Yup, I brought that up a while back, under the "First Sale doesn't Apply" thread. So far it seems ignored. Some other holes:
It appears this relies on the file being iTunes PLUS (not DRMed, but stamped). This is likely to bring back DRM.
It's also unlikely to work on anything that already had DRM not replaced by "upgrading" since that has ties into iTunes for authorization. (Free Songs, Old purchases you never upgraded).
Also they seem to rely on the hashed version Apple is now using to stamp these files, but they claim they don't decrypt this info, but rely on the hash as unique, but at the same time they say that they determine that it is actually owned by THAT user. How can they know it's owned by that user but leave the stamp encrypted?
Also, once someone "buys" a used copy of a file through this, if it's not just a "cloud copy" what prevents the new "owner" from simply copying the file to another machine (not running the ReDigi system) and putting it up on a file sharing service - complete with the original owner's details stamped on it?
Anyway seems like there's holes in this that you could drive a mac truck through.
Actually have mod points for once, but I'd rather expand on this point than mod it up (though I think it deserves a bump).
I'm kind of surprised that Ray's representing them. This really seems like it has lots of problems from the get go. The precedents don't look good to me. It seems like another "brilliant" idea in the vein of Psystar (and we all saw where that lead).
Here's a similar process, see if passes the smell test:
1. Buy used book 2. Scan used Book 3. Destroy book, sell DRM loaded PDF
After reading through the statement describing the process it appears that it has to start out as a digital file, but it still breaks down to:
Upload the (digitally purchased) item to a "locker" Destroy all the copies that are currently on attached media (at least that they can find) Sell the key to that part of the locker to someone else.
I still see some big holes here:
It appears this relies on the file being iTunes PLUS (not DRMed, but stamped). This is likely to bring back DRM. Not your client's problem (until it happens) but brings back the bad old days. It's also unlikely to work on anything that already had DRM not replaced by "upgrading" since that has ties into iTunes for authorization. Also they seem to rely on the hashed version Apple is now using to stamp these files, but they claim they don't decrypt this info, but rely on the hash as unique, but at the same time they say that they determine that it is actually owned by THAT user. How can they know it's owned by that user but leave the stamp encrypted?
It assumes that the user has no backups or other computers which could contain copies of the original iTunes purchases. Apple has been very persistent in reminding people to back up their iTMS purchases. Also, I've never done it, but isn't there a method that you can contact Apple to re-download purchases in the event of a disaster. What's to prevent me from "selling" all my iTMS purchases through this service, then un-installing and either restoring from backup or requesting new copies from Apple?
I also believe that under iTMS terms of service they explicitly state that the files provided are licensed, not sold. I'm sure you plan to try some attack on that tack, but that still leads me to this heading the way of Psystar. If the end-user never really bought anything but a license, then they don't really have a first sale argument.
Full disclosure: I'm a singer/songwriter (rights holder), and not a laywer, but I do follow these sorts of cases. I don't see how this is going to go your way (ultimately). First sale is an important right, but it's crap like this that will get legislation to override it. I think you're kicking the hornets nest (and for the wrong people).
Of course the RIAA still collects royalties from radios, pubs etc, for music by artists who don't belong to them. The amount of jumping through hoops to opt out is rarely worth the money you save. And they could sue you into ground before you can prove your innocence.
NO, the RIAA does not collect from those people, Performance Rights Org's do (BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, etc) - they only represent, collectively, the people who actually write the songs that radio stations, pubs etc. make money off of. The RIAA is made up of the record labels (and at one time they also did useful things like setting standards for mastering EQs so that all equipment and labels product could work together).
Performers (and record labels) get no performance royalties at all in the US (and because we don't collect it, US artists don't get what foreign artists do when played abroad). That would be what the RIAA would be looking for if they were allowed to. They only get $$ from sales.
Opt out = don't use music in your business. If you play music to attract customers you owe the people who created that music a portion of revenue. If you use a MUZAK style service, you pay them (and they pay the writers).
