Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Why o why did Mesh never release anything, even a poxy EP?
We were actually quite a long way towards doing just that, when Paddy left to form Pitch Black. There were, I think, about 6 or 7 tracks recorded. It all got a bit complicated.
A great band who were never really documented.
-
So i joined myself up to Peter's Last.Fm group..I've never really looked at the site before..not given it much more than passing glance (but when I went to register found I'd done so at some long past date, using my mother's nickname for me bizarrely) and it's rather cool, no?
One point of extreme frustration is it's tendency to assign the artist to whichever artist has the same name in it's database first..hence The Features track was attributed to the dodgy US group of the same name. So I fixed that..... ;)
-
A key thing that perhaps seems to be being sidestepped in this is the lack, in Indonesia and China at least, of personal indebtedness. It's a massive point of difference between many Asian nations and their western counterparts.
We do tend to look at this from a western perspective at times, ignoring things like that and the massive positive that the oil price collapse is having on the current accounts of heavy oil subsidy states such as Indonesia and Malaysia.
-
He is fucking great.
Say what you mean, Danielle :)
But agreed. I think I'm the only person on the planet that loves Pussycats (the album that is...)
-
Unfortunately the technical enforcement rights around Copyright is being placed more and more in the hands of the mega corps and *this* is what has a wide and chilling affect.
Not in the music industry. Witness the failures of the RIAA in the past decade.
In little old NZ both APRA and RIANZ have seen a little of the control wrested from the old guard. I'd argue the same is the case in the US & UK. The powerbase has shifted a little. But then, of course, those with the most money still have the biggest voices.
Independent music is now at 30%+ in the US and in the UK higher. And many of those tied to the non-Indies now control their copyrights and simply lease. The days of overwhelmng corporate dominance of the recording and music publishing industries, which peaked about 2000, are over.
-
@simon
There's no comparison and I think it's pretty disappointing of you to try to manufacture one. I had thought you smarter than that.Sorry, I didn't mean to offend but see above.
-
Charming. Part of the reason I've lost patience here is that judged by that standard, frankly, you have not done much better.
Lyndon, the most positive spin I can put on your response is over-reaction. There was no implication that anyone was a slaver or supporter of such but rather to point out the ongoing argument that it was and has been as evidence of what it will always be is spurious and less than rational.
Just because copyright has grown or changed, or will grow or change, that does not prove that it should now change in some particular way you or I might advocate.
No, but current evidence is that it is evolving in several directions, at least in the music industry. It's not neccesarily the way I'd argue it should always go but that's beside the point. I've also been a huge advocate of the Radiohead experiment on these pages.
Oh, not that I've been following that case but surely the copyright is in (for example) the information on the master recording, as opposed to the master itself being your property. You're controlling how people use the recording, not the tape.
So, since we are agreed that the tape and what is on it is physical propertry then by extending your drift, landlords have no right to charge rent.
-
Retroactively taking from the public, at the behest of a music label? That doesn't seem wrong to you?
Actually the driving force behind this was as much an artist's initiative as a corporate one.
And the way music publishing copyrights and the use thereoff has evolved is far more than duration. As is the implied end result of the fairly momentous Lennon decision which could have radical results.
I'm also thinking that durations, regardless of anything else do indicate evolution.
In the music industry the move is very much away from the corporations and the large companies retaining control. Instead there has been a fairly rapid divestment of the control of copyright back the creator. That is one of the crucial themes of the evolution of recording and songwriting copyright in recent years..maybe the past 15 or so.
-
ust because you want copyright to be a property right, doesn't mean it is. History, society and the law are against you on this. You need to accept that because your incessant "why" makes rational discussion difficult.
It's a non argument Mark...the simple evolution of copyright and the protections added over the years is enough to indicate that. Past is not good enough to indicate future. I made a comment about slaves above and whilst reading this thread last night watched a documentary on the slave trade on BBC Knowledge. The argument, apart the financial one, put up relentlessly by the pro-slavers prior to 1834 was fairly similar to your yours..they are property, and any questions as to why are not rational.
Hopefully we find ways to move ahead.
-
And if there is any argument for retaining copyright it must be the album of trance remixes of Elvis which I heard everywhere in Hong Kong last week.....my god...