quantumeffect
Max Output Level: -47.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2771
- Joined: 2007/07/22 21:29:42
- Location: Minnesota
- Status: offline
Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
My opinion has waffled over the years on the topic of how an artist should manage or deal with their copyright or intellectual property with respect to fan usage / abuse, particularly on the internet (although the issue is not new and it certainly predates the internet). I recognize the importance of protecting intellectual property but, does an artist personally going after an individual(s), usually a fan(s), really serve a purpose IN THE LONG RUN?
OK, so here is The Artist Formally Known as a Symbol suing an individual, presumably a big fan that distributed bootlegs of his concerts, for $1,000,000 in damages. Assuming for the sake of discussion that the fan was not profiting off of the bootlegs, is there really a good argument for aggressive litigation against a fan, doing something that a very obsessive fan does even though it is very legally dumb? I just envision a 30–something year old dude living in his mother’s basement, without a real grasp of the legal system or the implication of his actions, whose net worth is probably less than 1% of the artist’s, getting hit with a million dollar lawsuit.
Going beyond any short term legal gains and I would think something that is far more important, is the question: what is the legacy an artist wants to leave? People’s lives, especially artists, can be complex at many levels. Artists can have moments of brilliance that positively impact the world while simultaneously dealing with destructive demons (wow, I sound like a Behind the Music narrator). Fans and detractors alike will dissect an artist’s life and impact on society long after the artist has left this world.
Take Metallica’s Lars for example. If Metallica just simply aged into obscurity, I think (and this is my opinion so don’t get your undies all bunched up) people might say they were an influential metal band and that Lars was like the Ringo of metal drummers. But, when I and many others think of Metallica, it goes past the music to their high profile assault of individuals who used their music. The Napster thing was misguided in my opinion but not the worst of it. There was a cringe worthy (bordering on the bizarre) YouTube video out there of Lars where he called out a fan (a young girl if my memory serves me correctly) by name for posting a video of herself playing a Metallica cover. Maybe that is the image he/they want to portray and they envision themselves as stalwarts defenders of the artistic communities property but for me, I see it simply as a distraction.
And just to play an annoying devil’s advocate, I would venture to take a guess and say that if we turned the tables (how many clichés can I use in one sentence) we may find that these artist’s personal and professional dealing are not all completely legal but we choose as a society to let things slide (use your imagination) except of course for the IRS.
I am NOT suggesting that musicians simply ignore the inappropriate use of their property. Unfortunately, there is no simple solution to managing the music once it is out in the ether. I am just of the mind that an artist simply intimidating fans overzealously celebrating their stardom (i.e., stealing from them) ultimately doesn’t serve the music.
Dave 8.5 PE 64, i7 Studio Cat, Delta 1010, GMS and Ludwig Drums, Paiste Cymbals "Everyone knows rock n' roll attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact." H. Simpson "His chops are too righteous." Plankton during Sponge Bob's guitar solo
|
bapu
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 86000
- Joined: 2006/11/25 21:23:28
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 21:52:49
(permalink)
The guys in Metallica once said in an interview "back when we were coming up we made cassette copies of albums and songs and passed them around" IIRC.
To whom and for what purpose (the passing around) is moot; the fact that they broke the very rules they have tried to be stalwarts about is ridiculously delicious.
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 22:27:46
(permalink)
The law is the law - it's not for one to decide when or to who it should apply, even though there is room for discussion and improvement. But for as long as it is in place, distributing copyrighted material without permission is theft, plain and simple.
I've read so many arguments and people justifying it - almost as if justifying it to themselves made it acceptable. Or as if there was an actual gap into the legislation that allowed them to download whatever they wanted as long as they can justify it. But there is no such gap.
We have not been invited to freely download while we debate copyright, and it's not because we can discuss it on the internet and some people agree that we suddenly have the authority to bypass the laws in place.
This isn't a town meeting where we decide which color we'll be painting the Welcome sign at the entry of our village.
I've had to deal with people distributing my wife's entire catalog online for free. I'm not talking about a rich artist here - back then we were living on my income almost exclusively, because things were rather slow on her side.
But her fans in Europe and in Russia took it upon themselves to "celebrate the stardom".
But no matter who you are stealing from - it's theft.
If a couple of poor hungry guys broke into your studio and stole your computer and your gear, would go: that's alright, I still have my house and food in the fridge?
