Discussion: On Copyright

738 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 13 14 15 16 17 30 Newer→ Last

  • robbery,

    You have very low expectations, then.

    well it is the internet, and that page had zoomy buttons and things moving around quickly, and is a lot flashier than (cough couch your page couch) other pages around including mine.

    is that your music under your page?

    No, no, I do stuff with an ongoing melody. But I'm pleased he put an off switch on there.

    I'm pretty sure its nicked but since its not your page I won't get any mileage out of it will I

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    I'd dispute that, as all the musicians I know have a sense of humour.

    not quite sure what you're getting at here but what I meant was you could say musicians live in their mums basement as easily as you could make that gag about anyone else who doesn't have a job with a steady income, and flakey security given to the results of their efforts by law

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Grigg,

    No, how it works now is that I'd approach the copyright holder, which is probably not you.

    Not true at all...music publishing is something I know a wee bit about (ok a lot). Virtually all songwriters these days own their own publishing copyrights, which may or may not be leased to another body usually for a fat advance to allow them to either live or buy a new car or whatever. And more and more acts simply control their rights 100% themselves using the network of global rights bodies to collect on their behalf.

    If you don't need the advance there is no need to assign your publishing to anyone.

    Just another klong... • Since Nov 2006 • 3207 posts Report Reply

  • Don Christie,

    Some humour for robbery

    http://xkcd.com/488/

    hat tip the NZOSS forum.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1616 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    You'll find me at http://tracs.co.nz/gripping-hand/</quote>

    oh, you're that guy. (backs away slowly)

    I sympathise with your point on the invasion of privacy thing and the need to resist attempts to erode it but your solution appears to be
    "yeah, I see media creators are getting fucked over royally but that's their problem, don't fuck with my internet". Thanks for the support pal.

    all of that aside privacy issues have nothing to do with my main point which is still the right to control the fruits of your labour.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    Some humour for robbery
    http://xkcd.com/488/
    hat tip the NZOSS forum.

    a good first effort don

    kind of ignores the whole buying a disc and ripping it and having the disc as back up angle but never let commonsense get in the way of a good rant, I know I don't :)

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Grigg,

    kind of ignores the whole buying a disc and ripping it and having the disc as back up angle

    That's a big assumption Rob when in some genres up to 50% of sales are now digital.

    Just another klong... • Since Nov 2006 • 3207 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    I do it by being good at what I do (toot toot ;).

    thanks for that robin, I was beginning to wonder if there was some sort of code of secrecy about the whole thing.

    As for infinite terms, I'm against them because they reduce the creative pool that other people can build on.

    why do you think that robin?. why is allowing other people to sell my music reducing the creative pool. they can play versions of my songs and sell them, they don't need my versions to go forward.
    there's no benefit to the creative pool that can be gained by making me not own my music.
    If I develop a style of music there's nothing to stop people being inspired by that and playing in my new genre.

    If you have a look at one of the links I posted the other day, you'll also note that something like 14 years has been shown to be most efficient for the economy.

    like media is the corner stone of the economy. the only benefit to removing control and rights over media is that complete strangers can pick up something they had no part in the creation of and profit off it. take the elvis recordings again, ignoring that the copyright got extended on them. the original label still has them available, anyone can buy them if they want. no-ones missing out in anyway except a few shady back yard operators.

    I read the in defence of piracy article in the wall street journal.
    the thing about the woman who put a video of her kid dancing to prince on youtube cos she couldn't think of another way to send a video file to her family. this is stupid on all levels. firstly there are countless large file upload sites to do this on, secondly why put it up and leave it on you tube, its a private video.
    thirdly, prince is a jerk, why are we surprised, not every media owner acts that way.

    The other example was Talking heads who had a track of theirs used to back a campaign to attack barrack obama.
    why should they ever have to see their music promote a message they didn't authorise. is anyone saying they should? infinite control, or until someone lets it lapse. I can't see a valid argument against it if healthy business practices are followed.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    That's a big assumption Rob when in some genres up to 50% of sales are now digital.

