Slashdot Mirror
Revenge Of The MP3 Quickies!
An Anonymous Coward wrote in about the Salon article of an unedited transcript of Courtney Love's speech to the Digital Hollywood online entertainment conference. Gnutella News wrote in and told us that Inside Music is running a story about the RIAA uncovering very incriminating internal memos and e-mails between Napster executives that the RIAA says is "proof that the service represents a haven for music piracy and should be closed immediately". Also, head on over to Camp Chaos for the latest flash cartoons about Napster, including one featuring the real Motley Crue. There's also a parody over at Everything2 to check out. Also here is a Wall Street article about the copyright office and the age of the Internet.
They left her pants? How can you tell, she never seems to wear any.
From her recent appearances it would seem that she's been left with nothing but undergarments.
Good story to hear, though. You gotta wonder why you don't ever read things like this in the mainstream press.... oh, wait, who owns the media outlets?
Thank GOD for the web.
Once, back when Jann gave a shit, something like this might have appeared in Rolling Stone. Of course, Jann's been bought and sold so many times that the devil would have to lease his soul at this point...
Be that as it may, the points put forth are accurate. The music industry is a racket. There isn't very much good music being produced anymore because of the music industry.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
Yeah, I loved this article. I knew musicians were being screwed by the Man but it's good to actually hear it from the whores's mouth.
Hopefully, someday there will be more room for the middle ground between starvin-and-playing-on-the-street-corner and living-in-the-mansion-and-suing-Napster.
joel
Such is the infinite Grace of Popeye.
I didn't need to read this entire article through to further my rather firm notion that she's a complete hypocrite (and a horrible "artist"). She rants and raves for paragraphs about evil the recording industry is, and how her "art" and other "art" of pop mainstream crap shouldn't treated as products, and so on and so forth. What is she thinking? She signed the contract, she signed to the label, she agreed to the videos, she did this thing and that thing that _made_ her the total product she is today. She's not an "aritst." She puts out a product like Proctor and Gamble put out products, only the latter's is a little easier to take. She signed up day #1 to be DGC's (or whatever label she is on now) whore, and now she still wants to play the aritst card. No thanks, Courtney. Secondly, she details corporate culture for two pages and then asserts that "We don't understand or want to understand corporate culture." God. She needs to get over herself and go ahead and fade away. The MP3 saga does not her undying and unholy hypocricy. Or photos of her nasty likeness, for that matter. And Courtney, 192k MP3s sound fine. And I haven't heard a pleasant guitar tone in any of your "art" yet. Perhaps you ought to stick to killing off your husbands; you seem pretty talented at that.
jack's bicycle is music to my ears
Agreed, I didn't really know much about her before except for the whole Kurt Cobain thing, but she really gets what is happening, most pop / movie stars are quite vacuous, but Courtney is a sharp cookie, wow, I think I'm in love :)
Any sufficiently advanced man is indistinguishable from God
He's a hack, and worse, he waters down his liquor.
(jfb)
To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
/\w+/) || $words[0] eq "I" || $words[0] eq ucfirst($words[0]))) {
@mutterings = ("you know... ", "well... ", "umm... ");
foreach $line (){
@words = split (/\s/,$line);
if (defined @words){
while ($#words > 0){
# ignore a random number of words
$ign = 7 * rand;
for ($i = 0; $i 0; $i ++) {print "$words[0] "; shift @words;}
# ignore words with punctuations and problematic words
while ($#words > 0 &&
(! ($words[0] =~
print "$words[0] "; shift @words;
}
if ($#words > 0) { print "... $mutterings[int(3 * rand)]"; }
}
print "$words[0]" if defined $words[0];
}
print "\n";
}
[Courtney Love] has a lot of experience under her belt.
Um... Er... Well... Uh, huh-huh.
Was that a compliment or are you saying she puts out a lot? Either way, I think she'd take well your words.
InitZero
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Exactly when did the RIAA state that they wanted to shut down the Internet? I must have missed that story. I thought they were trying to shut down Napster.
Oh, you mean all that bullshit was meaningless hyperbole, and is totally irrelevent to the point? How Katzian of you.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
"It goes on to quote Parker's message to Fanning: 'Users will understand that they are improving their experience by providing information about their tastes without linking that information to a name or address or other sensitive data that might endanger them (especially since they are exchanging pirated music)." It's my (possibly mistaken) understanding that the parenthesis indicate a interpretation of the rest of the quote. if that's the case, why don't they quote what the document really said, instead of their interpretation?
This sentence no verb.
Comparing a replicator to Napster just isn't fair. The societies of ours vs. the fictional star trek world are just too far apart. In the world of star trek, they've repeatedly state that in what, the late 21st century people started getting along to the point where they no longer needed money...
If real life earth can figure out a way to sustain itself without the need for currency of any kind, then things like replicators would be welcomed with open arms, because it'd be for the good of society.
I don't think that we'll ever outgrow the need for currency, and hence won't ever live the utopia that star trek promises. Trade was one of our earliest creations. Who's going to clean the sewers just for the hell of it? Or will everyone take turns?
Modern law can't cope with a replicator very well at all. But fortunately things like that are SO FAR from the present day, that modern law and society will have plenty of time to adapt to the changes it would bring.
I was also surprised by the similarity of the beginning of her speech and Albini's article. But coming from Albini, one could suspect an anti-major bias, whereas Courtney Love -- it seems -- fully embraced her major label status. I think what Albini saw happen to friends of his, she saw happen to herself; and the same observation coming from two very different points of views makes it even stronger.
From this, she goes further and makes some very interesting points. I actually like her attitude when she says that since she did not get any money from her company, she might as well bypass it entirely.
"Hardly any pre-1982 REM fans"
If Courtney Love has access to some pre-1982 R.E.M., I want a copy of it! I didn't know there was much of them pre-1982. 1982 is when Murmur was first released. The only album they had before that that I know of was Chronic Town which was released in 1981 (I think) and is now out of print.
Napster would truely be cool if it had some pre-1982 R.E.M.
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
Why there was anything there to subpoena? Any halfway security-conscious organization should be shredding all dead-tree memos and deleting all email messages relating to internal matters as soon as they have served their purpose. Read, remember... and destroy.
It was incredibly lax of the Napster folks to allow this stuff to even exist long enough to be acquired.
--LordEq
I still have an old issue of Sassy magazine with the two of them on the cover, before they were married. I remember thinking 'who is this chick'? It soon became apparent that she was the stronger one. Kurt was tortured and couldn't hang. (Great artist, don't get me wrong.) Courtney's been through some deep doo, and at times I really disliked her, but after reading this speech I am jazzed about the future of music again.
:-) (How about OgFOMK Arts?)
So who wants to start a good 'Net recording company?
The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
>they need to do is nail enough in order to create
>an atmosphere of fear
Nicely put. Rule through fear. Now where have I heard that before???
Ah there it is... the Tarkin doctrine...
"I've just received word that the Emperor has
dissolved the council permanently...
Regional governors will now have direct
control over their systems. Fear will keep
the local systems in line... fear of this
battlestation"
Honestly, the number of slashdotters posting recently who are so willing to supplicate themselves to RIAA and its merry band of metallica/lawyers stormtroopers just baffles me. After all the work and struggle to bring down ONE evil empire, people are now anxious to submit to another?!?!?
Sad.
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Imagine all the people...
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Yeah... she's not very original, is she? How nice of here to pretty much read Albini's diatribe from a decade earlier verbatim (she even uses the 7-11 metaphor) without at least giving credit to who first came up with it. No wonder Steve hates her.
Well, that's the lovely part - if they don't excercise control over their copyright it reverts to public domain. They have no choice. :) Ah, I love it - the legal community is going to DoS itself.
Like you said, boy would I have loved to have been there in person...
It's not funny till someone gets hurt.
T-Shirts GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD. Why do I get the feeling that RIAA drums up all this nonsense in order to produce an "oh poor us, boo hoo" mentality. I can't really see the American public getting behind them simply because of this. By law (on paper) Napster is obviously illegal, but since when do paper laws matter? or even something being obviously illegal?Look at O.J. Simpson :) ... not that i'm beating a dead horse.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
The only "issue" courney has is that I'm here and she's there.
-- modestly, as always, I remain AC.
I must point out that I am not volunteering to do any such thing myself, merely adopting the "open Source" style of development by whinging about it in the hope that somebody else will. I certainly have no intention of learning Perl or any similar abortion of a line-noise emulation language (that's link, by the way, motherfuckers, so moderate me informative.
In conclusion, fuck you all.
--if only more people were more like streetlawyer.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
Generally The Wall Street Journal has fairer news reporting that this piece (which nobody has discussed yet).
I was particularly appalled at this:
Well, I was one of those who wrote to comment on the DMCA provisions. And my comment was published, as part of the legal comment procedure that Slashdot encouraged the public to use. I don't recall any comments on Slashdot that encouraged spamming or obscenity directed against the Copyright Office, and as one of the commenters I respectfully decline to characterize my comment as "Spam" or as "obscene" (more like "tepid").
One might assume from Mr. Carson's (edited) response that he did not welcome comments from the public via e-mail, instead of via the tortuous process of PDF documents or snail mail. But one might remind Mr. Carson that he is a public servant bound to serve the public and not (just) the lobbyists and corporations who have been speaking out regularly on this issue.
Now, it appears to me that The Wall Street Journal in characterizing our comments as from "hackers" is also attempting to dismiss them. I would remind, respectfully, this great newspaper that it too has an obligation, to report the truth, especially when it has a financial interest in the matter (on the other side).
Finally, I was quite disappointed in reading the reported reaction of the Registrar of Copyright to our comments. 'At a recent hearing in Washington, Ms. Peters told a panel of librarians that, while they have "legitimate concerns," she fears that the broad exceptions they want could "eviscerate the very protection that Congress intended."'
If this concern is accurate and a complete response to our comments, then we might as well pack it in and not bother to follow the law and submit our honest comments. Because it is true, the DMCA does attempt to take away our fair use and First Amendment rights, and no amount of tinkering to try to satisfy the objections of librarians is going to solve that. The Registrar should communicate this to the Librarian of Congress, who should report exactly that to Congress, that he is unable to solve the problem that Congress has tossed in his lap to make the DMCA make sense.
Slashdot deserves an apology from Mr. Carson and The Wall Street Journal. If not, Mr. Carson should be fired and Slashdot editors should simply ignore WSJ articles in the future.
At first I figured that Ms. Love is serving her self interest which is legitimate of course. Diving deeper into the article however, there's an anger and energy which must be admired. She reveals an artsists perspective (and yes, since seeing The people vs Larry flint I definitely consider her to be an artist and not just a blonde, arse swinging bimbo) about what really stinks in the entrtainment business. Even if taken with a lot of grains of salt, it's an unbelievable gripping speach she gave and the more I dived into it, the more credibility I gave her. Gawd, I really would have loved to be there...
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
Well, since Napster, Inc. is currently undergoing so much litigation, there's about a 99% probability that someone thought to subpoena its internal corporate communications as a information goldmine. (A la the DOJ vs Microsoft)
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Ohhhhh, no.
RIAA didn't just go there.
Mucking around with company's internal memos is something of a "below the belt" attack in modern corporate warfare. Yes, it happens in all out warfare and when companies are backed against the wall and are struggling to keep the creditors away. But the problem is that every company has internal memos that would be mission critical, quarter close affecting content if it ever gets out communications that occur precisely because if they don't occur, company's blindfold themselves and crash and burn.
Thus only the internally honest survive.
Oh dear God, can you imagine the anticompetitive, anticonsumer, antirecording, pro government manipulation("go bribe that senator with a junket") style messages that fly around the RIAA?
It's a nuclear attack, and a very, very dumb one. The RIAA's internal memos implicate, likely criminally, very large, very powerful, and very vulnerable(deep pockets) corporations. Meanwhile, Napster just screws itself.
There's a reason we don't see this happen much. We're all about to see why.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
Man that was awesome, I've never seen so much guts, integrity and brutal honesty all at the same time. Man that blows me away!
Sh*t, does she come off articulate. She has figured out that she doesn't really have anything to lose since her record label has basically pimped her art and left he with nothing but 'nice pants'. At last, not only does a major artist 'get it', she also has the balls to voice it, and with an amazing amout of credibility.
I hope she gets listened to, and that she is successful in starting a new movement in the production and distribution of audio art. More power to her!
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
I'm sure we could all pitch in a do this with a sed script.
I'll start
s/I/I um/g
s/So/So like/g
your turn,
George
if this pans out, Napster's got problems...
