Discussion: On Copyright
738 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 20 21 22 23 24 … 30 Newer→ Last
-
My own Counting the Beat story - imagine a packed school assembly with hundreds of teens enthusiastically belting out that song. We had a way cool music teacher.
A cool music teacher....I'm thinking oxymoron and will explain....Teachers may be inspirational, but use of the words "cool" and" teacher" are mutually exclusive. Musicians can be cool (in fact it's almost a default...but not quite mainly because of the accordion...which I recently found out is what Weird Al's instrument was/is...which does improve the stock of the accordion somewhat and has positive externalities for the whole music industry) , but not if they are wearing their teacher-hat at the same time. As the son of a teacher, this is the rock on which my world is based, so no messing with it in anyplace that I can see. (I'll leave the discussions regarding me starting my own religion and omnipotent deities for other occasions).
I'm also of the opinion that singing needs to be an entirely voluntary act and that any form of singing under duress should be banned....in my view this is included (& is near the top of the list) when people talk about the 'citizen thing'. To digress further, an old friend of mine, when we were at school was put into detention as he was approx a foot taller than any of the other students and therefore quite noticeable when not singing in assembly. The rest of us in the not insignificant non-singing-crowd simply engaged in shoegazing and ensuring we were in the middle of any rows whilst not singing, or pretending we were singing (you know like Britney does...except without the sequins, make-up, aerobics routine, big hair, microphone...tho probably with similar levels of talent & timing). My point is that one person's inspiration is another person's pain and teachers need to be better regulated with regards to the power they have.. To this day I have an aversion to singing in public and suspect why I prefer instrumental compositions over songs. (I'd suggest reading Steven Pinker for people who are interested in the whole nature-nurture-how unique experiences shapes your future thing). I am also keen to have "Jon does not have to sing" inserted as a term into any future contracts for my employment.
An inspirational teacher, who just happened to be in charge of a music class that I was...detained in, introduced me to "the Blues Brothers". For that I am grateful...his initials coincidentally were RB...spooky.
-
Ah, but Jon, any likely alternatives would have elicited exactly the shuffling avoidance you mentioned (me included). Given we were going to be forced to sing something regardless, his coolness lay in choosing a song that everyone actually wanted to be part of. Enthusiastically, like that tune deserves to be sung.
As for the accordian, well... -
Mark, those Zeiman figures are from 2002 and with respect, in the music industry it is a lifetime ago, as is the 2003 50 Cent example pointed to in your Napster opinion piece ( and I agree with much of Fader's piece).
The fact is record sales are down enormously and a big part of that must be due to piracy (although I'm not aware of any bogus specific figures touted by the industry that attribute actual losses to piracy, the ones you have already quoted seem not to relate specificaly to that..can you give me some from an industry body?).
And I agree, there are other very major factors that I think the recording industry ignores.
However, as an aside I'm also very wary of atrributing one of those to be what I think of as an old fart factor...the music isn't as good as it used to be, they don't sign the acts anymore, that sort of thing..that's a nonesense but it's often repeated...record companies both big and small sign the same ratio of pulp and non-pulp that they always have, with a variety of provisos that should be added concerning changing artist developement and such which would take this conversation off into another direction.
The nature of the music business has changed, and the industry has not caught up.
I'm not arguing with that at all and I think S92a is another sign that the industry simply still doesn't get it.
Judith Tizard cites reduced demand for services at York Studio as evidence of piracy damaging the industry, but is it really? Is it not more that artistes have an increasing range of technology available to them in their homes and less cash to lay in front of a production team?
Of course, but certain sorts of records need to be made in a studio, otherwise they likely suffer badly (and the odd exception doesn't break that trusim). But there are probaly more NZ records being made now that ever before and that's a fact too.
The record industry has quite a history of crying poor and, to toss in one too many metaphors, has perhaps cried wolf too many times..hence my aside about home taping above. Is it hurting? Sure, quite a bit. Do we know how much is due to piracy? No. Does this justify draconian law? No, not in my opinion.
lets see what the rights to the screaming mee mee is worth.
Rob, I think your grandmother's wedding ring has cultural value and I think society should own it....sorry, your family has had it long enough and you'll have to hand it over.
