing the DGM page references.

Thanks!

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:32, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed ToS violations from this article and Guitar Craft, for legality and respect of the ToS at DGM. (I suppose that having links only to DGM's frontpage provides newbies with more information about Robert and perhaps increases sales of DGM merchandise and music, so DGM's rules are understandable.) Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a lawyer, but I doubt DGM has any legal (or moral) right to prohibit linking to its web pages or copying parts of them. In my opinion, it falls under fair use. The "Any rights not expressly granted to you herein are reserved" sentence sounds particularly misleading to me, as there are implicit rights granted to us by the law, and no licensing agreement can override the law.—J. M. (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi J. M.!
I would bet that Fripp or DGM's lawyer reviewed the terms of service, given the frequency with which legal headaches and legal meetings are recounted in Fripp's diary. You may wish to read Bill Bruford's autobiography recounting the ease with which he obtained rights to some music by writing a letter with the keywords "Robert Fripp" and "copyright"![1]
  1. ^
    Bruford (2009, p. 142):

    Bruford, Bill (2009). Bill Bruford: The autobiography: Yes, King Crimson, Earthworks, and more. Jawbone Press. ISBN 9781906002237, ISBN 1906002231. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)
I am not a lawyer either.
Seriously, we may link the DGM main page and have our link include the full title of the page, as I have done when I have removed links to DGM subpages---this which should ease the reader's search, indeed making it trivial; such informative linking to the DGM main page also respects a reasonable request.
Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the following hook for DYK.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Fripp plays guitar.

Did you know