JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Industry Message Forum The Future of Music

Hi Everyone,

I just wanted to let you know that everyone should check out the futureofmusic.com website. There are a lot of bad laws being passed to support ONLY the major labels out there, and we really need we learn first hand about these laws. I will be running some additional info on how the RIAA is using the US government to reign control on the entire webcasting community (and thus will be able to artificially control the internet music scene just as they do the non internet music scene.) But the first step is for folks to take the initiative and learn the issues themselves, first hand.

Check out the basics and lets be sure that we are at the forefront as a community in protecting our rights.

Thanks,

Brian

Second the motion. I belong myself, I should mention.

There are a lot of issues in DC (where I am a lot) about music right now, after decades of silence. That is significant. It is in the paper here, and believe me, politics is the local news.

Yet much of the arguements are between the internet public/servers and the "major record companies" as if the only use of the internet was violating their copyrights. The whole issue that the internet was actually allowing independent and unknown artists to finally excape the publishing and distribution monopoly of the recording industry through essential cheap standardized codecs and software and hardware for recording and distributing music. Copyright violation was not an issue, and the driving force behind it all originally was the independent artists posting their music, not people trading metalica tracks. Yet the industry has tried repeatedly to find ways to close the whole system down, through proprietary codecs to legislation, all behind the smokescreen of protecting their rights, when they are actually trying to protect their monopoly. And one thing they have done is to take the spotlight off the internet as the means to discover and support the 99% of great "independent" musicians excluded by the record companies. The record companies are even more afraid that known artists will find means to escape the draconian bargains they place on artists who do "get signed" and use the internet to reach their fans directly and leave the record companies creating the best "bands" machines and money can make, ie , can I hear you say nillivanilli three times fast?
There was an article in PC magazine about adding hardware technolgy that would make it impossible to copy "copyrighted files" to a hard disk, or other storage medium. Like they sought to do with mp3 players, like they sought to make cassette tape recorders illegal.

It is in their very best interest to keep that 99% of artists obscure and unknown and they know it, the internet is the biggest threat they have ever faced. And remember the way politics works. Input does work, letters are worht a thousand votes, statistically, and are measured that way. And it is all about votes and money, though not in that order usually. And well, guess what, they have the money. They can get the best lawyers and spin doctors and ghost writers and "expert testimony" that money can buy. One of the main things we can do is to keep the politicians and the public aware of the fact that the internet is the means and medium for a great wealth of independent music, andf that frankly, whether or not a site host material posted without permission of the author, "published" in violation of copyright, is a non issue for me. I am posting my copyrighted material for free download for personal use. It is not public domain, it cannot be used for commercial or othrer purposes without my permisson, present law covers that, and everyone has my permisson to make as many copies as they like for themselves and everyone they know.

though we also get caught up in related issues from software to movies, "piracy" and intellectual propery and on and on. And real issues, as in, if everything is free, who pays for it? Sometimes it is real, and sometimes it is a smokescreen, and sometimes it is just silly. Personally, I'd like to patent the human genome and charge people royalties for making babies. Or maybe I should copyright water, or chocolate...

What is important is how to break the monoploy, is how to create a world where instead of 1% making 99% of the money, and 99% being unable to make a living, even if equally (or more ) talented than the 1%. And a lot of it has to do with public perception and accepted practice. Like someone said and I can verify, the pay for your standard "stand up and bang it out in a bar" hasn't changed in 20 years. And forget coffehouses, do they even pay at all unless you are lucky. And how many place where you play for "exposure", try eating that. Would doctors become doctors if they had a 1% chance of making a living, no matter how good they were? People expect artists to work under conditions they would never accept, perhaps because they know that they would give up their job in a second for a different one that paid better. Only a few jobs have the dedication that drives people to work despite lack of fair compensation. Funny, members of the clergy are some of those who actually understand when I say music is a calling, but no one asks them why they don't get "a real job".