Unfortunately the laws simply allowed the process to be out-sourced to collectives instead of taking it on themselves. Nobody questions that you need to pay a liquor license if you want to have a legal bar, but lots of folks open up bars and coffee houses, etc. never realizing that they are legally obligated to pay a license if they use music in their business. If it were like a liquor license it'd just be one of those things everyone would know to deal with instead of several different groups. Radio at least "gets it" and you aren't likely to come across many commercial radio stations that don't have up to date stickers from the PROs.
I'm a member of BMI, and it took me a long time to come to grips and join. I don't like that venues have a hard time with them (and they are still tied to formulas that make more money for the big dogs than anyone else) but as a songwriter I have no choice but to join one or leave possible money on the table that I'm entitled to. I'm NOT in any way affiliated w/ the RIAA though, I've decided I'd rather have 100% of a tiny amount than get a tiny percent of a larger amount.
I got no further than the first line: Not to be confused with pheasants. ROFL! What's that, a guideline for the upper classes when on a shooting party!
Naw, that's just a reminder to Dick Cheny, for his next hunting trip. He keeps getting these things confused.
Exactly! It's even better when someone uses the DRM-Free vbr 256 mp3 download service that CD Baby just started offering - That's the way to support artists - buy as direct as you can from them. As for going to concerts, etc... the HUGE names may make a bit of bank on concerts, and merch, and the little guys might squeek by on it - you're still not likely to hit up a show for everyone you've downloaded music from, and some don't / can't / won't tour. As much as the major labels are corrupt entities relying on a broken business model, if you download $1000 worth of music and go to $100 worth of shows, you're still just shining yourself on that you're "supporting the artist" and not "the man".
I'm an artist who's going it alone (with CD Baby's help) and my "touring" is severely limited by the fact that I can't support myself and family w/o a regular job that keeps me pretty well tied down. I've found a different outlet for that by "touring" in Second Life, and that's one place you can get in front of some people and make a connection. I do seem to be pulling in more in fees and tips in SL than I do in sales of the CDs/Downloads, so maybe that's a side effect of this attitude of download then go to concerts. Not sure.
The simple fact is that Apple claims that it takes almost all of the $99 cents a song that they charge to run the site, so artists get very little in return. CD Baby by comparison gives 6-8 times the profit to the artists. (91% on average)
As a CD Baby Artist, I feel I need to reply to this, since it's touching on some truth, but not completely accurate.
CD Baby pays 91% on all net income from all digital sources. If it's sold directly by CD Baby the artist gets 91% of the total sale. If it's a CD sale they take $4, though if I sell a CD at a show using their card swiper it's the 91% deal again. Obviously the best deal for me as an artist (monetarily) is a MP3 download from CD Baby directly, since there are no physical CD production costs to me, and the deal is about as direct as possible.
Apple pays ~ $0.70 / song or ~$7 / album to CD Baby. that's ~70% of the total sale price. Still the lions share. I get 91% of that.
On an album that I sell through iTunes, in the US (UK is higher rate) I get $6.37
It's the labels that take the huge chunk out of artists hands, which is why I opted out of that system and chose to release via CD Baby. I also contacted CD Baby when the EMI deal happened and now when Amazon got started and asked if they were getting into these deals - the response after EMI was they were already working on it, so hopefully that'll be soon, and I haven't get a reply from them on the Amazon thing.
I'd still rather get $6.37 than something like $0.37 which is likely what I'd get (if that) if I was on a label. iTunes doesn't suck nearly as much as the labels do.
Um, at least the 17" model of the 800mz iMac that I have owned since I bout it new has a Gforce4mx not a 2mx. Though the mx is the killer. iirc, the 4mx might as well have been a 2 series. Guess I have an excuse to get another machine now, huh?
That's the version already in Tiger, and the iPhone ships with a version of 10.5, so... I can't see them leaving this feature out, since it's already implemented (and I'm guessing, improved) in the desktop version, and it's a back-end connection thing, not a user facing UI thing. This of course points up the folly of poo pooing products that aren't yet shipping, based only on what you think you've seen as a feature set. We have all of 9 days to wait now, can we just wait please?