I guess the lesson here is to always present a united front, and once you've got a position, don't talk to anything but that position, ever, in any form. BillG got nailed that way, now Napster.
Great, now we're going to be inundated with "Open Source Courtney Love" posts.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Oper on the Nightstar
Despite what I think about her otherwise, Courtney has a lot of guts to actually put her money where her mouth is and dive into the "new media" revolution wholesale. I wish more artists would do the same -- dump the bloodsuckers that pocket most of the profits from their stable of artists. Get the artists talking to their audience directly. They may not make as much money, but let's face it: who is? Surely not the session musicians or the middle-tier artists who depend on their tiny but loyal core of fans to even keep their discs from being deleted.
The business about record clubs is a longstanding thorn in my side, one of the reasons I refuse to do business with those vultures. BMG and Columbia, both -- none of these guys care about artists, just ripping off the gullible and getting all their dough back from you eventually. 11 CDs for only a cent? Only if you've been smoking their brand of weed. They get it all back from you one way or another.
The whole "mp3s as a replacement for CDs" controversy to me is a non-issue. I know of no one, and I know a buttload of people, who seriously consider MP3s as a replacement for an actual studio-mastered copy of a record. They are at best a proxy if you can't find a copy. And this doesn't even have anything to do with encoding quality or convenience; it has to do with pride of ownership. People LIKE to own a tangible copy of something they enjoy. This is not going to die, no matter how many Nomads get sold.
Like I said, I wish more artists would take the plunge. Maybe PayPal and WinAmp could hook up and create some kind of certificate-protected pay-for-play system?
Honorary Member of Jackie Chan's Kung Fu Process Servers
keep it quiet about Hotline? Once the Linux users find out about a lightweight protocol for file distribution, it's over... Trying to find a pron, warez, or mp3 server will be like finding a needle amongst the haystack of sourceforge/tarball servers!
Looks like there's some infighting going on in the free-MP3-distribution ranks. MP3.com is getting in on the action by suing Napster.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Oper on the Nightstar
And my own personal opinion is that Courtney Love was cool for saying all that
I agree. Whether or not I agree with her (I do agree with most of it) she at least seems to have given the matter some thought and was expressing some honest opinions. She also displays an admirable lack of fear of the "new economy."
I'm also glad to see Motley Crue (one of my all-time favorite bands) coming up on the clueful side of the issue. Their stance on electronic distrubution isn't new, when their last album was released, before the mp3 craze, they had all of the tracks on the album available in RealAudio format for several weeks before the ship date. Apparently, several of the band members have also developed reputations for being very good about responding to fan e-mail.
There is NO obscure music on Napster - only teenybopper music. If you are new to music, or somewhat casual about music, it may seem obscure to you, but it is not obscure for more serious music fans. Open up a copy of a respectable music magazine, look at the reviews, and then search for the artists on Napster. You won't find them. Napster is a haven for top 40 fans, people who watch MTV, listen to Techno music, and watch music awards shows on teevee, but serious music fans have no interest.
Serves them right...never hire a businessman to write an app OR a hacker to run a business. Those two never had a business anyway...all they had was a cool app and an idea they could get real rich riding on the backs of musicians (most of them poor) around the world. It should have remained a free file-sharing utility and never become a corporation with VC funding.
It's not funny till someone gets hurt.
Courtney Love's article looks a lot like an ol' text from 1984:
"This is our world now, the world of the electron and the switch, the beauty of the baud. We make use of a service already existing without paying for what could be dirt-cheap if it wasn't run by profiteering gluttons, and you call us Criminals. We seek after knowledge, and you call us Criminals."
--Mentor's Last Words
In their legal action, the RIAA are using (amongst other things) this study by Soundscan, which claims CD sales have dropped around colleges with fast internet connections, whereas they have risen nationwide. So, the reasoning goes, this drop in sales is due to Napster. But if you look at the numbers on the 8th page of the report you see that CD sales have fallen around colleges where Napster use is banned just as much as they have around well connected colleges. Even if CD sales fell only around well-connected colleges this could hardly be blamed on Napster. Maybe the students who would previously have been buying CDs from shops have been getting them from CD-Universe or Amazon instead. Maybe they find playing Quake or watching corn grow in Iowa more interesting than spending time in record shops. The RIAA also has another report, which is based on interviews with students, but it's so difficult to read (looks like a third generation fax that's been badly scanned) I've not bothered with it. In any case, they seem a little preoccupied with students using Napster, as if nobody in the rest of the world uses it (I don't personally).
Ok, I listened to it... And? She was just drunk or fscked up or something. Big deal. You've never been wasted? Sorry, but this has nothing to do with her talent...
I modded the Troll Investigation and I got
Courtney Love has made me open my eyes to the evils of the record companies and the RIAA. Some great stuff said here. Something to note about the mp3.com suit here and how horrible our current music distribution system is. the record companies are taking money away from artists, some of whom really deserve to have it. I totally recommend reading this article in its entirety.
Music is intellectual property with full cash and opportunity costs required
to create, polish and record a finished product. If I invest money and time
into my business, I should be reasonably protected from the theft of my
goods and services. When the judgment came against MP3.com, the RIAA
sought damages of $150,000 for each major-label-"owned" musical track
in MP3's database. Multiply by 80,000 CDs, and MP3.com could owe the
gatekeepers $120 billion.
But what about the Plimsouls? Why can't MP3.com pay each artist a fixed
amount based on the number of their downloads? Why on earth should
MP3.com pay $120 billion to four distribution companies, who in most
cases won't have to pay a nickel to the artists whose copyrights they've
stolen through their system of organized theft?
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
GPL was created BECAUSE of copyright law. Non sequitur.
Its because no one else is willing to loan $1 million to musicians as startup capital. Think about it.
Normal banks, like Podunk Savings and Loan, wouldn't (too high default risk).
Normal capital investors, like Goldman and Sachs, would just laugh. (What's your market angle, again?)
Call it the expenses of a corporatized talent search...Courtney said it best when out of 30,000 album releases, less than 50 go platinum...that's more than 25,000 that probably didn't come close to covering the $500,000 of expenses it took to design and manufacture the bands' CDs. That's a lot of money, and it has to be made up somehow - by distributing the costs to the successful artists.
The system sucks, but no one's come up with a better one yet, especially not when it costs anywhere from $5000 (for a small-time local band) to over a million (for someone like Smashing Pumpkins) to produce an album.
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
any time she wants...let's get this girl petrified, she rocks!
wake up and find out that you are the eyes of the world.
I usually get my MP3s (I have a modest techno colloection) from the downloadable stuff at MP3.com or other web-only services. Today I wanted to check out some other tracks by a band whose album I want to buy. I d/l Napster and log on... I even get a name I like. But after getting the stuff I want, I deleted the software and swore to install something like OpenNap or Gnutella next time.
Once I logged in, I was forced to read and comply with this huge and standard disclaimer of liability and that I'm not commiting copyright infringement (which I'm there expressly to do) and so on. As much as it might pay to be on the up-and-up legally, screw Napster and screw toeing this insane "no, really, we're a company" line. Other services (notably ones that don't have to keep up some kind of corporate "we're not committing civil disobedience" drivel) offer the same goods without banning users or telling you that they're against the one thing that makes their service of any value to the average user.
Proppz to Napster to opening the door for distributed, anonymous filesharing services, but I'm glad there are alternatives that don't start with a "screw the MP3 revolution" splash screen or get bent over a legal barrel.
Data East: "Leaders in Dot Matrix Technology" - Star Wars pinball
You must have poor hearing (not an untrained ear). Anyone should be able to discern the difference between an MP3 and CD Audio on a reasonable hi-fi stereo system. I can tell the difference over good Sony headphones (not the best in the world) attached to my SBLive (not the cleanest signal in the world).
:)
Then again, maybe your stereo is Bose.
Friends
Against
Buying
Bose
"Friends don't let friends buy Bose."
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
>From her recent appearances it would seem that she's been left with nothing but undergarments
Yeah, read the blurb she has about playing topless at a soda-distributor-funded concert (and then ordering a six-pack of the rival's pop while on-stage... now, was it the 'taste of a new generation' or '___ and a smile'?)
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
The Supreme Court has already considered this question in the Sony Betamax case, and sent the plaintiff's home without their supper.
In that case, it didn't matter that Sony manufacturered an instrument that COULD be used for piracy, even if they knew such piracy existed, provided that the same instrument could substantially be used for a legitimate purpose: in that case, for time-shifting network television.
There are myriad non-infringing uses for Napster, and Napster doesn't itself infringe anything.
So why doesn't the Betamax case resolve these questions once and for all?
Napster will not kill the CD market, it will revive it. It's already doing this.
I've amassed a 400-piece MP3 jazz collection that I share on Napster and other Napigator servers. Most of the collection came from Usenet and Napster. I do not consider myself a pirate, and I'm not in the least ashamed of my collecting. I've learned a whole lot about MP3 sharing that many readers have learned. Napster is very, very cool. I want Napster in my life. It saves me from the industrialized, pasteurized, homogenized pop sterility of the kind of music foisted on the public by the companies fronted by the RIAA.
Both the RIAA and Fanning & Parker are wrong about the threat to CD music distribution. Napster is a means of sampling low quality copies of selected songs. It enables me to buy only CD's I know I like. This means I'm happier with my CD spending and less reluctant to make purchases. I always spent a fair chunk of change on music, and since I've been collecting with Napster I've continued to spend - probably a little more than before.
The other neglected fact is that Napster collecting is not free. It takes lots and lots of time and effort. It is not a convenient way to listen to music, nor is it a convenient way to collect music. The choices are limited. Downloading fails as often as it works. On my 56K line it is *slow*... For music I know I will like and listen to, I just by the CD. Napster is for sampling and browsing and expanding your musical horizons.
The Pew study deserves attention. It's not just college kids. It's me, the 40-something music collector too. It's anyone that is not being served by the current industrial radio, pop music machine. Napster and its offspring will be a means of empowering consumers and liberating individuals to seek their own true musical tastes.
All of this is disruptive. The RIAA position is no surprise. Nor is it a surprise to see the Napster founders' original intentions in print. But none of this changes the fact that law abiding music consumers from all walks of life are drawn to Napster because if serves a useful purpose. CEO Barry gets it. I sure hope he finds a way to derail the litigation and get on with the negotiating and partnering that must come about sooner or later.
This seemed like the appropriate place to post this: Swapster Banned from College Campus
Once again, the Man's coming down on us free-thinkers....
------------------------
Co-founder of GerbilMechs
Why has COPYLEFT entered the discussion? As I understand it, COPYLEFT applies to CODE. No musician gets upset about greater exposure, however the fact of the matter is that Music - Literature - Art...they do not serve the same kind of function as software. For example: One can customize a piece of software to suit their needs more appropriately than earlier versions. How can one change a piece of music and actually claim they made it better. The value rendered by listening to music is completely subjective. Therefore, we have to protect Intellectual Property and Copyright as they apply to the arts. I have written songs and if someone else received artistic acclaim, or money for them I would be pretty damned pissed. --- Copyleft does not belong in the discussion when we are talking about the free trade and exchange of artwork.
While you're there you should really check out Negativland's page on Intellectual Property Issues.
It needs to be said that Washington's Progressive Policy (PPI) think tank propose a unique "way out" of the Napster problem: no anonymity! It's simple! EVERY new service will simply be programmed in with personal info as required fields... whatever could the problem have been? WHAT A JOKE! Good God, it makes me laugh.
"Oh... people want to trade files anonymously, can, and will... oops. Slipped our minds." - PPI spokesman in future interview about totally ineffective policy.
Data East: "Leaders in Dot Matrix Technology" - Star Wars pinball
Great speech. I didn't know the girl had it in here, especially after listening to this gem:
:-)
Sublime_-_11_-_Courtney.mp3
Enjoy!
1 - I can hardly see how a subscription model would work. One of the really nice things about CD's is that you can buy them, and listen to them wherever you take them. Most subscription models are built around the idea that you can only listen to them on the computer you're using when you download the song. Plus, you get something physical for your money. Not many people will be content giving their money to a dotcom taking with them only the assurance that they'll be allowed continued and non-interupted access to their music. Not with the way they've been falling like domino's as of recent.
2 - If Napster kills off CD's, it's unlikely that DVD-Audio will even make it to the scene, so thinking that Napster could enable DVD-Audio is silly... The widespread use of Napster is showing that people aren't demanding higher quality recordings, which will make DVD audio that much harder to sell.
