How to respond to the takedown request email?

[Xmader]

Hi, I'm Musescore developer. You need to takedown this repository: https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader and any other your public repositories with same code. Because you illegaly use our private API with licensed music content. All not Public domain content on musescore.com is licensed by major music publishers (Alfred, EMI, Sony, etc.). Distribute licensed music content from Musescore.com for free you violate their rights. Therefore, in pre-trial procedure, I suggest you close the following resources: • https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader (and all your forks and mirrors) • https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/391931-musescore-downloader Otherwise, I will have to transfer information about you to lawyers who will cooperate with github.com and Chinese government to physically find you and stop the illegal use of licensed content.

Thanks, Max Chistyakov


P.S. You can always download Public Domain content for free from musescore.com.

2020-02-08T11:03Z

[Xmader]

update on the Chrome extension

[CSharperMantle]

@Xmader, is it possible to change the extension's name to something like 'moosescore' or even 'librescore' to bypass the trademark infringe (at lease, partially)?

[kmk3]

@Xmader, is it possible to change the extension's name to something like 'moosescore' or even 'librescore' to bypass the trademark infringe (at lease, partially)?

Indeed; unlike the copyright claim in the original post, this one seems to be just about the trademark. In that case, I suppose that the simplest way to resolve it would be to change the extension name (and probably also the project name) to something sufficiently different.

I think that everything else (including references to musescore.com) can remain the same, as long as it's explicitly stated that it's not an official client, etc (note: I'm not a lawyer).

to something like 'moosescore'

"moosescore" probably sounds too similar.

or even 'librescore'

There already exists a LibreScore:

• https://github.com/LibreScore/LibreScore

But "librescore-downloader" might do it.

[MatteoGheza]

Any update on this?

[joepie91]

For the record, their trademark claim is frivolous. A trademark isn't a monopoly on the usage of a name; there are many circumstances ("interoperability with" being one of them) where it is legal to use a trademarked name without authorization from the trademark holder, so long as you don't imply that your thing is provided or endorsed by the trademark holder.

[kirwinia]

Hi,

We're musicians, free software advocates, software developers but, most importantly in this case, freelance journalists.

We'd love to write a piece (published online, for free, for all to read of course!) about this unacceptable behavior on the part of MuseScore and it's employees.

But before we do, we'd like to have the permission of those in this thread, such as @Xmader @marcan @joepie91 @MatteoGheza @domsson @CaptainChicky @TheAceBlock @psharma04 @dalva24 @IamRifki @TheAlienDrew @EddiesTech @badcodehash.

We intend to focus mostly on MuseScore and what is, in our opinion, deceptive and unscrupulous behavior. But in case it's required, we'd love to use a handful of quotes (We're not sure which just yet.)

So we'd like to get permission beforehand, from anyone willing to be quoted. If you don't respond, we'll take it as a No.

Thanks :)

[EddiesTech]

Hi. It'd be nice to know where the quotes would be published (e.g. the website they'll be on) before I agree to have my name and quote spread across some random site :)

[Kaleidosium]

Hi,

We're musicians, free software advocates, software developers but, most importantly in this case, freelance journalists.

We'd love to write a piece (published online, for free, for all to read of course!) about this unacceptable behavior on the part of MuseScore and it's employees.

But before we do, we'd like to have the permission of those in this thread, such as @Xmader @marcan @joepie91 @MatteoGheza @domsson @CaptainChicky @TheAceBlock @psharma04 @dalva24 @IamRifki @TheAlienDrew @EddiesTech @badcodehash.

We intend to focus mostly on MuseScore and what is, in our opinion, deceptive and unscrupulous behavior. But in case it's required, we'd love to use a handful of quotes (We're not sure which just yet.)

So we'd like to get permission beforehand, from anyone willing to be quoted. If you don't respond, we'll take it as a No.

Thanks :)

Feel free to quote me, I don't really care either way.

[kirwinia]

Hi. It'd be nice to know where the quotes would be published (e.g. the website they'll be on) before I agree to have my name and quote spread across some random site :)

Medium, primarily. Might also link the article via Twitter. It's not going to be published anywhere that's outside of my complete control. :)

[Be-ing]

The Tenacity developers may be interested to talk. Come introduce yourself in our Matrix room at #tenacity:libera.chat

Medium, primarily. Might also link the article via Twitter. It's not going to be published anywhere that's outside of my complete control. :)

Medium is not really in your control. If you want that, then host your own website.

[kirwinia]

The Tenacity developers may be interested to talk. Come introduce yourself in our Matrix room at #tenacity:libera.chat

Medium, primarily. Might also link the article via Twitter. It's not going to be published anywhere that's outside of my complete control. :)

Medium is not really in your control. If you want that, then host your own website.