I find it rather depressing to think the we feel entitled to judge artists on their reaction to that, man. Seriously. People steal from them AND get to judge them? How f'd up is that?
It's as if I took a crap on your lawn and publicly slammed you because you reacted "like a jerk".
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 22:38:07
(permalink)
A (not so) funny anecdote - while I was trying to get one of those fan sites to take the copyrighted material off their web site, we had some issues clearing the rights to a promo shot of my wife and had to quit using that shot for a while.
So she could not legally use a picture of herself. Meanwhile, that exact same picture - and tons of others - was everywhere on that Russian web site which celebrated the stardom.
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
quantumeffect
Max Output Level: -47.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2771
- Joined: 2007/07/22 21:29:42
- Location: Minnesota
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 22:54:53
(permalink)
Don’t confuse my discussion; I am not making an attempt to justify theft. I am only discussing the artist’s response to it.
Wrt the law is the law and it’s not for one to decide … we do it all the time … Mary Jane comes to mind and I can name others.
I think our desire to prosecute certain crimes depends on how closely they hit home (or at least my lawn).
Dave 8.5 PE 64, i7 Studio Cat, Delta 1010, GMS and Ludwig Drums, Paiste Cymbals "Everyone knows rock n' roll attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact." H. Simpson "His chops are too righteous." Plankton during Sponge Bob's guitar solo
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 23:20:46
(permalink)
Well, that's the point. I don't see how we have a saying in that. I don't get how people who steal get to drag the people they steal from in the mud. That's adding to the insult.
In other words, the thieves are the judges and no one gets to judge them. That doesn't work for me.
Honestly, I don't think it's just a matter of hitting close to home, though in this case it does it closer to me, I guess.
In fact, I'd tell you that the real reason why it bothers me is that I do my very best to comply with laws rules that technically are there to help make this world a better place for the exact same people who constantly break those rules.
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
dubdisciple
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5849
- Joined: 2008/01/29 00:31:46
- Location: Seattle, Wa
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 23:36:26
(permalink)
I think Prince lost his mind years ago. I have no problem with him wanting to enforce his copyright. It's the excessive nature of such suits. There are many who want to cap damages for lawsuits where people get crippled or die. The idea that his music is worth more than people's lives is absurd. Prince is showing classic behavior of someone wit han inflated sense of himself. I enjoyed Prince's music two decades ago, but he has not been able to generate a record sale in forever for good reason. It goes beyond simply generation gap. The talent is still there but every time he makes news these days it is either to whine or sue. That's what superstars do when they lose the ability to make hit records. Prince has a history of making awful business decisions and then trying to sue to make up for the money he should have made.
|
yorolpal
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13829
- Joined: 2003/11/20 11:50:37
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 23:43:18
(permalink)
One problem that "the law" has a devil of a time coming to grips with is that every case is (even if only marginally) different. And that difference can (should, IMHO) affect it's adjudication. So...the aggrieved party's reaction to the aggrievment does matter. As it should. Call me Pollyanna...even though I don't answer to that...if you must, but being reasoned, level headed and...yes...compassionate if need be doesn't seem like bad advice to give both the aggrieved party and the adjudicator. If, after that advice has been taken and used it's still determined that harsher measures need to be applied...then...and only then...apply them...without guilt or remorse.
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/28 23:53:00
(permalink)
He dropped the lawsuit, by the way. I remember reading the biography of a French poet called Paul Verlaine, and the author remarked that, the more sublime his work was getting the more atrocious and unforgivable his behaviour became. At the end of the day, I think it would be our loss to throw away his work, but that doesn't mean that it redeems the man. And the same thing can be said about many, many, many artists. So as to whether this will affect an artist legacy, I think we collectively need to grow up and stop worshiping people and start making the distinction between them and their work. That would already be a huge step. I find it tragic that some people would be willing to drop an artist body of work and contribution to our culture because they didn't like being robbed. Me, I'm for 100% what Metallica did - even if I weren't much of a fan anymore when the napster thing started. It's THEIR work. It's not for me to judge or to decide whether it should be free. I find it far more distasteful to see the thieves condemning the people they are stealing from and, as if it weren't bad enough, contributing to create an illusion of legitimacy by spreading their "wisdom" everywhere on the internet. IMHO, those folks need to see that there are consequences.
post edited by Rain - 2014/01/28 23:56:51
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
craigb
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41704
- Joined: 2009/01/28 23:13:04
- Location: The Pacific Northwestshire
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 00:41:17
(permalink)
On that topic, does anyone have a download link to Prince's CD's?  (Just kidding! )
Time for all of you to head over to Beyond My DAW!
