Slashdot Mirror
Which Artists Support Music Swapping?
jtauber asks: "With RIAA's new campaign to 'educate' people that unauthorized downloads of music are illegal and with the range of artists who are endorsing the campaign, I thought it would be interesting to ask the question: which well-known artists (if any) go against the RIAA and are _in favour_ of music swapping? Certainly many unsigned bands like my own encourage it, but what about those signed with major record labels?" We did a question along a similar veign not too long ago, except its focus was non-RIAA Record Labels. What artists are you aware of (popular or not) who have come out in favor of music-swapping?
that moron fred durst of Limp Bisquick supported napter
Is on record as saying anything which rips of the record companies is a good thing...
I was in a question/answer session with them a couple years ago, and at that time they said they didn't have a problem with it.
Sig!
Rage Against the Machine would like to sincerely apologise to all of our fans who were kicked off of Napster for downloading 'Renegades'. The move to take action against Rage fans was taken completely unilaterally by our new management. In their zeal to keep the record from getting out before the release date, they did not consult the band before instructing Sony Music Corp. to institute the Napster ban. As soon as I was made aware of this horrible mistake on their part, I immediately phoned our management and the record company to see what we could do to get our Napster-using fans reinstated as soon as possible. I'm told that the easiest way to get back on Napster as quickly as possible is to download one of many files floating around on the Internet to get around the ban.
Most of the artists who came out against it in the early days, like Metallica, did so because studio tracks were being leaked before they had even been decided upon. Because they don't face a lot of risk from any potetial lost sales, or gains from additional sales, the sales aspect is not a big concern at least from what I have seen. I think if pre release tracks were not shared, most artists would not care. The artists coming out against sharing are probably doing it to please their contract holders.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
It's quite irrelevant what most popular artists think, since they don't own the copyright on their recordings.
What artists are you aware of (popular or not) who have come out in favor of music-swapping?
Me!!
Although, with the really lame license I have, I'm desperately wishing for the Creative Commons to get the heck on with it and put their license generator online!
- Phish
- Grateful Dead
- Tenacious D
- Oysterhead
and so on. There are several communities that can help you get lossless versions of shows from these bands and others:- www.etree.org
- www.furthurnet.com
-MikeI can't even use this music in an internet radio station if the station has ads (and I don't pay the digital audio transmission fee).
BONO: "My feeling," he adds, "is that it is cool for people to share our music -- as long as no one is making money from the process. We tell people who come to our concerts that they can tape the shows if they want. I think it is cool that people are so passionate about our music"
THE EDGE: The terror of online song-trading and bootlegging that has occurred in the wake of Napster is not something the members of U2 are losing any sleep over. "In fact, as long as fans aren't being exploited and bootleggers aren't raking in huge money from the practice, it's a part of the music business they've come to accept."
You can find four (count 'em!) complete and unrestricted songs by yours truly here. They're in RealAudio, I'm afraid; at the time I didn't know any better. I'll get around to replacing them with MP3s or OGGs one of these years. I'm too old and cynical for a career as a musician now, so do whatever you like with them, as long as you don't sell them or represent them as someone else's work. Ta!
Just another wannabe fantasy novelist...
...Janis Ian?
She has at least 2 articles on her website, http://www.janisian.com, that are quite anti-RIAA.
Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
Projekt Records' frontman Sam Rosenthal has been quite supportive of P2P music trading, saying that it's an excellent way for the "smaller" labels like his to get more of a widespread audience. You can find a lot of Projekt bands on mp3.com, etc, too. If you sign up for the weekly email list thing, he'll rant about it occasionally. He was quite pissed off when Napster got shut down.
Al Qaeda has ninjas!
smaller local type band, with great potential. here
Radiohead have commented about this before, saying that they're ok with live concerts being redistributed at will, but apparently their publishers aren't quite as keen as they've shut down several sites because of it.
Prince. He released a single on Napster. He appears to take the U2 stance: He doesn't like bootleggers who rake in cash from his work. But he appears to appreciate anything that shakes up a broken system... as explained in: A Nation of Thieves (As seen in a previous Slashback)
I assume the question is what artists support Napster scale digital swapping. Heck, even Lars "Napster Bad!" Ulrich has supported analog tape swapping amongst friends. It's the lossless generational copy, free for all with the entire universe he doesn't support.
I never understood. Limp Bizkit vs Steely Dan. Limp Bizkit vs Steely Dan. Not that I'm in the market, but if I was looking, the choice seems pretty obvious to me.
Ani at least used to have a thing on the back of her CDs about it being OK to make copies for your friends, but that they should buy it if they can afford it. This was before Napsterchic was in effect. I wouldn't be surprised if she wasn't into it anymore, she's lost some of her coolness. :P
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
David Bowie is the most enlightened artist that I know of as far as this goes. I don't care for his music, but he seems to "get it."
:-(
OTOH, his site is flash only
Now, flame on about how he is already rich, blah, blah.
