Is Music Free

Nicholas Dedring · Post by **Nicholas Dedring** » 15 Aug 2003 12:33 pm

During the Napster hearings, the head of the RIAA (when asked about non-pursuit of people making mix tapes) referred to that argument as "No good turn goes unpunished." Essentially, her point was that they chose not to pursue people, and now were choosing to pursue them. In contracts it's akin to the "non-waiver" clause... if I don't enforce my rights, it is not the same as not giving them up.

In the real world, the reason they didn't care about tape copies was that every generation of copy degrades the quality very very quickly. With digital music and video, you can make a perfect[/] "bit-to-bit" copy, that can be passed along with no loss in quality. The threat is more unnerving than small time single copies being made.

FWIW, you CAN buy singles again, if you own an iPod. I've heard the quality may lack something, but Apple is the first company to really make electronic music purchases work well. For a buck a song, you can have your jukebox... most people have said that they would buy single tracks, but the record companies were ever so happy making one "hook" on a record that would get you to buy the other 9 crummy tracks.

One final point, sorry to run on: the figures about falling sales are true, but disingenuous... the fact is that sales have fallen, but no-one has made clear what percentage of that decrease can be attributed to piracy. When CDs came out, the market transitioned over to buying CD players, and then replacing all of their library with new CD copies of the same records... now, most of the marketplace has all the old albums/tapes/8tracks replaced with discs, and isn't buying that much more of that old catalogue, which (back catalogue) is what record companies make the most money on.

Finally, I buy a lot of CDs, but few of them come from major labels... all those purchases fail to ring up as sales in the RIAA's book... they only care about MCA, or Sony or whatnot.

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 15 Aug 2003 1:03 pm

Nicholas..you mean to tell us that declining sales may be directly related to the quality of the final product ?

T

Del Rangel · Post by **Del Rangel** » 15 Aug 2003 1:53 pm

My impression is that Nicholas may be on to something. Total sales of all CDs may actually be up, but as market proliferation continues and niche markets continue to expand, the majors are not selling as many copies of CDs as they believe they should--and they are indeed the ones the RIAA is fronting for. I want to see a study that accounts for demographic changes in the population--age, ethnicity, and nationality--as well as any estimates of how many CDs are being sold in smaller markets such as those to steel guitar afficianados. These things as well as an economy that is soft may account for lack of sales to a greater degree than file copying--or is at least adding to the perception that file swapping is the single culprit.

Nicholas Dedring · Post by **Nicholas Dedring** » 15 Aug 2003 1:53 pm

lol. What I meant was more along these lines: If you compare the BEST years the industry could expect (when everybody is buying highly profitable back catalog, and buying SECOND copies of the same Beatles or rolling stones record) with the years after the completed transition to the new format, then it's OBVIOUS that sales would slump.

New records are never as profitable as old ones... Elvis makes more profit per unit than any new band could hope to, because there's no promotions budget, no public relations tour, in store displays etc etc. Dire Straits sell records just because they sell them, the company just owns the rights, and rings up the profits.

I also wanted to digress to the question of why people download... I don't usually download peer to peer stuff... but when I do it is for one of two reasons: I either want to know if the record is worth hearing (which you used to be able to do in a listening booth), OR I know I only want one song, and if I weren't downloading it, I would not buy the cd anyway.

But yes, the fact that the new product is garbage probably doesn't help either. Nor does it help that the industry has relied on the tastes of a demographic (teenagers) who have to beg for money to buy music that they see as disposable, and that have a lot of free time, and a lot of technical comfort with the platforms that allow stealing... start making music that appeals to people who work, and don't want to steal, and loathe their computers... and THEN you'll make some money on it.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 15 Aug 2003 2:10 pm

If this is all true then most everyone here that owns a recording device has pretty much done something illegal with it at one time or another.

Yes, it's true. You've got a good point there, George. We've all done it (stealing), at one time or another. J.B. protests because he is a songwriter. He doesn't like the idea of songwriters being "ripped off". But what makes them so special??? Where exactly did all this self-righteous attitude start? Twenty years ago, every one of us were making tapes and cassettes of everything on the radio, and live performances, as well. Did it hurt the business much? Evidently not. The "big fuss" has only come about quite recently. Yes, we all steal. Everyone who plays steel, steals. My basic tuning? It isn't mine, I assure you! Someone else (Buddy, Jimmy, Speedy, etc.) came up with it. Same thing with most all of my pedal changes. Someone else came up with them...I didn't. Did I pay for these? Nope. Have the developers (of these tunings, changes, licks, etc.) realized any profits from these? Nope! Maybe they should have run out and copyrighted their contributions...then where would we all be today? You see, we (steelers) are willing to share for the betterment of us all. But songwriters? No way! They want protection!!! What makes them so special, I ask once more?

