57Gregy


According to that test someone posted a few months ago, many of us are Libertarians.

Ah, well that does make me feel better.

Time to party yet?

Randy B.

It's a very interesting thread, but I'm still surprised that the on topic responses are all negative.

Randy with all due respect I've just read the entire thread from the top and I can find very little negative among the whole thing.

Strong positive opinion that is contrary to your expectation isn't a definition of negative.  Most of the people that post here are affected by the issues contained in your letter and the overwhelming feeling I'm getting from the responses as well as my own reaction being contrary (not negative) to what it contains it looks to me very much like ASCAP are out of touch aside from the traditionalists it seems to represent.

ASCAP claims to be poor and cites Many forces including Creative Commons, Public Knowledge, Electronic Frontier Foundation  which have all become positive forces through experience of on-line realities.

Lets not confuse this issue with cheap shots about sweat shops and human exploitation either that is very cynical when you are sitting there among all your affluent looking nicety and self funded expensive gear and by listening to your posted tune there I'd say you were an enthusiastic hobbyist rather than reliant on music as your primary source of income and that is in no way a put down it just that this issue I would suggest is not life and death in your case.  Of course I don't know you so I may be well out of line there.

I've been well-represented by a creative commons licence on more than one occasion in areas that ASCAP doesn't even operate and it has worked out well for me financially on those occasions as I'm clearly represented as the author which has led me to being sought out by those interested in that work.  Basically they created a revenue stream where one did not yet exist and the backward looking ASCAP which is now like in intransigent old man is having to hold out its hat for donations from it's own membership didn't even have a clue.

They (ASCAP) will either get with the program and learn how to represent their members relevant to these times and grow like these forces they cite as an enemy or they will go under because nobody wants them any more simple as that.

As for the individual artist and creator, using Bitflipper's cookery analogy, they will range from somebody making sandwiches for the village hall coffee morning to the top international chefs as ever but they have increasingly more avenues to make it pay if you wish without being bound to an institution.  And at the end of the day it doesn't matter what trade you are involved in it is your ultimate responsibility to get it to work for you.

In truth, no representative body has really had that much influence on my 30 year career, which has been somewhere between that village hall sandwich maker and the chef, although some have been more helpful than others it's all largely down you your individual acumen whatever trade you are in whether you make a go of it or better served doing something else.

I've noticed recently though that a lot more hobbyists having a voice (a good thing) and holding a lot of store in these so called representative bodies, perhaps hoping that they become more protected by belonging to one or more or sometimes just because it makes them 'feel' more 'professional'.  It may be worthwhile but shop around there are as many ways of protecting your work as there are methods of generating income these days.

Whatever, follow your dream first if it is worthy people will buy it.  That axiom holds true for ASCAP too.

ohgrant


Oh it's much worse than that, I'm campaigning to have Bapu elected

Yeah, plenty of Baplicans on this forum.

It's down to the Baplicans vs Moochists here although the defining line gets blurred sometimes and they appear to be the same thing.

And lets not forget sometimes Bapu's been known for his rod of iron too.

"It's a very interesting thread, but I'm still surprised that the on topic responses are all negative."
 
I wasn't negative... I simply said the TOPIC HAS NOT BEEN DESCRIBED!!!!
 
That's different.
 

I simply said the TOPIC HAS NOT BEEN DESCRIBED!

What is this Topic of which you speak, and do we have them in the Coffee House?

tarsier

Someone who thinks a writer doesn't have the right to be compensated is disguising, I think, his own lack of appreciation and maybe even contempt for music.

Your writing (or music) is worth exactly the amount that people are willing to pay for it. If you set a price and people aren't willing to pay, then it's not worth that price.   Just because it's gold to you doesn't mean it's worth anything to anyone else.

My main gig is creating music and sound.  I'm being paid for it through no help from any other organization. I find that ASCAP letter to be quite frightening in its attack on copyleft, EFF (especially EFF, who is does far more for individual rights than ASCAP), and creative commons. What that says to me is that ASCAP cares far less about people's freedom to create that it does about their own income stream.

Unions/guilds have their place, but they always grow far beyond their necessary origins. They always become the oppressor they were created to fight.  ASCAP is now the oppressor.