-Peter
I don't think it's clear at all from the text of the license that this is the case. The only relevant clause is: The music is not used for any form of advertising or promotion. You certainly can't use the music in an advertisement, but that's something else. I don't think a court would consider playing a song for free on an ad-supported station "use in advertising or promotion."
Regardless, it's a little ambiguous, and it's a pretty lamely worded license in general. This sort of confusion is why I'm excited about the CC's license generator project. Like it or not, there is a reason they have actual lawyers write this crap up.
Note that the original question was "which artists support file-swapping" -- which this license explicitly does. The question was not "which artists use licenses that would make Richard Stallman happy".
Judging by this article in Salon Magazine, I'm guesing that Courtney Love isn't that big a fan of the recording industry and she (sort of) supported/defended Napster when it was still around.
Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
I guess I did just misread it then if that's what you meant for it. And yeah, I realize you were answering the original question, my response was off-topic.
One way to make things unambiguous is to allow public performance (including by digital audio transmission) without restriction.
And by the way, I most certainly wasn't interested in pleasing RMS, I was considering what I'd personally want to be allowed to do.
This is certainly not the same as allowing someone to copy a commercially produced recording but there are a lot of bands that allow the trading of their live recordings. For a list of these bands see http://btat.wagnerone.com
Also, as someone else has already mentioned, etree.org and furthurnet.com are great resources for this material.
This can get confusing. There's one "Bono" who's pro-sharing, and there's another "Bono" who was (and whose widow is) strongly anti-sharing. In fact, the confusion has even inspired some bad jokes about volunteer legal work: is it possible for an attorney to fight the expansion of copyright law "pro bono"?
Will I retire or break 10K?
The Smashing Pumpkins have been major supporters of digital music, they infact made their entire last studio album, Machina II: Friends and Enemies of Modern Music 100% free for download on the internet. At their website you can also find many MP3's of some of their latest commercially availiable music. They also have often times stated that they fully approve of live recordings, and Billy Corgan's new band Zwan has live recordings availiable on their website.
Check out www.musiciansview.com I haven't had alot of time to work on it but I will post any info I can confirm at contribute@musiciansview.com with info on how a musician or band sees it.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
http://www.musicbuilder.com/zaraza
They offer ALL their stuff in MP3, high-bitrate too (LAME --alt-preset standard), not just the crappy 128kbps
I remember hearing that The Offspring wanted to release all the songs from their "Conspiracy of One" album for free on their web site, until the record label stepped in. Does anyone else remember this?
Travis
Dave Matthews Band was on Carson (Daly) a month or two ago, and said (if I remember correctly) that they don't mind song-trading at all, except when it involves their unreleased studio tracks, which they're a little embarrassed about.
John Mayer doesn't mind copying of his albums (at least his first album, which was out of print for quite a while). In his words, "You can burn a CD, but you can't burn a t-shirt". He also allows audience taping of all his live shows. Oh, and Strike Anywhere have pretty much their entire discography available in [128kb/s] Mp3 on their official website, so I'd say they're pro trading.
...which is the most reasonable thing in the world. There's a real need for making licensing options a natural part of music distribution, for both the artist and consumer. I'd actually like to see an industry standard for encoding specific licensing grants (e.g. commercial use, derivative works, etc.) as a part of standard audio formats. A curious listener could just click a button in their audio player to see a track's licensing. Since audio generally doesn't come with a README, making this information part of the file format itself is essential.
Responsibility for respecting copyright ultimately falls on individual consumers -- so it seems a good idea to make that responsibility as easily and approachable as possible.
and encourage non-commercial trading of live performances of their shows. A given venue they are playing at may not permit taping, of course. :),
Some links if you're unfamiliar with the Dots:
fall 2002 north american tour dates so you can go tape
The Official Live LPD Archive, roughly 30 live shows complete, over much of their twenty-year history
LPD official website
(Not an affiliate of any kind, just a fan)))
Mojo Nixon Supports taping and distributing of his performances,\ and his studio recordings. He may even own the rights to his songs.
Don Henley must die
I metamoderate, therefore I am
I think just about every single indie band supports it, or at least doesn't mind. The more people these bands can get their music out to the more people who will come to their shows. I know that I will look up show listings for my area, download some MP3s of the bands I haven't heard before, and make my decision as to who gets my money for that weekend.
I know I've heard a few bands say that turnout for shows in smaller cities has actually been getting better, and a lot of kids will say it's because they checked them out via MP3.
Metallica are dead-set against sharing of studio albums (and concerts which they have recorded and released). However, they have always allowed taping of concerts and trading/sharing of concert recordings.
Leftover Salmon those crazy "Polyethnic Cajun Slamgrass" musicians allow live taping of their shows and have several shows "off the board" up in MP3 format on their website here.
:)
I think the majority of bands of the "jam band" genre are cool about low key bootlegging and people trading their music.
The local jam band from my whereabouts Toadstool Jamboree is pretty cool about bootlegging as well. I got permission to throw my DAT on the board at a couple of their shows.