Songwriters of America...get a life! Get a real job! Get a life! Go play music somewhere, or something.

Have any songwriters here sang the songs of others...in public...without paying for the use of that material? Yes, undoubtedly. Probably all of 'em.

You see, as J.B. has no sympathy for the big stars, I have no sympathy for him, and for the rest of the songwriters out there, as well. They're no more special than anyone in the musical machine that exists today. I'm a steelplayer, and I'm most interested in the steeler...that "unsung hero" of the music world.

Songwriters, producers, singers, hell...they're all a dime a dozen. But a steelplayer? Now there's something special!

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 15 Aug 2003 5:51 pm

Another quick thought.

( thank you Mr Hinson. I read your post after hitting the "send" button on mine")

SOooo many musicians insist that they ply their trade "For Sheer Enjoyment". ( I think it's bullshit myself) ( can I say that?)

They're talking about lugging hundreds of pounds of stuff around, making their fingers bleed, going without sleep, constant tinnitus, and bragging about how they make 20-30 bucks a night with union cards in their wallets.

They'll even "dis" each other for "wanting money" for something they believe or claim they do for the enjoyment. Kind of like a self flagellation contest.

Lead incidentally by some of the "Greats".

In my mind its Shameful.

When it comes to songwriting, it's a different animal. They want EVERY DAMN DIME. And appearantly look to "The Gubment" to get it from ME for them. LIke The Gubment wasn't busy enough trying to keep people from blowing them up...

A lot of the same people people feel that the drunken sober, "insightful" or otherwise "off the cuff" musings that millions of us have done over the years while sitting around a jukebox, driving a truck, taking a crap, or wherever it is that most songs are statistisally written are all of a sudden worthy of providing them and their families lifelong incomes?

I'm going to have to dig around for "Three Legged Puppy", "Before you got Mean", and a couple others. I'm getting tired of working for a living.....

Just a glaring incongruety I happened to notice after working hauling machinery for twelve hours and before another "pure fun" night gig like I've done all week.

I'd say "so shoot me" but I think I saw my shadow today and it looked like a piece of swiss cheese...

EJL[This message was edited by Eric West on 16 August 2003 at 11:46 AM.]

JB Arnold · Post by **JB Arnold** » 15 Aug 2003 6:22 pm

A: Every time I play someone else's song in a club they ARE getting paid. Out of the ASCAP fees the club owner ponies up every month. Same thing with the jukebox. Or perhaps you don't agree with that either?

B: If something I create starts selling and making money and you grab a copy and start giving it away to thousands of folk at a crack (file sharing), that's theft. Clean and simple. And I am all in favor of seeing you strung up by your thumbs-be you a 16 year old techno geek or a middle aged steeler. If you painted a picture and were selling copies out of your store, but every time someone came to the door the first guy who bought one gave them a free copy, you'd be hacked. It's the same deal.

C:Writers ARE a protected class, as well they ought to be. Theft of intellectual property is no different that stealing a horse. If you want to be entertained, you'll need to pay for it. Music ain't free.

D: Just making a copy for yourself for later is NOT illegal. Giving it away to others, or worse, selling it to others and keeping all the money is what's illegal. Taping something for you to listen to later (or watch) falls under the same heading as the "personal consumption" exceptions applied to a certain substance I suspect some of the respondents here to be smoking.

Really, it's a shame the labels brought this on themselves in the first place. By delivering NO value for the price of a full CD, they've created a monster. The artists arent losing anything-They get their advance and never see another penny, even if they sell millions. That's been going on since time began-just now the labels are blaming it on file sharing. The labels are screaming because they are now getting less money to lie to the artist about, and that's the real issue. But the writers depend on sales-and they're the ones who get hurt the most.

And Eric-if you can turn some drunken ramblings into a hit song, yes-you deserve every penny you can wring out of the system. squeeze 'em till they bleed from the forehead and cry "Uncle". (and trust me, you'd be on my side here.) I have yet to get my SOBER ramblings past the publishing stage, but I'm all for anyone who does.

JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

[This message was edited by JB Arnold on 15 August 2003 at 07:36 PM.]

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 16 Aug 2003 12:27 am

JB.

I know. I mostly think that it's a shame that most of the money never gets to the people that deserve it. Mostly to leaches and lawyers.

I know several of each kind.

I look at "it" as pulling the tag off a mattress, and so does everybody I know.

I think the people "it" frustrates the most are the ones that deserve "it" the least.

Download it.

Burn it.

( Of course I don't.)

I even pause the FBI warning on DVDs so I can read it carefully each time..

EJL

...

