How much does it bother you?

Andy Alford · Post by **Andy Alford** » 30 Dec 2001 7:46 am

This topic needs to be moved to the way off topic section where the far side is not far enough.

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 30 Dec 2001 8:54 am

I think we're probably not too terribly off topic if we're talking about music (well, I hope not, anyway), and I'll stick with that arena.

A subset of this subject of... err.... "borrowed" music is also local bands playing big name bands' material on their gigs. Copy bands are everywhere and nobody I know of makes them pay ASCAP or BMI fees every time they play a song from the radio. And playing copy stuff may even be their living. How does this figure into the music copyright concerns we're speaking about here?

------------------
Bill (steel not out of the woodshed) | MSA Classic U12 | Email | My music | Steeler birthdays | Over 50?
"You are SO middle aged in SO many ways...." -my wife[This message was edited by Bill Llewellyn on 30 December 2001 at 10:50 AM.]

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 30 Dec 2001 5:09 pm

Speaking of the Wilkinsons, what has happened to them. The local "country" stations aren't playing their stuff anymore. Did they pack up and go home to Canada?

They had just finished a new album earlier this year when Giant was bought by Warner Bros. This apparently enabled them to "shop around", and they're now with BNA/RCA.

BNA didn't want to buy the album ("Shine"), so Warner Bros. still has control of it. It's been released in Australia and parts of Europe. (You can get a copy delivered from Australia for $19). For some strange reason, they didn't even release it in Canada (where they have always cleaned up at the awards).

The new album from BNA should be out in March or April.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 30 Dec 2001 5:14 pm

A subset of this subject of... err.... "borrowed" music is also local bands playing big name bands' material on their gigs. Copy bands are everywhere and nobody I know of makes them pay ASCAP or BMI fees every time they play a song from the radio. And playing copy stuff may even be their living. How does this figure into the music copyright concerns we're speaking about here?

Good question. What happens to those who operate "karaoke nights", or bars that spin CD's for the dancers?

Isn't ASCAP/BMI supposed to collect on those, too?

I know that standard karaoke tapes/CD's don't have a license agreement for public "performances" in them.

Who's responsible? The bar, or the band/karoke-operator ?

How are the fees collected?

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 31 Dec 2001 4:03 am

The "legitimate" clubs that have bands pay an annual fee(s) to BMI, ASCAP, etc.

Same with jukebox and background music operators. I once worked for such a company and they paid fees for each juke box and they also tracked the background music songs they played and paid royalties on them (this was an independent company not a Muzak affiliate).

Larry Miller · Post by **Larry Miller** » 31 Dec 2001 5:57 am

The "legitimate" clubs that have bands pay an annual fee(s) to BMI, ASCAP, etc.

There is usually a sticker on the door of the club stating they have paid the fees.

Michael Holland · Post by **Michael Holland** » 31 Dec 2001 8:04 am

Right, it's the venue that's responsible for licensing fees. In addition to internet piracy, there is a long tradition of overseas piracy of music. China has a huge industry that copies and distributes millions of CD's. Do they pay royalties to the American companies that produce the music? Of course not. There was a piece on the news the other day about music in the streets of Afghanistan following the banishment of the Taliban. A street vendor was showing cassettes of Michael Jackson and saying that he sells over 100 a day. Do you think these are legitimate copies from an authorized distributor? Think again.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 31 Dec 2001 8:15 am

Basically, that's true, I suppose. Yet we'd better be prepared to pay the consequences (both here and in the hereafter) of our actions.

Hmmmm...I think there's a loophole out of that one, too. Something about "Not by words or deeds are ye judged..."

Jack's right...it's done everywhere, and by everybody. That's not right, but that's the way it is.

Jeff Lampert · Post by **Jeff Lampert** » 31 Dec 2001 2:57 pm

Am I to understand from the thoughts on this thread that when any of you guys join a cover band, they make you go out and buy a CD of every song that you need to learn? Or do they make a copy of every song you need to learn? Oh, I see ... This is NOT a rationalization, by the way; this is just to point out that it isn't that simple, and that we should all be careful about being self-righteous.

erik · Post by **erik** » 31 Dec 2001 7:06 pm

I had this argument with my friend the other day. I asked her on the phone what new music she has been listening to. She tells me she just burned Alicia Keys new CD. I say,"Did you pay for that!". She says, "no." I say, "You can't DO that!". I then find out not only is she burning free music but getting the blanks from work, and burning it on the company computer. Hopefully, i got her to change her ways.