What ASCAP and BMI are paid for are the performance rights to the musical composition - the song, so if your name is on the songs writing credits, and you haven't sold away the rights, you get a bit of that pie (in theory). The performer and the label who recorded it do not get anything, just the exposure that comes w/ airplay.
Example: Radio station plays the Jimi Hendrix version of "All Along the Watchtower": Bob Dylan gets a payment (in theory) Jimi's estate gets nothing, as does the label.
Good Summary. What really needs to happen is this:
1. Make all forms of broadcast equal: Terrestrial Radio, Satellite Radio and Internet Radio (possibly put a clause to catch future developments). Make it low, fair and statutory. Have exemptions for low listener "hobbyist" stations, etc. 2. This includes giving them what they want (Recording Royalties, in addition to publishing royalties, for terrestrial broadcasts)
BUT:
3. Have 100% mandated logging for any broadcaster over say 1000 listeners. 4. Have a government body, NOT ASCAP/BMI or SoundExchange tabulate the royalties, collect and disburse them. 5. Tax them as they are disbursed (like withholding) as normal income.
This would normalize US practice with most of the rest of the industrialized world, and make things saner. It would also take out of private hands the disbursement of royalties and spread it where it needs to go, instead of sticking to the PRS's who learned their accounting in hollywood (no movie/ever/ makes money;-)).
Part of the fun here, is that the broadcast (terrestrial) radio industry has had a free ride on performance royalties for 50 years or so, but because this happened, even though in theory, if a US artist gets say, UK airplay, they should get paid, in practice they DO NOT because the UK figures, we (the US) don't pay their people (UK artists), why should they pay ours.
I have mod points, but there's so much crap and so little points, and I hate to mod down, so I'd rather put up my own thoughts. In summary, I guess my point is: give 'em what they want, but level out the whole playing field and get the crud out of the system. If they did this there'd be a lot of pissed players in the industry, but they'd all be the ones already rolling in dough, the ones who really need it would benefit, finally getting some share of the benefits of their work.
Well, I don't know about Netwerk, et al, but I emailed CD Baby about it as soon as the EMI announcement came down the pike and they said they were already working on it w/ Apple, so at least hopefully soon you'll be able to get DRM-free versions of the songs I have up on iTunes so far. Or you could just buy the CDs now and rip the files:-)
OS X will not teach you how to use UNIX, because its "UNIXness" is an incidental feature. OS X might be a UNIX, but the typical user doesn't use it like one. The typical user doesn't need to learn the unix stuff, but for someone who does, it's all there and there are a couple good choices for F/OSS package management to install all the tools you might want to use. I also don't think I'd call the processes and tools that run all the behind the scenes stuff "incidental" if you do a ps -ax on a mac you get back some mac only stuff, mainly having to do with the Aqua interface stuff and some other specific Apple stuff, but a large portion of what you'll see is the same stuff that powers any other unix or Linux system. You can use all of the standard commands you'd expect, including that ps command, the shell is a nice normal bash (glad they changed that over fairly quickly, I wasn't too fond of tcsh). I admin a bunch of Linux systems from a Powerbook, and really on the command line the differences are not that much more than there are between several different versions of Linux.
One of the things I think they got right recently is that a Mac can appeal to both classes of user, a casual user just wants stuff to work, and for things to look nice (like a passenger on a cruise ship) and power users and geeks like me want to be able to get at the inner workings and tweek as much as we want and don't want a bunch of stuff getting in our way. I find what is present in OSX a much better balance than it ever had in OS9 and before and also preferable to windows. Windows errs (strangely enough) too much on the passenger side (no serious dev tools bundled) and Linux too much on the power user/geek side. I use all of them and for me the best balance and therefore most comfortable "home" is OSX.