People go out and pay $2.50 or more for what is essentially a cup of coffee, day after day, yet they won't fork over a few dollars to a musician to help them be a musician even if they are willing to download their music for free. If I had just a dollar for every download I've had, I'd have more money that I've ever made in my life. Yet the fact is, I'd rather gve it away for free than not be heard, and the problem is breaking that mind set that music isn't valuable.

I go to other countries and its GREAT. They pay well, 10 times what they pay here. They treat you with lots of respect for the gift and the effort it takes to develop that gift. And that is the best thing about it in my mind, to finally get some respect for being a musician. In fact, one of the questions I find hard to answer is when foriegn tourists can't understand why I play in the street when I am so good. All I can say is thats the way the system works. I play in the street so i can afford to play in all the places that pay diddly.


Anyway, so the legal battle is still going on. It might be worth keeping tabs on a paper like the Washington Post for music articles, till something else becomes pop or they raise a smokescreen about some other non-issue. The latest article in today's papaer was about the napster case, and hearings going on, and a representative talking about legislation for manditory use liscenses, ie, the record companies would have to be paid royalties, set at a standard rate possibly by congress or a regulatory agency, but could not deny access to the music to the internet distributors.

There was another article written in by a highschooler, I believe, possibly a college student, saying that albums (that made the industry billions as they monopolized production and distribution) are passe'. That people don't care about CD cover art even, and the packaging. They put CDs into plastic folders and foget the rest. They keep their collections on their hard disks alone and burn their present favorites to CDRs. They don't listen to a single band play an album's worth of songs, it is like the single is back. And he said that despite the squak, the record companies are still doing a bongo business. Maybe they aren't making the killing they were used to for so long, but should we support that gouging? And often the artists get peanuts while the record company execs aren't suffering.

he went on in this vein. And they printed it. This is important. Politics is so much a matter of public perception, and the internet is as important as the printing press and photocopiers in their time. But remember that more people still listen to the lowly radio than get their info from the internet. One show on PBS can launch a national issue that ends in legislation, changed attitudes, and a different world.

So hey, check it out, it is the news of the day, maybe you can get some intereste from local radio to air a spot from a independent musicians viewpoint. Funny, I did a radio editorial up in Alaska, with the power of PC based digital recording and the net. We were 400 miles of bush from the radio station, yet my friend wrote the script, e-mailed it back and forth through several rewritings, then I recorded them reading it, converted to mp3, e-mailed that and it was on the air the next day I think. Neat.

peace
Brian



------------------
Brian
Folksinger
PAN,CMC,IUMA,JPF,52TV
http://www.pan.com/folksinger

Folksinger, how is it that you so eloquently expressed what I was thinking?...
I'm going to that website RIGHT NOW!

And now 12 years later... didn't exactly go the way the Music Industry wanted it to.

What about 12 years from now? I'll pull this thread up again in 2024.

John

http://www.care2.com/causes/sopa-shelved-until-consensus-found.html

SOPA put on 'hold', awaiting 'consensus'.

The drive to stop the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) seems to be working. On Saturday, the Obama administration criticized SOPA for potentially ”disrupting the underlying architecture of the Internet.” Now, The Hill reports that the controversial bill has been shelved. While SOPA was intended to go after websites that illegally offer copies of music, movies and TV shows, technology giants like Google, Facebook and Reddit have argued that the legislation will curtail innovation and freedom on the internet and mounted a huge campaign against it.

On Saturday morning, House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said that Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) had promised him that the House will not vote on SOPA until “consensus” can be built:

“While I remain concerned about Senate action on the Protect IP Act, I am confident that flawed legislation will not be taken up by this House. Majority Leader Cantor has assured me that we will continue to work to address outstanding concerns and work to build consensus prior to any anti-piracy legislation coming before the House for a vote.”

Shortly before Issa’s announcement, the sponsor of SOPA, Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), had said he would remove a provision requiring that Internet service providers block access to overseas websites accused of piracy, a major concession to SOPA opponents.

A former chair of the Consumer Electronics Association, Issa — a critic of the bill — had scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday to examine the “potential consequences of the bill’s site-blocking provision.” In his statement Saturday, Issa said he would cancel the hearing, following Smith’s decision.

