Get in on this discussion...

[pinky]

Originally posted by John Stannard:
...it's illegeal, like driving 34MPH in a 30 zone or parking for "just a minute" in a no park zone ... is file sharing just the "post modern" version of copying cassettes ??...

Not the same at all. Making copies -for personal use- IS legal. Manufacturing and distributing those copies is called bootlegging, whether it is a cassette, video, 8-track, Beta, CD, or "swapped" audio file.

As far as parking in a no parking zone for just a minute, your ticket will be the same if you are caught.

Going 34 in a 30 zone? That is a judgement call on the part of the officer. Speed limits are suggested for different roads under differing conditions. An offficer can give you a ticket for doing the speed limit or less in adverse conditions! Do 20 MPH on an icy road that usually has a 50 MPH limit and you can get a ticket for speeding!

IOW, you can get a ticket (or a conviction) for doing something just because it is bad judgement or just plain stupid!

LIKE FILE SWAPPING!

ps- Do you park in handicapped spaces? Or use the carpool lane when you're alone? I don't know about the UK, but here in the USA there is a term most of the people use: it's called a fu•king idiot!

[John Stannard]

Whoa there Pinky !!, I am most definitely, 100% NOT defending anything illegal, i wasn't talking driving, it was by way of an example of how "legal" seems to be stretched, this is way "off topic" but i love the idea of a "discretionary" ticket issued by a police officer at the scene, here it's a speeding camera and "you're knicked !" and you just know it's connected to a Wintel box somewhere!!
Sorry, back to the plot .......
My point is that by looking at all the previous posts its obvious to see the two camps will never see eye to eye on this one, it certainly stirs up some emotions though and it is a great topic for a rant, the cynic in me thinks you really won't stop file sharing now we have the technology.
I lived and worked in Norway in the 80's and there used to be a levy on blank cassette tapes, i think it was about 1Kr per unit and at the end of the year you could apply to the "tape fund" for monetary help with your project, maybe the same thing on a blank CD would help if you could somehow administer it fairly ?
I'm interested to see just how this will be resolved .......

[pinky]

...maybe the same thing on a blank CD would help if you could somehow administer it fairly ?
I'm interested to see just how this will be resolved .......[/QB]

Well, I am passionate about this because it is the same thing as walking into my butcher shoppe (spelled as they do in the UK and snagging my meat.

NOBODY TOUCHES MY MEAT WITHOUT PAYING!

Just because the technology exists and is in widespread use DOES NOT mean it will remain so. And it certianly does not mean it should!

As for the added on fee for digital media, it has been in place for serveral years and BMI has (and still does) make distributions to artists from this fund. I believe ASCAP does as well. I forgot the name of the Act of Congress that created this (Millinium Copyright Act, perhaps?) but the $$$ is distributed to artists who have commercial sales (presumably those whos music is being copied.)

So if we SERIOUSLY want to get the opinions of the members of this group on the subject, we need to realize that MANY of us do not agree with the file swapping concept. And as we make a living at selling our musical wares, many of us will not just voice our views strongly (OK, I'm of Mediterranian decent and fight like Ulysses!) - but will defend our work to the full extent of the law.

BTW, I might add that I have about 5 hours (FIVE HOURS!!!) of music being commercially distrbuted ILLEGALLY in the UK on Amazon.uk and in several thousand internet sites outside the USA and Canada. The loss to my company is estimated to be between $150,000 and $3,000,000. The copies were made digitally and reproduced en mass. So if you are wondering WHY I am so passionate about it, THE GUY HAS MY HOUSE OVER THERE!!!

[John Stannard]

So if we SERIOUSLY want to get the opinions of the members of this group on the subject, we need to realize that MANY of us do not agree with the file swapping concept.
OK, i'm with Pinky on this one, it would be interesting to see where everyone stands on it once and for all.
Would the common link between both camps be the 'service provider' ?, (don't want to start a new argument here !), it would not be so hard for ISP's to just stop the movement of Mp3's etc. either 'upstream' or 'downstream' but then of course there are those who DO want their music on the 'net because they have no other outlet's !
This is getting too confusing for a Friday !, Pinky, if the pirate who has "your house" lives near me i'll gladly toss my spare 18U rack case through his window !!, and at those prices i will p*ss in his swimming pool too !!
(These days "shoppe" is spelt m-a-l-l by thee way )

[Keith Henry]

Originally posted by John Stannard:

Julio, sometimes you "dream of being king of England ?", well come on over, we could do with a hand sometimes !!