-
I wasn't talking about "whether copyright should be infinite".
Ah, well there goes the confusion there. I was under the impression you were using 'creative works are created by both creator and audience" so artists can't claim full ownership.
The discussion at the time was in relation to how creative property is different to physical property and why it should be treated differently. you raised a point regarding cultural value which is parallel to creative works, but not all creative works are considered culture and not all culture is considered creative work. A creative works cultural value to society should have nothing to do with the property rights assigned to it. it exists as a stand alone work before anyone gives it cultural value. to use jon's example of a work locked away in a cupboard unshared. the property rights on that item should be the same as one that has been exposed to the publiced and embraced open arms. the items are the same.its true that "Cultural Value" and "Creative Capital" ie its accelerated worth over time does rely on how much people like it, but I fail to see how that counts against the rights of creators to control over their works. Its nice that people like it but why tar all creative works, liked and disliked with the same brush as the more liked works. I think it is irrelevant to my point of "why can't creative works have infinite property rights"?.
but if you say you weren't raising the point to further the argument against infinite rights then that's cool, we don't have a disagreement. I acknowledge you point and we agree it has no influence on the extension of property rights part of the discussion (see above quote).sasha
It's just not the dominant understanding - yet.
robbery
"you've put forward an idea, a hypothesis , one that hasn't been agreed with, hence not adequately raising a valid difference at all."
ok, so I've said in other words it is not the accepted view point, and you've said it is not the accepted (dominant) view point. so how are we disagreeing again?
Try that in a pub conversation and see how far you get.
I don't converse in pubs with people who resort to violence or aggression. all my discussion mates have a thick skin and a good sense of humour.
I was defending my point, you weren't attacking it although you appreared to be, but you've clearly stated you weren't ieI wasn't talking about "whether copyright should be infinite".
so we're sweet.
unless of course you were disageeing in which case..... -
"Coolness" would have been picking "Albatross" in my books, though I get that some peope (sick f*&%$#s that they are) enjoying public singing....Later I determined that assembly was a prime opportunity for me to exercise my inner Ferris. Instead "Maxwell's silver hammer" is hated by me and it wasn't until I discovered that George wrote a few songs and Ringo got to sing that I allowed myself to look at the Beatles.
Actually the one occassion that I have felt ashamed of the singing efforts of NZ'ers was at the ANZAC day dawn service in the domain in Auckland. If ever there was a need to have a Public Address system with someone good (but not too good...you don't want people feeling the lack of obligation) leading the crowd, it's that moment. Standing there, in front of that building, looking at that view, watching the condensation either rise slowly as the darkness evaporates allowing the realisation that the other coat wrapped human sized blobs are people, perhaps even people you know,
or the rain continues to pour from the ashen sky with the city lights in the distance glowing like a pack of UFO'swaddled in cottonwool and the wind assisting the rain in occassionally penetrating the waterproof layers and making it look like you've been bawling and perhaps you have.Anyway those are rare moments.
Kinda makes me dislike Wellington all the more and yeah I have been the odd rugby game where they wheel out that miserable funeral march of anthem...at least it's miserable in English version...The Maori version sounds a lot better, though I know the meaning is just the same. Perhaps as Robbery suggests ,NZ should become a Republic and give ourselves an opportunity to feel good about NZ, give the English anthem the elbow and get rid of a bunch of other ideas about ourselves which we may benefit of being liberated from...I know they'll still be part of our history...but I hope you "get it".
-
your family has had it long enough and you'll have to hand it over.
yes your lordship. ruling class type, I apologize for not recognizing you needed my property sooner.
so you're saying no to finding out what market value for master recordings is?
I kinda like the idea. country pays market rates for it to make it available to its citizens, just like it does for a piece of land it wants to make into a road or a park. then mark can sample to his hearts content cos his country has done right by all its people. (sigh, butterflies and candy floss.) -
excuse me mr moderator (jon). i'd like to point out that the moderator is diverting the discussion to non copyright things, like his hate of singing and wellington. is this some sort of clever ploy to get ideas flowing?
-
so you're saying no to finding out what market value for master recordings is?