3 - No matter what you think and hope, the fact is that the recording industry will and needs to survive whatever transition takes place... WE need them to put up the money for artists to record their songs and publicize them. Napster does nothing to promote new music, it's still the burden of the labels. If anything positive comes from Napster, it will be that artists may now or soon have a bargaining chip to force more favorable deals from the labels.
4 - Record store are still one of the best ways for us consumers to find new music... You can just browse through their merchandise and see what looks interesting. Plus there's employees and stuff who you can hum a couple notes to and they'll tell you which CD the song is from. There are advantages to them, so i wouldn't hope to get them out of the picture just yet. Oh yeah, and CDNow is screwed last time i knew... About to go under, aren't they?
5 - Napster vs. the RIAA is nothing like the US vs. Microsoft... that case shouldn't even be brought into this discussion
Thought so... although I thought that other mostly-blue soda sponsored a concert or two last year also. Don't usually pay attention to n'sync, bsb, britney spears and other micky-mouse-fronted 'bands'. Kinda surprised she would get involved in one of those deals, tell the truth.
Boy, I woulda loved to be a fly on the wall at the international headquarters for producing sugar-water and bad advertising when the news of the topless performance came in!
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
I'm a BeOS-zealot most of the time, and it has taken a little compromising of views to reach this opinion. I've never been a real big fan of the GPL, but mainly because of the force it carries, given to it by copyright law and IP.
For the third time in this thread, I have to repeat it as it seems so many idiots keep forgetting the basics of the Free Software Movement and bash Stallman by making false accusations against him ... GPL is the implementation of the concept of COPYLEFT, which is an attack and a joke against COPYRIGHT. You're allowed to do basically anything you want with GPL software. You're just not allowed to restrict other users.
Phish's official policy. From here.
--
All taping must be for personal use only, which may include trading (via analog or digital tape, CD, or digital file transfer). Recordings may be traded only for an
equivalent amount of similar media (cassettes or CDs, pre-recorded or blank). Regardless of any expenses incurred, no money may ever be exchanged as part of
a trade; however, stamped, self-addressed envelopes may be included with blank media. In addition, the media by which audio trading is publicized may not be
commercialized. Therefore newsletters, web sites, clubs, or any other communication forum facilitating audio trading cannot accept advertising, offer links for
compensation, exploit databases compiled from their traffic, or otherwise derive any commercial profit in any form. Stores or businesses may not offer to
duplicate Phish media for customers or sell or otherwise provide media containing unreleased Phish music for any price.
--
In other words: Listen all you want, but please don't sell it.
IMHO, this is how copyright should be, i.e. the literal translation should be "sellright".
--
+&x
Well, the Federation is obviously a bunch of Pirates, and The RIAA (Replications Inhibiting Asshole Association?) and the MPAA (Mass Production Assets Association) will sue them and every theif that has stolen from their possible future profits. Manufacturers and farmers deserve to be paid for their hard work, it's not like they are artists.
---
As an example, Piers Anthony wrote a series called Apprentice Adept. It's a mix of science fiction and fantasy, and it constantly jumps back and forth between both (if that doesn't make sense, go get the first book from your local public library). At the time Anthony had a deal with one publisher granting them exclusive rights to publish all of his sci-fi stuff, and a similar deal with another publisher for all of his fantasy novels. The three parties had to get together and negotiate which publishing company would publish the Apprentice Adept series. Everybody was understanding, everything went smoothly, and there were no problems. An unusual situation, but an example of the kind of stuff that happens with exclusive licenses. The point is, it's not a problem.
And the larger point is, Anthony owns every book he's written - not the publishing companies.
Sorry for ranting incoherently again.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Why? because I dont listen to any label artists. I use mp3's almost exclusively, I buy CD-s from non-label artists, and I will be startingh a LPFM station this summer that will play only non-label music. I bypass the RIAA in every way, legally, and that scares them. It scares them that someone like me will let others listen to this non-label music I have, and that I will point them in the right direction to get it. And finally they are horrified that I will be playing on the public airwaves non-label music. I will be spreading to the public proof that they dont have control, that there are alternatives, and that it really is good!
I scare them, and I hope that you will too.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I have to say that I haven't been a big follower of Ms. Love's career. I know the broad strokes (Kobain's widow, Hole, sometime actress, etc.), but beyond that, I pretty much registered her as another instance of the phenomena of pretty, angry, but essentially empty-headed grrrl rocker-types.
Then I read this article, which, had it been a Slashdot comment, would have been quickly moderated up to 5:Insightful/Interesting/Informative, and beyond.
Not only is it clearly reasoned, it offers perspective that only one on the "inside" of the industry can get. It touches on many pertinent aspects of the situation without obviously glossing over important details. And it has a truly delicious air of righteous rage, focused on clear and (apparently) deserving targets. In short, Ms. Love has demonstated intelligence and real assertiveness (as opposed to the vacuous, unfocused rebellion of many), and good humour in addition to her more obvious gifts.
Sigh. I may be in love. ;) At the very least, she's going on my contender's list of Sexiest Women Ever (not being sexist, I have one for men too, but this one's a little dearer to my heart).
If I read that she writes her own MIDI drivers, I'm doomed. ;)
-TBHiX-
The opinions expressed above are only those of the writer. The fact that they represent Universal Truth should not dissuade you from expressing different ones.
HAHAHAHA
Didn't Jackyl have a video where they taped on the back of semi trailer flatbed? Cause I think they filmed that down the street from my house in high school.
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
on Fox had a slam on Courtney last night.
if you've never watched the show, I would recommend it. They do a bunch of "what if" dream sequences. One of the ones last night was "What if Kurt Cobain had quit."
--
Kurt walks of stage "Thanks a lot kids, and remember, say no to drugs!"
Company execs wait offstage, "Great show Kurt, and your seventh album is selling great."
Kurt: "Thanks guys. You remember my girlfriend Courtney Love, right?"
Execs: "Umm, well, uh, no."
(fade to Courtney's sad face)
Anyway, it was a great interview. She know about the legislation and the system as a whole. It's good to see a well known artist take a stand. And using Neal Stephenson as a source was just golden. Great read for anyone interested in this stuff.
--
+&x
Actually, she went to a very prestigous school in northern Michigan. I forgot the name of it. She's been schooled, but she's a little wierd.
I seriously respect that article, though. Very insightful.
Band shirts & paraphenalia, CDs (I'm one of the throwbacks that would buy them), plus concert tickets (where bands actually make the money) are all valid earners for bands even with everyone and their sister having every song ever released. They may be even more profitable, with the huge listener-base that a good band could accumulate.
It would mean more tours for listeners (good) and bands (maybe bad), and better stage performances - the bands could get some pretty major draw by playing unique material at every show, staying ahead of (and increading) their MP3s available on the net. Bands would absolutely have to increase their "value-addition" to content in order to get draws at shows, but at the same time, this is real value that's created (unique & transitory experiences), rather than artificial scarcity e.g. the record label's offerings (limited numbers of expensive CDs). I'm not saying everyone wins with fame and riches and all, but it
s possible to make a living as a musician in the MP3 era.
Data East: "Leaders in Dot Matrix Technology" - Star Wars pinball
VAXman spewed:
>There is NO obscure music on Napster - only
> teenybopper music.
Actually, there *is* obscure music. What do *you*
consider obscure, if not Dr.Demento's collection
of insane songs, including Kinko the Kid-loving
Clown? Or Ren & Stimpy's "Don't whiz on the
electric fence"? Or some real music, like Funker
Vogt, Front 242, Front Line Assembly, VNV Nation,
Hawkwind and Blue Man Group?
Neither of the above are available in the shops
around Dublin, so *I* label these artists as
'obscure'. But that's only my opinion.
Moron, radio stations PAY to play music.
Sometimes I get a little confused in all of the Napster vs RIAA wars. It seems that sometimes they are confusing a lot of what people actually think about the whole situation. I for one am a strong believer that Napster, although maybe not created for all the right reasons has had a very positive effect on music in general. People who never would have listened to different types of music are listening now because they download MP3's which cost nothing and give it a whirl. Yes, this is most likely exactly the definition of music Piracy, but maybe we should change this definition and besides...I thought it was all about the Music man...(Metallica).
~ Yes, that's my real name.
Because I am the only source for this quote. In other words: I made it up. Call it an exercise in memetics.
- Rev.I thought that DLO only contained selected tracks from Chronic Town... Is Chronic Town on DLO in its entirety?
I really wish Chronic Town would be reprinted because the album cover was great!
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
It's apparent to me that Napster in it's present form is not going to be around much longer. Enjoy it while you can, folks - hoard those songs.
What I hope is that when the huge-scale Napster operation crumbles, Gnutella or possibly Freenet will step in and fill the void. Sure, they're already here and they work, but what is needed is the SCALE. It's that HUGE community of users that makes it so convenient to find virtually any song you like. So spread the word. If Napster kicks it, I hope like the public will move to a more subversive version of the same distributed filesharing system - and with more than just songs.
If Gnutella or Freenet becomes widespread, that will only make the present community of Napster users stronger, and make it more evident that nothing can be done - especially if it crosses international boundaries. It might even sway the public's paradigm of intellectual property, showing that now, they old system CANNOT work.
--
grappler
Vidi, Vici, Veni
Let's be honest here.
It is a violation of Copyright Law to download mp3's of music you have no legal right to.
You can justify it in your mind if you wish, you can justify it to your friends if it makes you feel better, but you are 100% unable to justify your action in a court of law if you have no legal right to the music.
That being said, and, hopefully, understood, the action of the RIAA is nearly humorous. Instead of embracing a new distribution model, they push it deeper underground. I suppose the RIAA thinks out of sight, out of mind.
A life long dream of mind has come to fruition. Imagine ordering something over the Internet and having it appear in your hands instantly! Saturn can't zip a car through your phone line, Domino's can't send a pizza through your modem, but the music industry can!
Now is the time for an enterprising group of people to from a 'record' label, recruit some musicians, produce an album, and offer it for sale over the Internet. Say, $2.00 for the entire album, and it gets split 50/50 with the "record comapny" and the musician. The musicians get as much as they're getting now, the "record company" gets a shake, and the middle men get nothing because they're not needed!
Now, this does not solve the piracy issue. There is but one solution to that: prosecute every single person who commits that crime. Will that happen? We both know the answer to that...
And after we get this up, we can help Domino's with the delivery of their pizza.
I would consider most of those _extremely_ mainstream. I have never been to a record store which doesn't have large sections dedicated to Hawkwind, FLA, Front 242, etc. Some of the others I am not familiar with but it doesn't mean they're obscure since I'm not into that type of music. Heck, Dr. Demento is a radio program which puts a lower limit on his popularity.
I'm not familiar with Hale Rev 3s. However, I wouldn't think that Shatner's album was recorded with the utmost care to quality. :)
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
I guess it is no longer illeagal to hack someones e-mail server to get the dirt you need on them. WRONG!!! Sorry fellas but that evidence was obtained under false pretenses and is not admissable in court. OOPS!!!!!!!!! Thank you for playing... better luck next time!
"Help me Obi-/.-Kenobi,your my only hope!" -$
According to ON24's 1pm (EDT) report, the judge overseeing the Napster trial has issued a preliminary injunction to shut down the Napster service.
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
Slight amendment to this...i applaud Courtney for making such a bold statement.
I think we are missing a connection though...the sad fact is that the record companies take advantage of all of us. they only promote certain bands with the most marketable image, they overcharge listeners, while underpaying artists.
It is time for us to take matters into our own hands. go to shows...musicians fuck the labels hundreds of bands DIY. jump on the boat!!!
Where have you been? The music industry as such has _always_ been "destroyed" in this sense.
In the current system, as a music lover, I buy 200-300 CD's every year, and feed money to the system. My "vote" counts much more than that of teenbopper's, and that's why serious music is still produced. Us music lovers drive the music economy much more than teenybopers who buy a couple of Ani DiFranco or Moby albums every year. Thus, the music that we demand -- jazz, classical, folk, world, and misc -- continues to be produced. In the new system, there are no serious music fans, because all fans are reduced to Moby downloading automatons. There will be no money to drive into the system, and the teenyboppers who listen to Moby are just as important as serious music lovers who enjoy serious music.
I'm not sure anyone should. But that's not for me to say; the question is, did you? Because that's all that separates the music lovers (who trade music to _share_ what they enjoy with others) from the leeches (who are just looking for some free crap) in this debate.