EJL

Jason Odd · Post by **Jason Odd** » 16 Aug 2003 6:15 am

Back to the news article, what three 'major' companies went bust?

Ray Montee, I imagine that you could copy a long deleted disc for sharing in a non-profit mode, (ie; you're not selling it) and especially if you don't say you're going to do it on an online public forum.

I figure one guy at home knocking a copy out here and there of long deleted titles is pretty safe from legal action. If it takes them years to get rid of a website, I don't think one person would be worth the effort.

Jeff A. Smith · Post by **Jeff A. Smith** » 16 Aug 2003 9:09 am

Writers ARE a protected class, as well they ought to be. Theft of intellectual property is no different that stealing a horse.

I won't get into this subject very specifically, except to say that I don't think "stealing" an idea is the same thing as stealing a horse. Only one person can use a horse at any given time; but how many people can use an idea?

Just as food for thought, consider this section from a letter by Thomas Jefferson: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It would be curious then, if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property. If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dipossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breath, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody. Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices.

-Thomas Jefferson, to Isaac McPherson, 1813<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've always thought the legal separation between songs and instrumental parts was transparently arbitrary. Should Buddy Emmons receive money everytime someone plays one of his licks? However, having an acknowledged arbitrary provision, not based in natural law, like Jefferson describes above, is a different issue.

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 16 Aug 2003 9:40 am

Even in ancient times, people have always agreed that it is wrong to steal someone's horse (camel).
But as Jefferson noted, the idea of "intellectual property" is very recent and has never been universally accepted.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 16 Aug 2003 10:13 am

JB wrote:

Every time I play someone else's song in a club they ARE getting paid. Out of the ASCAP fees the club owner ponies up every month.

Does your band supply a songlist to the club owner for ASCAP? Or do they simply assume that you are playing the "most popular" music?

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/Hotb0b.gif" width="96 height="96">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9),
Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 16 Aug 2003 10:40 am

I know it's been mentioned before, but the trick is doing those "cover tunes" with "different chords" "made up" words, and basically to any trained ear they are rather distant renditions.

Ya-Know-What-I-Mean-Vern...

Like last night..... ( $125..)

EJL

Jim Smith · Post by **Jim Smith** » 16 Aug 2003 11:58 am

One of the clubs I play has apparently had a tough time with ASCAP in the past. They have a sign on the bandstand stating that ASCAP songs are prohibited from being played. I don't have a clue, and I doubt that hardly anyone else knows, which songs are ASCAP and which are BMI. We just play and don't worry about it.

Nicholas Dedring · Post by **Nicholas Dedring** » 16 Aug 2003 4:34 pm

Jason Odd wrote:

Ray Montee, I imagine that you could copy a long deleted disc for sharing in a non-profit mode, (ie; you're not selling it) and especially if you don't say you're going to do it on an online public forum.

In fact, while the labels wouldn't be likely to follow up on it, you would be committing the same offense in sharing an out of print title. Until the copyright lapses, you cannot make any copies of anything... once the copyright and renewal expire, it is public domain, and you can do anything you want with it.

Wild as it might be, you are a criminal if you copy a record I can no longer buy because no one thinks it's going to be bought... just because you want to do a favor. They won't bust you, but not because they aren't within their rights to. sadly.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 16 Aug 2003 6:08 pm

Every time I play someone else's song in a club they ARE getting paid. Out of the ASCAP fees the club owner ponies up every month.

JB, I ain't pickin' on ya, you're probably an OK guy. You've just been "brainwashed" by a system that's more corrupt than anything the government could ever come with!

Most clubs don't even pay ASCAP fees (and I've played in more that a few in my 40-odd years of playing). If they do pay at all, it gets mostly "absorbed" by administration fees, and a damn little goes to the top 10 artists who are currently charting. Do you think that's fair? Well, I'm glad you're not a tax auditor.

The reason there's so many "starving songwriters" is that they're being screwed by the recording companies and the promoters just as much (or possibly more) than they are by the public. But now that the revenues are dwindling (which, by the way, happens eventually in every business), they must come up with every nickel they can to maintain their mega-salaries (the executives of said companies, that is).

Like just a few here, I see very few really good songs being written today. What passes for hits on the radio, in most cases, is analogous to what we wrote, as children, on the schoolyard with a piece of chalk.

Yes, OF COURSE everyone wants to be a hit songwriter. All it takes nowadays is a few words of babble about a tractor, or a pickup truck. And after all...it is soooooo much easier than actually learning to be a world class instrumentalist or singer.

You see, when someone write a "piece of crap" song, and gets rich, I just think it's a slap in the face of all the talented songwriters who have gone before, and got little or nothing...long before "MP3's" were invented.

Yes, it's not the public that screwing the writers, it's the recording industry itself, and the writers are too stupid to realize it.

