Slashdot Mirror
Led Zeppelin Agrees To Digital Distribution
cphilo points out a NYTimes article on Led Zeppelin's decision to sell its music online. The group is one of the last superstar acts to hold out against the digital tide. There was a months-long, trans-Atlantic bidding war for the rights to license the band's catalog. In the US, the only digital holdouts that outsell Led Zeppelin are the Beatles and Garth Brooks.
Under the original terms of copyright in the USA, which I believe was 17 years + 17 more optional renewal if author was alive and wanted it, much of Led Zep's catalog would be in the public domain by now.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
(I check several times each day.)
I suggest you read Slashdot
IIRC when he went into retirement he inked a deal which granted exclusive distribution rights, going forward, to Wal-Mart; unless they get into downloadable music in a big way, or can grant digital rights to a big online player like Amazon or Apple, that may come back to bite him pretty hard.
...is that Garth Brooks outsells Led Zeppelin?!? Who knew?
My blog
The true Led Zap fans rip their vinyls to Mp3 :)
listening to Led Zeppelin, I can say they are easily one of the best rock bands of all time. Unlike a lot of recent 'talent' which seems to be concerned only with imitating others, Led Zeppelin pioneered rock and roll and actually brought creativity back to a genre which many had dismissed simply as hippie music.
Good to see their catalog online; however, a few years ago I had a rather revealing experience after buying one of their earlier works on CD: I could definitely notice the limitations of the analog equipment used for recording. I hope that the tracks offered online are of better quality, or it will be a little bit of a disappointment.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
must... stay... awake...
Michael Jackson purchased most of the Beatles copyrights. He also owns copyrights to the music of many other artists and whomever wants the rights to use those will have to negotiate with him, at least till his control of the copyrights expire.
Which means it'll cost you an arm, a leg, and a white-woman's nose.
Table-ized A.I.
Don't CDs store data digitally?
:-)
Also why do marketeers always cal them "digital downloads", when can I get them on analogue downloads?
if the stores are all closed, with a click she can get what she came for.
Amazon patents notwithstanding
If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
My thoughts on possible reasons:
Seriously, who doesnt have all the Zep songs in MP3 by this point already if they like them? I dont get this concept of downloading bands that have been purchased over and over and over again in the past. If I didnt have the MP3's I could get them in short order from rip of my cd, or a library, or have em dropped off on my server by a friend, or turn on any classic radio station for more then 20 minutes.
I was a big fan, I even have hours of boots, back when that was interesting, and I still like them, but think about it, even 20 years ago (1987) you didnt have to buy an album or cassette because someones big brother or friend would give you one. They were very common during the transition to cd. And about 8 years after that I think you could pick up a cd in the $2 used bin.
It's true, the band should have been more up front about the music they were covering, but you are exaggerating the case. They did not "steal everything." They did cover some songs and there were lawsuits to force them to credit Willie Dixon and I don't know if they've ever credited Jake Holmes. But that is a small handful of songs in a large catalog -- Led Zeppelin has plenty of "original" songs. Sure, they were basically a blues band, but they used the blues to basically pioneer a new hard rock sound. Rock n Roll is itself basically ripped off from the blues and country music. And a lot of heavy metal ripped off Led Zeppelin. And so on.... that's how progress occurs in the open source world of popular music history. You're right that they should have credited (and paid respects -- not to mention some percentage of their profits -- to) the musicians whose work they used. But I don't think you can define all of their work by that.