John, I was just in England & Wales this past November. I absolutely loved it and felt right at home. I'll drop you a line if I'm heading back in the furture.

Click on News & Updates button

http://home.comcast.net/~keith_henry/

[loff56]

This conversation is of course very interesting to all of us who create music, but to me it really brings out a much larger issue. Whether it's file-sharing, or copying to a tape or even copying sheet music with a pencil and staff paper, it's all technically illegal no matter how you slice it. But beyond that, it's morally wrong. The more rampant the "stealing" is, ultimately, the worse off our morals are in this society. Ironically, the music industry can at times be a major culprit of corrupting our morals. (Though, our politicians and our business leaders, on a whole, are a much bigger threat.)
For me, I say "don't shoot the messenger", in this case the "messenger" being technology. Let's get to the source of the problem.
I do think that we as musicians are making some headway in educating people about the wrongs of sharing music. We need to continue that course by talking about it more with the public. Maybe make them realize that it's not just the Madonna's of the world that are losing money, but all the little guys that make her albums possible. Recording musicians, the studios, engineers, producers, the marketing firms, the guys that make the studio equipment, the piano tuner, etc..., etc..., etc...
Just some food for thought.

[MMullen]

Thanks for all the great information. Keep it coming! I think more people need to be more educated on how much it cost and what goes into producing a record. They might think about paying for them

m

[duncan]

Someone said we will never see 'eye to eye' on this issue. I disagree. Eventually kids grow up and discover that they have to work for a living, and then they realize that stealing income from working musicians is wrong. This is the reason labels are suddenly very interested in the Boomer market. The boomers are all grown up and they don't steal music like their kids do, which means the label won't lose 30 percent of its sales to downloaders.

[Nama]

Maybe, musicians would be paid with their live performances not recordings from now on? Back to old days.

[qo]

Originally posted by pinky:

As for the added on fee for digital media, it has been in place for serveral years and BMI has (and still does) make distributions to artists from this fund. I believe ASCAP does as well. I forgot the name of the Act of Congress that created this (Millinium Copyright Act, perhaps?) but the $$$ is distributed to artists who have commercial sales (presumably those whos music is being copied.)

I disagree with this fee simply because I use blank media and I don't pirate. Yet, I have to pay the same surcharge as the pirates.

Quoting John Stannard:

Would the common link between both camps be the 'service provider' ?, (don't want to start a new argument here !), it would not be so hard for ISP's to just stop the movement of Mp3's etc. either 'upstream' or 'downstream' but then of course there are those who DO want their music on the 'net because they have no other outlet's !

I work for a prominent networking company in engineering. There is no way to do what you are describing without impacting legitimate traffic. It's possible to block e.g. TCP/UDP port numbers, but going further inside the packet (especially in hardware) is problematic, and is not possible with current products. Perhaps we can get there in a couple years, but silicon isn't up to it yet.

IMHO, I'm in the camp that believes there's no closing Pandora's Box. The technology is such that pirating is here to stay. DRM is a joke, and any such attempts will be easily thwarted by pirates. So, what's the answer? I think there are several.

1. Nama's right. Concerts and all the associated memorabilia, are a way to recoup investment and earn a living.

2. Think beyond music. Any of you old enough to remember albums that had a neat design e.g. Rolling Stones' Get Your Ya Ya's Out, Bee Gees Odessa, Jethro Tull Stand Up, to name a few, know that interesting packaging can help sell a product. Give the buyer something more than just a plastic shell with a nondescript sleeve. IMHO, CD form factor is great for music stores, but terrible for generating sales. Give me 12" any day to stuff all kinds of pics, booklets, and other goodies. For $19USD, users should get more (besides the music) than a couple pieces of plastic. So, think about adding some analog paper and cardboard (or a zipper, or felt/velvet) to your next product. What? Your production cost increased? Live with it.

3. Satellite Radio, cable music channels, and CD baby, iTunes, et al). Once it's out there, it's gonna get pirated. But, give your audience a reason NOT to pirate. How can you do this? How about RELATING to them on a level that they understand your situation? We're back to concerts and taking your case directly to your audience. Go to a bar with some average Joes after one of your concerts instead of eating caviar in the fricking green room with the big wigs. Then maybe, just maybe, those average Joes will post on boards how down to earth you are and maybe that might give people second thoughts about stealing from you.