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 00:50:54
(permalink)
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
Moshkiae
Max Output Level: -14 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6111
- Joined: 2009/04/27 10:26:25
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 08:40:17
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby jbow 2014/01/29 10:31:34
Rain ...
The law is the law - it's not for one to decide when or to who it should apply, even though there is room for discussion and improvement. But for as long as it is in place, distributing copyrighted material without permission is theft, plain and simple.
...
I will NEVER disagree with that, specially when I had a screenplay stolen! When I look back at bootlegs in the late 60's and 70's, they told us who and what the bands really were. In those days, Bob Dylan, Grateful Dead and Pink Floyd were the big ones in the bootleg thing, and there was one very important part to these, that no one wants to discuss. The work they did in there was completely different than any album. And it was nice. I love the 20 versions of "Echoes", or the 15 versions of "Atom Heart Mother", and the 9 versions of "Ramble On", and the different versions of Led Zeppelin's first big hit, that always had something different in the middle of it. None of this EVER came to an album, until 40 years later, when Roger Waters gave in, and let fans have a copy of the original material that became known as "Animals" 3 years later! No one would have given a damn about Led Zeppelin as the best live band ever, with insane energy and total dedication and care to the material at hand, even with mistakes and such ... to the point that when Jimmy tried to clean it up for "How the West Was Won", he plainly ruined the energy and the feeling that was there already! No one will EVER complaint about the "Basement Tapes" that were, probably the biggest and most sold bootleg of all time. Why? Everything in it was different and it was like Bob to do that in concert because he thinks it gets boring after 3 times! There is only so much "teasing" you can do, before you will get taken and such. Why are you ****ing and complaining? You don't have enough? The Mettalica case was stupid, and them going after Napster, only made the mp3 thing even bigger. It was a perfect time to show that their value as a band had gone from the music to the ripoff side of things. And lastly. The one band that NEVER/EVER complained about bootlegs, has its history in the annals of rock music. The Grateful Dead never cared if anyone taped it or not, and not many bands will ever be remembered as fondly and caring as that band ... and perhaps you should take notice, that GREED, should not be the issue behind copyright, but protection of the work. I'm OK with that, but the folks that stole my screenplay, are waiting for me to die, so they can use the script, and not pay me a dime. Well, it won't work, and if they try, they will be cursed with the biggest loser that will hurt a few folks along the way, and besides, regardless of what happens, I won't be around ... and they ARE NOT ME, and they can not DUPLICATE ME, and what I wrote and what it meant and how it was to be presented that I saw. So the best they will do is come up with some calamity that will have everyone confused. ****'EM. Good luck, but the curse and the pox is on them, not me! As for Prince, he has lost his ability and his creativity because of his ego, and maybe one day he will get humble enough to learn something and bring us something of better value than more paperwork. Rain, for crying out loud ... why are you "protecting" people that don't need it, when you yourself are fighting like crazy to make it with your own abilities? You need the fans ... you need what they provide. Even if they do something like that, but in the end, very few of them are making money off it ... they are just sharing your talent, and that is something that is much more precious to you in the long run, than any money you can collect. My work was stolen, but I am not worried about it. It was "ME" in that work, and no one else can do "ME". Bootlegs just showed you at noon, or 6PM in the house. There is no fan out there that doesn't want to meet "you" and that is another inch for a bootleg! AND, sometimes, the bootleg is a lot better than the fan showing up at your house, and saying hello the wife and the children ... I'm sure you would love that! Look at the bigger picture. I'm not disagreeing with you, just helping you and others protect something else that is much more valuable than a frivolusly stupid and selfish lawsuit that will only accomplish more anger from people that once liked his work, and now know who the real mother**** behind it really is like. Maybe you should watch "Purple Rain", and find that there is a possibility that Wendy and Lisa were far better and more important to the whole thing that they will EVER get credit for. It's hard to think/say that Morris was right in laughing, but all of a sudden that part in the movie takes another dimention that ... you know what? ... makes damn good sense! You can't be that selfish! And not appreciate your "fame", to the point that you have to go after someone who doesn't ahve anything anyway, for a dollar that you will never get! It's bizarre, stupid, and if I were the judge, I would throw it out as court abuse. Sir, you are rich and fat and you are abusing the court for your priviledge! Your case is meritless and did not hurt anyone, except your ego! Have a nice day, sir. Hammer on the table!