Joe Law · Post by **Joe Law** » 31 Dec 2001 7:37 pm

This admittedly is a little off topic but I had to inject this in the conversation.Being treasurer of our church and having to pay the bills I see some of this license stuff that is a little far out.When the choir gets 20 copies of the sheet music and one day there is an extra singer, in order to run him a copy of the sheet music we have to have a license, so far OK. But the preacher handed me a bill the other day from CCLVI for a license to show a legitimate video to the congregation that was bought from the Baptist Assn. to show to the congregation.Seems that this is a little to much licenseing

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 31 Dec 2001 7:42 pm

I'l have to admit, between the costs of licensing, figuring out what needs to be licensed and how to do it, and the hassles of actually doing it -- it's no wonder a lot of it gets "ignored".

Does anybody remember when the RIAA wanted to have the Scouts pay licensing fees to sing campfire songs (or something like that)? Whoever was behind THAT didn't have much experience in PR, I guess.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 1 Jan 2002 4:26 am

Oh Geeze you all hit a nerve with me here as well.. Although I do not Copy CD's I do download some, very few mind you, tunes off of Morpheus, usually songs that are very hard to find if I could find them at all. Now here's my gripe about the music industry, an Industry that my family has been in for well over 35 years. I believe what caused the entire copy thing and download thing is two pointed. 1) Most of the CD's you buy are terrible, one or two good songs and the rest wouldn't make it on a bad Karaoke night and thats what they sound like, and they still sell for 15 or 16 bucks. 2) did you ever try to return a CD for poor quality ? When was it decided that a muscician or singer could sell a CD and it couldn't be returned if it was a poor CD or album? Lets take Wallmart here, you could buy every TV and Dishwasher in the place , spend thousands of $$$ and return it all for a full refund the next day if the item's didn't measure up. But try to return an opened CD..or video ..for poor satisfaction. In my mind the Industry created this monster out of total greed. This Industry knows exactly what they have created and have been reaping the rewards for years..I would venture to say that , and I know I'm out on the springboard here, the majority of CD's, all music, are purchased by early and mid teenaged kids, they really don't give a flip if the music is bad because the money came from Mom and Dad ! This is the best marketing scheme I have ever witnessed , genius if you will. It wasn't until my daughter bought and paid for her own Mirah Cary CD last year that she was more angry than me. She spent her own 16 bucks on a CD with two radio tunes and another 12 or so tunes not worthy of the Ted Mack amature hour .That was the last CD she ever bought.Yes, she downloads some songs from the Internet, she doesn't copy CD's though, she says that copying an entire CD most of the time is a waste of a 50 cent blank !
Nuff said...
TP

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 1 Jan 2002 11:26 am

Fortunately, some of those problems ARE being addressed (in a somewhat limited way). There are stores where you can listen to CD's before you buy them. Amazon.com has sound clips of a lot of songs from albums you can listen to before making a decision.

The reason you can return a washing machine to Sears is because you can't (easily and cheaply) make a copy of it before returning it. If we ever get to the point where the average citizen can buy a "cloning device" for $200, pay $1.00 for a lump of "mass-media", and make a perfect functioning copy of anything they buy, I'll bet te return policies will VASTLY change.

Yes, a lot of albums have "filler" on them. Or is there? I think part of the "problem" is that artists/record labels are trying to appeal to a very large audience with the CD's they put out. Other than the 4 radio singles on the album, there might be 8 other songs. I might really like 2 of those. Yet others might like a different 2 songs. So is it really "filler", or is it a by-product of "diversification"?

I'm trying to remember the last album where I truly enjoyed EVERY song on the album. That would probably be Deana Carter's first CD. (And could be the only one - I can't remember at the moment all the songs on Tim Mensy's CD). Unfortunately, Deana made up for that with her next CD -- I don't think I liked a single one on that album.

Does the music industry need to change? You betcha. But it doesn't justify what people are doing. Also, I'm STILL waiting for this deluge of talent and cheap music everybody's been talking about, that's gonna result from the "digital age". I mean, come on. It's not that expensive these days to buy the stuff you need for a home studio, record an album, and somehow "market yourself" to the world. Is that being done? Not that I know of. At least not on a BIG scale. Yes, it's being done locally and by word of mouth, I'm quite sure. But without the "record industry", how many of these will ever be heard nation-wide? Very few, if any. That, to me, says that the record industry IS providing some "value". If it's over-valued, then I'd expect to see entrepreneurs opening up their own record labels and doing it better/cheaper. Yet I don't see it.