I kinda like the idea. country pays market rates for it to make it available to its citizens, just like it does for a piece of land it wants to make into a road or a park.No I was absractly trying to point out that the line that is applied to what is and isn't culture or of cultural value is vague. Which brings this back to the question as why some things qualify and some don't. I'd argue that my old 1964 Austin Mini 850 (oh how I loved that car..did you lnow you can fit a drum kit in one?), wherever it is now, is a cultural icon and all Austin Minis should be heading into the public domain some time soon. Just like your grandma's wedding ring.
-
Yeah sorry Rob, things were getting away from me.
You should have seen the post before I chopped it in half....Islander was getting to write a new national anthem, Sacha was getting to sing it, you got to record it and Simon got all the credit & wrote flowing prose about it.
Perhaps a contest like this could be on the cards (Jon turns and looks towards the team members of Public Address from Devonport & Pt Chev...you know the ones with the web contest skills and the clout and apologies to the ginge from Wellyhole whose monopoly on hockey on PAS I appear to have inadvertently broken...I'm sorry about lots of stuff for that guy).
I consider myself told off...and appropriately so.
-
No I was abstractly trying to point out that the line that is applied to what is and isn't culture or of cultural value is vague.
and it should be irrelevant to the property rights you give something.
it simply doesn't matter what cultural value society gives something to the rights the owner or creator should have.
the master tape in the cupboard unheard, and the master tape that spawned a massive hit that a nation feel defines them (there is no depression in nz?) should have the same rights.
I'll swap you my dear departed grannies wedding ring for you culture defining moment simon if you guarantee me I can leave to any illegitimate spawn i might have? -
Mark, those Zeiman figures are from 2002 and with respect, in the music industry it is a lifetime ago, as is the 2003 50 Cent example pointed to in your Napster opinion piece ( and I agree with much of Fader's piece).
Read further down the page for more current information.
The fact is record sales are down enormously and a big part of that must be due to piracy
must?? You say so, but let's see some evidence. My point (and Ziemann's, incidentally, as well as the Ars article) is that the industry is pulling these figures out of their arse with no evidence.
"Sales are down!!! OMG!! Must be pirates because it couldn't be anything like we don't know how to manage our business anymore!!"
(although I'm not aware of any bogus specific figures touted by the industry that attribute actual losses to piracy, the ones you have already quoted seem not to relate specificaly to that..can you give me some from an industry body?).
One credible analysis by the Institute for Policy Innovation concludes that global music piracy causes $12.5 billion of economic losses every year, 71,060 U.S. jobs lost, a loss of $2.7 billion in workers' earnings, and a loss of $422 million in tax revenues, $291 million in personal income tax and $131 million in lost corporate income and production taxes.
The Institute for Policy Innovation is describes by Sourcewatch as:
"__a think tank based in Lewisville, Texas and founded in 1987 by Congressman Dick Armey to "research, develop and promote innovative and non-partisan solutions to today's public policy problems."The conservative Capital Research Center ranked IPI as amongst the most conservative groups in the US, scoring it as an eight on a scale of one to eight.
[...]
The IPI was solicited by tobacco companies in 1995 to submit comments in response to proposed federal regulations by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration restricting the marketing of tobcco products. IP responded by sending comments in favor of the industry to the FDA__"Wikipedia refers to it as "libertarian". I'd call them "guns for hire" but YMMV
"Music Industry is facing losses of about 50 per cent due to piracy...the industry is trying to keep its head above water as we are fighting to retain the industry," Secretary General of IMI, a consortium of more than 140 music labels, Savio D'Souza told reporters here after a seminar on piracy for police officials.
IFPI:
IFPI estimates the trade of pirate discs was worth US$4.5 billion globally in 2005. At the same time, almost 20 billion tracks were illegally swapped or downloaded on the internet in 2005.
This is from the 2006 Piracy PDF, the latest published.
Interestingly, in a google on "Music industry" piracy losses , the first 20 results give 10 arguing against the idea, 4 neutral and 6 in favour, all of which are industry bodies.
If anyone has actual statistics and dollar values, especially for NZ, I'd really love to see them, honestly.