post edited by Moshkiae - 2014/01/29 08:54:59
As a wise Guy once stated from his holy chapala ... none of the hits, none of the time ... prevents you from becoming just another turkey in the middle of all the other turkeys!
|
jbow
Max Output Level: -0.2 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7601
- Joined: 2003/11/26 19:14:18
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 10:37:35
(permalink)
Moshkaie... I was thinking about the Dead and about mentioning them when I read your post. Well said! Fans taping every concert has not hurt them at all it has in fact... been a huge help to them. Artists who sue fans almost always come out looking like a jackass. As long as the bootlegs aren't being marketed and sold they really should be encouraged, IMO. It would be much better to work with fans instead of against them. It looks petty and small... and I think it is.
J
Sonar Platinum Studiocat Pro 16G RAM (some bells and whistles) HP Pavilion dm4 1165-dx (i5)-8G RAM Octa-Capture KRK Rokit-8s MIDI keyboards... Control Pad mics. I HATE THIS CMPUTER KEYBARD!
|
jbow
Max Output Level: -0.2 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7601
- Joined: 2003/11/26 19:14:18
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 10:40:57
(permalink)
Rain
FWIW, I can't stand the guy (or whatever it is) and I dislike him even more since he broke that guy's guitar on Fallon last year.
http://www.epiphone.com/N...piphone-Interview.aspx
That was really a horrible thing to do. I am surprised he didn't get smacked on the nose for that. I went from not caring to active dislike after that too. J
Sonar Platinum Studiocat Pro 16G RAM (some bells and whistles) HP Pavilion dm4 1165-dx (i5)-8G RAM Octa-Capture KRK Rokit-8s MIDI keyboards... Control Pad mics. I HATE THIS CMPUTER KEYBARD!
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 15:05:46
(permalink)
Moshkiae
Rain, for crying out loud ... why are you "protecting" people that don't need it, when you yourself are fighting like crazy to make it with your own abilities? You need the fans ... you need what they provide. Even if they do something like that, but in the end, very few of them are making money off it ... they are just sharing your talent, and that is something that is much more precious to you in the long run, than any money you can collect.
My work was stolen, but I am not worried about it. It was "ME" in that work, and no one else can do "ME". Bootlegs just showed you at noon, or 6PM in the house. There is no fan out there that doesn't want to meet "you" and that is another inch for a bootleg! AND, sometimes, the bootleg is a lot better than the fan showing up at your house, and saying hello the wife and the children ... I'm sure you would love that!
Look at the bigger picture.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just helping you and others protect something else that is much more valuable than a frivolusly stupid and selfish lawsuit that will only accomplish more anger from people that once liked his work, and now know who the real mother**** behind it really is like. Maybe you should watch "Purple Rain", and find that there is a possibility that Wendy and Lisa were far better and more important to the whole thing that they will EVER get credit for. It's hard to think/say that Morris was right in laughing, but all of a sudden that part in the movie takes another dimention that ... you know what? ... makes damn good sense!
You can't be that selfish! And not appreciate your "fame", to the point that you have to go after someone who doesn't ahve anything anyway, for a dollar that you will never get! It's bizarre, stupid, and if I were the judge, I would throw it out as court abuse. Sir, you are rich and fat and you are abusing the court for your priviledge! Your case is meritless and did not hurt anyone, except your ego! Have a nice day, sir. Hammer on the table!
If I cared about myself only, I'd be doing exactly what you accuse those rich musicians of doing. I'd also be doing the exact same thing as the people who steal their music : deciding for myself who deserve to be paid for their music. Besides, I'm not defending Price or Metallica, but rather stating a very simple fact. The same principle applies, whether we're talking about Celine Dion or Hocico. As for fans sharing my talent, that is utter rubbish. When I go to the grocery store, showing that fans are enjoying my work is not going to pay the bill. Or maybe I should just tell the cashier: give me the food, and I'll go on the internet and tell everyone how much I love your food. And if you don't, I'll blackmail you guys. Most artists these days put out free samplers. If you want to "promote" them, promote that. Sharing their entire body of work is NOT promoting. I can't believe how far into delusion we've come... A price tag on a CD is an indication of the price one must pay for that CD. It's not a survey asking you how much you think you should pay for it, based on the artist's wealth. It's not a request for a lesson in economy and media distribution. It's not an invitation to debate. It is not a request for "free promotion" via illegal distribution. It's not a mandate to go out on the internet and contribute to the illusion of legitimacy of illegal downloads. It's a frickin' price tag. Period. There's no trying to turn this into a debate. In spite of all the noise, there is no debate. The only people who want to debate are the ones who steal but refuse to be called thieves. They're the ones generating this controversy, and honestly, I am ashamed to think that we live in a world where what those ****s have to say is actually taken into consideration. They're frickin' thieves. They don't have a leg to stand on. It's not because they have access to a tribune (internet) that what they have to say should be taken in account. I cannot believe how twisted we've gotten to rationalize theft, accusing the abused! But that's what we systematically do with criminals these days uh? Victimize them.