It's in my control in as much as there won't be any editing or changing of what we write. At most, something could get pulled down, in which case it would go up on my website, but that website is not really in a fit state for publishing on just now.

[lengthwave]

Hi,

We're musicians, free software advocates, software developers but, most importantly in this case, freelance journalists.

We'd love to write a piece (published online, for free, for all to read of course!) about this unacceptable behavior on the part of MuseScore and it's employees.

But before we do, we'd like to have the permission of those in this thread, such as @Xmader @marcan @joepie91 @MatteoGheza @domsson @CaptainChicky @TheAceBlock @psharma04 @dalva24 @IamRifki @TheAlienDrew @EddiesTech @badcodehash.

We intend to focus mostly on MuseScore and what is, in our opinion, deceptive and unscrupulous behavior. But in case it's required, we'd love to use a handful of quotes (We're not sure which just yet.)

So we'd like to get permission beforehand, from anyone willing to be quoted. If you don't respond, we'll take it as a No.

Thanks :)

Please contact press@mu.se

I can make time to discuss with you personally, even face-to-face in Seattle.

[kirwinia]

Please contact press@mu.se

I can make time to discuss with you personally, even face-to-face in Seattle.

Hello,

You will be contacted if and when the situation requires either an answer from Muse Group as to a question posed, or if a comment is sought on the article.

At this time, Muse Group's input is not required, nor would it be useful. The position of the company on these matters is quite clear to all, by way of comments here and also the suppression efforts that the company has engaged in.

Again: A dialogue with Muse Group is not sought at this time. I am also, frankly, shocked that you would suggest a face-to-face meeting, because that would not only lend an appearance of biased journalism, but we're still in a Pandemic for heaven's sake. WA may have reopened, but it's not entirely safe yet and I'm not risking my health to meet with someone from a company I am reporting on, when I have no reason and zero imperative to.

[EddiesTech]

I think he was just trying to be nice. He wouldn't have suggested an in-person chat or gone along with one if he knew you wouldn't be comfortable with it. Yes, some of the company's actions have been questionable, but their employees are still human and there is no need to hound them down for suggesting an in-person meetup. Please don't dehumanise these employees, they seem like nice reasonable people, especially making time to speak with a freelance journalist.

[marcan]

Feel free to quote me.

[lengthwave]

You will be contacted if and when the situation requires either an answer from Muse Group as to a question posed, or if a comment is sought on the article.

At this time, Muse Group's input is not required, nor would it be useful. The position of the company on these matters is quite clear to all, by way of comments here and also the suppression efforts that the company has engaged in.

Then your intent is not actual journalism.

For reference: Society of Professional Journalism Code of Ethics.

Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible.

Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.

_

It is not possible to meet those two essential requirements of journalistic ethics without seeking comment from Muse Group.

[kirwinia]

@EddiesTech Every time I ended up writing about this kind of issue (the impetus to write was often due to dodgy practices or overbearing corporate interests) and the company in focus suddenly wanted to speak, especially if it's when we're barely getting going on a piece, and we've let them engage us in an e-mail conversation... it's immediately gone heavy on talking points and pushing their angle on the perception of the issue (instead of the facts).

We're older, wiser and far more jaded. I don't talk to subjects of a piece until I have thoroughly researched it and have a solid foundation of fact that can serve as a buttress against attempts to color my writing.

[kirwinia]

@workedintheory My intent is journalism free from even the appearance of a conflict of interest or the dissemination of propaganda and that does not endanger my status as an independent journalist.

I follow the IFJ's Global Charter of Ethics for Journalists.

And as I said before: I will contact Muse Group, at the appropriate time, with any questions I may have and will allow an opportunity for them to comment upon the piece. At the appropriate time.

[lengthwave]

And as I said before: I will contact Muse Group, at the appropriate time, with any questions I may have and will allow an opportunity for them to comment upon the piece. At the appropriate time.

If contacted only for comment on a published or finished piece rather than in the process of gathering fact, that is not actual journalism.

Your intent in that case would be to present a particular agenda, rather than seeking objective truth. That is the very definition of commentary, not journalism.

Journalistic ethics would require the article then be clearly labeled as commentary and also state that the subject of the article offered to speak with you to verify and/or clarify any details of the article prior to publication, but was refused.

[processor286]

The absolute irony of Muse Group lecturing on ethics. I just can't.

[badcodehash]

hi @kirwinia, no problem. Feel free to quote me. I appreciate the effort.