I agree with much of this post but would like to expand and nuance on this segment:
Now I do believe that one should pay for what one receives, and I've no problem buying music, but I'd just rather buy from a source that is as close as possible to the creator. That way, as much of my money as possible goes to the creative elements of our society rather than the parasitic ones. Take iTunes: yes, Apple gets very little of the vast stream of raw dollars pouring into it's DRM-constricted throat, but the people actually producing that music don't get even that much. The rest is picked off by businesses that have litte raison d'être in the Internet age. I am a (fairly new) completely independent artist that distributes via CD Baby. I also opted for most forms of digital distribution that they offer. They are a middle man, but in this food chain, they take their proper place as a service provider and take a cut, of anything they help me sell, but I'm free to sell completely direct as well, keeping 100% of the profit of a direct sale. So, if you want to provide support as close as you can, look for artists who are doing what we can on our own as much as possible. To break it down for you:
iTunes sale w/ CD Baby artist: Apple takes it's cut, CD Baby gets 9% of the rest and I get 91% Buy a CD at a show via cash or check: I get 100% of profit. Buy a CD at a show w/ a credit card: CD Baby get's 9% (if I use their "swiper") and I get 91% Buy a CD via CD Baby website: CD Baby gets $4 from each sale, I get whatever I priced it higher (for normal priced CDs).
So, don't completely discount the idea of getting music via iTunes because the artist is getting less than they deserve. If they choose to use a reasonable distributor, they will be doing OK, if not maybe the artists should start looking around (wtg BNL).
Anyway, I just got my iTunes links from CD Baby today, so they're not quite live yet, but if anyone is interested, you can click on my website above and it'll get you to a place you can get my CDs.
Try clicking on my homepage link;-) Anyway, my karma's pretty good, and I have a feeling the meta's will take care of those that tagged me as a troll, and if not, well, thats the breaks for speaking my mind. Thanks for offering karma if you had it to give.
Thank you for posting this, it's about time someone took a step back and put up a fair analysis and this is as close as I've seen here. It seems that most of the people who love to rail on and on about how crappy SL is are the ones who logged on expecting a game. This is a fundamental flaw in their logic, since LL has been stating for some time that SL is NOT a game, it is a platform, built to provide user created content to other users. Unlike WoW (or FPS or any mainstream commercial game) which all have gobs of assets pre-optimized and stored on your hard drive, SL has to stream everything you see to you in real time. It's a different animal, and if you're looking at it and comparing it to any of those, you're comparing apples and wildebeest. Just not the same thing at all (even though SL looks a fair deal like an older tech game).
As to live music, thank you for pointing that out. I've been performing there regularly for about a year now and I can say that the experience is definitely different than just streaming audio and publishing the URL (or even putting out a webcam stream along with it). It is much more like the RL experience, in that the audience just needs to be in the "place" and they get the audio - no need for getting people to go to your URL or even know your performing - they can just wander into their favorite "pub" or other venue and see/hear who's playing there. There is also the possibility for much more direct feedback from the audience than in the just plain streaming environment and overall, it really is more like the real thing than any alternative I've seen.
So, OK all you 1337 gamz0rz SL sucks as a game. Fine. Go farm some gold in WoW and get on with your life. I find it amazing that people seem to have to always find something to sneer at, and will make use of any opportunity to do so, loudly and in public. If it wasn't your cup of tea, fine, go play, leave it to those who are interested in this new platform.
I was online when this thing was attacking, and it never seemed to get to my sim - I saw the notices, and the web notice that they'd locked things down to linden login, but they let anyone there stay. It was laggy, but that's not that unusual these days. At least with this one, the grid was never fully down (if you were already in or didn't get booted) and the Lindens were able to contain and clean it up pretty quick (unlike some of the marathon outages caused by goo of the past). Total offline time for this one was about 1/2 hour.
A clarification - even if there are currently ~600k active user accounts there are usually only ~10K or so online any given time of day.
Anyway, I'd say the overreaction to copy bot did more damage to SL as a whole than this thing did.
