Just a headsup on whatsup! You can readup about it here 

Sounds like a PITA to me. What is a good alternative? Is there a place you can post cover songs if you are not selling them? I guess I could always go through Harry Fox to aoid any trouble but still I would wonder where to post tunes. I would think that if you are not selling other people's songs... just covering and sharing for input or  fun, what is the harm? If you have original tunes, then downloading sales should not be a problem.
So much crap...

J

Hi,


Sounds like another website that needs to die with everyone leaving for greener pastures ... why, why ... I can not understand why ... someone would stay there when they are not paying you and your friends for work you do?

Again, it's time you stop depending on those morons ... create your own website and start another one of those webring things and share that with your friends ... look, for crying out loud, I don't need Soundcloud to tell me that the CHB is good and cool because they gave it a good rating and then ripped everyone else off!

Stop thinking that someone else can do things for you!

Stop being a fool!

Help kill websites that hurt you!

But DJ's? ... not sure too many real musicians want to share money with them, but ... never know ... these days in Las Vegas, DJ's make way better money than most band members!

The petition seems to be saying SoundCloud should permit mashups and bootlegs. Perhaps I do not understand the current use of those terms.

It appears that if a DJ samples pieces of another artist's recording, then recombines them in new and interesting ways to produce a new recording that  the original artist never intended, that is a mashup. It is also clearly a derivative work of the original artist(s) phonorecord. Even very short phrases of actual recordings have been found to infringe the copyright of the original. 

It is somewhat more difficult to find a creditable definition for bootleg, which always implies an illegal activity. Surely the petitioner cannot intend that complete distribution of  copyrighted recordings should be made available. That is the kind of file "sharing" that has brought down dozens of websites and peer to peer systems. More likely he is referring to unauthorized recordings of artist performances, which has been common since the invention of magnetic tape, and which is also pretty well established as illegal. Or he might be thinking of an unlicensed "cover" of a songwriter's work, which is clearly infringement.

The petition seems to be requesting that SoundCloud adopt a policy that would permit if not encourage copyright infringement, making it potentially liable for damages. If, as stated, the petition intends that SoundCloud should serve as a way for people to have access to the original works of otherwise voiceless musicians, it is hard to see how turning it into the target of the anti-piracy minions, armed with established copyright law, will serve that purpose.

I wouldn't sign the petition and I wouldn't participate on SC, in fact I have stopped participating on all other similar sites. I have left the music I had long since posted but plan to move on in the near future (closure of my accounts)! 

What gets me is this, (Q) How many of you guys actually got paid for all the streaming (audio) on sites such as SC, RN, SClick (and other such sites)? The answer is most likely NOTHING. That's because musicians sign over their rights allowing these sites free reign (licencing) to stream your music freely. So, if 'Free Streaming' is the future? Musicians are screwed, and yeah, that about sums it up. 

(A) Better off with ones 'own site' and use wordpress app (or similar) or if able to create your own site layout (design) then simply embed YouTube videos. Put up some nice images, some info about yourself, news update stream and links to stores (purchase)! Get your music professionally distributed thru sites such as; MondoTunes.  So yeah, better off doing plan (A)

-

jbow


Sounds like a PITA to me. What is a good alternative? Is there a place you can post cover songs if you are not selling them? I guess I could always go through Harry Fox to aoid any trouble but still I would wonder where to post tunes. I would think that if you are not selling other people's songs... just covering and sharing for input or  fun, what is the harm? If you have original tunes, then downloading sales should not be a problem.
So much crap...

J

Good alternative? 

. Get your own site and with appropriate licencing to do covers for 'streaming only'. 
. If you do covers? Include original author(s) credits and you're licenced to stream.
. If need be, use wordpress + optionally use their widgets (audio players)
. For your own music, get it distributed professionally thru sites such as; MondoTunes. 
. Use social sites to promote your site and music and/or; 
. MondoTunes offers KickStart marketing program. 

-

Hi,

The bootleg thing is scary ... and one should not be making money off it ... but then, you get a Grateful Dead or Bob Dylan and half their fame came because the bootlegs were vastly superior to the albums in material, not necessarily in th emore processed and radio friendly stuff that came on the albums!

However, if the "band" DID get some money for the bootlegs, I would have no issue with it ... but I doubt this will happen! But on this day and age of modern recording ... I'm not sure that anyone can prevent any recording and it is a matter of time when a 007 recording device will make the recording better than the band's own studio stuff anyway ... which means that it will be harder to prevent fans from getting the clips they want.
 
I do think that the main issue in here is ... DJ's ... and how can they get their music copyrighted, when it is using someone else's -- for example -- and uses samples like crazy ... and sooner or later, the copyright services will probably have to address how to handle DJ's and perhaps charge them half rate or the like, but some of them are quite original ... though I have heard some of the European folks and they have been way better than some of thsoe cardboard covers in Las Vegas ... and many of them are actual musicians ... not just a geek! My own son-in-law in the LA area, has gathered some good reputation, and he's a musician first and the combination is very good ... though I think that he's not making as good a mix of his abilities as he is just DJ'ing some easy crap ... and he got mad when I called it "easy crap"!
 
It will be a matter of time and some DJ will have an album that pops millions and then the whole thing will change again ... !!! who knows where it is going to go?

I don't understand any of the outrage here. Soundcloud and other sites offer free web space and bandwidth for you to upload your work and for others to stream it. They make their money by selling premium memberships with more bandwidth and other extras. What is wrong with that? Surely nobody is expecting to get paid by such a website for the privilege of hosting their work. Soundcloud don't get paid per song listen or anything like that. They're not making advertising $$'s from their site. They're not making $$'s from the quality of your music. It doesn't matter to them if you're uploading musical masterpieces or white noise. They're simply collecting subscription fees from people who want to pay for what they offer. 

As for the copyright thing, well duh, they don't want to host material that infringes copyright. Imagine back in the 80's, if there were a service that offered to put the music of your choice onto cassette tape and distribute it to people. I'm pretty sure there would be a "no copyrighted material" rule then as well. 

Besides which, these "DJ's" could always host their "mashups" on YouTube if they got banned from Soundcloud. It's chock full of copyrighted material, some of which has been there for years without being taken down. And since music in these "mashups" is rarely played at the original speed, it's going to get past YouTube's content detection. Plus the sound quality on YouTube is significantly better than Soundcloud. I don't even know why people bother with Soundcloud in the first place. 

I don't even know why people bother with Soundcloud in the first place.  


Ditto  

I never bothered using SC and won't bother in future. 

SongCraft


I don't even know why people bother with Soundcloud in the first place.  


Ditto  

I never bothered using SC and won't bother in future. 

The first time I listened to a tune in the Songs Forum from that site I knew I wouldn't be using it. It wasn't but
a few visits there trying to listen to others from the forum that I stated it was the last time. Haven't been back since.
 
Isn't the "streaming" and all that a bunch of BS anyway? I mean anything that I can hear on my system can easily be recorded.
I know that I've posted songs at Box and been confronted about "streaming"....changed it so it can't be downloaded and all the
while thought....isn't that stupid. "Download" or hit "record"...what's the damn difference? BS...that's the diff.