I think its mostly the uptight corporate bands that have such an issue with people MP3'ing. Most of the lowerkey / unsigned / indie bands don't really make much off of CD Sales and aren't in music to make a bundle, rather they love entertaining and would rather you buy a t-shirt and pay admission to their show. They also manage themselves typically so they aren't getting screwed by industry insiders.
Just my Opinion, but check out Toadstool and LOS... rocking music, plus you get to say slamgrass
Rule of Life Number 2: Remember, it can all go to hell at any minute. --Jimmy Buffet
...on www.musicunited.org which is the website of the RIAA backed organization behind the recent ads and TV spots. If you check out their page of quotes you'll notice that some of the quotes like "artists should get paid" have apparently been taken out of context. And their list of 80 names really isn't very impressive considering the numbers they could have gotten.
For instance, they quote Neil Young as being against file-sharing by using a quote from Yahoo! Entertainment News: "I don't like to have a record out and have people hear versions that we don't want them to hear. With the Internet, there is no more privacy and not even the chance to express yourself in front of your audience in the intimacy of a concert that lets songs evolve. You can't do this because they immediately get circulated."
For enough, but this doesn't necessary mean he's against file-sharing, only that he's frustrated when unauthorized songs are released. Maybe they did get his permission, but since he isn't listed on the actual ads I sincerely doubt it. He's also on the record as talking to BusinessWeek about Napster: "It's great. Whatever gets the music around. The record labels will worry about that, and I'll worry about the music." I wonder how many of these other artists have similar views and if they realize they are the being represented as the poster children for anti-piracy.
I would LOVE to see someone make a parody of the these ads with a list of equally prominent artists that have come out in favour of file-sharing. You could change the tag-line to "we don't care about file sharing" or something, and maybe take a dig at the RIAA for mispresenting certain artist's views ("libel is wrong").
My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
In another interview I read, she said she composed the album with the idea in her mind of her fans sharing the album through the web, and wrote much of the lyrics as a kind of "whispered secret" for listeners to enjoy. I think she's one of the few artists who realizes that without her fans, she wouldn't be where she is today.
Chuck D. has also seemed to be fairly clueful about the web, although I'm not sure how he feels about P2P apps.
Free music from Jack Merlot.
The Sound of Urchin supports both "tape trading" and the free distribution of everything but their latest work (CD) online.
At first I thought that seemed naive... the songs are gonna get shared, but then it occured to me that the average time it takes to get a "non-hugely popular" track seeded to a P2P network is far less than the amount of time that most new CD's have on a national distributors (Best Buy etc...) store shelf.
Im not too sure what thier stance on p2p etc is, but they released all the live concerts for their last tour - all 70-odd of them! the good thing about these releases is that there is NO COPYRIGHT anywhere on the cds - Pearl Jam even encouraged copying them between friends & p2p iirc, their words were something like this: We're releasing these so anyone can hear our shows - buy the one you went to but beg,steal copy the others if you want them Theyre also very friendly about personal camcorders at their show & have a HUGE fanbase of vcd traders of their shows - http://www.theskyiscrape.com/
I know that it might not be the 'technically' correct answer, but I've been hearing things like 'cover songs', 're-mixes', 're-interpretations', 'sampling', and so on and so on.
Metallica has 'shared' songs on garage days where they paid a royalty and distributed millions of copies. Dr. Dre shares quite a few things, some of them without permission(there's a lawsuit filed against him now for that song 'contagious')
I'm not trying to bash the artists, I like both of their work, but just thought that I'd offer examples of the two biggest opponents of file sharing.
http://www.theonion.com/onion3618/kid_rock_starves
I'm going to guess that it's because they're a Christian band and are happy to have their work spread as a teaching of the Lord or something along those lines.
ruthie - who is NOT Christian, but still loves their Going Public album
You can copy my music which is available in Ogg Vorbis format. How many other musicians here have released their music online? Surely more than have spoken so far.</SHAMELESS PLUG>
Feel free to share my music files:
bengarvey.com
OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
Diskonto play fierce hardcore punk (if you think blink 182 and friends play punk, this is not for you) and they have their complete discography available in mp3 format.
http://www.diskonto.org
They don't technically exist anymore, but they're all for getting their music heard. Download their songs from mp3.com, or the solo songs from the lead guitar/singer, Charles Balter.
Mod Parent up +1 Real Punk.
I just checked them out and, yes, they're real punk. I'll tell you something AC, I didn't expect to see anything true to a subculture in this thread. Whoever the hell you are, thanks for being able to see past the RIAA's (mostly successful) attempt at commercializing what should have always been free.
If you know any other Punks, tell them to "hang in there" for me.
On a shameless side note, my band will be releasing tracks which are available free of charge and Free to share.
If you like what you hear, drop the band a line and mod this up!!! :)
I 'worked' for two years as a musician(only - no day job), and it was hard work and rewarding ($$ and otherwise).
Fun is fun, but people should get paid for entertainment. It's their time and talent in exchange for your money.
Hmm. That sounds a lot like my day job.
Forgive me, but when I hear 'get a real job' I about have to smack the person (who most likely has never even attempted what I do - drunken kararoke doesn't count)