[Semisol]

The Tenacity developers may be interested to talk. Come introduce yourself in our Matrix room at #tenacity:libera.chat

👋 Heya. From what I see and read, I am going to be honest this is bs.

1. If the publishers' rights are being violated, THEY should come and open a DMCA claim.
2. I feel like there was no intent on copyright violations, because they CAN do it doesn't mean they will. (this claim may not be correct, take this with a grain of salt)
3. Taking down the developers website is very stupid, and feels like was made to reinforce their claim of "you are using a private API".

Hope the outcome is positive.

Small note to whoever wants to publish this as a quote

Please contact me at hi [@] semisol [.] dev with where you want it published, so I know what will be done with it. And if possible, please add a link to the comment for reference. Thanks!

[joepie91]

@kirwinia I'm fine with being quoted, so long as it's not presented misleadingly of course :)

[kirwinia]

@kirwinia I'm fine with being quoted, so long as it's not presented misleadingly of course :)

Any quoting that we do will simply display a screenshot of the quote, unedited, with all of the GitHub layout around each comment box and such. Quotes will be in their entirity and unblemished and only included in a relevant section, or the quote won't go in at all.

We're extremely rigidly ethical about our writing, which is why we're stuck as a freelance journalist. Working for someone else means letting someone else edit your work and that allows others to twist what we're trying to say.

And hell no to that.

[EddiesTech]

Hey @kirwinia. You say "we". Who is "we" exactly? Will your article be written with others? I am happy for you to use my quote if you want. Thanks :)

[Semisol]

@kirwinia You may quote me, but please provide the post link here. Thanks for the clarification.

[kirwinia]

Ah @EddiesTech no, sorry. That's a personal pronoun thing. Sorry for the confusion!

And okay, sure @Semisol :)

[EddiesTech]

No problem @kirwinia. :)

[RockyMM]

At this time, Muse Group's input is not required, nor would it be useful. The position of the company on these matters is quite clear to all, by way of comments here and also the suppression efforts that the company has engaged in.

Again: A dialogue with Muse Group is not sought at this time.

I am not sure if you ever went to any journalism school but this is not how journalism works. Your coverage of the story would be extremely biased if you did not ask both parties for comments and do not include them in your written piece. If you have only one side this is called propaganda - not journalism.

Even here in Serbia, where we have one of the most oppressive regimes regarding free word and free thought, the regime journals are persistently asking opposition figures and other non-regime persons for comments, just to honor the form.

[kirwinia]

@RockyMM "at this time".

[lengthwave]

I think he was just trying to be nice. He wouldn't have suggested an in-person chat or gone along with one if he knew you wouldn't be comfortable with it. Yes, some of the company's actions have been questionable, but their employees are still human and there is no need to hound them down for suggesting an in-person meetup. Please don't dehumanise these employees, they seem like nice reasonable people, especially making time to speak with a freelance journalist.

Thanks for injecting a more human element to this discussion. There is actually quite a bit more to this story here than most people realize.

I'll try to explain.

EDIT: On second thought, I will not and just leave it at that. It seems the internet is fed on outrage and must interpret every intent as malicious.

[joepie91]

I am not sure if you ever went to any journalism school but this is not how journalism works. Your coverage of the story would be extremely biased if you did not ask both parties for comments and do not include them in your written piece. If you have only one side this is called propaganda - not journalism.

You're specifically describing values-neutral journalism, which isn't the only form of journalism, and in fact there's an increasing amount of criticism aimed at it because it's trivially exploitable by bad actors. Far better is journalism that dives deep into a subject, considers all the viewpoints provided, and then determines what the truth is, whether or not that is a compromise between viewpoints.

Or, more succinctly: "if someone claims it rains and someone else claims it doesn't, your job as a journalist isn't to report both; it's to look out of the fucking window".

[joepie91]

@workedintheory I can't speak with certainty for the US, but in many other countries, for something to qualify as "circumvention of copyright protection" it requires that the protection measure is effective to begin with, and significant work and/or an uncommon approach is needed to get past it. Unless you can argue that that is the case here, which I doubt since this seems to be using a documented API, this claim would not fly internationally.

Likewise, to argue that a tool is illegal because it circumvents copyright protection measures, you would need to argue that that is its primary or at least major reason for existence; something that's quite difficult to argue here, considering that the documentation very clearly states the motivation of this tool as "this will let you download scores that you have the right to download under an open license", which is not a copyright violation.

So no, I have my doubts about the validity this claim, and it feels to me like "you're using our API in a way we don't like" and "you're circumventing copyright protection measures" are two claims that are being willfully conflated here, even though legally they are totally separate things.