The music scene in SL is really exploding. Another of the "old guard" of pioneering performers in SL is Frogg Marlowe and he often (usually) plays with (at the same time) Jaycatt Nico. Recently a pretty good number of us have started making our way onto the virtual stages around SL. I go by Kaklick Martin and perform at least a few times a month, Melvin Took, Slim Warrior, Cylindrian Ruttabega, Mel Cheeky, DimiVan Ludwig... all artists worth going and checking out. I know there are many I'm missing here, these are one's I've heard and know, but there are many excellent musicians playing SL stages these days.
For those here in/. it's an excellent opportunity to find some great (NON-RIAA infected) music. If every anonymous coward that bellyaches about how all music sucks these days would just check out and invest in some of the great truly independent artists out there...
If you're curious about this, but don't want to dive into SL, my homepage is my Live365 station, that plays self-produced music (from me and a few of the above mentioned acts, and several others who aren't yet on SL).
Slashdot Mirror
Yup, I brought that up a while back, under the "First Sale doesn't Apply" thread. So far it seems ignored. Some other holes:
It appears this relies on the file being iTunes PLUS (not DRMed, but stamped). This is likely to bring back DRM.
It's also unlikely to work on anything that already had DRM not replaced by "upgrading" since that has ties into iTunes for authorization. (Free Songs, Old purchases you never upgraded).
Also they seem to rely on the hashed version Apple is now using to stamp these files, but they claim they don't decrypt this info, but rely on the hash as unique, but at the same time they say that they determine that it is actually owned by THAT user. How can they know it's owned by that user but leave the stamp encrypted?
Also, once someone "buys" a used copy of a file through this, if it's not just a "cloud copy" what prevents the new "owner" from simply copying the file to another machine (not running the ReDigi system) and putting it up on a file sharing service - complete with the original owner's details stamped on it?
Anyway seems like there's holes in this that you could drive a mac truck through.
Actually have mod points for once, but I'd rather expand on this point than mod it up (though I think it deserves a bump).
I'm kind of surprised that Ray's representing them. This really seems like it has lots of problems from the get go. The precedents don't look good to me. It seems like another "brilliant" idea in the vein of Psystar (and we all saw where that lead).
Here's a similar process, see if passes the smell test:
1. Buy used book
2. Scan used Book
3. Destroy book, sell DRM loaded PDF
After reading through the statement describing the process it appears that it has to start out as a digital file, but it still breaks down to:
Upload the (digitally purchased) item to a "locker"
Destroy all the copies that are currently on attached media (at least that they can find)
Sell the key to that part of the locker to someone else.
I still see some big holes here:
It appears this relies on the file being iTunes PLUS (not DRMed, but stamped). This is likely to bring back DRM. Not your client's problem (until it happens) but brings back the bad old days. It's also unlikely to work on anything that already had DRM not replaced by "upgrading" since that has ties into iTunes for authorization. Also they seem to rely on the hashed version Apple is now using to stamp these files, but they claim they don't decrypt this info, but rely on the hash as unique, but at the same time they say that they determine that it is actually owned by THAT user. How can they know it's owned by that user but leave the stamp encrypted?
It assumes that the user has no backups or other computers which could contain copies of the original iTunes purchases. Apple has been very persistent in reminding people to back up their iTMS purchases. Also, I've never done it, but isn't there a method that you can contact Apple to re-download purchases in the event of a disaster. What's to prevent me from "selling" all my iTMS purchases through this service, then un-installing and either restoring from backup or requesting new copies from Apple?
I also believe that under iTMS terms of service they explicitly state that the files provided are licensed, not sold. I'm sure you plan to try some attack on that tack, but that still leads me to this heading the way of Psystar. If the end-user never really bought anything but a license, then they don't really have a first sale argument.
Full disclosure: I'm a singer/songwriter (rights holder), and not a laywer, but I do follow these sorts of cases. I don't see how this is going to go your way (ultimately). First sale is an important right, but it's crap like this that will get legislation to override it. I think you're kicking the hornets nest (and for the wrong people).
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/05/137530847/how-much-does-it-cost-to-make-a-hit-song?sc=emaf
I don't pay BMI a dime. Can't speak for ASCAP or SESAC, but BMI is free (for writers anyway) to belong to.