You said:
However, as an aside I'm also very wary of atrributing one of those to be what I think of as an old fart factor...the music isn't as good as it used to be, they don't sign the acts anymore, that sort of thing..that's a nonesense but it's often repeated...record companies both big and small sign the same ratio of pulp and non-pulp that they always have, with a variety of provisos that should be added concerning changing artist developement and such which would take this conversation off into another direction.
I don't think 47 is that old, actually. ;-)
Apart from indies, who by their nature have always gone their own ways, the mainstream industry has been turning out formulaic stuff for the best part of 20 years. Stock Aitken Waterman are a prime example. There has always been pap, I'll agree, and the symbiotic nature of Tin Pan Ally and the recording industry has always meant a pile of dross for each gem. Hell, go back to Chinn and Chapman in the 70s for examples of that.
But the SAW assembly line produced more crap than most (and I promise that link's not a rick-roll, although they did that one too).
<opinion>The industry saw the acts as "product", to be ground out and marketed like toothpaste and soap. They even started creating their own product - Spice Girls. Westlife, Take5, etc. It's no wonder the fans have lost faith and stopped buying. The ones with a spark, like Blur, or Oasis, stand out all the more, though technical analysis of their stuff shows nothing special. No Pete Townsend or Lennon/McCartney going on there. </opinion>
Meanwhile iTunes has grabbed the online market, as Fader points out. The dynamic has changed, and the industry no longer dictates the terms. Thus, their sales slip and they blame the pirates. But they state these losses without providing evidence of them. None of the individual artists who are supposedly affected have come forward to state "I have lost $x to music piracy, and here's how I know". Instead we get anecdotes of finding burned CDs in people's bags.
Look, I'm not denying that piracy exists, and that some people make a lot of money out of it. I just don't think it must be the cause of slipping sales, and I suspect it's not even the major contributing factor.
Look at where the money is. Young people only have credit card debt and student loans - the current "old farts" have the disposable income. And we're not buying "youf music" because we don't like it.
Has anyone correlated the "boomer bulge" against record sales? I'm not aware of it but it might make an interesting academic piece (lookin' at you, Sacha :-)
Around 7 years ago, I turned 40, and I'm reckoned to be about the last year or so of the boomer generation. I've bought sod all produced in the last 10 years, focussing on filling gaps in existing stuff, and older generational stuff like early jazz, ragtime and the like. I honestly couldn't give a crap about the Kurt Cobains and other grunge stuff.
And the inanity that is music radio these days just turns me right off. Where once, the Beatles or ABBA might have reached a wide audience through the few stations that existed, radio these days is balkanized into little niches, so it's more difficult than ever to get that wide appeal going.
Really, there's lots of reasons for the music industry's decline. Look past piracy and really analyze where your business is going.
Of course, but certain sorts of records need to be made in a studio, otherwise they likely suffer badly (and the odd exception doesn't break that trusim).
Wouldn't argue there
But there are probaly more NZ records being made now that ever before and that's a fact too.
That's my feeling too, so I really struggle to understand Tizard's logic.
-
I don't think 47 is that old, actually.
.
what's that theory about this sort of thing called? Rationalisation of Cognitive Dissonance. There is a great book called "Opening Skinner's Box" by Lauren Slater that probably explains and entertains people on this a few other similar subjects. It's definately to be taken with a grain of salt, but a life changing book nonetheless.
Being well shy of 47, (by a factor of 3...I'm actually only 14.75), I'm fighting my instincts to use the "can't polish a turd, but you can roll it in glitter" comment. Having got that off my chest I'll now seriously read Mark's comments....sorry Mark 47 is just a number and you're only as old as you feel. BTW I am soo looking forward to getting my driver's license which is why I'm a bit hyper...that and the lemsip.
-
And yeah I'll try to take more note of Rob's comments about my off topic posts to heart.