I don't offer music I like on Napster, because I don't have authorization from the artists, and I believe that they should be paid. People who download -- but also share -- music on Napster are just as much leeches as those who share nothing. I don't download anything from Napster, but I have logged on in order to browse their crappy music selection. Lots and lots of Limp Bizkit, Ani DiFranco, Moby, Rage Against the Machine -- but no serious music. Only the weakest, most banal top 40 pop music.
Yes, but without it there would be no way that the GPL could enforce upon others the REQUIREMENT of redistributing source code to all who asked. I'm not exactly sure what Non sequitur means, but if it's anything like a catch-22, i'd think we're stuck in a chicken and egg type situation.
You might want to look into the most recent LPFM stuff. A number of industry lobbyists went full bore against it in the last few months. I believe they cut the availabe freqs in half after some totally contrived (emulated) tests showed that LPFM would degrade regular FM signals. I don't have the C-mens names, but they set up the "Radio Preservation Act" that pretty much slams LPFM.
:) (it's got links to a number of the things Ms. Love, hehe, mentioned in her speech)
Not to rain on your parade, just trying to inform you that many others are trying to keep you from having a parade permit.
Oh, and I hope they fear me too.
--
+&x
I dont know if I want music to be free- I just want more of the 12$ I lay down to go to the artist.
Why reinvent the wheel when you don't need to?:80s.com. (Albeit, it's closed source.)
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Sublime_-_11_-_Courtney.mp 3
For those interested, this is a tape from (I believe) Brad Nowell's answering machine. Brad is the now deceased former frontman of Sublime.
Basically I was talking about pop musicians, as they are the ones who will probably move to online distribution well before classical and 'serious'(non-top40) artists. They are the ones currently getting screwed the most by their labels, and I imagine that in the near future quite a few up-and-comings will eschew the major labels and opt for grassroots instead, now that it's becoming apparent that a whole new worldwide medium exists. Eventually the radio stations will have to start including this music in their shows (the sooner the better) and the sheer amount of music out there will cause the cream to rise.
:)
I agree that online is not a good medium for lengthy works (yet). Of course I downloaded "Thick As a Brick" from Jethro Tull a month or so back, and listened to it as a complete work for the first time (amazing what not having to get up and change album sides will do for you). It took about 10 minutes on my t-3 at the college. Hopefully the next format for digital music will sound better out of a stereo, and that by that time bandwidth won't be as big of an issue. As for the Ring, usually that's performed over a period of several days at a festival, correct? I could imagine getting all 20 hours overnight on a cablemodem and mp3. I would even not mind if it took a week of overnights at 56k if the company could garauntee resumable downloads
Either way I think it had better be a good shift, or people simply won't buy it.
Obviously. But some RIAA memo could "turn up" - I imagine they have their share of enemies. Of course that wouldn't swing the direction of the Napster case, because obviously it has no bearing on the Napster case.
I'm just saying that it would be sweet if internal RIAA memos were leaked. That could do wonders in the long term as far as public perception is concerned.
--
grappler
Vidi, Vici, Veni
I'm sorry
Don't be.
So fucking WHAT if she can "sing and dance"?
So fucking what if you can code in Perl? (Just supposing 'you' as a prototypical Slashdot reader can, for dialog's sake.) Is your 'striving' to learn Perl on your Dad's computer somehow more noble and respectable than Britney's learning to dance and sing?
Give me a good choreographer and I can do the same thing.
That I'd LOVE to see!
Remember Tifanny? Or Debbie Gibson? How about Samantha Fox? And where are they today? How have they recently made your life better?
Not every successful performer creates a lasting legacy, if that's what you're getting at, and there's no rulebook saying they have to. Part of successful Entertainment is giving the People what they want, when they want it. Silly question.
She is yet another bubble-gum pop-star that will be forgotten as soon as her tits start to sag.
That's her problem and her responsibility that she'll have to face it the same way the rest of us do . Ever heard the term 'dead wood' in the corporate realm? Doesn't matter what you do or for whom, sooner or later your tit's will sag too. Worry about your own ass, and she'll worry about hers (while the rest of us admire it from afar;)
Examples abound of pretty-girls that have two, three hits and are tossed aside by the next new
thing
Examples also abound of software developers, heavy-metal guitar-players and vaccuum(sp?) sales-men who are also tossed aside by the next new thing. Are you bitter of these folks too when they're successful? What's your point?
You've been sold an odorous pile of shit, pal, no matter how fuckable it looks.
She's a smart kid thriving in a high-pressure, high-profile job, and I respect that. End of story. I haven't 'bought' anything.
Spears is the music equivalent of America's Funniest Home Videos: occasionally humorous, but ultimately forgettable
That's an insightful bit of music criticism, but I'm not sure that it's of any consequence.
Looking forward to seeing your dance number!
**>>BELCH
I'm sorry man, but as relativistic as I am your comments are absolutely asinine. So fucking WHAT if she can "sing and dance"? Give me a good choreographer and I can do the same thing. Do you not understand the fact that she is totally superficial? If it weren't for looks, we'd have zip. She is yet another bubble-gum pop-star that will be forgotten as soon as her tits start to sag.
Let's flash back to the 80's... Remember Tifanny? Or Debbie Gibson? How about Samantha Fox? And where are they today? How have they recently made your life better? Examples abound of pretty-girls that have two, three hits and are tossed aside by the next new thing. Talent requires staying power, imagination, originality, and meaning. Spears' talent is skin deep. You've been sold an odorous pile of shit, pal, no matter how fuckable it looks.
Spears is the music equivalent of America's Funniest Home Videos: occasionally humorous, but ultimately forgettable.
- Rev.This is what I find disturbing about music today. It is basically mass produced "fast food" music. It really doesn't take anyone special to
perform it, just a good set of pipes and some nice T&A.
ANY art that can be profitable WILL be relegated to the realm of fast food. Simple fact of life.
Hell, food itself has been relegated to the realm of fast food!
That's what makes Mom's home-cookin' or Chef Nagato's sushi so worthwhile!
Or bands like Nirvana or the Smashing Pumpkins.
Doesn't stop me from choking down a little Burger-Doodle now and then. If you consistently avoid Burger-Doodle, well, you can pat yourself on the back, but they're not going out of business any time soon.
The same technology that gives us Slashdot has also given us MIDI, cheesy synthesiser sounds, hard-disk recording and Digital Voice Pitch Correction, all of which have been put to blazingly creative as well as cunningly nefarious uses.
Mope if you must, but some performers don't want your respect, they just want the money. If they can work the system in their favor and get it, I say more power to 'em.
**>>BELCH
Why are you watching 'The Charts' in the first place?
If you don't like ants, don't stare at ant-hills.
**>>BELCH
Courtney surprised me too. Silicone or not, she made some great points. Although, does TLC even write their songs. I figured that they were record company meat to dangle out on stage while a song played in the background.
e s.html (not an ad an example)
This whole issue will end up being good for music. Technology will hopefully break the record companies influence on what music is played in the mainstream. Mainly, there will be less of a mainstream and more ways to discover different bands (v. Britney Spears).
There are musicians that make decent livings outside the mainstream. Dischord records is a label to many great underground bands. They are cool because they know who put the bread on their tables. They go so far as putting pay no more than x$ labels on their CD's (they still sell vinyl too) check out their low prices
http://www.southern.com/southern/label/DIS/pric
Several Dischord bands like Fugazi play many $5 benefits and free concerts. Now that is cool.
Stealing music is wrong, but it will happen. A great example of how a free mp3 (not some lame 2 second clip) is good, is my own experience. I downloaded a 2 Skinnee J's song, and liked it so much that I bought the album.
How does this all apply to used CD sales. I buy many of my CD's used?
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
It is obvious you know less than nothing about how the internet works, so here is a quick breakdown for you.
Fact: the internet is a peer-to-peer network. This means that no centralized control exists. The closest thing we have to controlling the internet at the protocol level is the DNS system (which is making attempts to decentralize) and the loosely-knit agreements between ISPs and backbones to provide connectivity. Beyond that, every packet is routable through *some* means, and every packet is treated the same (it is a "dumb" network).
Fact: The primary means to search for information on the internet is via a search engine. Most all search engines use a substring glob search, with the more advanced ones allowing for regular expressions. What this means is that there is no definitive way to find any particular page or piece of information on the internet. When you use a search engine, you get "close enough" to the result that you can follow the links to where you want to go. More popular sites are easier to find, obviously.
Fact: People on the internet like low-cost to no-cost services. Consider pricewatch.com, ebay.com, any local newspaper or TV station - all of these offer up-to-the-minute content that often serves as a replacement for conventional media. This also lowers the cost of distribution dramatically as the cost-per-character is vastly lower than paper.
Fact: People have no morals. As the RIAA itself has demonstrated, profit and economic gain rule the marketplace. This is not limited to corporations - call it "Trickle down morality" if you will, but people have taken their que from businesses and also seek out the best ways to maximize their profits. This is an excellent example of true capitalism.
Conclusion: Here's where we put it all together. In a nutshell, you cannot control the medium as it was engineered specifically to resist centralized control - the US military built it to survive a nuclear blast.. I doubt a few lawyers can cause that kind of damage to the network. The network routes around failure automatically - if you kill an ISP another takes over the previous services. The network has mirroring capabilities and built-in redundancy. You cannot shut down the network. Next, due to the way search engines work, you cannot a) locate all of the material you want to remove -OR- b) quickly and efficiently identify that material. This means that if you plot the amount of money put into removing information log-log with the amount of return, it will rapidly drop to zero and infinity, respectively. In short - there will always be a sizeable percentage of "forbidden" material available. Even with no mirroring, napster, or crawlers.
Guys, you do not need more lawyers, you need more engineers. Evil engineers. Go build an internet that's trademark and copyright-friendly. And good luck getting everyone else to use it. :)
I fear this, too. It's a legitimate risk. Except that really good musicians will continue doing what they always have, which is make a complete work and a complete experience. The folks who've been releasing one song and a bunch of crap (IOW, pretending to be good musicians), are the ones who should worry.
Oops, I forgot this point. Artists who make 1-2 good songs are the ones who will succeed in online music. Nobody is interested in 10 catchy singles of the same artist, so they won't succeed. There will be absolutely to room at all for a new interpretation of a symphony, some exploratory tenor sax work, or cora music from West Africa because all music will be consumed in downloadable three minute sound bytes on demand -- the artists who write the catchiest tunes now will also continue to and succeed -- at the expense of more serious musics.
This article gave me more respect for Courtney Love than I had previously, which was roughly nil. I'm not a big "Hole" fan (All joking aside) and was under some belief that she was cast in People vs. LF more because she was a natural than anything else.
However, I think I've seen the light here; While I know nothing of her worth as a person, she can talk some straight shit, and is willing to do so, and that puts her high up in my book. Courtney, you're my hero this week. I'll drink one for you.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Come on, they knew they were going to be facilitating trading of music for free. They should have made the service more all-purpose, rather than choose to only distribute a file format which is used almost (but not quite) exclusively to distribute copyrighted material. I think the Napster fiasco will alert others to go with something like gnutella or some other general purpose transfer mechanism. Hotline was my favorite on the Mac. By restricting the type of information being traded, Napster opened themselves up to all sorts of scrutiny that Hotline never did, even though copyright violations were rampant on that service which last I used it (3 years ago).
Logic ... merely enables one to be wrong with authority. -- Doctor Who
Nope, this is not the same. It would be if you had taken a year off of work (or working a burger-flipping gig) and spent that year developing some really cool software. And then you went to work for someone and you handed them all rights to your previously done work. This is what musicians do, scrape by for years developing their talents and writing their material only to have to sign it away hoping for 'the big score'.
If you were hired at an IT company starting with nothing specifically tasked and paid to develop software for them then they have every right to expect to own that software, and conversely you have every right to turn down the job.
There are companies out there with IP clauses that basically assign all ownership of your ideas past present and future to the company. Anyone accepting such a clause is a fool.
Of course this goes for the artists too, but I suppose the promise of fame and fortune clouds their judgement when they have the contracts in front of them. It's also a case where the record labels are the only game in town, but that won't last forever.
-- Greg
Slashdot, would a spell-checker for posting be too much to ask? It's not rocket science!
Let us now elect
Courtney Love as President
She's smart, and hot too!
You misunderstand. I dont give a shit for anything from Madonna to Scraping Foetus Off the Windshield to the Butthole Surfers to whatever. To me, those are all forms of popular music. I dont care what clique your magazines are giving voice to.
Er, I'm talking about serious music, Einstein. Madonna and Scraping Foetus off the Windhsield, Butthol Surfers, and the others are top 40 teeny bop music. Get a copy of Grammaphone or something.