Of course the RIAA still collects royalties from radios, pubs etc, for music by artists who don't belong to them. The amount of jumping through hoops to opt out is rarely worth the money you save. And they could sue you into ground before you can prove your innocence.
NO, the RIAA does not collect from those people, Performance Rights Org's do (BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, etc) - they only represent, collectively, the people who actually write the songs that radio stations, pubs etc. make money off of. The RIAA is made up of the record labels (and at one time they also did useful things like setting standards for mastering EQs so that all equipment and labels product could work together).
Performers (and record labels) get no performance royalties at all in the US (and because we don't collect it, US artists don't get what foreign artists do when played abroad). That would be what the RIAA would be looking for if they were allowed to. They only get $$ from sales.
Opt out = don't use music in your business.
If you play music to attract customers you owe the people who created that music a portion of revenue.
If you use a MUZAK style service, you pay them (and they pay the writers).
Unfortunately the laws simply allowed the process to be out-sourced to collectives instead of taking it on themselves. Nobody questions that you need to pay a liquor license if you want to have a legal bar, but lots of folks open up bars and coffee houses, etc. never realizing that they are legally obligated to pay a license if they use music in their business. If it were like a liquor license it'd just be one of those things everyone would know to deal with instead of several different groups. Radio at least "gets it" and you aren't likely to come across many commercial radio stations that don't have up to date stickers from the PROs.
I'm a member of BMI, and it took me a long time to come to grips and join. I don't like that venues have a hard time with them (and they are still tied to formulas that make more money for the big dogs than anyone else) but as a songwriter I have no choice but to join one or leave possible money on the table that I'm entitled to. I'm NOT in any way affiliated w/ the RIAA though, I've decided I'd rather have 100% of a tiny amount than get a tiny percent of a larger amount.
Wrote a song about it. Like to hear it? Here it Goes:
Zombie Love Song (If anyone eats my brains)
http://www.reverbnation.com/tunepak/2759032
It's your basic boy is about to marry girl, she dies in a tragic car accident, but is brought back to him by the zobiepocalypse type thing.
This is a live recording - I have a better one in the works complete w. zombie chorus.
It's the verb: literarily a right to copy.
Stupid auto correct: literally not literarily
It's the verb: literarily a right to copy.
Give a man a fish you've made a customer, teach a man to fish you've made a competitor.
Naw, that's just a reminder to Dick Cheny, for his next hunting trip. He keeps getting these things confused.
Exactly! It's even better when someone uses the DRM-Free vbr 256 mp3 download service that CD Baby just started offering - That's the way to support artists - buy as direct as you can from them. As for going to concerts, etc... the HUGE names may make a bit of bank on concerts, and merch, and the little guys might squeek by on it - you're still not likely to hit up a show for everyone you've downloaded music from, and some don't / can't / won't tour. As much as the major labels are corrupt entities relying on a broken business model, if you download $1000 worth of music and go to $100 worth of shows, you're still just shining yourself on that you're "supporting the artist" and not "the man".
I'm an artist who's going it alone (with CD Baby's help) and my "touring" is severely limited by the fact that I can't support myself and family w/o a regular job that keeps me pretty well tied down. I've found a different outlet for that by "touring" in Second Life, and that's one place you can get in front of some people and make a connection. I do seem to be pulling in more in fees and tips in SL than I do in sales of the CDs/Downloads, so maybe that's a side effect of this attitude of download then go to concerts. Not sure.
As a CD Baby Artist, I feel I need to reply to this, since it's touching on some truth, but not completely accurate.
It's the labels that take the huge chunk out of artists hands, which is why I opted out of that system and chose to release via CD Baby. I also contacted CD Baby when the EMI deal happened and now when Amazon got started and asked if they were getting into these deals - the response after EMI was they were already working on it, so hopefully that'll be soon, and I haven't get a reply from them on the Amazon thing.