    I wasn't making a big assumption, just a little one, and pointing out that if you're worried about losing your collection there's a perfectly good way of preventing it already on offer. Buy a disc. it costs about the same if you buy from the right places.
    all of those issues raised in that cartoon care easily addressed. promoting piracy as the best solution seems a little silly, don't you think?
    by that logic smash and grab is a good solution to shops being closed at 5.30pm.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Mark Harris,

    @simon

    If you don't need the advance there is no need to assign your publishing to anyone.

    That's good to hear, I'm glad it's changing. (And yes, I know you know a bit about the music biz ;-)

    Waikanae • Since Jul 2008 • 1343 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Grigg,

    I wasn't making a big assumption, just a little one, and pointing out that if you're worried about losing your collection there's a perfectly good way of preventing it already on offer. Buy a disc. it costs about the same if you buy from the right places.

    Why should you have to? Answer..you shouldn't. Respecting the copyright owner and respecting the customer goes both ways. But since in the music cosmos DRM is gonna be a what-were-they-thinking museum piece in a year or two, it's largely academic now anyway.

    Just another klong... • Since Nov 2006 • 3207 posts Report Reply

  • Mark Harris,

    oh, you're that guy. (backs away slowly)

    Oh, yeah, that's me. Uh huh. (Keep on backing)

    I sympathise with your point on the invasion of privacy thing and the need to resist attempts to erode it but your solution appears to be
    "yeah, I see media creators are getting fucked over royally but that's their problem, don't fuck with my internet".

    As a media creator, I don't agree with your surmise. An open internet benefits everyone. I don't know what you mean by the "invasion of privacy thing" and I'm not sure I care. You're becoming a bit one note and really not advancing any argument beyond "it's mine, why can't I keep it forever". So the selfishness plank seems to be in your own eye, but thanks for your "help" with the mote you perceive to be in mine.

    Thanks for the support pal.

    Heh, you'd be welcome, if I thought you understood the issues here. But I think Don had the right of it when he named you "troll. You're just hear for a fight and you really couldn't give a damn about the result. you have no alternative to offer and you have no idea what people like me do. So, keep your thanks as I was doing fine without them before, and I'll keep on doing so.

    all of that aside privacy issues have nothing to do with my main point which is still the right to control the fruits of your labour.

    And what you've consistently failed to acknowledge is that I have no interest in taking away any rights that accrue to you now.

    Waikanae • Since Jul 2008 • 1343 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    __If you don't need the advance there is no need to assign your publishing to anyone.__

    That's good to hear, I'm glad it's changing. (And yes, I know you know a bit about the music biz ;-)

    Simon makes a point I was trying to make, but with more knowledge on his part. I've met plenty of artists for whom their publishing is what lets them do what they do -- it underwrites their creative independence.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18957 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    you want to be allowed use without asking?

    Yep, unless it's for commercial purposes, in which case I'd approach it differently. If I sampled a piece of your song and used it in one of mine, I wouldn't worry. But I then wanted to perform that song or make it available for money, I'd seek your permission and work out a deal that enabled me to do just that.

    as simon pointed out that's kinda how it works now, if only people would honor it and work with it instead of inventing some mad scenario of how the worl is being dragged down by it all.

    what you do in the privacy of your own home with my music is your business. when you bring it out into the public eye then it becomes mine. if you try to make money off it, then you slip some gratuities to the right people, its only polite, its not that bad a system. at worse you could come up with a whole original idea all of your own and do anything you like with it.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    it underwrites their creative independence.

    is loan sharking, get into bed with the devil and expect what's coming to you.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Grigg,

    That's good to hear, I'm glad it's changing. (And yes, I know you know a bit about the music biz ;-)

    It's been a few decades (since the eighties) since the publishing rules changed, partially as a result of a few major law suits (Sting vs Virgin, Elton John vs DJM etc) and partially as result of a new generation of indie publishers and managers asking and offering better terms. That forced the hand of the old school guys who used to buy writers' works for the duration of copyright, often for shitty money (ask Lennon-McCartney) and convoluted sub publishing arrangements which reduced royalties to a pittance.