Napster go bye-bye
because Metallica has
penis jelousy
Hahaha...
-----
"The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad." - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)
There's another, more recent comparison of encoders at http://www.r3mix.net/.
I know what you mean. There are many subjects I grow tired of hearing about, although for me the napster saga is not one of them.
You're in luck though, theres a nice and convenient solution available. It's called not clicking on the link. Also, some people might judge how popular a given topic on slashdot is by how much discussion it generates. To those people you are just making it look like a "hot topic" A better way to show your disinterest might by not commenting.
[sorry for being offtopic everyone]
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
If you want some pre-1982 REM, most of it will be bootleg material of live shows. The REM Web Boot Discography does a good job of cataloguing their shows and known boots. There is some pre-82 material available. Underneath the Bunker offers a website and Hotline client connection information for facilitating trade.
There is no catch-22. COPYLEFT was created as a protest to abusive COPYRIGHT law (to put it simply), and it uses such copyright laws to subvert them from the inside. If there was no COPYRIGHT abusive laws, there would'nt have been the need for COPYLEFT. Thus it would'nt have existed. Therefore accusing the GPL of hypocrisy as some people did in this thread is not just fallacious, insulting and libellous, it's just plain dumb.
Today Be Inc. also announced that it would incorporate "MP3 encoding and decoding" into its Internet appliances. Basically they want to turn your house into an MP3-pumping powerhouse.
For more information, click here.
Napster is all about piracy, anyone arguing otherwise is kidding themselves. They will be killed in court. BUT, they are a huge wake-up call to the Biz.
It seems that the majors are all developing secure systems and such, but until they address PRICE, they will be eaten alive by pirates. Why would I want to download something and pay full price just so I could then pay for my own blank CD and take the time to burn it?? That is nuts!! The middlemen create most of the markup of that 15.98 cost. Labels end up with 6 bucks or so - and they have manufacturing and print costs to deal with!!
If I could download a CD for 5$, then it is much more attractive to me. The artist gets paid, the label gets paid, the consumer gets good value.
Until the ARTISTS are part of a music equivalent of OSS they will still expect to get paid. The labels and publishers that invest in the artists will expect to get paid. And of course the lawyers that will sue your ass seven ways from Sunday will get paid...
MP3.com (at least in it's earlier days) was a much more interesting idea - "here's my music, listen to it, if you like it then maybe you will buy it". The model was about artists choosing to do this. Much closer to OSS in spirit. Also a good place for Industry Weasels like myself to cruise for talent.
I see the napster phenomenon as a dangerous precedent - "its OK to steal cuz they are all rich bastards" or "if its Digital then it should be free (so I will just take it)". I fear it is creating a generation that just doesn't give a shit about law or ethics.
I fully understand what the GPL/free software movement is/is all about. But all theses posts don't cover ANY of the points I was addressing. The artists never did anything to you. Why do you have to violate their rights??
the main point that I had was: when person X violates GPL, they get attacked by slashdot. When person Y infringes on someone's copyright, slashdot looks the other way or claims it's their right. This is hypocrisy..
Below is an Article that Steve Albini wrote a few years ago about how working for a major label is a huge sucker bet. It was published in The Baffer and Maximum Rock 'n' Roll under the title "Some of Your Friends are Already this Fucked"
This is an archived article off of Google
. We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines, you know that ain't allowed - Talking Heads, "Life During Wartime"
BTW, I'm a BeOS freak too... I wonder what JLG, as a 'born-again capitolist', thinks about all this.
Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
Napster brings about death of the CD
And...? The subscription model doesn't? Hell, the DVD-Audio model doesn't?
Isn't it ironic that everyone wants the CD dead? Techies want compressed digital audio, industry wants your ossicles to be trade secreted.
And yet, I can't imagine anything else that could have killed the CD...
Record industry may be unwilling to support this transition (gut their bottom line)
And...? An existing oligopoly might be afraid of making less money?
Record stores (Tower Records) obsoleted.
This is incriminating? Boy. CD Now is screwed.
Of all the things to call incriminating, these sure don't qualify. Transitioning an entire industry into a new level of technology which lowers margins for some players and entirely eliminates others...last I checked, we did have some kind of public policy which advocated competition. This is starting to reflect the ugliest aspects of the Microsoft trial.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
Classical music and any of the early 20th century music that do not fall under copyright due to expiration. Many people download MP3 of those categories of music.
Granted, it appears that a bunch of it was taken from other places, but it's also the stuff that a lot of people have been saying for some time.
And she invokes Neal Stephenson as part of her speech. If she's actually read his stuff and isn't just spewing, well, how cool is that?
----
Brazil has decided you're cute.
Oh man, that's good stuff :-)
--
grappler
Vidi, Vici, Veni
That may be true for the music itself, but the sound recording is still under copyright, unless it's ripped from an Edison wax cylinder or one of the earliest lacquer 78s.
But, hey: those orchestra musicians and soloists are just spending their millions on drugs, whores, and gold-plated Jeep Cherokees. Fuck 'em.
"Yo biotch! Cash monee boyeez! -- Luciano "Phat Boy" Pavarotti
k.
--
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people
are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
She is intelligent, can act pretty well, and has a lot of experience under her belt. Plus it is my opinion that Hole rocks pretty hard.
Hehe this quote is much funnier if you add elispis and a colon
She is intelligent, can act pretty well, and has a lot of experience...under her belt. Plus it is my opinion: that hole rocks pretty hard.
My Home: Apartment6
Hey, man. I browse at +2. So when I get a message that just says "Oh, that's right. I forgot. Thanks!" it's no better than pointless, USEnet spam. If you're going to post something worthless, DON'T USE YOUR EXTRA POINT.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
--
--
The Internet is the Suppository of All Knowledge. You get it in the end.
I wonder if anyone has noticed the similarity between her issues and IP rights whithin IT/commercial industry. If I take a permenant job or a contract, the chances are that anything I create whilst under contract belongs to my employer - I have very little right to innovate for myself - is this not the same as artists creating music whilst under contract to a label?
I just happend to think it is kinda neat that someone who happens to be a fairly good looking famous female type likes the same type of books as me--I sorta doubt she quoted it to make herself popular with a buch of geeks--she did after all have to explain the quote, and so on....
it was actually the whole rest of her speech that made everyone go, "oh she's one of us,she understaaaaands!!", as you put it---or maybe made us go "oh I understand, now, about musicians position in the industry...and isn't it kool that she likes sci-fi books too!"
(note:snowcrash isn't what I think of as cyberpunk, but that could just be 'cause I was never a big fan of it, and I like that book way too much!)
Slackware: old school feel, new school gear.
How ironic ...
:)
After reading Courtney's article, I feel like downloading her albums
Okay, this is obvious flamebait. Moderate it down. BUT:
I'm browing at +2. About FIFTEEN POSTS in a row say "Wow, I like Courtney Love now, she's gutsy, she's taking on the record companies, people should show her more respect." Then they all get moderated +3 to +5 Insightful, Interesting...
Isn't this the definition of redundant?? When I browse at +2 and I STILL have to read a discussion that consists of nothing but people accolading a celebrity's character??
People's personal opinions of Courtney Love do not add a thing to the discussion, and thus should not be moderated At All. And if fifteen people post the same thing, the Redundant tags should come out - NOT the "Interesting/Insightful" tags. There is NO insight in this.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
The Chronic Town EP is available as part of the Dead Letter Office compilation (which has some other interesting stuff on it, along with an amusing drunken rendition of "King of the Road").
I have NO DOUBT that SAlbini was the first to applaud her effort.
:) -- no...
From centerstage.net:
He's recorded albums for Nirvana, PJ Harvey, the Breeders, the Pixies, Helmet, Cheap trick, Jesus Lizard, Bush, and "about 1000 bands you've never heard of." Courtney Love asked if he would produce Hole's recent album, and Albini said -- surprise
Search for them on the internet... Their dispisal of one another is quite documented... Which is what makes the fact that she had to rely on what he said 10 years ago to make her point. The least she could have done is think it out for herself...
"I don't feel like embarrassing Kurt by talking about what a psycho hosebeast his wife is, especially when he knows it already." -Steve Albini, Producer of In Utero
That has got to be one of the most harsh and caustic things I've read in the past month. She is absolutely brutal. It was great.
One of the most revealing quotes: Put simply, the antitrust laws in this country are basically a joke, protecting us just enough to not have to re-name our park service the Phillip Morris National Park Service
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Without copyright laws, there's no way to force people to distribute their code.
Even if copyright went by the wayside, the GPL would still be needed in order to force peopel to share what they'd done.
SAlbini's article is and was great, but it's on the shelf, and has hence lost it's impact. Ms. Love expertly and enthusiastically re-stated much of what SAlbini said with a fresh and updated perspective. She did all that and got it smack in the Public Eye. Piece-o-work, I say.
It sorely needed doing, and she did it BRILLIANTLY!
To mean-spiritedly write off her achievement as "ripping-off Steve Albini" is an act of annoying, whining Ignorance.
I have NO DOUBT that SAlbini was the first to applaud her effort.
-kent
**>>BELCH
So far all the methods for electronic cash have fallen through... Even the one's with the right ideas.
It appears that credit-cards have become the de-facto currency of the internet economy. Some company that had an add on the radio finally got it; they started selling check card accounts specifically targeting internet commerce (works just like a credit card).
So we have an in-place working system, but the crux of this is that the credit card companies get a cut of every transation that occurs. Its the same as having to pay 'useage fees' whenever you use some other bank's ATM machine although its not the customer who pays these but the merchant.
I use my bank-supplied 'check card' to pay for most everything from gas to food to hardware. I rarely pay paper money for anything anymore, only when its less than five dollars.
Perhaps this is the reason behind DOJ going after VISA. Could the government be so visionary as to see that the credit card is replacing paper money and therefore that industry required more oversight? I doubt it, just lucky I suppose.
-- Greg
Slashdot, would a spell-checker for posting be too much to ask? It's not rocket science!
you obviously did NOT read the Courtney Love article at Salon. She made some excellent points on these issues. NEXT TIME READ THE ARTICLE BEFORE POSTING!
But I have to say that this is one of the best damn articles about the recording industry as a whole I've ever seen.
When I read the initial headline that said it was the 'unedited transcript', I assumed it was going to sound like she was just stupid. I also [wrongly, I might add] assumed that she probably didn't even understand the issues.
Was I ever wrong.
She knows exactly what is going on. And she has a lot of valid points about the RIAA. I'm not going to rehash the whole article, but suffice to say her math certainly backs up the sentiment that the RIAA is raping artists of money that should be theirs. She also has refreshing views on Napster et al, and I'm glad to see that.
Anyways, an extremely good article that I think anybody interested in the whole RIAA/Napster/Gnutella/Etc deal should read.
-[Blaine]- "'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic."
you can tell because she makes refence to the need to buy the soda, call a number and do a voicemail thing to access the concert. a beverage company with a red logo did this type of promotion last summer.
- bridgette
Of course, I assume the incriminating part is there the Napster guys talk about users trading pirated music, such as this quote about halfway down the article:
"It goes on to quote Parker's message to Fanning: ''Users will understand that they are improving their experience by providing information about their tastes without linking that information to a name or address or other sensitive data that might endanger them (especially since they are exchanging pirated music)."
The parts you pointed are of course just internal cheerleading, and not incriminating (as least not under the terms as I understand them). But if quotes like the above convince the court that the people running Napster KNOW the service is being used for illegal material... well...
Anybody know how soon a ruling on the injunction is expected?
Phallic Symbols in LOTR
So when is the software association going to close down the net because it is a haven for the transfer of illegal software? Who does the RIAA think they are, the software companies haven't stopped the warez yet. Blaze on....
courtney love quotes neal stephenson!--she actually read his book!--how cool is that!
(note:the quote was from the first chapter of snow crash, for those who haven't read it yet--now go get a copy!)
Slackware: old school feel, new school gear.
At this point the "record collector" geniuses who use Napster don't have the coolest most arcane selection anyway, unless you're into techno. Hardly any pre-1982 REM fans, no '60s punk, even the Alan Parsons Project was underrepresented when I tried to find some Napster buddies. For the most part, it was college boy rawk without a lot of imagination.
That is my biggest problem with mp3 sharing - it doesn't seem to have expanded many horizons at all. (Except, as she says, in the techno genre.) Bubble-gum pop and frat rock (neither of which I totally despise) seem to be the dominant uses of Napster.