The shift in what had been broad bipartisan support for the two pieces of legislation is indeed a “shift in momentum” and even a “victory for internet freedom.”

The “focus of protecting the Internet” now needs to be on the Senate, Issa said, noting that Majority Leader Harry Reid has “announced his intention to try to move similar legislation in less than two weeks.” On Thursday, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the sponsor of the Senate bill, Protect IP Act (PIPA), had said he was open to changes about the site-blocking provision — now, perhaps even more changes (including shelving PIPA too?) may follow.

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/sopa-shelved-until-consensus-found.html#ixzz1jewtqKfr

NSAI and the entire commercial country music industry in Nashville are supporting SOPA and PIPA. While its understandable that the commercial music industry would seek to protect their copyrights and royalties from piracy, this isn't the way to do it.

For a more balanced view of SOPA and PIPA and how passage of this legislation would endanger freedom of speech, access to the Internet, economic innovation and cyber-security here's an article by Alex Howard from the website O'Reilly Radar which takes a hard look at the dangers of SOPA and PIPA.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyk3AEXvmLg


President Obama is ready with his veto pen if Congress passes legislation that would endanger the open Internet, and rightly so. I don't think any of us would like to see the Internet in America run like the Internet in China.

Considering all the evils and abuses of the Internet; it would be even more evil to endanger the open Internet. Freedom often entails taking the good with the bad.

John

I support the ideas behind SOPA, but not the actual bill which is flawed. However, far more frightening is what Wikipedia and a host of politically motivated multinational powerful sites and key infringers as well as left wing media are pulling. The bill was already stopped, yet the stunt pulled by these sites was truly disappointing. Wikipedia prides itself on saying it is a neutral site where only facts are offered, not agendas, and then they pull the biggest agenda stunt ever. Their actions are just as evil as their worst case scenario they are scared of in those bills. Wikipedia has shown its hand as being in bed with the biggest infringers and least fair and objective sources out there.

Brian

The establishment is always trying to keep people out. But newbies are innovative and find a way to get in.

This is definitely an issue we need to keep aware of and prevent! We don't need to go back to the old days of being force fed music that the corporate suits deem are "hits." I grew up listening to radio when it was about the music and not just the money. Our local radio station helped several big name artists "break out", taking a chance on playing them when few others would. (Sadly, this same station is now a pitiful shadow of its former self; AM and PM drive shows are now talk/shock jock crap...no music!) I later worked in radio and watched how it became less and less about good music and more about profits and copycat/formula bands.
My husband as well as many of our friends are musicians/songwriters whose music would not be considered commercial radio-friendly yet they still play local gigs, spend their money and time writing and recording their songs, all for the love of music.
The internet has allowed me to discover music that I like not what the suits determine I should like and it allows such bands to share their music on a global stage. I will continue to fight against any attempt to regain the establishment's monopoly! I have signed countless petitions and written to my representives and will continue to do so.
Cleveland would have a slim chance of getting any airplay about this issue on commercial radio (six of the major stations are owned by Clear Channel...talk about monopoly!) Thankfully, we do have 3 or 4 wonderful college radio stations who do support indie artists and issues.
Thank you all for your informative input!

Jo,

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it was ALWAYS about the money. In fact, back in "the day" artists/writers were ripped off worse than they are today even. There weren't books and websites and educators helping people avoid being ripped off. But now, a new group is ripping off artists. The fans. They love the music SOOOO much that they steal it and artists and writers have never been so underpaid for their work. The labels will always make their money, so there's nothing left for those who make the music the "fans" just HAVE to have. It's sad, but the good old days and the current days both victimized artists and writers. Same old same old.

Brian

Brian, you are correct about that. I know artists/writers were getting ripped off and that "politics" played a big part in what songs received airplay. But at least back then, radio was much more listenable, and local artists had a chance to be heard. I totally agree that pirate site for "fans" (if they were true fans, they would support these artists!) to steal music should be taken down; I just don't want the labels and corporate radio to regain their monopoly on the music industry again.

Thank you for posting the Future of Music link. Looks like I have a lot of "homework" ahead of me