[lengthwave]

Far better is journalism that dives deep into a subject, considers all the viewpoints provided, and then determines what the truth is, whether or not that is a compromise between viewpoints.

And that would require also interviewing me, or another representative of the subject in the process of developing the article.

As demonstrated in my most recent post here, there is quite a lot that external observers cannot see or know.

Without this perspective, it is not an accurate story.

[joepie91]

And that would require also interviewing me, or another representative of the subject in the process of developing the article.

No, it wouldn't. Interviewing someone is only one way to get hold of information, and while it's often considered a good practice to at least hear out all parties, it's by no means a hard requirement for responsible journalism.

[marcan]

This repository violates 17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems.

No, it does not. It's in the first sentence:

No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

A public API does not effectively control access to a work.

Another repository of his, musescore-dataset, has far more serious implications as it may be considered willful infringement with criminal intent (see: 17 U.S. Code § 506 - Criminal offenses). That repository is actually illegally distributing copyrighted works licensed to MuseScore by major music publishers.

That repository is doing no such thing, as no copyrighted works are hosted as part of that repository. The copyrighted works are on IPFS, which is a distributed filesystem. The legality of linking to infringing content is not settled in US case law.

Simply put, the actual process of requesting the take down and proving violation would have severe implication on Wenzheng Tang, so I have hesitated in the hopes he would simply choose to take it down himself.

The arrogance and FUD in your words is palpable.

Upon further investigation, it became clear that Wenzheng Tang is a Chinese national, but not resident in China. As a guest in his current country, his residency status is predicated on a number of conditions, one of which is not violating the law.

If found in violation of laws, residency may be revoked and he may be deported to his home country.

This becomes even further complicated given another repo of his - Fuck 学习强国, which is highly critical of the Chinese government. Were he deported to China, who knows how he may be received.

This is blatant blackmail.

What I have described in this post is not at all a threat, but an informed assessment of your own personal legal risk.

Dude.

You are young, clearly bright, but very naive. Do you really want to risk ruining your entire life so a kid can download your illegal bootleg of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" theme for oboe?

I don't think this requires further comment.

[lengthwave]

A public API does not effectively control access to a work.

There is no public API.

It was discontinued as a condition of music publishers.

@Xmader was notified that it was discontinued and access was no longer authorized.

In addition, code was changed and this circumvention tool was repeatedly modified to circumvent these changes. This is seen in both the commit history, PR and discussions.

Again, the practice continued after informed that it was unauthorized and continued modifications were made beyond the original API to circumvent copyright protection.

That repository is doing no such thing, as no copyrighted works are hosted as part of that repository. The copyrighted works are on IPFS, which is a distributed filesystem.

You are missing 2 other key points:

1. Files were accessed/downloaded illegally (after he was informed API access was revoked and after changes were made to API)
2. He uploaded the files himself to IPFS as he described in the comment

[marcan]

1. Files were accessed/downloaded illegally (after he was informed API access was revoked and after changes were made to API)

2. He uploaded the files himself to IPFS as he described in the comment

Both of which you'd have to prove, and the liability of which is completely unclear given the files were originally available through a public API and are not being hosted personally by him. Did your lawyers not advise you about the importance of details such as this?

Either way, deferring to threats to a person's personal safety in a discussion about copyright is utterly disgusting, and your conduct makes it abundantly clear that the original e-mail was not "a developer gone rogue" but MuseScore's official position, and that your company can in no way, shape, or form be accepted as part of the free software community, the music community, or any other community for that matter. There is absolutely no place for this garbage in the world.

[SchizoDuckie]

Upon further investigation, it became clear that Wenzheng Tang is a Chinese national, but not resident in China. As a guest in his current country, his residency status is predicated on a number of conditions, one of which is not violating the law.

If found in violation of laws, residency may be revoked and he may be deported to his home country.

This becomes even further complicated given another repo of his - Fuck 学习强国, which is highly critical of the Chinese government. Were he deported to China, who knows how he may be received.

I have never in my life read such a vile public threat to somebody's life on Github as this. Whoever wrote this is a despicable excuse for the human race. Let's make this idiot famous.

[klondi]

There is another misconception to also clear up. Rights to an arrangement of a copyrighted work do not belong to the arranger, but belong to the rights holder of the original work. It is up to the rights holder to individually determine if they would like to share any revenue resulting from the arrangement, but are under no legal obligation to do so. This is the way the current law works.

As such, an arranger may not monetize their arrangement without explicit permission from and payment of fees (fee for right to arrange, plus royalties) to the rights holder. Again, this is the way the current law works.