I'm a musician, and an engineer, and am producing a few artists. Nothing big time, but enough that I realize that the work that everyone involved puts into our "product" should be rewarded. But, some of the blame lies with us. It's not like this happened overnight. The industry has had plenty of time to adjust and they've failed because the powers that be love the status quo. If as much effort was put into creating a product that people wanted to buy as has been put into organizing battalions of lawyers to fight a "war on terror" that can't be won, the industry would be better off.

<small>[ July 18, 2005, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: qo ]</small>

[Henry Robinett]

Pirating is wrong. It's stealing. The same rules apply regardless of the seeming frutility of prosecuting the perpetrators. It is morally wrong. It just astounds me that people can justify stealing just because the "genie is out of the bottle". Property is property and is owned by someone. If you have no legal right to own it and you obtain it with the intention to own it, it is called thievery. Just because it's more difficult or even impossible to find finger prints or the like does not change the fact that it is stealing.

If someone told me I could rape anyone I wanted to without fear of prosecuition I wouldn't do it, even if I were standing in front of Salma Hayek. Why? Because it's morally wrong. The difference, you might say, is that I'd be causing harm to Salma Hayek or said woman, but no harm comes to the victim of the pirate. It's not for me to decide what constitutes harm.

Many a criminal justifies his robberies. He often says, "They have insurance." or "Look these folks are filthy rich, they can afford it!" The act of taking something that doesn't belong to you is morally wrong. And no amount of justification will adequate explain it or REALLY justify it.

The challenge today is not taking something and getting away with it. The challenge today is remaining honest. It is knowing what is correct, what is right and following your dictates.

[qo]

Hi Henry

"It just astounds me that people can justify stealing just because the 'genie is out of the bottle'".

Just to be clear, I'm not justifying stealing/pirating. I'm just recognizing that it's a part of doing business now. In order to be successful at any endeavor, one has to work with the cards they're dealt. We've been dealt a rotten hand and somehow have to figure out a way to manage within these new constraints. I really don't think DRM is the answer. Nor do I think prosecution is. Rather, a new business model is called for.

[Henry Robinett]

Yeah, well a new business model has yet to be found. I agree that we need a new one. But for the time being and for the foreseeable future, it is illegal and immoral.

[Timeline]

100 opened with limits of income they could gather. A new model indeed!

Every time new models are thunk up we get things like things like "Subscription" music. We loose big time.

I highly recommend that you only digitally distribute to companies like Apple who stand up to the mass thievery going on or we will all loose.

I have a new album to put out. It's complete. I'm dragging my feet because Apple has not released the Intel chip machine that uncovers DRM watermarks from non purchased music copies.

This is why Live TV shows are not streamed yet as well. Movies are another matter but you would think we would see streamed product one could pay a fee to see rather then have to be ripped off by the cable providers. A bit OT but had to add it.

I would love to also have music on demand set up but the copywrite rights are tough to negotiate by the players.

Each company involved in our digital pie take a bit more of your income until its almost gone.

I think were better off selling our CD's out of the back of our vans around high schools.

I've lowerd our first album down to nothing, like $5 bucks. I have seen no added sales as a result.

www.cdbaby.com/cd/retrobeast

I think it's a great record... whatever!

<small>[ July 19, 2005, 07:26 AM: Message edited by: Timeline ]</small>

[qo]

OK, the following isn't a full-blown business model. Rather, it's just an idea for value-add with a CD form factor.

Included on the inside sleeve of each CD is a unique, potentially date-limited, key code. Using this code, the consumer goes to the band's website and registers for...whatever. Could be a special invitation to a reception held in each city along the band's next tour. Could be an entry in a random drawing of x number of fans that get to spend an evening backstage. Could be merchandize in the form of posters, t-shirts, etc. Might also include access to a member's area of the band's site, where e.g. outtakes, alternative tracks, soloed parts (e.g. guitar leads, for those that might want to learn them), tabulature, etc, are available (of course, these would eventually be pirated as well, but that's just the way it goes...).

The point being that the only way to get the code is to buy the CD. Obviously, this wouldn't entice everyone. Obviously, it's not a holistic solution to pirating. Rather, it's just one idea that might help curb pirating a bit. Surely there are other ideas that, in combination, could help a bit more.

<small>[ July 19, 2005, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: qo ]</small>