A lot of the problem is that today, we've come to EXPECT music to be available to us, almost as if it were a "right". And the ability to cheaply make digital copies has given us the ability to do that.

If CD's were to drop in price to $5, and 80% of the songs on there were VERY GOOD songs, how much do you think it'd curb piracy? Sadly, I think it's "not by much". It's still cheaper to just go buy the blank CD-R and make the copies, and the availability of music through Napster-clones makes it easy to do.

Think of it this way. If the artists were the same, the songs the same (as they are right now), the prices still the same, but things were recorded on LPs and all we had to copy was cassette tape: would we have the same piracy problem that we do right now? I don't think so.

In other words, I think that even 30 years ago, back when we supposedly had better morals than we do today, that if the technology had been there, we'd have had much the same problems as we do today with piracy. I think the underlying tendency to steal when we can "get away with it" was still there at about the same level as it is today. But that technology has now enabled it to happen.

$19 for a Wilkinsons CD? Not too bad, IMO, considering it's coming all the way from Australia. Then again, I think I paid $35 or so for the promo-copy of their second CD on Ebay, just so I could hear it before it was officially released. (And, yes, I did buy another "official" copy of it when it was released. Of course, the promo clearly had marked on it "Not for Sale", too. Talk about a moral dilemma.)

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Chris Schlotzhauer · Post by **Chris Schlotzhauer** » 1 Jan 2002 12:01 pm

Let's take a pole. How many of you have a CD-RW drive on your computer, and why?

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 1 Jan 2002 12:18 pm

How about a poll?

Yes, I have one. (One for each of my systems now, actually).

My usage of CD-R media (in decreasing order of usage):

1) Storage of pictures I've taken (whether scanned film or digital). I archive either the original negative scans or the RAW digital files)

2) Moving files from one PC to another. (I suppose I should setup a home network for a lot of this, but haven't for various reasons). The CD-R(W) has essentially replaced my use of ZIP and JAZ disks for this purpose.

3) Backup of important files. (#1 is most of this, but there are other downloads, mainly drivers and programs purchased via the net, that I want to keep backups of).

4) Making copies of my CD-collection, to use in the car. I started doing this about a year or so ago. I maybe did a dozen or two. I'd like to complete it, but right now, it just seems like more work than I want to deal with.

5) Making Video-CD's of stuff I've shot on my digital camcorder. Now that I've got a DVD-player that'll read VCD/SVCD, this makes more sense than going to VHS tape. I suspect I'll end up getting a DVD-RW (of some format or another) to do this within a year or so. That way I won't have to compress as much.

6) Making CD's of karaoke stuff I've done. Much better than the cassettes I used to do. And, yes, there are a few crazy people who actually request CD's from me.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 1 Jan 2002 6:41 pm

I don't have one. Am I missin' something? Also, at least some of the "pirating" is done because of the high cost of CD's. No one will ever convince me otherwise. Thirty years ago, most of the "pirating" was done because you simply couldn't buy the recorded material you wanted!!! Finding a good steel album or tape was like finding a crook in a monastary. I imagine burning CD's is like making a tape. In other words, it's a time consuming pain in the ass. I have many more store-bought cassettes than I do home recorded stuff, and if I had CD burning capability, I don't think that would change. I would still buy the CD's that I wanted.

And if they were cheaper, I'd buy a lot more. [This message was edited by Donny Hinson on 01 January 2002 at 06:57 PM.]

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 1 Jan 2002 7:22 pm

Burning a CD is far easier than copying via a cassette tape. (Well, at least it's faster). This assumes you're starting from a digital source (like another CD). Presumably it's just as easy to burn from the MP3 files that are downloaded from Napster-clones.

It's true that if one doesn't like the music, he probably won't waste his time and media making a CD of the download. If he DOES like the downloads, hopefully he would buy the CD rather than burn a copy.

I came across the following quote today (of all places, on a digital photography website):

"Last year, when the whole Napster/MP3 thing was in the headlines, the music industry was screaming about how it was stealing. Now I agree that downloading MP3's of commercial CD's is no different than stealing, but I still do it, either to try before I buy, or when I know for a fact that I don't intend to listen to the MP3 more than once or twice, that is, I don't get enough 'pleasure' from it that it crosses the line into something I should be paying for. MP3's give me the power to treat music like shareware. MP3's give me the power to impose my own ethics on the situation rather than obeying the music industry's screwed-up ethics."