I'd still rather get $6.37 than something like $0.37 which is likely what I'd get (if that) if I was on a label.
iTunes doesn't suck nearly as much as the labels do.
Um, at least the 17" model of the 800mz iMac that I have owned since I bout it new has a Gforce4mx not a 2mx.
Though the mx is the killer. iirc, the 4mx might as well have been a 2 series. Guess I have an excuse to get another machine now, huh?
That's the version already in Tiger, and the iPhone ships with a version of 10.5, so... I can't see them leaving this feature out, since it's already implemented (and I'm guessing, improved) in the desktop version, and it's a back-end connection thing, not a user facing UI thing. This of course points up the folly of poo pooing products that aren't yet shipping, based only on what you think you've seen as a feature set. We have all of 9 days to wait now, can we just wait please?
What ASCAP and BMI are paid for are the performance rights to the musical composition - the song, so if your name is on the songs writing credits, and you haven't sold away the rights, you get a bit of that pie (in theory). The performer and the label who recorded it do not get anything, just the exposure that comes w/ airplay.
Example: Radio station plays the Jimi Hendrix version of "All Along the Watchtower": Bob Dylan gets a payment (in theory) Jimi's estate gets nothing, as does the label.
Clear now?
Good Summary. What really needs to happen is this:
/ever/ makes money ;-)).
1. Make all forms of broadcast equal: Terrestrial Radio, Satellite Radio and Internet Radio (possibly put a clause to catch future developments). Make it low, fair and statutory. Have exemptions for low listener "hobbyist" stations, etc.
2. This includes giving them what they want (Recording Royalties, in addition to publishing royalties, for terrestrial broadcasts)
BUT:
3. Have 100% mandated logging for any broadcaster over say 1000 listeners.
4. Have a government body, NOT ASCAP/BMI or SoundExchange tabulate the royalties, collect and disburse them.
5. Tax them as they are disbursed (like withholding) as normal income.
This would normalize US practice with most of the rest of the industrialized world, and make things saner. It would also take out of private hands the disbursement of royalties and spread it where it needs to go, instead of sticking to the PRS's who learned their accounting in hollywood (no movie
Part of the fun here, is that the broadcast (terrestrial) radio industry has had a free ride on performance royalties for 50 years or so, but because this happened, even though in theory, if a US artist gets say, UK airplay, they should get paid, in practice they DO NOT because the UK figures, we (the US) don't pay their people (UK artists), why should they pay ours.
I have mod points, but there's so much crap and so little points, and I hate to mod down, so I'd rather put up my own thoughts. In summary, I guess my point is: give 'em what they want, but level out the whole playing field and get the crud out of the system. If they did this there'd be a lot of pissed players in the industry, but they'd all be the ones already rolling in dough, the ones who really need it would benefit, finally getting some share of the benefits of their work.
Well, I don't know about Netwerk, et al, but I emailed CD Baby about it as soon as the EMI announcement came down the pike and they said they were already working on it w/ Apple, so at least hopefully soon you'll be able to get DRM-free versions of the songs I have up on iTunes so far. Or you could just buy the CDs now and rip the files :-)
/ viewAlbum?playListId=218127260/ viewAlbum?playListId=218215721
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa
and
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa
So far they just have the regular setup.
(the cds are here)
http://cdbaby.com/cd/bryanbaker1
http://cdbaby.com/cd/bryanbaker2
One of the things I think they got right recently is that a Mac can appeal to both classes of user, a casual user just wants stuff to work, and for things to look nice (like a passenger on a cruise ship) and power users and geeks like me want to be able to get at the inner workings and tweek as much as we want and don't want a bunch of stuff getting in our way. I find what is present in OSX a much better balance than it ever had in OS9 and before and also preferable to windows. Windows errs (strangely enough) too much on the passenger side (no serious dev tools bundled) and Linux too much on the power user/geek side. I use all of them and for me the best balance and therefore most comfortable "home" is OSX.
iTunes sale w/ CD Baby artist: Apple takes it's cut, CD Baby gets 9% of the rest and I get 91%
Buy a CD at a show via cash or check: I get 100% of profit.
Buy a CD at a show w/ a credit card: CD Baby get's 9% (if I use their "swiper") and I get 91%
Buy a CD via CD Baby website: CD Baby gets $4 from each sale, I get whatever I priced it higher (for normal priced CDs).
So, don't completely discount the idea of getting music via iTunes because the artist is getting less than they deserve. If they choose to use a reasonable distributor, they will be doing OK, if not maybe the artists should start looking around (wtg BNL).
Anyway, I just got my iTunes links from CD Baby today, so they're not quite live yet, but if anyone is interested, you can click on my website above and it'll get you to a place you can get my CDs.
Try clicking on my homepage link ;-)
Anyway, my karma's pretty good, and I have a feeling the meta's will take care of those that tagged me as a troll, and if not, well, thats the breaks for speaking my mind. Thanks for offering karma if you had it to give.
Thank you for posting this, it's about time someone took a step back and put up a fair analysis and this is as close as I've seen here. It seems that most of the people who love to rail on and on about how crappy SL is are the ones who logged on expecting a game. This is a fundamental flaw in their logic, since LL has been stating for some time that SL is NOT a game, it is a platform, built to provide user created content to other users. Unlike WoW (or FPS or any mainstream commercial game) which all have gobs of assets pre-optimized and stored on your hard drive, SL has to stream everything you see to you in real time. It's a different animal, and if you're looking at it and comparing it to any of those, you're comparing apples and wildebeest. Just not the same thing at all (even though SL looks a fair deal like an older tech game).
As to live music, thank you for pointing that out. I've been performing there regularly for about a year now and I can say that the experience is definitely different than just streaming audio and publishing the URL (or even putting out a webcam stream along with it). It is much more like the RL experience, in that the audience just needs to be in the "place" and they get the audio - no need for getting people to go to your URL or even know your performing - they can just wander into their favorite "pub" or other venue and see/hear who's playing there. There is also the possibility for much more direct feedback from the audience than in the just plain streaming environment and overall, it really is more like the real thing than any alternative I've seen.
So, OK all you 1337 gamz0rz SL sucks as a game. Fine. Go farm some gold in WoW and get on with your life. I find it amazing that people seem to have to always find something to sneer at, and will make use of any opportunity to do so, loudly and in public. If it wasn't your cup of tea, fine, go play, leave it to those who are interested in this new platform.
I was online when this thing was attacking, and it never seemed to get to my sim - I saw the notices, and the web notice that they'd locked things down to linden login, but they let anyone there stay. It was laggy, but that's not that unusual these days. At least with this one, the grid was never fully down (if you were already in or didn't get booted) and the Lindens were able to contain and clean it up pretty quick (unlike some of the marathon outages caused by goo of the past). Total offline time for this one was about 1/2 hour.
A clarification - even if there are currently ~600k active user accounts there are usually only ~10K or so online any given time of day.
Anyway, I'd say the overreaction to copy bot did more damage to SL as a whole than this thing did.
Yawn.
Come to one of my shows in SecondLife and I'll play it for ya :-)
The music scene in SL is really exploding. Another of the "old guard" of pioneering performers in SL is Frogg Marlowe and he often (usually) plays with (at the same time) Jaycatt Nico. Recently a pretty good number of us have started making our way onto the virtual stages around SL. I go by Kaklick Martin and perform at least a few times a month, Melvin Took, Slim Warrior, Cylindrian Ruttabega, Mel Cheeky, DimiVan Ludwig... all artists worth going and checking out. I know there are many I'm missing here, these are one's I've heard and know, but there are many excellent musicians playing SL stages these days.
/. it's an excellent opportunity to find some great (NON-RIAA infected) music. If every anonymous coward that bellyaches about how all music sucks these days would just check out and invest in some of the great truly independent artists out there...
For those here in
If you're curious about this, but don't want to dive into SL, my homepage is my Live365 station, that plays self-produced music (from me and a few of the above mentioned acts, and several others who aren't yet on SL).