Like I said...get a real job. Play steel!

Denny Turner · Post by **Denny Turner** » 16 Aug 2003 8:15 pm

The parameters of Fair Use. When you can legally copy and share and when you can't.

A few links to comprehensive copyright information. Scroll down the alphabetical links to "copyrights".

Aloha,
Denny T~[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 16 August 2003 at 09:16 PM.]

JB Arnold · Post by **JB Arnold** » 16 Aug 2003 11:20 pm

Obviously, writers aren't real popular around here-they aren't in bands either, because members get nothing when the album sells, but the writers are getting checks all the time. I remember Michael Clarke being quoted that they had that problem in the Byrds. Hillman and McGuinn were driving porsches, and he couldn't put gas in his busted up VW.

I couldn't care less who thinks it's fair-If I create something it's as much of a hard asset as a horse, camel, or a car. If you use it for profit, I get a piece of the pie. Most writers deals these days call for royalties to be paid in a lot of instances where the band does not. (Record club sales, etc.) And most real bands, if they have only one or maybe 2 writers, work out an arrangement for the members to get a piece of that action too-or they don't last long.

It's all moot at this point, because I either suck or am a genius-(I suspect the former)-either way no one's biting....so there's no money to fight for. But if there was, trust me, I'm a hard core capitalist pig, and you can bet I'd protect what's mine-no matter how many dead bodies wind up on the side of the road.

As far as labels screwing writers the way they shove it to artists, I have a favorite story about Elvis Costello. Seems he got the usual surprise of seeing no artist royalty checks despite the massive sales of his first album-and being a man after my own dark heart figured out a way to get even. He noticed that he DID get checks from his publishing company for writers royalties, as those are easier to document, and the publisher can't get paid if you don't. Deciding that the only way to get his money was from per song/per album payments from the label for writing, and having complete creative control over his product, his next LP contained 23 original Elvis Costello songs. It was a single album and some of them were only 30 seconds long-but the label HAD to pay him. They fought it, but he got his money. And now there is the Costello clause in most deals-the label won't pay writers royalties on more that 14 songs (I think-it might be less) per LP. Paul McCartney pulled the same thing when he added linda to all his credits. The labels didn't want to pay her. They wound up coughing up the dough. So the labels do have their feet held to the fire when it comes to paying those-or there wouldn't be such a fuss whenever someone gets clever.

And no-Buddy Emmons can't copyright a lick-see my post about Chuck Berry-But he HAS written a lot of songs-and if other people are recording them and selling them, he damn well OUGHT to be getting paid. Now it may not be much, because as we saw in the post about the Harry Fox agency, under 2500 copies is pretty much a low flat fee. But it's still the principle of the thing. If you've cut his tunes and sold them, and haven't paid for the rights, you should be boiled in oil. Maybe he doesn't care. I would.

And don't be so sure about not being able to copyright a signature riff-Every time you hear the phrase "Lets get ready to rumble!!!", Michael Buffer is getting paid. So it's not impossible.

As for the general philosophical musings on whether it's RIGHT for someone to be able to "own" an idea, I don't care. The philosophers can hash that out while putting the finishing touches on their "Will Work For Food" signs. I'll bring 'em a big mac on my way back from the bank.

And if it's impossible to own an idea, you better try telling that to the company you work for-because if you have a good idea on company time-meaning whenever you're in their employ-they own it. At least they will if it starts making money. Read that small print on your employment contract.

As for the ASCAP payments, all the clubs out here have the sticker in the window saying they've paid, so it can't be that much. I have seen different versions of how it's all allocated-I think they make some assumptions about your place on the charts being an indication of how often your song gets covered, but I've also seen talk of journals, like arbitron diaries-so I'm not really sure. The money ultimately winds up with the publisher-which is why the first rule in dealing with a label is "Don't give up the publishing-whatever you do!"

Anyhoo-flame away, if you will. As far as I'm concerned, if I create something I'm entitled to any and all revenue streams directly or indirectly generated as a result, for as long as I can Phineagle a way to control them-which is why I'm 100% in favor of the copyright extension law. If that somehow offends some folks sense of propriety, well, that's their problem, not mine.
JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

Susan Alcorn (deceased) · Post by **Susan Alcorn (deceased)** » 17 Aug 2003 11:41 am

I have mixed feelings about the phenomenon of music sharings, but . . . I think that stopping would be like standing on the beach and trying to stop the waves from coming in. It's just too big. My two daughters download files constantly, but they also buy CDs (when they have the money). There's something to be said for having something solid in your hand with all the artwork, etc. The business of music is changing and today's technology and our issues with what it brings may be totally archaic in two years. I think we just have to ride the waves and see where they take us (hopefully not out to sea).