Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Arrests Pro Artist for Making Mixtapes
Maximum Prophet writes "The RIAA is now going after mixtapes; specifically, the well-known mixtapes of rap artist DJ Drama. From the article: 'On Tuesday night he was arrested with Don Cannon, a protégé. The police, working with the Recording Industry Association of America, raided his office, at 147 Walker Street in Atlanta. The association makes no distinction between counterfeit CDs and unlicensed compilations like those that DJ Drama is known for.' The story goes on to say that many of the artists featured on the mixtapes would never have had the exposure and thus sales they had if DJ Drama had not featured them on a mix. Nowhere is a specific artist mentioned who claims to have been wronged by him. Additionally, the article states that mixtapes such as those made by DJ Drama are an accepted and integral part of rap music culture. His arrest is confusing on several levels."
I'm confused
If there is no complaint from the copyright owner, why was he arrested?
Tech Liberation Front is also reporting that the raid was carried out with the help of a SWAT team. Cripes, what exactly did the lawyers tell the police was happening in there?
The mixtape industry is rife with payola straight from record label pockets.
He was prosecuted on RICO charges? As in, the same RICO that was designed to help fight mafia families? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_ and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act
It's like the RIAA isn't even sure what to charge people with anymore...
for years these wannabe musicians (hip-hop DJ's) have been stealing tracks and music from people who actually make music and then going back and paying them after the fact.i hate to be on the side of the RIAA, but this is one time i am.
So this guy had 81,000 discs (containing other people's works?), presumably sold them for profit (he had 4 vehicles !!) and what, we're complaining that he was nabbed?
... [was] sent cease-and-desist letters from a local lawyer."
Screw him for getting wealthy on other people's talent and hard work. Would he try to stop me if I tried to drive off in one of his 4 cars ?
"before the raid, DJ Drama
So he's not only selfish and greedy, he's arrogant as well.
"most of DJ Drama's mixtapes begin with enthusiastic endorsements from the artists themselves."
1. Most (not all) artists !!
2. Does he have written proof? Did a naive artist nod stupidly and say "oh yeah, go ahead"? If so, then fine, they both should have confirmed that with a contract. (In particular the DJ, who left himself exposed.)
3. Did SOME of the artist need the okay of their studio producers? (You know who I mean, the companies that put their cash at risk by backing them?)
I'm all for "Fair Use". Now, "Fair Use" doesn't exist in and of itself, it's a notion created by us (humans). And its extent is defined by us (and varies by country / jurisdiction). But this bloke went too far.
If you disagree with a law -- and choose to break it -- it's just tough luck if / when you get caught.
(Ironic: just noticed that my captcha is the word "divisive".)
My point is, just because something is illegal, it is not immoral and it should not automatically follow that people agree with the particular law or usag e of the law! Because you see, there are plenty of laws in effect, but not _enforced_.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Realistically its not about the "artist", but it is about the music labels. They are an association who's prime customer is the music labels. If the music labels don't think this is a good idea the RIAA will backtrack... But it will be interesting to see how this plays out.. If it gets enough attention you might even see some Rap heavy labels pulling out of the RIAA.
Additionally, the article states that mixtapes such as those made by DJ Drama are an accepted and integral part of rap music culture
The prolific dealing and smoking of crystal methamphetamine "ice", plus drive-by shootings are also an "accepted and integral part" of the rap music (sub)culture too.
The cops are all very much aware of those things and how it affects the psychology of the people they are sent to bust.
Not a bit like drug dealers...exactly like drug dealers...The RIAA is trying to be the middle man in an agreement that's just between a grassroots 'pirate'(distributor) and an artist.
This is the music-industry equivalent of the mafia harassing someone because they are importing drugs straight from Colombia and selling them on their territories, bypassing the mafia's trade route and therefore removing them from the deal.
This not only proves that the RIAA is unnecessary, and their role in discovering and distributing music by new artists extremely overvalued, but that they are more or less now just a music cartel. Their claim to domination over music production is merely nominal and contractual. It is obsolete as well - the means of production and distribution are now commodities, accessible to laypeople. Fortunately, thanks to the internet and the long tail effect, the market will eventually correct itself by locking the existing record industry out of music production and distribution, and the new record industry will mostly just consist of artists and fans.