post edited by Rain - 2014/01/29 15:13:45
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
craigb
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41704
- Joined: 2009/01/28 23:13:04
- Location: The Pacific Northwestshire
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 15:36:06
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Rain 2014/01/29 15:38:22
Actually, I believe what we do with many of the criminals these days is elect them to office.
Time for all of you to head over to Beyond My DAW!
|
paulo
Max Output Level: -13 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6218
- Joined: 2007/01/30 05:06:57
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 16:19:49
(permalink)
At the risk of making Rain spit his drink over his screen and keyboard I think there are times when an artist actually benefits from copyright infringement.
Examples ?
Has no-one ever seen a cover version, good or bad, by some you boober and then remembered how much they liked that band an subsequently ended up re-buying one of their albums ? I have.
Seen a covers band in a pub who almost certainly don't have permission to play the songs they are performing and heard a tune that you always liked but don't own and then subsequently bought it ? I have.
A friend of mine once sent me a link to an unofficial you tube upload of a Blackfield song. Based on that I went on Amazon and bought two of their albums. Wouldn't have done that if it weren't for the initial copyright abuse. Also wouldn't have done it if I'd listened to them first, but that's another issue. ;)
Don't get me wrong, if it were me who was having his lovingly crafted official cd's duplicated and sold at car boot sales or whatever, I'd be mightily pissed off, that is just plain wrong, but a bootleg recording of some performance somewhere that isn't going to be offically released anyway, wouldn't acutally bother me. Ony a die hard fan who has probably bought everything you have ever done is going to buy stuff like that anyway and who doesn't want a few of them ?I guess for me it's a question of the type of infringement that would make me want to take action or not.
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 17:03:47
(permalink)
paulo
At the risk of making Rain spit his drink over his screen and keyboard I think there are times when an artist actually benefits from copyright infringement.
Examples ?
Has no-one ever seen a cover version, good or bad, by some you boober and then remembered how much they liked that band an subsequently ended up re-buying one of their albums ? I have.
Seen a covers band in a pub who almost certainly don't have permission to play the songs they are performing and heard a tune that you always liked but don't own and then subsequently bought it ? I have.
A friend of mine once sent me a link to an unofficial you tube upload of a Blackfield song. Based on that I went on Amazon and bought two of their albums. Wouldn't have done that if it weren't for the initial copyright abuse. Also wouldn't have done it if I'd listened to them first, but that's another issue. ;)
Don't get me wrong, if it were me who was having his lovingly crafted official cd's duplicated and sold at car boot sales or whatever, I'd be mightily pissed off, that is just plain wrong, but a bootleg recording of some performance somewhere that isn't going to be offically released anyway, wouldn't acutally bother me. Ony a die hard fan who has probably bought everything you have ever done is going to buy stuff like that anyway and who doesn't want a few of them ?I guess for me it's a question of the type of infringement that would make me want to take action or not.