-
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
-
Mark,
Ok, I thought as soon as I posted it that I'd not looked for figures and I'm not going to argue that there is a vast amount of twaddle spoken by the recording industry assaulting piracy. I don't, without going through all those links, which I don't have time to do as I'm about to board a plane (sitiing in the world's worst airport..Jakarta BTW), either want or feel the need to to study all the data especially as I keep on saying that I too don't buy piracy as the only, or even core factor in the downturn.But I'm also aware as a parent that kids no longer buy 45s (or MP3s=2008 equivalent) but listen to as much music as I did when 13 and are as fanatical as I was about the acts. They are just as obsessed but without the need to pay. They tell me they borrow the songs and see nothing wrong with it. Maybe I'm alone in this experience? But I thnk not.
I'm sorry Mark, I know it's simply throwing a negative in here, without the precise evidence you require, but, since you can't provide the evidence that piracy is not hurting sales, from personal experience, I'm stating it as a fact that artists are losing money from piracy.
And for every Beatles or Abba (who were very much derided as the death of popular music at the time) I'll throw a Pat Boone or a Mitch Miller or a Frankie Avalon at you. The industry has always had product. Heard of The Monkees? Or all the Spector acts. Or 10cc?
SAW, lets agree to differ here, but they also produced some incredible pop amongst the crap.
I'm not trying to offend but you do sound like an old guy saying it ain't what it was. Witness Fat Freddies Drop..the biggest selling NZ act of all time in an era when you say it can't break through. Or dozens of hip hop acts selling 700,000 plus in a week. You might not like them but a lot of kids do and are as excited about their pop as you were about whoever (just a shame that it's all first week sales now). Generally, it;s regarded as an industry trusim that most people stop listening to new stuff in their late 20s. They end up playing their Talking Heads or Crowded House albums forever after that. You did well ;).
There is so much music out there, consumed in large quantities (those 20,000 tracks on iPods come from somewhere...not iTunes mostly, unless iTunes ain't paying on sales) -but not being bought in the same quantities- and as the live resurgence shows, kids are excited by music and want to hear it. And there are thousands of exciting, fascinating acts out there producing new music for both indie and major labels. I rather wish it wasn't so as it would be a lot cheaper. There is rarely a week that goes by when I don't buy one new album or a bunch of new singles (mostly digitally now) by new acts.
BTW, it isn't my industry anymore. I'm just an interested observer.
-
A couple of things things worth pointing out, Mark
a) the radio split thing you mention with regard to The Beatles etc is overstated. Most of the biggest music sales in recorded history have come from the post FM era, when radio began to split into more formats, but by the early 70s there were, in the markets that dominate, a huge variety of formats. It was not as homogenised as you suggest. Top 40, Black, Album rock, AOR etc were all established, and the biggest sellers, apart from The Beatles latter albums all came from these years onwards, and even those got many of their sales from 1970 onwards when classic rock and gold formats continually pushed sales. One of the reasons NZ was diffrent was that we didn't have these formats until the mid 1980s, but we don't matter of course in the big picture.
b) you mention the baby boom, but how that drove sales in the golden years of the late 80s and 90s was via replacement on CD, as much as new records. The CD replacement thing was a massive sales success as boomers replaced Dark Side Of The Moon and thousands of other titles on CD. This had largely run its course by 2000 and is a factor in slowing sales. -
Rob, we'd get on better in a pub, I'm sure.
Jon, you clearly haven't heard me sing. And oh I wish I had the time or connections for that sort of research.
Simon, how come you are travelling so much these days (if that's not to intrusive to ask)?
-
-
you clearly haven't heard me sing
That's no problem, I'm a terrible listener. If all we're aiming to do is better the current anthem, there's even room for Mark to do a terribly self-indulgent accordion solo at the end....I had overlooked his important role in my initial vision/seizure.
My guess is that Simon travels so much because it's a Zen thing. I'd imagine and I don't have to do that very hard, that it's for much the same reason as guy picks up his sticks and moves to Bali. Simon seems like he's got it together...I'll stop now before I get inspired.
-
Imagine RIAA, MPAA in Control of Handbag Industry
that was a really bad analogy, and they lumped the 2 media together.
films have zones, but music doesn't.
and its not about sharing handbags its about copying them so in this analogy it would be letting their friends manufacture an exact copy of said handbag, similar to name band knock offs.
if they'd tried a little harder they might have come up with analogy that had more knowing similarities and a few punch lines. -
I'm sorry Mark, I know it's simply throwing a negative in here, without the precise evidence you require, but, since you can't provide the evidence that piracy is not hurting sales, from personal experience, I'm stating it as a fact that artists are losing money from piracy.