The problem is that mix tapes invariably help those without exposure and fame already to achieve more of both. This tacit agreement to share music for collaboration does exist in many artists minds (except maybe the Metallica's and other super-popular artists out there with one thing in mind the $$$). The thing is that many of these artists are represented on many levels by a business that has only one thing in mind and that is $$$. Basically this is a money grab, and it is a perfectly legal one at that. If you want the money on the table, grab it, especially when you have no reputation in the mix as the RIAA has shown many times that it doesn't care about it's own reputation. The RIAA acts as the reputation-shield for those artists who are only interested in the money; Conversely the RIAA acts as the mafia (only interested in making money, regardless of how) in regards to smaller artists who are only interested in more play. Unfortunately the whole system feeds on itself as artists get super-popular, the artist might change their mind and become more interested in the money, and then the RIAA serves its purpose to the artist quite well.
Meet new people, and kill them.
We had a new law enforcement agency set up in the UK about a year back and the new chief of the agency was on the radio stating quite blatantly that the plan was to confiscate anything of value that the criminals owned (however acquired) and sell it on with the express aim of funding the department - nothing like your funding being provided by how much stuff you take to get you taking anything you can get near ("you're in prison but your wife and child still live in the house? pffft, out!"). IIRC I shouted at the radio, even though it was so early that everyone else was asleep.
Now, in the last few days, we have proposals to allow this to be done to *suspected* criminals who they haven't been able to secure a conviction for. They instead want it dealt with as a civil matter ("We can't prove you did it, but you probably did it, so we'll have your assets anyway. You won't have anywhere to live? pffft, out! Oh, and give us that shirt you're wearing too."). Also, there are proposals afoot to ban such people (who've had no case proven against them) from using computers or mobile phones (with court orders imposed, again, on a balance-of-probabilities basis. Breach the order; 5 years prison. Which smacks of handing out criminal sentences on civil evidence). Sadly all the opposition can do is claim that they'll be 'ineffective', like we want unjust laws like that to actually be effective.
Ministers who propose this sort of stuff should have a copy of the human rights act, with the relevant portions highlighted, stapled to their foreheads.
FGD 135
As of yesterday DJ Drama was sitting in jail, but dozens of his unlicensed compilations were still available at the iTunes shop.
I know iTunes has deals with the record labels, but apparently these compilations are illegal. Now, considering iTunes may not have the license to directly sell these songs in the way that the contract they have with the labels intends isn't it possible to assume that they could *possibly* be brought up on charges or at least void part of their contract?
By the way, Grey Album was not for profit, this DJ Drama guy's stuff was. Seems to make a big difference to the RIAA.
Well, if DJ Drama's gotten anything out of this arrest, he's got one more person buying his mixtapes - me (who isn't particularly into rap). That, and I would be interested to see if this ends up causing some ill will to be shown to the RIAA from some of the established rap labels (imagine, if you will, Suge Knight, Will Smith, Dr. Dre, and Jay Z joining forces against the RIAA, because of this... or something - Nahhhhh).
Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
What makes no sense about this is that Drama and Cannon are signed as recording artists, work regularly in the industry as record producers, they're both well-known and respected DJs and are a part of Eminem's satellite Radio program Shade 45.
They represent all aspects of the music industry. The Artist, the Promoter and the Producer.
What a dumb, short-sighted move on the part of an industry that's already in enough trouble.
Israel? It's remarkable how any topic here turns political within a few posts.
But now that everyone has warmed up the bed, I'll jump in. Israel started getting colonized by Jews in the early 1800's and in larger numbers in the 1880's. The Jews didn't invade Palestine. They were actually buying land from the Palestinians - who have had about 2,600 years to form a nation since the last time Israel was there but never did. That land was always administered by the Romans, the Arab neighbors, Turkey (Ottomans) or the British after WWI. Idunno why, it just was.
The Jewish settlers and Palestinians had frictions building but nothing huge. It was getting clear that the Jews and Palestinians needed to be separated so the U.N. partitioned the land into Jewish and Arab sectors in 1947. The Arab League preferred the Jews to be dead or elsewhere. The big one hit when Israel declared independence in 1948. All this time, nobody was getting "thrown out" of Israel until the day after its founding when all the Arab neighbor countries attacked. The Palestinians who were automatic citizens of Israel didn't drive the attack, the Arab neighbors did.
