Slashdot Mirror
Ask Singer Janis Ian About the RIAA and Online Music
Janis Ian has been a popular songwriter and performer since the 1960s, and has decided that Internet music downloads help her and many other recording artists. She wrote an article saying so, then wrote a followup piece, and now it's time for Janis to answer your questions about how the RIAA, the "major labels," and online filesharing affect artists like her. We'll send 10 of the highest moderated questions to Janis tomorrow and post her answers when we get them back. (Off-topic note: Alton Brown has not forgotten Slashdot. He had some show taping problems that messed up his schedule, and asks us to be patient, please.)
What percentage do you make of the sticker-price of your CDs?
Also, if you know, how much of that price is going to pay for advertising, studio time, et al., and how much is pure profit for the record companies?
Do you not find it strange that a 2-hour DVD, with commentary, subtitles, and extra scenes, can be sold for less than $10, while few audio CDs are that low priced?
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Its obvious that CD's from a lesser known artist such as yourself (no offense intended) might have difficulties selling. Its also apparent that free downloads of your music would expose it to more people and potentially increase sales. However, what do you think the effect of peer to peer sharing is on more recognized artists and groups, particularly very popular artists and groups (Britney Spears and the like) who don't need peer to peer technology to gain recognition?
When you entered the music business, radio stations were diverse. In the last few years, this diversity has disappeared. Do you have any comments on this?
In one of your interviews, you mentioned that contracts with the music industry should be likened to indentured servitude (must produce X albums, but the label has the final say on if what you produce was acceptable). Why do you think so many artists willingly accept these terms? What can be done to promote contracts that are more fair?
slashdot!=valid HTML
RIAA is evil. This is an established fact of life. What I'd like to know, from an artist's standpoint, is how SHOULD it be? Now you sign with a label that helps production and then calls you a hired hand and steals your music. How should it work, start to finish? What's currently broken that's stopping this? Do you have any ideas on how we can fix this for the artist, as a society? How can we get involved to help the artists?
I'm curious - you're an artist who's been in the business for a number of (ahem) years. How has the RIAA changed since you signed your first recording contract?
When an artist signs on to a record label, exactly how much control do they lose over they type of music that they will put out?
We've all heard the stories or watched a movie about how an indy band decides to sign onto a record label, and the label then forces them to change their image / play crappy music written by some 2-bit composer / or do something else that the band doesn't really like, but their contract obligates them to do.
Are these views extreme in most cases?
Does the artist lose all control, allowing themselves to be remade into whatever the record company wants them to be? Or is some amount of control retained?
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
I don't think many can argue that the overall experience of downloading/ripping/burning music is still prohibitive to many. People will still buy CDs and whatnot because the current technology does not allow for immediate, complete, high-quality copies to be made. In that way, modern filesharing is very much like sharing tapes. This, in my opinion, does help artists.
However, let's take a look into the future. Let's say that technology has evolved to the point where one can transfer complete, same as CD-quality albums in less than a second, and imprint them onto CD (or whatever the current technology is) in even less time. One click allows me to fully reproduce Janis Ian's latest release - liner notes & all.
At that point, should artists be worried? Or, to put it more generally, should artists always permit the reproducing of their works?
She sat at the window watching the evening invade the avenue.
What has been the RIAA's or label's attitude about your online pieces regarding the "biz" and have you received threats ( legal or otherwise ) for speaking so candidly about it?
As the coauthor of a rapidly-becoming-obsolete technology book that's barely more than two years old, I can certainly sympathize regarding royalty checks in the red (I only received one, so far, that actually came with a check attached). Knowing that, how do you feel about significantly reduced copyright terms? Obviously, it would mean your former label would no longer be able to profit off of songs like "At Seventeen", but conversely, having that material in the public domain much more quickly might result in some of the collateral effects on your current material that, as you described in your first article, Baen is doing for authors.
This expiry issue is actually a more critical concern for many in technology, because unlike other, more tangible cultural elements like books or records, a lot of culturally significant digital content (e.g. old video games) has been produced in the technology arena that, by the time its copyrights expire under current law, no one will remember how to (or have the right hardware to) reproduce. Then again, how many people today (a mere decade later, really) still have working phonographs?