It's funny when people mess up copyright law so widely... Derivative works can be copyrighted, but the copyright will only apply to the changes and additions made over the original. And hey, I'm not saying this myself, actually it is the U.S. Copyright Office doing so! https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf

As a consequence: Rights to an arrangement of a copyrighted work do belong to the arranger but only for the changes and additions made. All rights to the original work belong only to the rights holder of the original work. Until the original work goes into public domain, it is up to the both of the rights holders to determine if and how would they like to distribute the arrangement, but neither is under no legal obligation to do so. If they do not want to or can not reach an agreement the derivative work cannot be distributed and NEITHER of the holders can make use or derive revenues from it. THAT is the way the current law works.

As such, an arranger may create an arrangement without explicit permission from and without payment of any fees (including fee for right to arrange, plus royalties) to the rights holder. Permissions and possible payment of fees (which again are to be determined after agreement between both authors) are only needed for publication and only if the original work is not on considered to be on the public domain. Again, THAT is the way the current law works.

One would expect a bit better knowledge of the copyright law from the director of strategy of Musescore.

[asumagic]

How do you expect anyone from the communities you pretend to serve to trust you when you keep doing things like this?

Artists publishing arranges for music that is not owned by major music publishers in any way will not receive a dime, and yet we still need to pay for a subscription to download sheets, effectively feeding companies that do not have any single right to those sheets.
In fact, most of the sheets I couldn't download on MuseScore for learning purposes fall exactly under this case.

You haven't done crap to prove you need to do that. It's not a minor detail you can sway off, it's a pretty huge one. You haven't addressed that one bit and this one single problem justifies the existence of this repo.
And that's completely ignoring the derivative work issue, on which I have no opinion because IANAL and don't know enough about copyright.

Then you expect public blackmailing to make you look good, apparently. Because why the fuck else would you think it's a good idea in this thread.

[migueldeicaza]

Screenshot of the threat that has now been deleted, so people coming here can understand the discussion:

https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1417085393762099200?s=21

[aveao]

An archived version can also be reached here: https://web.archive.org/web/20210719115639if_/https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5#issuecomment-882450335

[FergusInLondon]

Just to clarify @workedintheory, are you still speaking on behalf of Muse Group when you make statements like these?

Upon further investigation, it became clear that Wenzheng Tang is a Chinese national, but not resident in China. As a guest in his current country, his residency status is predicated on a number of conditions, one of which is not violating the law.

If found in violation of laws, residency may be revoked and he may be deported to his home country.

This becomes even further complicated given another repo of his - Fuck 学习强国, which is highly critical of the Chinese government. Were he deported to China, who knows how he may be received.

If so, that sounds dangerously close to you indicating that Muse sees the author's vulnerability to political violence as advantageous?

[processor286]

I have original work on Musescore.com and never going to see a penny. It's a bit rich for Muse to be all about the copyright holders - but apparently so long as they're big, and stuff the little guy. It's like they assume that every score uploaded must be of a big published song.

[auscompgeek]

FYI comment edit history is public on GitHub. The comment hasn't been deleted, just click the edited dropdown on https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5#issuecomment-882450335. No archive necessary (yet).

[sJJdGG]

EDIT: On second thought, I will not and just leave it at that. It seems the internet is fed on outrage and must interpret every intent as malicious.

You LITERALLY said: Comply with us or you're being sent to GULAG

And after seeing the backfire and missing the chance to say sorry you blame the internet for your actions???

Wish you some mindfulness🙏

[kirwinia]

See? We don't need to interview anyone from MuseScore.

Everything we could possibly need to know about the ethos and moral basis of this organization has been publicly displayed in this thread of comments.

That was an out-and-out threat to have someone deported, detained and likely incarcerated without anything even close to the due process that exists in the US and other North American (and European) countries.

To threaten a persons wellbeing, nay, their very LIFE over some nebulous copyright claims is just...

Frankly, we didn't expect Muse Group to stoop any lower than what they already had, but someone must've had a shovel because they're deep under the foundations now (and we doubt it'll stop there, especially if these frankly laudable free software projects continue!)

@Xmader we're truly sorry that you're having to deal with this level of harassment and threats. We've been in that situation before and it is destabilizing as well as traumatizing.

(And as @marcan well knows, doxxing someone, threatening their life and livelihood, can have deeply saddening results...)

[CSharperMantle]

FYI comment edit history is public on GitHub. The comment hasn't been deleted, just click the edited dropdown on #5 (comment). No archive necessary (yet)

@auscompgeek Not really. Now history content can be deleted by the author, but the 'delete' action will leave a log entry too.

See the history of this comment for example.

Oops I at'ed the wrong person.

[Semisol]

Yep.