I always hear that Napster is good because "I don't have to buy a 12-song album to hear the 2 songs I want to hear." But when I buy a 12-song album for 2 songs, half the time I end up loving the other 10 even more, even though radio didn't expose me to them. I worry that if the entire album-rock paradigm goes the way of the 8-track, the music community will lose something other than money....
grep -ri 'should work'
Also, check this report by the Pew Center - they did some research on who uses Napster (age, gender) and why (pirating, sampling).
---
Can anyone explain to my why making a copyrighted MP3 file available for public download doesn't make you liable for copyright infringement? Just having the file doesn't, but making it publicly available does, yes?
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
It's funny, but understandable that you would would so eagarly write-off Britney Spears as a talentless bimbo, and recieve lots of support (moderation points) from other less-than-very-thoughtfull slashdotters.
The girl can dance and the girl can sing, both with confidence and style well beyond her years. Is she and her act completely self-made from the ground-up? Hell no, but it takes skill, determination and, yes, Talent to hang on to and thrive amongst the opportunities she has been given. It's easy to look at those opportunities and say that, given the same, anyone could be a Britney Spears. Wrong-o pal! Star-struck upper-middle-class parents around the world funnel millions into little darlings with lot's of potential who end up going to college instead of Hollywood, because they don't have the extra ingredients (and luck of course) to capitalize on the opportunities as they arise.
I'm not a fan of Britney's music/product, but she totally kicks ass in her own way, and for that I congratulate her.
**>>BELCH
the Courtney love text is here:v e/print.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/lo
I have to admit that when I read this all I could say was, "Daaaaamn!" She nailed it right on the head. I recommend this to anyone interested in Napster/MP3's/Music/RIAA. I think she fairly gets on everyones case a bit. Very well reasoned out. I have to say that I am on her side. Go Courtney!!!
We ought to boycott every goddamn form of slime-bucket commercial entertainment in existence. Then maybe the newly merged entity GE/NBC/ABC/Sony/Universal/Viacom/AOL/Time-Warner/W alt Disney/Hustler Unlimited Incorporated will stop threatening to airlift 5,000,000 surplus copies of Snow White 1000th Anniversary Special Edition Deluxe Box Set to Eritrea and send some fucking food instead. Who the hell needs refried dreams anyways?
Napster is just the beginning...
I don't care what the RIAA says, I find it funny, actually, when they turn Napster's quote against them. RIAA caims that Napster was speaking of violating copyrights when the claimed you never have to worry about wading through pages of unknown artists again, and you could find what you were looking for on Napster, unfortunately, this implies that your favorite music is one of the bands that the RIAA's member labels represents. It's quite possible that the music you are looking for is freely available. It's just a matter of perspective, and I don't care what the RIAA thinks, this software merely looks for what it is told, which means that it can't be Napster's liability. The software is simply designed to search, they're not saying pirate music, and they can't help what people use it to search for. That's like saying you can sue a knife company for making the knife that killed someone, when in fact it was the user of the knife who misused it.
"God is REAL
Many companies are trying to make a dollar off free software, why not free music. I'm sure considering the math that Courtney presented and the trouble all artists are having fighting record labels and their control of distribution that Free music could work.
Imagine first a cooperative "record label" that exists to help market and distribute discs in meat-space. They take a cut off the sales (and their risk is associated with those sales, nothing more)and the band gets a good chunk of the royalties.
Also allow that anyone else could distribute the music as well (kinda like FSF software, you can buy it from them as well and you know where the money goes). Work out MP3 deals so the artists can also get paid on a voluntary basis by the people who like the MP3s.
It might be a big shift in ideals but if a few artists can afford (or believe enough in the concept of Free Music) to release their albums like this they will probably win in the end. (They can still charge for playing live shows, and other time consuming tasks)
News for UW students
The 'sucka VCs' line was great. I actually just tried to register the suckaVC.com domain name. If I get it and anyone wants an @suckaVC.com mail alias then drop me an email :)
Whereas the only thing impossible about the plot of MI-2 was staying consious throughout the whole movie, the RIAA really has a Mission Impossible if they think they can stop piracy of music. I suppose their next step will be to go to every college campus and shut down all computers that are illegaly sharing mp3's. Maybe it's just me but I think they would have more luck with the Haiku Generating Program.
--C:\DOS C:\DOS\RUN RUN\DOS\RUN
Not satisfied to rip the shroud off the recording cartels, which everybody knew to be corrupt anyway, she turns the bright light of reason on our own industry as well!
... a year ago ... anything dot-com sounded smarter than the rest of us, but the scam has been uncovered. I did a chat today, twice. Big damn deal. 200 bucks for the software and some elbow grease and a good back-end coder.
Courtney, I'll show you a good back-end coder. Yeah baby.
Courtney Love revisited the concept of "tips" several times during her rant on the current state of the recording industry. Now, could this not be a viable application for system of micropayments that Rob explained in an episode of Geeks in Space a while back?
Here's the way I see it working:
Sounds nifty, eh? The only short term problem I can think of is actually getting people to participate in the thing. If you can get several forward-thinking websites (who aren't so full of themselves that they'll go and build a similar system of their own, like slashdot) to sign on to the system, then the users will come. If the users come, more websites will come. And if more websites come, then more users will come. Ad nausium.
The key to making this whole thing work is how it will handle the exclusive content. Websites should be able to offer goodies only to registered webtips.com users, but they don't necessarily have to leave a tip to get at the content.
Waddya think?
--
courtney love is absolutely dead on right about everything she says. her summary of the workings of the RIAA scam, the artists, and how Napster fits in the picture is the best i have ever read.
her speech is a must read for everyone daring to have an opinion on the matter. she is fucking brilliant: clear, concise, visionary... plus, she looks good, too.
OK this is getting out of hand.
but... it all makes so much sense now!
YEAH! courtney love is a whole lot smarter and more articulate than one might think. i would marry her in an instant - for her brains. also, she cites neal stephenson. so go read it! you won't be disappointed. this could become some sort of fundamental speech. it should...
I keep hearing MP3 and Napster, et. al., discussed in the popular press, and no one is getting it right. They (including Lars) keep talking about "perfect digital copies (pdc)." But no one is swapping pdc's, and MP3s are no such thing. They're compressed, lower quality copies. They are the PC equivalent to the cassette tape. They may sound the same on your cheap PC speakers, but pump them through a stereo and crank the volume and the difference is very clear, especially at 128 Kb/s, which is the encoding bitrate most used on Napster. (Ars has a review of different MP3 encoders and how their output compares to the original here . If they were pdc's, would there be a need for this?) A pdc is the wave file from the CD, which runs about 50MB for the average cut from a 10-cut CD. That's too large for the average use to pull down over the net with anything but a blazing connection, and even at that, you aren't going to be able to pull many down per day. It can be done, just like you can rip DVDs and post the movies to the net, but only the very persistent and very lucky (others on your LAN?) are going to be able to pull them down illegally. Please call into talk radio/TV/whatever and draw this disticntion, the RIAA has convinced the press that MP3=CD quality. Stop the misinformation!!!
There were a billion music downloads last year, but music sales are up. Where's the evidence that downloads hurt business? Downloads are creating more demand.
Precisely. Ms. Love's right on the money here. What I want to know is why more bands aren't up in arms about the fact that they are expected to swallow the cost of thousands of promo CDs.
Promo CDs, for those who've been under a rock, are the "For Promotional Use Only" discs that get sent to reviewers, radio stations, and the like. Sounds like a perfectly legitimate use for those discs, right?
Think again. You know those CDs they sell through record clubs? Think the artist gets a full royalty from those sales? Wrong. Those are considered part of the promotional-copies budget at many companies.
A fairly standard provision in agreements with American artists is that they receive one-half their usual royalty rate on sales through clubs and that no royalties are payable on bonus or free records distributed by clubs.
-Syndey Shemel, "This Business of Music". 1990. 61.
In other words, if you buy CDs from a CD mail order club like Columbia House or BMG, you're shortchanging the artist as well -- and that's a legitimate, legal form of screwing musicians. The argument that "MP3s are taking away profits" is sort of disingenuous, given that the vast majority of the people I know use them the way they're used on the radio and in record store listening booths (IOW, "try-before-you-buy"), not as a replacement for the disc.
My belief is that Courtney Love is on the right track. Give folks a few songs for free on the band's Web site -- if the music's good, they'll buy the disc. Hell, after reading this, I'm going to buy her next disc. I've liked Hole's stuff in the past, and never found the discs not to be worth the $15 or so I spent on 'em. And just think... if she's that confident about it, I'll bet it doesn't suck like Reload.
Chance
http://imc.dyndns.org
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein
If you don't like clicking through all seven pages you can access the whole article at http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/ print.html
Courtney hit on a novel concept, intentionally or otherwise, when she mentions pop-musicians playing for tips.
I think in the future we'll be seeing a lot of high-quality free mp3's and virtual "tip jars" for bands where you can click to send some small (but oh so significant) change to the artist(s) whose music you've just snagged.
It'll be TOTALLY voluntary and EXTREMELY profitable for the bands who please their audience.
The biggest obstacle is an easy and secure way for listeners to proffer real cash credit in minute amounts without always having to have a credit card number handy. Now that online banking is becoming more common, the only remaining obstacle is a distribution model that helps listeners separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of mounds of online music, much of which is of low grade and inspiration.
The profitable sites (Mp3) of the future will be the ones that provide filtering via ratings and such in an agreeable and reliable manner, rather than the ones that simply host mounds of mp3 material.
-kent
**>>BELCH
And my own personal opinion is that Courtney Love was cool for saying all that. Whether it's true or not, Kurt would have done the same thing (well, that or blowing his brains out, go figure........)
Acting stupid isn't much fun when there's someone around who knows better
My image of Courtney Love isn't the most, uh, "together" of persons. "Babe with Issues" as the saying goes.
But holy shit, does she ever understand her industry, and she understands what Napster means to artists way better than anyone else I've ever heard (read) speak.
She's way, way higher in Clue Level than ol' Lars, lemme tell you. Suprisingly intelligent and insightful, given her media image.
If you belong to the "Napster is Wrong! Piracy!" crowd, go read the article all the way through. Ruminate for a second that all her arguments are based on **direct observation**, and see if you don't change your mind.
And if you think that the RIAA is nasty to people outside their industry, just wait 'till you see what they do to "family"
Go Courtney!
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
The quote at the bottom especially. I somehow don't think that Steve Came up with this editorial simply so that they could sit on some website (reproduced completely without his permission, as the link you produced earlier says, that *was* you with the link, right?) and not be read.
/.? I would think in the case of the former you could get over petty trivialities and recognize that Courtney is actually doing a very good thing by reusing this example. Either way, what she did may be plagiarism, perhaps even infringe^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpiracy!, however it's essentially no different than putting those same words up verbatim on a website without the author's permission. Oh, except people besides some geeks who read a non-mainstream website might be exposed to it. Horror!
Obviously at least one other person has been paying attention to the issue (or experienced it firsthand), and uses a cribbed example to bring it to national attention. I say good for her. She uses it in the way it was intended to be used, to highlight the fact that the artists are currently getting screwed, not to defend the RIAA from evil music pirates.
If anyone in this whole situation stands to get royally fucked, it is the artists. Period. The Recording industry isn't looking out for them (I don't recall the Albini article going into quite that amount of depth, he is a producer, right?) and are trying to put artists into almost a position of slaves (perhaps a bad reference to make in the US, however the shoe seems to fit).
Anyway, are *you* concerned more about the artists, Um...Lucas, or are you merely concerned with showing your moral superiority over the dot-communists here on
Before you guys pass out with lust over Courtney Love, what about the following quotes from that article?
"I'm on [Metallica drummer] Lars Ulrich's side"
"I hear idealistic business people talk about how people that are musicians would be musicians no matter what and that we're already doing it for free, so what about copyright? Please. It's incredibly easy not to be a musician. It's always a struggle and a dangerous career choice. We are motivated by passion and by money."
"I demand a lot of money if I do a big huge worthwhile job and millions of people like it, don't kid yourself."
"Music is intellectual property with full cash and opportunity costs required to create, polish and record a finished product. If I invest money and time into my business, I should be reasonably protected from the theft of my goods and services."