MOO;IANAL.
There used to be a picture linked here.
When I talk to RIAA lawyers they insist that they and their colleagues with the major labels are staunch defenders of the 1st Amendment. Has this been your experience? Why or why not?
Finding God in a Dog
I assume that you get a chance to talk to other artists at music festivals and the like. Have you received any feedback from them regarding your recent public comments? What about other music industry people (festival organizers, recording industry execs, radio DJ's, etc)?
(Seems to me that this organization can not only exist to deny P2Pers. It existed before Napster, et. al. and thus provided some service to artists, even if peripherally.)
Is there anything in your assorted contracts, past and present, that disallows you from organizing with other musicans to protest or strike against your label or the RIAA?
Has artists ever sucessfully orginized against the RIAA or one of it's member companies, to stop a practice that makes the industry money at the artists expense?
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
What do you think that the general music-buying public should do about the current situation? Should we boycott copy-protected CDs? Write letters to someone? Share our views artists after concerts?
How difficult would it be for an established artist to leave the RIAA and remain a success?
OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
How practical or common is it for an artist to retain copyright to their own material? Is there a financial incentive to do that? Does a wish to retain copyright of recorded material have an impact on your chances of signing with a "mainstream" label?
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Hi Janis,
Your site has some material that implies you were the subject of FBI investigations. Could you tell us more about that? Was it related to your early work regarding interracial relationships ("Society's Child", 1966), or something else?
Thanks,
S.D.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Imagine a future where music bands only make a small percentage of money of what they earn now because of piracy, a future where the most popular band is not even close to being millionaire.
Do you think music would disappear? In other words, would musicians (both new and already well-known) compose, play, perform as good if money were not there? How important is money in all of this?
Today, distributing recorded music costs next-to-nothing. Yet the price of recorded music has never been higher.
What does a record company offer an artist today? What can a record company do for an artist that the artist can't do herself? Are artists beginning to realize this on their own?
Thanks / Jeff
It has always been my opinion that the RIAA cares not about selling a million different CDs, but rather sell a million identical CDs. The RIAA would be silly not to think that way. I believe the record industry isn't so concerned about "theift" of the music, but more about controlling what people listen to.
It's a little hard to justify the cost of buying a CD without hearing it first. So, to first hear it you have the option of radio and TV which are pretty much controlled by the RIAA or you can get a copy from a friend (extending to online "friends") which is frowned upon by the cartel.
Do you feel the RIAA's stance on music trading on the Internet and even outside of the Internet is entirely about lost sales, or is it more sinister?
About 10 years ago, I submitted tapes of my material through the Readers_Digest_Songwriters_Market : RequestToSubmit : SendTape : Never_Hear_Anything_Back_Except_For_Promotion_Sca
Having spent a considerable amount of time touring, do you see this as a viable approach for undiscovered songwriter / artists to get their message out; perhaps the only one? Do you know other signed artists personally who are still benefitting from the legacy A&R / Promotion-heavy approach who might be considering the recent turns of events in their current model of distribution? Are they planning to focus more on touring if the current CD sales slump doesn't turn around?
As a side note, I love where all this is going and look forward to the promise of a world where we can get access to creative content unfiltered by the RIAA. With cheap / useful technology, artists should be able to finally get some real creative work done. I only hope our lobbyists don't legislate that potential away from us...
www.dedserius.com
VB != VisualBasic
What do you think about unitedmusicians.com? Will the idea work? What would you recommend as the best course of action for an independent musician who wants to maintain ownership of the publishing portion of their songs' mechanical and performance royalties? Should singer/songwriters start their own publishing companies in order to maintain control of their work?
"Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
I think that goes for OS's too
Have you considered providing a specific license for those downloads? If so, would you use your own license, or would you use an existing "open music" license such as the Open Audio License published by the EFF? If you didn't use an existing license, what would your primary reason(s) be for using your own?
No Laughing Allowed!