The attacking Arabs (Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) told all the Palestinians (who hadn't figured it out) to leave the Jewish sector and let the Arab armies wipe out all the Jews. When that was finished, the Palestinians could come back and claim ownership of the Jews' land and possessions. It didn't work out that way. The Arabs lost the war.
All the Palestinians who "got out of the way" [~700,000] were not allowed to return but all the Palestinians who stayed in Israel were welcome to live in peace and take part in all of Israel's institutions. That's why there are "refugee camps" full of hostile, displaced Palestinians. If anyone is upset about that, then why not be upset about the 850,000 Jews expelled from Arab countries in that time period, or the thousands of Jews slaughtered, captured or expelled from Gaza and other parts of Palestine?
Q: Why don't the Arab states who started that mess accept the displaced Palestinians as their problem? A: The Arabs don't want them in their countries but they'll supply weapons and ideology to let them help destroy Israel. The Jews didn't do anything to the Arabs except exist - and embarrass them in 1948.
To the Arabs, being beaten by Jews [clearly sub-humans] was like being beaten by a woman [also sub-humans, eh?]. The Arabs lost face and that's why they'll never give up until Israel is gone. That's what all this nonsense is about. After that, everyone who doesn't look, act and pray like a Muslim will be attacked until they're gone... or until everyone comes to their senses.
I really fear for this planet over the next few decades.
Most of the stuff on
Dunno. We have this lovely thing called the human right act which one would assume to have been enacted with the express purpose of being a final unmovable roadblock to dangerous legislation like this. Now, however, many politicians are calling for its repealing because it's, you guessed it, getting in the way of dangerous legislation like this which they want to push through. Clearly unjust laws are more important than human rights if the present bunch of ministers want the unjust laws instead. Remember these 600-odd MPs represent the will of the people without wavering for 5 years after election - it's the people's will to be oppressed, they elected the MPs so it must we what they want!
And you wonder why we still persist in having an unelected (and therefore not easily swayed by party whips) upper house - The House of Lords may be undemocratic but it's the last constitutional obstacle between here and the founding of the ministry of love. (The Queen is the last obstacle because she COULD refuse to sign a passed piece of legislation into law, but since that would trigger a constitutional crisis and probably result in the end of the monarchy, it probably won't happen.)
FGD 135
At the time of the founding of Israel, while most of the people in the land were Palestinian, most of the owners of the land were Turkish, Egyptian, and of other Arab nations. Most of the people living in that land were regarded as cheap labour, and very few who lived in the region actually owned land. When first wave of Jewish settlers stated pouring in from Russia they bought land from mainly Turkish landowners. While Arabs may have owned the land they weren't the same Arabs that were living there (and if you think all Arabs are the same than you REALLY need to take a better look at the middle east).
Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
Of course if artists didn't give away all rights but instead signed away rights for as long as the publisher promoted them (or something) then we wouldn't get in this mess ... I guess you'd need a consensus of nearly all musicians though.
I know someone who signed with a major label recently. She required substantial changes to the contract, including a much larger percentage of royalties. Much larger. They know they are not really needed anymore, and are prepared to negotiate terms with people who demand a better deal. She also did not give them sole distribution rights, I don't know the details more than that.
http://marriedmansexlife.com/
Hey hey hey. The majority of drug dealers are well meaning people trying to provide a valuable service to their community and making a little profit meanwhile. In the War on Drug Users, they are the freedom fighters. Don't mix them up with thugs like the RIAA.
What's sad is this is moderated funny when it's pretty much true. I have had friends who's first apartments were in the "not so good" inner city part of town. Their opinion of drug dealers changed when they discovered the friendly neighborhood street dealers were the best form of neighborhood watch. Think about it, who else is it who's business is to stay on the street, who's acting in their own best interest preventing the sorts of crimes that the cops would be called for.
I know it's hard to understand, this is slashdot, where I'm willing to wager most when teens bought computer equipment and not drugs. While moraly questionable, it can easily be argued that some street dealers peform a valuable community service.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.