Umm, firstly you can't prove a negative and secondly, this is merely industry cant. Not fact. If you can't prove your point, stop making it. I've provided material to back mine up.
Yes, the industry has always had "product" but now it seems the industry is all about product. It's not that it "ain't what it was" but that it's not selling like it used to. You say "just a shame that it's all first week sales" but don't ask why that is. Perhaps not as many people want it.
As for FFD, I never said that there couldn't be breakthroughs, just that it's so much harder than it was because of the little musical ghettos. This kid listens to hip hop exclusively, that one to death metal, where once they would have listened to a much wider range because the outlets (i.e. radio) would try to meet the whole market. Now they can find an Internet redio station that specialises in their particular taste. Why would they listen to anything else. Without the exposure, they're not going to buy.
Generally, it;s regarded as an industry trusim that most people stop listening to new stuff in their late 20s. They end up playing their Talking Heads or Crowded House albums forever after that.
Heh. That's possibly accurate.
There is rarely a week that goes by when I don't buy one new album or a bunch of new singles (mostly digitally now) by new acts.
I think you would be a rarity. Although, I'd guess that PAS is full of rarities, given RB's predilections.
BTW, it isn't my industry anymore. I'm just an interested observer.
Fair enough. I'd ask that you actually observe and analyse what the industry is saying, rather than accept and repeat it as "fact"
-
there's even room for Mark to do a terribly self-indulgent accordion solo at the end
Excuse me, my instrument's a theremin (I reason that a) the less I touch it, the less I can screw it up and b) you can't tell if I'm in tune anyway) but I'll agree on the self-indulgent bit :-)
-
I always thought I understood the concept of copyright. Robbery's concept of longer periods of copyright seems, to my mind, to negate the "public good" (if the good is determined as a benefit or a "good" as in goods) I also think the creator of a work deserves a period of exclusivity in terms of reproduction as does any person or company that aids it's production and/or distribution but this should be balanced against benefit to society as a whole (this is, of course, an idealogical point of view). If you look at the laws of thermodynamics with regard to work then you see why there is no such thing as a free lunch. ( I also think economists should consider those laws instead of game theory but that is a point for another day)
However and it is a big however. In all the opinions and statements there has been nothing said about gifting, there is plenty about lending, hiring, reselling, copying, storing for retrieval etc. etc. but gifting has not been mentioned. So. It is quite legal to buy a CD, listen to it and then give it to your Mum for Christmas but if I copy it to listen to on my iPod I have broken the law, if I copy it to my hard drive I have broken the law if I allow others to share that file I have broken the law, If I play it in listening range of the public without paying a royalty fee I have broken the law, if I whistle the tune in public I have broken the law.
So. All I can do legally is to listen to the CD on my own in private and if i want to allow anyone else to hear it I must give it away and for this privilege I have to cough up $30 or so.
SuX eh? -
If you can't prove your point, stop making it.
Simon has proved his point. He's stated real world examples of piracy around him, and that attitude that allows it to expand, ie the poeple doing it don't even think they're breaking a law, simpley because it is so far from ever being enforced. and I've stated a few real world examples directly relating to me which you've also ignored.. Aside from it is kinda spooky to find a pirated copy of your own music in a new female acquaintances cd stash the fact of that is that she didn't see what was wrong with it. you'll argue well maybe shed never have bought it anyway, and I'll argue that the fact that she had a copy in her home indicates she would, if she couldn't have easily taken it.
needless to say I dumped her and stole an equivalent in jewelry and petty cash. (kidding!!!!!!) -
Robbery's concept of longer periods of copyright seems, to my mind, to negate the "public good"
a key part of my point is what has public good got to do with it if you don't apply it equally to all areas of your society.
reclaiming oil reserves would help the public good but we don't see that happen much now do we.
There's lots of things we could do to benefit our society at the expense of the individual but that's not the structure we live under right now, well most of us don't, just creatives and people who's work you can relieve them of easily with little or no chance of repercussions.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.