I don't know how things work here, but I think that back home, any place that has people playing live music pays a licence and some of that license money is redistributed among songwriters/right holders. Just like it used to be for tapes and other means of reproduction. I'll have to verify. My wife knows a thousand times more than I do about that. She still get checks from la Socan every years for an arrangement of a song she made years ago. Playing a song live is one issue. Making a recording out of it is another. In most cases, it really isn't all that hard to get the authorization, anyways, so why not be legit? Back in the days, it might have been a hassle, but with internet nowadays, it's actually very easy to get in touch with all the right people. I think it's a weird debate, really. It's not up to me to determine when or why it's ok. I don't feel I have a say in this. I don't have the legal expertise and I think that 99% of the people who make arguments in favour or against don't. Which is why my point is - there is no debating. Trying to put the emphasis on the grey areas only serves to provide thieves with more arguments. As for bootlegs, I myself find that they no longer have a reason to be in a lot of the cases. Back in the days, they were relevant, but nowadays, most artists regularly put out live DVDs. Many artists have understood that they can capitalize on it and sell recordings of a bunch of different shows from the same tour. I think it's the best approach. Beat the Boots, as Zappa said... For me, the core issue is the sense of self-entitlement. When I go to a Cirque show and see someone take a flash photography despite the very clear announcement that photography is forbidden and that flash photography can be dangerous for the acrobats, it's that very same attitude that's at work. The notion that I can decide for myself whether or not the rule is justified and should be observed or when it should be observed. That an exception needs to be made for me. And many people seem to think that that security warning is BS - though I assure you the danger is very real. But since we live in a world where everyone think he's an expert who gets to call what's relevant or not, flash goes on. They could probably go on and justify their action if you asked them to. It's the same attitude. And I have no tolerance for it. I should also mention that at this point, I'm not making money with music. Quite the opposite - I am actually spending quite a bit buying CDs, lots of which I used to own back home or that I bought on Itunes while we were on the road...
post edited by Rain - 2014/01/29 17:06:38
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
paulo
Max Output Level: -13 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6218
- Joined: 2007/01/30 05:06:57
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 17:40:36
(permalink)
Rain
paulo
At the risk of making Rain spit his drink over his screen and keyboard I think there are times when an artist actually benefits from copyright infringement.
Examples ?
Has no-one ever seen a cover version, good or bad, by some you boober and then remembered how much they liked that band an subsequently ended up re-buying one of their albums ? I have.
Seen a covers band in a pub who almost certainly don't have permission to play the songs they are performing and heard a tune that you always liked but don't own and then subsequently bought it ? I have.
A friend of mine once sent me a link to an unofficial you tube upload of a Blackfield song. Based on that I went on Amazon and bought two of their albums. Wouldn't have done that if it weren't for the initial copyright abuse. Also wouldn't have done it if I'd listened to them first, but that's another issue. ;)
Don't get me wrong, if it were me who was having his lovingly crafted official cd's duplicated and sold at car boot sales or whatever, I'd be mightily pissed off, that is just plain wrong, but a bootleg recording of some performance somewhere that isn't going to be offically released anyway, wouldn't acutally bother me. Ony a die hard fan who has probably bought everything you have ever done is going to buy stuff like that anyway and who doesn't want a few of them ?I guess for me it's a question of the type of infringement that would make me want to take action or not.
I don't know how things work here, but I think that back home, any place that has people playing live music pays a licence and some of that license money is redistributed among songwriters/right holders. Just like it used to be for tapes and other means of reproduction. I'll have to verify. My wife knows a thousand times more than I do about that. She still get checks from la Socan every years for an arrangement of a song she made years ago.
Playing a song live is one issue. Making a recording out of it is another. In most cases, it really isn't all that hard to get the authorization, anyways, so why not be legit? Back in the days, it might have been a hassle, but with internet nowadays, it's actually very easy to get in touch with all the right people.
I think it's a weird debate, really. It's not up to me to determine when or why it's ok. I don't feel I have a say in this. I don't have the legal expertise and I think that 99% of the people who make arguments in favour or against don't. Which is why my point is - there is no debating. Trying to put the emphasis on the grey areas only serves to provide thieves with more arguments.
As for bootlegs, I myself find that they no longer have a reason to be in a lot of the cases. Back in the days, they were relevant, but nowadays, most artists regularly put out live DVDs. Many artists have understood that they can capitalize on it and sell recordings of a bunch of different shows from the same tour. I think it's the best approach. Beat the Boots, as Zappa said...
For me, the core issue is the sense of self-entitlement. When I go to a Cirque show and see someone take a flash photography despite the very clear announcement that photography is forbidden and that flash photography can be dangerous for the acrobats, it's that very same attitude that's at work. The notion that I can decide for myself whether or not the rule is justified and should be observed or when it should be observed. That an exception needs to be made for me.
And many people seem to think that that security warning is BS - though I assure you the danger is very real. But since we live in a world where everyone think he's an expert who gets to call what's relevant or not, flash goes on. They could probably go on and justify their action if you asked them to.
It's the same attitude. And I have no tolerance for it.