    That, coupled with digital communication and global collection agencies have really reduced the role of the big boys. Which of course is a major reason they're so keen on copyright extension...to get the maximum return from those copyrights they own 100% before they lose them..all those standards from the early to mid 20th century are goldmines but have a time limit on them. Without these old copyrights the record companies, who own the publishers, are in a pretty shaky position.

    Just another klong... • Since Nov 2006 • 3207 posts Report Reply

  • Robin Sheat,

    the only benefit to removing control and rights over media is that complete strangers can pick up something they had no part in the creation of and profit off it.

    You are wrong.

    We've pointed out how you're wrong many times lately.

    This track gives you just one example. (Whole album)

    Dunedin • Since Oct 2008 • 44 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    the term troll describing grumpy fucks better fits others in this thread I think ;)

    And what you've consistently failed to acknowledge is that I have no interest in taking away any rights that accrue to you now.

    is this about acknowledgment? you want me to acknowledge you? If I'm not discussing the issues you're interested in why are you engaging me on mine points, if they've got nothing to do with what you're discussing surely you'd just ignore them. other than that, yeah, I am just fucking with you, just a little I did ay I was bored on saturday,
    I was kind of interested in what you had to say on your area of knowledge but you weren't very forthcoming on it. apparently from you page you do have a point but you haven't really made it well.

    robin entered a good informative post so I'm sweet for now.

    I'll see if I can have a read of don's page. I'm glad you're all passionate about your stuff, totally appreciate it when I see it, and I certainly don't take it personally

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Robin Sheat,

    the term troll describing grumpy fucks better fits others in this thread I think ;)

    Troll in this context means, loosely: someone who says things for no other purpose than to get a rise out of others (as opposed to furthering the discourse).

    It's usually frowned upon (depending of course on the nature of the forum).

    Dunedin • Since Oct 2008 • 44 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    You are wrong.

    your position is no more right than mine, I'm anti sampling.
    I think its unnecessary and a purely economic answer to a creative question. that track and its message (its all about money) could easily be turned around on its writers. its all about money, ie them keeping there's and using the results of someone else's.
    all of that shit can be easily created a new, it just takes time money and skill, its easier to nick it off someone else. nothing more to it than that. they're not champions of freedom, they're just naughty boys.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    theirs

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    Troll in this context means,

    yeah I know the term, I was making a point, but you knew that.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    I am just fucking with you

    Rob that's not a good way of ensuring a respectful conversation, surely.

    I think it's fair to say that you're not valuing the goodwill in this forum, and the many hours of unpaid expertise folks are contributing.

    Letting yourself down.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16739 posts Report Reply

  • Robin Sheat,

    I'm anti sampling.
    I think its unnecessary and a purely economic answer to a creative question.

    So, art forms that you approve of are fine, but not others? Just because you don't consider it creative or interesting means that it isn't worth creating?

    And, umm, in this case there is no economic consideration. Their stuff is all free for download. But they use samples, and encourage others to sample from them, so I guess it's not worthwhile then.

    A pity, I quite like it.

    Dunedin • Since Oct 2008 • 44 posts Report Reply

  • robbery,

    So, art forms that you approve of are fine, but not others? Just because you don't consider it creative or interesting means that it isn't worth creating?

    art is completely subjective. but that's not the point I'm addressing.
    as far as copyright infringement through sampling goes it isn't necessary, and the arguments for infringement are purely economic.

    there could be a certain punk ethos to that ie reclaiming music for everyone, but its a little different to picking up a guitar and making noise.

    I understand you like that stuff and that's fine, and surely I'm allowed to not like it, and give my reasons which are relevant to this convo.

    a lot of artists wanting certain vintage sounds are now opting to create them themselves and avoid the whole clearing samples thing. I guess that shows its not so hard after all.

    I have no problem with referring to past works,

    a point you my not know is that in classical music it was common to write new works based on themes in other writers works.

    new zealand • Since May 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 13 14 15 16 17 30 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.