So why is it that when a slashdotter says these things they get sneered at, yet when Courtney Love says it, everyone ignores it and gushes about how eloquent she is (an eloquent woman, oh my, stop the presses)? Everyone from Steve Albini to Frank Zappa to Robert Fripp has railed against the record companies' dealings for years.
s/said/was like/g
s/thought/was all like/g
s/,/, you know,/g
in the spirit of opensource i will neglect to check whether commas need an escape character
- bridgette
Her point was exactlly what I have had on my mind for the last little while....If you look on Napster or Gnutella, the majority of the music you find is what is "hip" today --- and what you are hearing on MTV and the Radio constantlly...
:)
As a music lover who purchases many CD's a month, I would love to be able to use Napster or gnutella to find music that is out of print, and hard to find in the stores....If I want todays top 40, and Singles only, I can tune my Radio to a local station and press record
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Thanks for the info. If I had $1 for every time someone on /. said something like "If you don't like paying a lot for CDs, order through Columbia House, BMG, etc; that way you don't rip off the artist," I'd have... 12 x "a lot" CDs.
Once again we see that legal != moral. If a reasonable, fairly priced method of paying for high-quality MP3s directly from artists ever arises, I'll use it in a second. Until that time, what I'd like to see more than anything is a list of addresses where I can send personal checks to artists thanking them for the enjoyment I've recieved from songs of theirs I've downloaded.
I have been in the minority for a long time in saying that Courtney Love is a great artist that even the caustic Bill Hicks would respect. She's not just another talentless bimbo a la Britney Spears or Celine Dion. She is intelligent, can act pretty well, and has a lot of experience under her belt. Plus it is my opinion that Hole rocks pretty hard.
But this speech solidifies the fact that there are brains above that sexy belly-button. Her comments are dead on right, and are anti-establishment enough to warrant deep respect. Maybe this will put the final nail in the coffin of the "riding Kurt Cobain's coattails" meme.
- Rev.If CL cannot live up to the commitment she origionaly signed on the dotted line for, then she should have never signed. No one held a gun to her head.
This crapola about artists need a different set of rules then the rest of society is leftist elitism at it's best. Artists have an overly developed sense of their importance to the world.
I submitted this article way before the AC but anyway. This line from the Courtney interview rocks! Check this out:
"If you're afraid of your own filler then I bet you're afraid of Napster"
So to all those succa's who can't finesse art... please go home.
_______________________________________
Will the real Sunking7 please stand up?
"a powerful and unexpected ally..."
Next, due to the way search engines work, you cannot a) locate all of the material you want to remove -OR- b) quickly and efficiently identify that material. This means that if you plot the amount of money put into removing information log-log with the amount of return, it will rapidly drop to zero and infinity, respectively. In short - there will always be a sizeable percentage of "forbidden" material available. Even with no mirroring, napster, or crawlers.
That's wrong. If the information can't be found by the RIAA, and hence can't be found by normal users, but exists what's the point of it? Only a minority of users can find it, and only that minority of users can use it. Realistically all you need to do is find the infomation that can be found easilly and shutdown it. Once you've done that the amount of effort needed to find the other mirrors can easilly become too great for the majority of users. The important thing with FreeNet and Gnutella is that if any single peice of information exists in the network you will be able to find it. With FreeNet it's automatically mirrored by the very process of asking for it.
Courtney's statements on Napster and the RIAA and artists in general are easily the best I have read throughout this entire fiasco and I have to say she has my complete respect. I always saw her as one of the few true female rock artists left in the world (although I must say I'm not particularly a fan -- though I'll listen to her music and have MP3's of most of her songs at work -- heh), but I can see that she easily has more balls than just about any of the other real rock groups around.
I'm sure Trent Reznor would have a lot to say on this issue and I'm disapointed that he hasn't uttered anything yet. I'd also like to see people like Aerosmith and Metallica and some other big name groups take the same stand that she's taken here.
Her dig on Ulrich and his apparent inability to communicate his thoughts well (enough for soundbites) was amusing and I was impressed by her obvious familiarity with the Internet. I don't think Lars or James could find the AnyKey on their fucking keyboard, but I have a feeling you could get Courtney putzing around with a command prompt pretty easily and she probably wouldn't be too shy with the bash prompt.
Anyway, glad to know that my suspicions of her being one of the brighter bulbs in the music scene are now confirmed. Anyone who digs her music or has any of her MP3's should find out (probably from her website?) how to send a couple bucks along with a note that you appreciated her stance and that you wanted to leave her the "tip" she spoke about for any Hole MP3's you might have laying around. -- I like Metallica, but I wouldn't give those fuckers a dime the way they're headed now. They're attacks on the fans are legitimate, but it's like worrying about a bruise on your arm while your foot is on fire.
---
icq:2057699
seumas.com
They can play with napster.
But they can do the same with gnutella ?, is time
an money lost.
The game is over.
bye bye
Those who register their music can get a CD with special packaging; an artefact that symbolises the relationship one has with the artist and the community of fans. Perhaps the CD can contain bonus fans-only tracks, perhaps not.
You know, throw this onto the pile of other things she's said and eluded to -- and she starts to strike me as a bit of a geek. I mean, even a lot of geeks I know aren't familiar with Stephenson.
---
icq:2057699
seumas.com
The RIAA's memos will not be released, as it is not the RIAA that is on trial. There are no grounds to subpoena memos from the RIAA.
And so:
MAC | A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
So I was over at Best Buy the other day, getting a new hard drive 'cause my old one is like totally stuffed full of MP3s, ya-know? An' the aisle with all the drives was blocked by these 2 fat kids tryin' to decide which joystick to buy. So like, I was inna hurry, 'cause my cd burner was just about 10 minutes from spitting out another Metallica disk (screw you, Lars), so I went over to the next aisle to like, go around, ya-know? An' I saw all these boxes that I never noticed before an' they were all playing music, like for free! They were like way cool and totally portable, so I grabbed one an' I got my new drive an' took 'em home. The box didn't come with no good instructions but it gets free music and downloads real quick, like right away when you turn it on. I don't have to logon or wait for a connect or nuttin'. Without the instructions I haven't been able to figure out all the options but there's a lotta music choices even if I can't figure out how to get it to do anything but play right now. It works real good, although after every couple of songs ya gotta listen to a pop-up ad from some luser company that thinks I care.
Anybody got any info on this box? The guy at the store called it a "ray-dee-oh."
+someone+ 'dubbed' anonymous coward.. like they can't even figure out it is a default name..
he who has the fastest cart always has the best lie.
here's an interesting little tidbit from the transcript:
Of the 32,000 new releases each year, only 250 sell more than 10,000 copies. And less than 30 go platinum.
Now, how many recording contracts do you think have a recoup point of 10,000 or less? By the way - 150k is considered 'about average' for a major label first release artist contract.
Y'know, I read with interest Lar Ulrich's viewpoints on this phenomenon and the reasons for Metallicas reaction to it and thought he had some good points, but the most resonant one to me was basically "we got caught with our pants (label) down and felt we had to do something about it." The something, of course, was a joke - woopty-doo, you disabled my 'account', so I'll change my login name. Bottom line is that the label's need to find a way to embrace new technology and add value to the consumer (as well as artist!) experience if they are going to continue to focus on mechanical. Even then, screw 'em - they screw us, that's for sure.
"At this point the "record collector" geniuses who use Napster don't have the coolest most arcane selection anyway, unless you're into techno. Hardly any pre-1982 REM fans, no '60s punk, even the Alan Parsons Project was underrepresented when I tried to find some Napster buddies"
I admire her cooler-than-though attitude, but I have found a ton of 60's punk (Stooges, Fugs, MC5, Lothar and the Hand People) on Napster. Especially since the Metalica lawsuit, many non-mainstream people have apparently discovered Napster. I've even been finding obscure experimental Japanese bands (Zeni Geva, Merzbo, Guitar Wolf) lately. As for pre-'82 REM fans... uh, their first album (EP really) was released in August of '82 so any fans before then were probably all Athens locals. I have yet to look for the Alan Parsons Project (wasn't that some sort of hovercraft?) and wouldn't know what to look for anyway, so I can't comment on that.
Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
Courtney, whatever you may think of her personally, is to this generation what Madonna was to the previous one. She's a hardline chick with balls who's not afraid of her intelligence OR her sexuality. She's also not afraid to use those advantages to her benefit.
Does she sell herself on outrageousness? Absolutely. Does this discredit her views, or her music? Hell, no.
Courtney's music is about the same things that her words here are about -- and those are the things we're discussing, no? She's doing something that's a lot more on target here than almost anyone else talking about the issue. But then, I think the whole artists-suing-Napster issue lost a great deal of credibility with Eminem, that no-talent, started directing his pottymouth at the Napster users. I can honestly assure the "gentleman" that I have never downloaded any of his so-called music, nor do I ever intend to do so.
As far as artists who are eloquent when speaking live and on the spot, check out the transcript of the Charlie Rose show where Chuck D of Public Enemy squared off against Lars Ulrich. It's available at this link if you haven't seen it yet.
Just some more thougths for y'all.
Chancery
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein
I am surprised. With all the hate-press Courtney Love gets, she sure can write. Just to amuse myself, I read her article, and liked it. SHe was honest and blunt like Chris Rock's stand-up routine.
It was wordy, but not a "put you to sleep digital revolution is coming" sleep like all JonKatz articles.
C'mon Taco, let Courntey Love take over as columnist for Slashdot instead of Katz. Just look out for Bikini Kill.
"or she's waaaay smarter than she's let on for the past 8 years."
Or, given the content of her article, she's way smarter than the record and media companies have allowed to let us on...
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Woof.
Woof. Woof. Woof! WOOF!
WOOF!! WOOF!! woof.
grooowwwllllll...
Phallic Symbols in LOTR
I might not have the same trained ear as Ms. Love, but 128kbps sounds pretty good to me. I do encode all my stuff in VBR, high quality, in case I ever get better music equipment, but I can enjoy the song just as much at 128.
:P Ok, that was mean, they're not that bad I guess.
I'm not a big fan of her music, actually I think most of it sucks, but I thought that article was really good, except for bashing MP3 quality. Actually the extent to which she thinks 'MP3s sound shitty' makes be doubt how much she experience she's had with them. A good number of the mp3s I have that 'guitar/vocal emotional/cost feeling' she mentioned, and they haven't lost anything I can tell. A few of my friends doubt she wrote her own speech, but I like to think that isn't true.
128kbps should be good enough if you're going to listen to a crappy Hole song anyway.
Yes... I never thought Courtney Love was actually intelligent.
Nice article! I sense a revolution....
I was not expecting Courtney Love's article to kick so much ass. One of the better reads I've had in the last year. She's absolutely amazing.
Please, please read it if you haven't already.
This is the new economy in a nutshell: the ways and means of production that Marx told us about in das kapital are now not the barrier they once were to distribution. The RIAA will "get it" as long as Congress, in the interest of preserving the Golden Goose, decides to protect the freedom of the Internet. Way to go Courtney! Are you really a man like that Margaret chick on the Phil Hendry show said?
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
Yes, they will likely silence Napster.
The question I have, is "So what?"
People will find other ways to distribute copyrighted media. One post to another story posted about what might be required to actually stop mp3 usage. It went something along the lines of all peer-to-peer sharing (RIAA was trying to ban all napster-like technology) as well as, say, port 80.
Napster may indeed lose, but RIAA is fighting an uphill battle, and is only drawing more attention to Napster and similar software than they otherwise would have. They would do better to spend money figuring out how to make money from mp3s, instead of the futile attempt to rub them out entirely.
We are geeks, resistance is futile, you will be forced to change with the times.
-Tannin Kal
Maybe I have an untrained ear, but it really does sound "CD quality" to me (again, show me all the graphs and data you want, we're talking about my ears here). Maybe I would have to hear the tracks (MP3 vs. CD) played back to back on a high-end system to hear the subtle little differences...
For instance, I just downloaded a copy of William Shatner's "Mr. Tamborine Man" this morning, and it's crystal clear.
MR. TAMBOURINE MAAAAAAAANNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!
Phallic Symbols in LOTR
Unfortunately *questionable* moderations have left me high and dry. Great post though.
Bitchslapped? Give Rob a bitchslap from bitchslapped.com.
If you haven't done so yet, GO READ THIS SPEECH. The following quote comes from the end, and could have very easily come from a /. reader:
In the last few years, business pulled our culture away from the idea that music is important and emotional and sacred. But new technology has brought a real opportunity for change; we can break down the old system and give musicians real freedom and choice. A great writer named Neal Stephenson said that America does four things better than any other country in the world: rock music, movies, software and high-speed pizza delivery. All of these are sacred American art forms. Let's return to our purity and our idealism while we have this shot.
