Do you want to be poor?

Subject: Do you want to be poor?
From: Legal Eagle
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 02:27 PM

Has it become an article of faith in the folk world that performers have to be poor to be taken seriously? Do folkies taken view that copyright and performers' rights are merely obstacles to the propagation of their chosen art forms?

I ask because, a couple of days ago, I received an e-mail from the providers of an Internet tool. They were trying to persuade me to subscribe for an update with added MP3 capability. Their promotional e-mail actually said that I would be able to use the new utility to record all of my CDs. In essence this means recording them in MP3 for the only likely purpose of posting them to a Web site for others to download

There was a thread about the ways in which MP3 would change music distribution. Nobody wanted to address the copyright issues, except to rubbish them. But performers and composers depend upon revenues from their proper royalties in order to live. If they cannot do that, then they cannot make music. In some countries both copyright and performers rights "benefit" from a private use exemption. But in many jurisdictions they do not. The composers and performers depend upon the additional revenues they get because people need to buy a tape as well as a CD, so that they can play it in their car, etc.

But no one wanted to debate the very serious issues of how proper revenue was to be obtained for performers and composers from MP3 duplication and MP3 postings of recordings of their compositions, words, and performances.

Why is that? Are all of you pirates?

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Margo
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 04:49 PM

I'm sorry. I looked at the MP3 post but I didn't understand what it was. How come it couldn't be tracked, so that when a person downloads music, they get billed. The webmaster of the site offering the music would get a cut, and the rest go to the performer.

I know I am completely in the dark as far as how computers and the internet work, but would my suggestion be so difficult to impliment?

Margarita

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: emily rain
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 04:55 PM

i read christine lavine's essay about mp3, and my understanding was that royalties were actually a very small percentage of her income, the bulk of it coming from her live performances. she implied that this was pretty typical of professional musicians today. therefore, making some of her music available over the internet was actually a very good investment, if it led more people to buy tickets to her shows.

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Margo
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 05:00 PM

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 05:09 PM

REGULATION of the internet is coming folks! No way will they be allowed to steal the product of performers & writers (and telephone companies) if those folks can possibly keep 'em from the outright theft this would most assuredly be. Then the thieves will hide behind hackers and militiias and terrorist groups to accomplish their planned tasks. To hell with Star Wars; Cyber Wars will diminish the glow of the most outlandish film special effects. Those new pirate guys will all move to rural Montana along with the Russian KGB/Mafia and other ethnic cleansers. Far fetched, huh?? Does anyone remember New Orleans in the days of LaFitte and the Barataria pirates? I'm thinkin' this kind of thievery will make my scenario nearfetched enough that we all might feel the heat all the way from cyberspace.

Art

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: reggie miles
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 06:03 PM

I'm no cyber guru but isn't the MP3 site a place to post a recording in exchange for a site to sell your recordings? You give the site a song they and give you space and those interested in your stuff contact you about purchasing cds or whatever you may have. That's my understanding but I've barely begun to explore this. There are those that may wish to post entire cds there but that's up to each individual.

Reggie

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Jack (who is called Jack)
Date: 10 Jun 99 - 06:31 PM

Christine Lavin is allowed to make the bulk of her money anyway she darn well pleases. And if she WANTS to advertise by making her stuff readily freely available then thats her decision. She is not obligated to exercise her rights, but that doesn't mean she shouldn't have them. A lot of people don't exercise their right to vote, thats not an excuse for eliminating universal sufferage.

There are a large number of musical professionals that make nearly all of their money on royalties. The popular music example is Steely Dan, a studio band that played a live concert ONCE over a period of close to 10 years. They made all their money on record sales and royalties.

Unregulated copying and distribution of recorded music not only violates the law, it violates common decency and manners. You don't pick vegatables out of another person's garden unless THEY say its okay.

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Legal Eagle
Date: 12 Jun 99 - 06:57 AM

The real problem is that, say, Joe Schmoe decides muic ought to be liberated. He goes to his CD collection. He rips an MP3 off it. He sets up a website. He posts the MP3 to the website with no download restriction or SCMS (serial copy management system). Fred Schmoe (no relation) copies it off the website. Both Joe and Fred have infringed copyright - but no record company or whatever is going to bother to sue them, even if they can trace them, because the Schmoes have no money and the costs of the lawsuit would exceed the recovery many times over.

But the ISP's are lobbying very hard that they should not be liable for money damages - because they say they can't control waht people post. Result - a million digital copies of recordings, no royalties for musicians (or record companies).

There are two possible answers. One is a sort of Macrovision type security feaature, so it can't be done. Technically that is years away 'cos no two MP3 comapnies can agree on the standards yet. The other is for someone amenable to jurisdiction and financially able to pay damages to be and remain liable for the infringments.

Actually, there might be a third, and this scares me because it could be the key to government control of the internet. Suppose all ISPs agreed not to accept ANY posting unless it carried a digital signature, something like verisign, indicating the current certificate of insurance of the poster against legal liability and costs. Sort of a bit like having to have car insurance.

But again, the real question is why are more musicians not interested in this? It's their money which is being stolen.

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Chet W.
Date: 12 Jun 99 - 11:19 AM

It seems to me that the first part of this problem would be easy. Websites can keep track of how many hits they get, so surely they can tell how many times a multi-meg song has been downloaded. So then BMI or the less reputable ASCAP could collect a fee the same way they do with radio stations, so many cents per play or per download. As for subsequent propagation on the web, shouldn't the same system work unless somebody E-mails a song? If it keeps people from buying cds and tapes, like was said above, it would be a loss to performers, writers, etc., but any cd purveyor will tell you that over 90% of sales is just what's on the top of the charts. Most of us will never have that problem, and each of us can make our own decision about whether to have our stuff MP3'd or not. Yes?No?

Chet W.

Subject: RE: Do you want to be poor?
From: Legal Eagle
Date: 12 Jun 99 - 06:45 PM

Yes, but the ISPs are lobbying hard for the legal position that they should not be liable for what is posted on sites they carry. If they succeed than they will not have to pay, and ASCAP and BMI (or, over here in the UK, PRS, MCPS, PPL, PAMRA, etc) can go whistle Dixie. If the ISPs were all going to pay blanket licence fees, and return music logs I would have much less of a problem - albeit that copyright would have been replaced in effect by a right to reuneration.

But don't forget that most of the music on the web is not posted by musicians, nor with their consent, but by people who have bought the CD and want to play it to others.