Exactly. Freedom is about the ability to choose. Given that the large corps that ASCAP works with have rendered royalty payments to the actual artists (who are not the corporate copyright holders that have all the power now) to such low levels that the main stay of an artists income is in performing, many of the reasons for ASCAP's existence seem to no longer apply.

This is where I go really left wing: IMO laws need to be changed so that the creator(s) of (anything) forever owns it. No more corporate ownership of copyright or patents.

"This is where I go really left wing: IMO laws need to be changed so that the creator(s) of (anything) forever owns it. No more corporate ownership of copyright or patents."

geez louise.... what if I want to sell my silly song to a big corporation? Would I no longer be free to do so?

"...these are the same people who forced TVs out of sports bars and restaurants..."

?  Is that just in some states-?  I've never heard this before.  TVs are playing non-stop in every sports bar here where I live.  Where are you talking about, Bit?

And, Mike, "...I'd be pleased to think that you may be able to convey that sort of message to the folks at ASCAP..."

Yes, it would be very good for ASCAP to read all the objections on this thread.  I sent the link to this thread to them, explained why I feel it's important for them to respond, and offered to do a cut-and-paste digest of the posts here if that would be more convenient.  Still hoping I'll get a reply.

Randy

? Is that just in some states-? I've never heard this before. TVs are playing non-stop in every sports bar here where I live. Where are you talking about, Bit?

It may have been a local thing, I don't know. But a few years ago ASCAP came around and demanded payments from every bar and restaurant that had a television receiver. The majority of them simply unplugged the TVs. One of them was my son-in-law, who was told that if he didn't take out the TVs from his restaurant he'd be sued by ASCAP.

ASCAP suing mom & pop businesses is an ongoing activity:

"ASCAP sues 21 nightclubs, bars and restaurants"

"ASCAP sues 29 establishments"

"ASCAP sues restaurants..."

Even when ASCAP appears to have justification for a suit, the fees they demand are nothing short of extortion. $30,000 because a band played a Hendrix tune?

bitflipper

Or consider prostitution as another analogy. Again, something everybody does, everybody thinks they're better than average at it, and relatively few are paid to do it. Is everybody on the planet entitled to a hundred dollar bill on the nightstand?

I was fully engaged in this discussion, right up until the prostitution analogy.  For no good reason whatsoever, the image of Mariah Carey leaving a $100 on my nightstand popped into my head.  True, I'd be overcharging her, but the image is stuck in my head nonetheless.

bitflipper

? Is that just in some states-? I've never heard this before. TVs are playing non-stop in every sports bar here where I live. Where are you talking about, Bit?

It may have been a local thing, I don't know. But a few years ago ASCAP came around and demanded payments from every bar and restaurant that had a television receiver. The majority of them simply unplugged the TVs. One of them was my son-in-law, who was told that if he didn't take out the TVs from his restaurant he'd be sued by ASCAP.

ASCAP suing mom & pop businesses is an ongoing activity:

"ASCAP sues 21 nightclubs, bars and restaurants"

"ASCAP sues 29 establishments"

"ASCAP sues restaurants..."

Even when ASCAP appears to have justification for a suit, the fees they demand are nothing short of extortion. $30,000 because a band played a Hendrix tune?

In 1981, an ASCAP rep made the mistake of entering a bar my band was playing. We did some cover songs, and on a break he approached us for payment for the covers we were playing. Our bass player was from northern Minnesota and was from an especially nasty Norwegian clan. He offered to meet the rep out in the back parking lot, where our truck was parked, where he would "settle up". I can still see his shoes sticking out from under that blue Camaro. I never found out if he crawled under there, or was put there.
 
Randy

 

As you know, many of my sensibilities come from my background in visual art.

In that context it is an inescapable fact that at one time almost every artists was starving... even the busy ones... then some corporations showed up and bought some art to enhance their corporate image... and that created a situation where not all artists were starving.

I fail to see how this effects the remaining artists who continue to starve.

The circumstance simply created an opportunity that never existed before.

FWIW, I work in a creative field but as an artist... I'm still one of the hungry folks. :-)

It just doesn't bother me that other folks have partnered with big corps to make some money. More power to them is what I say.

best,
mike

"patrons" often times simply equals investors.

Some don't even take the time to look at the art.

Here's an interesting article:

http://www.artnews.com/is...rticle.asp?art_id=1520

Frank Stella is mentioned... he is wildly successful... making corporations appear as if they have some interest in art.

best regards,
mike