I have felt for a long time that rock music (and all music, really) suffers when business interests enter into the equation. Business is about making money, which means selling as many copies of a given CD as you can. When this is your focus, artists who make great art but who are unpopular get left behind or ignored. As St. Hicks said: "If you do a commercial you are off the artistic roll call forever. Unless you're Willie Nelson." When money is held more important than art, Truth suffers a fatal blow.
All hail Courtney Love! May her tummy be forever flat and her music eternally jammin! You shall be in my masturbatory fantasies forever more! I was absolutely amazed at the erudite reasoning she gave in this speech. The RIAA should be terrified: we now have a hero. And not only is she a hottie, she's a fucking brain.
- Rev.Obviously someone's been spending too much time in his cubicle, a haven for butt piracy. Because of this, the National Association for gay people's rights have been miffed that this person is not coming out of the closet, and thus has ordered that we shut down that cubicle.
This has been a public service announcement
We don't need no Net Explorer We don't need no Thought control
What would have happened if Metallica had said: "man napster is great, it rocks!"...slashdot would have a whole different attitude.
IANAH[1], but it is indeed true that had confederates had a bigger army, they might indeed have kicked the yankees' ass.
[1] I Am Not An Historian
music industry fearing smaller profit line attacks a scapegoat
When did Sarah Michele Gellar say that?!!
lf.o
Prohibit File Transfers over the internet. Yes, that would be the solution to the "Napster" problem and all the other forthcoming. In the meantime there should be a standarized "embedded file copyright gen". A transparent, persistent, file atribute that could be identified even after any non-lossy compression/encription process were applied to the original file. So there would be "detectors" on any ISP backbone, constantly checking and blocking transfers that contain copyrighted content. Also any software tool that has the capability to contact more than two people by a common denominator should be considered illegal and its creators prosecuted and all the software copies erased from all the media storage devices in the net. A good idea to begin this process is create a virus definition for the software (for example Napster) and pass it to the antivirus developers. (If you didn't realize i was being sarcastic) The internet will vanish "license" money making machines. Be prepared. Long live to the artists !!! Down to the merchants !!!
Some might say shutting down Napster would be wrong because it's just a content provider; it's not responsible for what's on its users' hard drives. Well, now that we've got some email from its creators that says, basically, "Yeah, we deal in stolen property," how's Napster any different from a drug ring?
I'll probably get moderated down for disagreeing with people. So, go ahead and hit me with the -1s.
- A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Whether you like to admit it, probably >80% of the mp3s on napster are illegal. Why buy a cd for a few good songs when you can download them? Cable modems and dsl connections are rapidly increasing, two minutes to download a song for free or buy it. Damn I can decide! But then most of you here are so anal about licensing all your mps are A ok kosher, but how about that 13 year old kid with a cable modem...
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Just how did the RIAA get access to Napster's internal communications? Certainly the Napster guys didn't say, "Here, we want you to have these copies of our memos. And while we're at it, have some copies of our e-mail messages, too..."
--LordEq
What more is there to say.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
I'm waiting for SACD's to come down in price... At least they should sound a lot closer to analog than CD's...
If you had read RMS's writings, explaining *why* he had created the GPL ... and why it's called copyleft for instead. Copyleft is about using copyright to fuck itself. So copyrighters can sue us because we share with friends? Well if you're allowed by law to pull that bullshit on us, then we'll pull the same bullshit on you. You're not insightful, you're just short sighted and ignorant. And you got everything wrong.
Perhaps this is a rash judgement but IMHO it is kinda simple. Is there are indeed that much amounts of money flowing which should go the other way (read; people don't follow the rules in the contract) its time to take it to court. And with the amounts mentioned I am convinced that there are more then one attorney who are quite willing to take the case.
The simple fact that they are taking it the other way sort off proofs it to me that this is bogus. Take a blond wearing only a bra and use the latest 'hype' (in this case the whole story around Napster) to spread your complaints about your record company; offcourse blaiming them and in a way 'legalising' napster (read; telling what the 'crowd' wants to hear, at least most of 'm).
Actually this article is a two in one and I can't comment on the second part since I don't use napster myself. Napster is way to insecure for my taste since it doesn't use 1 single port for its transfers (as do dcc on IRC and some other programs). Its an easy security policy on my box and I can live with it. Besides; I don't quite understand the hype anyway. Whenever I goto Audiofind I can easily find mp3's and download them over http or ftp if I want to. And yes; this site isn't 100% to my liking as well since it tries to access port 70 for some reason. But like I said before; its one single port and since I know that there are no processes on my box listening to this port I don't really care.
Napster has had to age a little before the niche tracks have started to show up (still not much help for Jackyl fans). That's always been the cool thing about Napster, though. As time has passed I've found it easier and easier to come up with the obscure tracks.
Phallic Symbols in LOTR
She says it costs a lot of money to pay the radio stations to play music, but I thought the *radio stations* paid to play. What gives?
compressed digital audio, it sounds like shit. Analog all the way. Sure cds have that crystal clear sound, but its cold and lifeless. Analog and vacuum tubes, thats where its at.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
My god, there is somebody that really _GETS_ it. Perhaps even better than the average Slashdotter. And this person is COURTNEY LOVE! Man, I told you to stop bitching and give Lars et al. a chance to speak. She hit the nail on the head, very hard.
We are so obsessed with our revolutionary "gift" culture, we forget that music has been working on the same premise: write cool stuff, hope people like and use it, and you will be karmically rewarded. We need to step the fsck off and give artists a chance. They are NOT trying to shut down free music distribution for greedy ulterior motives. They are trying to get these channels to work WITH them instead of with the record companies that are fscking them over. I would be pissed off too if people profited from my work by making deals with those who were exploiting me. It's like the artists don't even exist to these companies. Artists WANT to embrace the internet and the freedom it brings. They don't want to be chained to the record companies. They are trying to make all us IPO-crazed geeks realize that we can do GOOD by artists as well. We have tons of audiophiles among our ranks.
She even quotes Stephenson! My god...if I only knew that I really *was* on "their" side when I was 15...
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Go bash your head in with a large rock.
She is nearly perfect...super hot...and either smart enough to come up with that stuff her self or at least smart enough to hire someone who can (I hear shes really smart though) another perfect woman
My Home: Apartment6
That's sort of the beauty of the whole thing. The RIAA and their cronies of the motion picture industry are heading towards disaster, while being totally clueless about what's going on. When Mr. Bronfman insists on the non-anonymous internet I take offense. I say that as a person that never downloaded illegal material from the net and use it since 1992. Those greed freaks are really willing to sacrifice one of the most important values (not anonimity per se, but the right to be left alone, it's called privacy) to regain their stranglehold on the distribution channels and to keep control over the artists (hint: that's called slavery). Now for the good news: Napster goes ? Maybe, there are half a dozen companies and grass roots organisations that will replace the service instantly or are suplementing it with a decentralized and not easy killable structure. The entertainment industry? They lose. They have lost already and they are spending money, resources and energy on a totally lost cause. As soon a viable business model is up the whole distribution channels will change dramatically. Artists will be less and less willing to sell out their soul just for getting published and at the same time they will make more money. The even better news is that the more the established industries use they're energies towards one (or two or maybe three companies) the more they are doomed to fail, because time is an incredible critical factor. Read the Salon transcript if you haven't yet. It's very informative. Bye now, obsolete Dinosaurs, bye RIAA, bye Mr. Bronfman. You may go and bang yer heads now... All the power to the artists
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
What the hell is content? Nobody buys content. Real people pay money for music because it means something to them.
Not quite.
I have a roomate who owns in the order of 120+ CDs. No two of them are alike. The same goes for his movies. And all of his CDs and all of his movies vary wildly from crap to brilliance. And I'm speaking of crap on the most basic, universal-sense-of-the-word here (like Fantasy Mission Force starring, almost, Jackie Chan).
This poor fool listens to this music all day long, and yet can't manage to repeat a single lyric to me, or even tell me why he likes his music. The conclusion I reached? He doesn't like his music. He just wants noise in the background and has come to the conclusion that "diversity == good taste", and not "diversity (of his magnitude)== indecision".
Anyway. My point? Courtney Love likes to think that people listen to her (and others) music because that music means something to them. I have a different opinion. There's a higher percentage of people than she thinks that listen to music for a steady rhythm and background noise, not for emotional content.
***JUMP PAD ACTIVATION INITIATION START***
***TRANSPORT WHEN READY***
***JUMP PAD ACTIVATION INITIATION START***
***TRANSPORT WHEN READY***
Then you must read this article. That is all I have to say.
All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
That implies that the internet is the conduit we've needed for the past 200 years to make capitalism work for a change, by connecting producers and consumers directly. However it will require a violent removal of those parisites who are so accustomed to making money by doing absolutely nothing that each of us couldn't do for ourselves. It will also require the cessation of our government's inherent support for these dregs, which is exactly what we need to be fighting for here.
My question is, how do we fight? Do the people who actually make the decisions read Slashdot? While I wish the answer were yes, I doubt that is the case. How can we identify the key decision-makers in this case and communicate our concerns and desires to them, in hopes that their personal motivations (ie retaining their positions of power) will be more driving than the massive amounts of money the RIAA is undoubtedly funnelling in their direction?
And, since I seem to have gone there, how did American government and society get so far from the golden path our forefathers (according to public schooling) saw it marching down? More importantly, how can we get back there?
Why is it that I can't find any source for that quote other than you?
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
While I think she might be overdramatizing the "piracy" of the major labels and RIAA, many of her other muddled, unfocused rantings ring very true. The necessity of a major label to bring your music to the masses is gone now. Oh sure, you still need promotion, recording, packaging and whatnot, and for that the major labels are a great one-stop shop, but if the contract and money issues are anywhere near as bad as Love makes them out to be, any musician interested in owning their work or getting adequate compensation is best advised to do otherwise.
For a change, its nice to see someone who's actually doing something about a situation they're unhappy with, and not just sitting on their ass saying "there ought to be a law", or worse yet, lobbying for that law.
B
B
"I'm payin' taxes, but what am I buyin'?" -- James Brown
Of all the things I wrote, I didn't expect to be caught on such a trival issue. I wasn't really commenting about the Free Software Movement or Stallman (I'll admit I know little about either), but I meant only to point out my feelings on the GPL, which are rather unrelated to the topic except for the restrictive aspect of the GPL. The GPL is not magic; it is software license that is given the same power as any license agreement attached to a Microsoft product by copyright law. By abolishing that copyright power, we abolish the GPL, and so I provided a bit of my history with the GPL so that readers would understand my position.
I'm not a big fan of her music, but she's either got one hell of a speechwriter or she's waaaay smarter than she's let on for the past 8 years. The Neal Stephenson quote only cemented it.
Being a half geek half musician makes me particularly sensitive to the issue of copyright infringement and intellectual property in regards to the wide scale trading of mp3 files.
On the one hand I feel that the real enemy is the record companies which have a monetary and legal stranglehold on the situation at hand.
On the other hand I am growing tired of techies who are completely insensitive to artists' positions --- if your software generated $100 mil. or more and you saw next to nothing in terms of compensation for your hard work, while at the same time you also know people are downloading it for free over the internet, you would have a right to be upset.
I think we know who the enemy is, but we have yet to find a way to attack record companies without hurting artists.
I think the bottom line here is...it's fine to stick it to the record companies, but there must be a means to compensate artists for their work. And don't tell me "anyone can write a hit record" because you wouldn't want to hear someone say "anyone can write killer code"
Ok, ok I'm going out on a limb here... I think IP* needs to die. As technology becomes more and more sophisticated, it will become harder and harder to stop piracy. The only solution to this is to stop the advancement of technology, to build controls into the hardware and software on both ends, to build a proprietary Internet, something I don't think anyone wants. To stop Napster is one thing, but are we prepared to stop peer-to-peer filesharing all together? Would we be willing to give up our broadband connections to insure that we won't download huge data files? The choice, as I see it, is between the open and decentralized advancement of technology, something that has a proven track record at improving, enhancing, and expanding society, or an industry that exists solely to continue its own existence.
The principle side-effect of the death of IP is the driving force of capitalism. IP is a central part of technology; can technology survive without IP? I'll be honest and say I don't know. Feel free, slashdotters, to get me on this point.
My bias:
I'm a BeOS-zealot most of the time, and it has taken a little compromising of views to reach this opinion. I've never been a real big fan of the GPL, but mainly because of the force it carries, given to it by copyright law and IP.
* Intellectual Property, referring to music, software, anything that is valuable because of its arrangement, rather than the sum of its parts.