I'll have to say that I don't really have a big problem with people who truly treat the MP3-thing like he does. If he truly only "samples" via downloading, and buys the music he wants, then I can't really blame him.

On the other hand, I DO blame those who make it possible for him to do that. (Weird, huh?). Those who convert their CD's into MP3-format, then make it available for ANYBODY with internet access to get -- they make my blood boil. They've just become distributors of music, and should be required to pay royalties on all songs that they distribute, IMO.

______

Anyway, I guess there'll always be theft of music. And there will always be those who argue that song-swapping actually HELPS the industry, overall. Maybe they're right, I just don't know.

OK -- hopefully I've now vented enough for the next year!

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Joe Casey · Post by **Joe Casey** » 2 Jan 2002 12:06 pm

It could be a lot to do with it is the crap they put out isn't worth saving in any collecton.So people copy and then when the next clone releases something new they copy over the previous copy. Now atleast your not stuck with a collection "hype" hits that stay on the charts and air about as long as a good flatute stays in the air once released. In other words gone with the wind..

------------------
CJC

Jeff Lampert · Post by **Jeff Lampert** » 3 Jan 2002 8:13 am

Hopefully, everyone realizes that such issues as the cost of a CD, the amount of filler, the difficulty of finding certain songs, etc. etc. is not in fact an excuse for breaking the law. If the law makes no allowances for such mitigating circumstances, then the fact that in certain situations you feel morally right in copying does not in fact make it right.

Johan Jansen · Post by **Johan Jansen** » 3 Jan 2002 8:17 am

No matter what excuses: copying CD's, Tab, Books, Video's and whatever you can come up with: It's theft!
About a lot of crap on CD's:
In Holland we have a chain of stores now, where you can ensemble your own CD, 2 songs from this, 3 from that, one from another, and they burn it for you, with a nice cover. You have to pay all the rights and then it's legal and OK to me.
JJ[This message was edited by Johan Jansen on 03 January 2002 at 08:22 AM.]

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 3 Jan 2002 8:59 am

Johan,

How long has this been going on? How's the public reacting to it? Are the record companies supporting it?

It's certainly a novel solution, and one that makes a lot of sense.

I can see difficulties with it in some regards, though, like for counting album sales. I suppose, though, that if you have 2 songs burned that come from an 11-song album, that could be counted as 2/11ths of an album sold.

Another issue would be some of the liner notes. If you (for example), like to see the writer credits, and musician credits, can this be done for each song, if you've made a CD of 20 songs from 5 different albums?

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons

Johan Jansen · Post by **Johan Jansen** » 3 Jan 2002 9:18 am

Well, it works, and the recordcompanies can choose between drowning or this. You have to pay more for each song, say the average price for a CD is here about $18.00, a CD with as much songs are $20.00, Songs that are sold this way are paid, and also in parts of recordsales, it's really good thought over. People like it, but it doesn't stop the copying. On schoolyards you can buy a CD of your choice for about $2.00, and those kids are the big group of CD buyers, so it helps almost nothing....
And those people don't give shit about linernotes. I do, that is why I buy the real stuff

[This message was edited by Johan Jansen on 03 January 2002 at 09:20 AM.]

David Pennybaker · Post by **David Pennybaker** » 3 Jan 2002 10:32 am

Can you listen to the music in the store, to decide what songs you want on the CD?

Is it priced as so much for the media, plus so much a song that you put on it? And I presume you can fill up the entire media, and not be limited to just 11 or 12 songs per CD ?

It's too bad it costs more, but I guess there IS extra labor involved. But in the long run, it could save you money, by only paying for the songs you want. If you typically only like 2 songs out of 12 on a CD, you'd be saving a bundle right there.

Of course, there's the added labor of having to listen to the CD's and make your decision about what songs to get.

I, too, enjoy the liner notes. Of course, those who steal the music probably think they can just find out that info for free on the internet anyway, if they want it, so why bother.

Also, are they burning these CD's onto CD-R media? Surely they aren't actually stamping a CD, or are they?

One potential problem with the CD-R media is that they ARE suspeptible to damage from sunlight and heat. (Some media are MUCH worse about this). And some older CD players won't play CD-R media.

I haven't had any media ruined (that I know of yet) from storing the media in my car. But I've seen the results of one guy who taped a CD-R to his window. Parts of the CD-R faded within a very short time-frame, so that media was obviously very sensitive to sunlight.

------------------
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons