RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/11/2010 7:15:04 AM)

[:D]

True dat.



pahunkboy -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/11/2010 8:27:29 AM)

Hows come the banks and auto industries need bailouts, but not the entertainment industry ?/snip

LMAO!

The auto industry made more off of finance then on the cars.   The banks- set up a dummy corporation- the one faction hoards the cash- then other portion - which then is on the public til-  shows the loss.    Not to worry- their profits are safely off shore.



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/11/2010 12:40:38 PM)

That quote, however, certainly didn't come from me.




pahunkboy -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/11/2010 1:22:07 PM)

No-  It was Term



gungadin09 -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/11/2010 7:19:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

I did not know a simple coffee shop has to pay $800 a month for license fees.  That seems excessive.


i used to work in a little cafe that got around this rule by selling CDs of the same music they were playing. Don't know the technicalities of the situation, or whether they were still breaking some rule, but that's what they did. They had a flamenco CD, world music CD, Brazilian CD... They told us we could only play THAT music, but it was supposedly okay, since we were selling the CDs.

pam



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/11/2010 7:21:08 PM)

It's different because you were playing sample product, not broadcasting.



pahunkboy -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/12/2010 8:51:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

I did not know a simple coffee shop has to pay $800 a month for license fees.  That seems excessive.


i used to work in a little cafe that got around this rule by selling CDs of the same music they were playing. Don't know the technicalities of the situation, or whether they were still breaking some rule, but that's what they did. They had a flamenco CD, world music CD, Brazilian CD... They told us we could only play THAT music, but it was supposedly okay, since we were selling the CDs.

pam


One of my jobs we played musac.   It got so predictable as to the nest song. LOL.

Then around Christmas we had the same worn out songs.



Termyn8or -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/12/2010 12:16:11 PM)

FR

OK, where I went to spend money one music was a place called Peaches on Pearl road. They were almost always playing music, and they were in the business of selling music. In the old days I think it was called Coconuts, and ws back when they were playing vinyl.

Now we have someone in the business of selling music, of course for their own profit. But then every sale they make benefits the music industry, so where are we now ?

As I warned, this is a colex issue. Not even thinking about the law, just what's fair. Does Cocnut/Peaches owe for that ? Or do they get that for free because they are promoting the product ?

What am I saying here ? That there should be no professional musicians ? We've had some quality music over the years and that wouldn't happen if musicians didn't dedicate their time to it.

This issue is not easy.

T



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/12/2010 12:27:03 PM)

quote:

Now we have someone in the business of selling music, of course for their own profit. But then every sale they make benefits the music industry, so where are we now ?


How is this different from any other sale?

The supermarket is in business for their own profit, but the laundry soap industry benefits when you wash your clothes.

Nor is this any problem with music for fun. People always have and still do play for fun. I play for fun.

But if you want me in such and such a place at such and such a time to play such and such, you'll need to pay me. For that, too, you can expect professional quality performance.

Or take recording/performing. If you've never done this professionally, you can't really appreciate the work it takes to do this, much of it tedious and laborious. If you want to use my recording for your own financial gain, I'm due a cut. No different than any other business. Now, if you want to buy my recording, play it, then sell it to someone else (without making a copy), you owe nothing, no more than if you sold your car. If, however, you bought a car, copied it, then gave away/sold the copy, the manufacturers and workers would be after you, and rightly so. Nor is it different for intellectual property. If I patent a process, and you buy my product and immediately duplicate my formula, that's not allowed, or no one would have incentive to innovate. Or movies. It costs money to make them. Copies are due financial reimbursement.




Owner59 -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/12/2010 3:55:55 PM)

Music is one of our biggest exports.The world loves it.Same with our movies,games and other media.

I know of only one guy who makes his living exclusively from music.Lessons and piano tuning are a big part it.

Lot of starving artists out there.



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/12/2010 4:04:27 PM)

Lots of dreamers who don't know how or don't want to run a business. Not to mention amateurs who overrate their own musical abilities.

Lots of successful full time musicians too.

And yes, lots of starving artists.




pahunkboy -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/12/2010 4:26:06 PM)

for someone who knows very little on how it works the article explains it- and looks at pros and cons of the law.


Book mark it-  it is an interesting read.



Termyn8or -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/14/2010 8:50:52 AM)

"Not to mention amateurs who overrate their own musical abilities. "

I do not engage in that, I'll be the first to tell you that I suck. I use a strange chordography that some find different and pleasing, but I do it because it is easier to play.

When the song is not instrumental, you can use two fingers on the guitar and three on the piano, and with a good beat it all hangs on the vocals. I've created an instrumental on the acoustic guitar which has gained accolades from all who have heard it. But in reality I created it in a way that makes it easy to play.

On the other hand a professional musician is forced to play what they say, not what they want nor exactly how they want to play it. That makes it work and no longer play. At a certain skill level they might enjoy doing the hardest of pieces, but does that mean they shouldn't get paid ?

And this is a metaphor NOT an analogy - What of a prostitute who enjoys sex, and is perhaps a nymphomaniac ?

This whole issue is symptomatic of an ogliarchy operating in capitalist mode, which is what we are.

My friend's nephew has (or had) a band called Mandrake. I payed willingly to see them when they played, even though I could hear them at his house. This guy is pretty good, plays just about everything normal for a rock band. He wrote and recorded a song all by himself, using overdubbing. I mean he played the drums, played the recording and added the bass line, and then the guitar(s), and lastly sung the lyrics. You don't think that's work ?

But he lives in the city like me and does other things for money usually. He's even been on the radio and is as good as anyone you might hear on radio, but never got that break. My problem is the suits.

So he is OK, but members of the band have died and otherwise incapacitated. The bass player was in a bad car wreck and may be wrecked for life. The drummer came from a band called Black Death and he died. Shit happens.

Like a boss, he got pissed when people didn't show up for practice night. He had spent thousands of dollars soundproofing the attic so they could play without disturbing the neighbors. The equipment itself ran well into five figures. I had no problem paying the ten bucks at the door of the bar, but I used to just go over there on practice nights and hear them for free. Actually heard the new songs in the making. When I went to the bars to see them it was more a show of support, rather than helping to enrichen them.

Most of their material is original, they do very few covers. But now that brings us to this - what about bands who just do covers ? What do they owe ? They didn't write it but they performed it. Is that a different formula ?

That is the problem, who owes whom how much ? Mandrake is not the Beatles or Pink Floyd, they are not as versatile. But they are good at what they do. Or were.

So is there some kind of scale or something ?

T



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/14/2010 8:05:03 PM)

Whomever owns the publishing rights is due the royalties. Performers don't have to worry about this at all. The venue pays the annual fee and the reporting/song-counters do the rest. ASCAP/BMI distribute the funds.

Performance is a different matter. Union musicians indeed make scale (or better if they're good and in demand) and travel if applicable. Non-union musicians are generally amateurs, even if very talented ones, playing for free or for various sub-scale approaches (tips, for example, or a cut of the bar), and are restricted to non-union establishments (i.e., union musicians won't play there). But the whole thing is generally poorly enforced when at all. Though it does happen. The band leader, though, is responsible for all that. The venue just hires the band for what it charges (or what they agree upon with the band leader).



Rule -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/14/2010 9:08:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:

But if say music was not played in shops, would anyone actually notice ?

I have been in places where it was an annoyance, to the point that I shorted my time there.

As have I; rapidly.



Termyn8or -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/15/2010 1:29:28 AM)

Alright then. Now we have a neighborhood band that puts out a product better than what is on the radio for exemple. Where does this stand, does it mean that quality means nothing ? Three dudes, three chords and a voice that can imitate a dinosaur, MILLIONS. Guy studying and practicing all the time, NOTHING.

A good band with a few good tunes might be garnered by a record company, but they must fill the album, it must be seven or eight tunes. Then under contract they have to produce another album in like two years or else. Their first album was the best because it took their whole life to do it. That is why many bands have their first album as their best album. If you were in the thick of it, you saw it. We all saw it, at least the ones of us who are not sheeple. Look at Boston, and many others.

Now these bands were young people and when they got that first check they went partying. Then the second album sucked, but it got the promotion and radio play, and made a bit of money. I bet you don't remember Boston's second album, and that is because you don't want to.

But once they take that money they are committed legally to making another album in either a year or two. That first album was the work of an entire lifetime at that point, there is no way they can do another in a year, but the contract says they must. Mm is one who probably understands this. This is the penultimate in turning play into work.

Like anything else, it comes down to who plays the game best. Ted Nugent collected a hell of alot fo money for Stranglehold. Little River Band collected a bit less for that tune of which I can't remember the name. And 100 Proof Aged In Soul probably signed off on Eveerything Good Is Bad after they got their first ten grand. Mark Farner is not in the hall of fame, why ? And why are certain other artists in there who have no fucking business being there ?

Money.

It doesn't get much simpler than that. Once you figure that out for real you got it by the short hairs. But when you got it by the short hairs they belongs to a creature 100 times more powerful than all of us put together.  

T



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/15/2010 8:24:03 AM)

quote:

Alright then. Now we have a neighborhood band that puts out a product better than what is on the radio for exemple. Where does this stand, does it mean that quality means nothing ? Three dudes, three chords and a voice that can imitate a dinosaur, MILLIONS. Guy studying and practicing all the time, NOTHING.


The problem here is apparently a gross misunderstanding about quality in music.

But if they were actually that good, nothing is stopping them from marketing their shows/product. New bands come along all the time.



DomImus -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/15/2010 9:43:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
The problem here is apparently a gross misunderstanding about quality in music.


I have been searching for over thirty years for an objective yardstick to measure music quality with and I have yet to find same. Music covers such a broad spectrum of sounds that this is almost impossible to do. If it sounds good it is good. If people will pay money to hear it then all the better. If we can find a system by which the creators/owners are consistently and fairly compensated for their work then we all win.





pahunkboy -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/15/2010 9:45:39 AM)

For some reason the station I linked above shies away from cover songs. I get the impression they will not play them.



Musicmystery -> RE: The Music-Copyright Enforcers (8/15/2010 10:05:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
The problem here is apparently a gross misunderstanding about quality in music.


I have been searching for over thirty years for an objective yardstick to measure music quality with and I have yet to find same. Music covers such a broad spectrum of sounds that this is almost impossible to do. If it sounds good it is good. If people will pay money to hear it then all the better. If we can find a system by which the creators/owners are consistently and fairly compensated for their work then we all win.

Which of course is part of the problem he describes too. Wrong measurement tool for the job.

But if someone is sitting in a garage with a few songs, not enough for an album, better than anything heard on the radio, and just can't seem to get anywhere--the problem is self-delusion, not confused social values.

It's no different than any other businesses. Four out of five small businesses fail within the first five years not because business is so incredibly tough (though it is more difficult than non-business people generally realize), but because the new inexperienced business owners make poor decisions, as they don't know (at least at first) how to run a successful business.

Meanwhile other business people run six successful businesses.

I can tell you that I've seen musician after musician after musician squander opportunities right and left, self-sabotaging their own success, then going back to whining they never get a break.

Nor is that unique to musicians. Artists, same thing. I work with wannabe writers who continually whine about this too, yet never/rarely send their work out. Strangely, they're never published. Who'd have thought. Or write so little material that they couldn't make a living even if they sold every piece. They they cry about unappreciated creativity. What creativity? Go create!

I have no patience for the "I'm really smart but I just never get a break" thing either. I felt that way when I graduated college. After a year, I faced facts, that this wasn't going to get me anywhere, and that if I was so smart, I'd better get creating my own opportunities. Viola. A career was born.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875