I should also mention that at this point, I'm not making money with music. Quite the opposite - I am actually spending quite a bit buying CDs, lots of which I used to own back home or that I bought on Itunes while we were on the road...
I'm not really arguing with your basic principle that the law isn't for people to interpret for themselves or trying to provide excuses to steal. I was really just expressing how I would feel about taking action if I were the artist in question. Some things just wouldn't bother me really.
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 18:52:45
(permalink)
paulo
I'm not really arguing with your basic principle that the law isn't for people to interpret for themselves or trying to provide excuses to steal. I was really just expressing how I would feel about taking action if I were the artist in question. Some things just wouldn't bother me really.
I get that my friend. :) My replies tend to go on forever as I've been involved in a few arguments about that elsewhere since yesterday. But I understand your point.
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
dubdisciple
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5849
- Joined: 2008/01/29 00:31:46
- Location: Seattle, Wa
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 20:14:46
(permalink)
copyright arguments rarely go anywhere because inevitably one side introduces the "i'm right , there is no debate" card ands begins arguing against points that were never actually made. It's almost like gun control debates. both sides tend to spit the same talking points and rebuttals regardless of what is actually said. i don't think anyone actually argued it was right to steal music.
|
dubdisciple
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5849
- Joined: 2008/01/29 00:31:46
- Location: Seattle, Wa
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/01/29 20:31:00
(permalink)
Rain, as an FYI, I'm not singling you out. I was being general but I realize it may seem like what i a msaying applies more toward you. i assure you i feel the same way about the opposite side of the argument whe nit gets into absolutes. I used to teach a course on copyright and the debates would get intense. The one thing i took out of dealing with tons of students and lawyers on both sides of the debate was that few things are clearly as black and white as either side sees it. As for Prince, i think he is doing a classic case of fighting the fight he can win even thou8gh his real fight is against people he can't win against. Prince was a poster boy for how an artist can sell tons of records, get lots of critical acclaim and not make nearly as much money as one would think. Prince's battles with WB resulted in hollow victories at best. WB made the real money off of him at his peak. If he had been able to get his true worth from WB, I doubt he would be as angry about such things. Multi-platinum pop stars, particularly urban genres are bootlegged far more than prince. It is rare a big name rap artist releases an album that does not get leaked and bootlegged months before it hits the shelves. They don't like it anymore than Prince does, but realize attacking fans, even fans that are wrong, is probably a bad idea. A couple of big name rappers actually admitted they were bootlegging their own material because they made more money than what they get from record sales. As said as that is, it does bring up the question of whether artists should focus on the fan thieves or the label thieves.
|
Moshkiae
Max Output Level: -14 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6111
- Joined: 2009/04/27 10:26:25
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/02/02 13:10:47
(permalink)
dubdisciple ... As said as that is, it does bring up the question of whether artists should focus on the fan thieves or the label thieves. I think this is the hard part. But it is also the difference between an original and a copy! The problem is that the legalities occur more on the copies than they do on original musicians. Mostly everyone tries to copy and worship the hits and yeah, these highlight the money a lot more than a band that no one knows that has an album that kinda makes it on the underground, and they need the exposure. All of a sudden, copies and a few boots is ok, because you need all the opportunities for people to see you and get to you, and you are not going to turn down that chance. We're, TODAY, in such a consumerist society, that we have no idea, how much it is hurting YOUR ABILITY, to make it in that environment, that does not want new things, or different things, and too many folks become convinced that the replicant way of life is favorable, and you can not be an outcast! I just do not subscribe to that socialist/democratic drivel! And protecting the rich from further riches is also not my idea of a fair state of government either! It leasves you and I out, and we can never be creative or valuable or have something that we can "sell" to the public. At least in America, this is better, but in Europe? Asia? Africa? Latin America? Forget it! You need that "underground badly, as it is a great show of the actual public sentiment, instead of fabricated numbers that supposedly tell you what is number one and what isn't!
As a wise Guy once stated from his holy chapala ... none of the hits, none of the time ... prevents you from becoming just another turkey in the middle of all the other turkeys!
|
craigb
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41704
- Joined: 2009/01/28 23:13:04
- Location: The Pacific Northwestshire
- Status: offline
Re: Prince's 22 Million Dollar Lawsuit.
2014/02/02 13:13:52
(permalink)
Say, is that a $22 million clown suit you're wearing?
Time for all of you to head over to Beyond My DAW!
|