|
09 Jun 06 - 03:21 PM (#1756236) Subject: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Interesting food for thought in today's The Register (www.theregister.co.uk) - Billy Bragg has taken his songs off. There has also been some consternation in other forums over the attempted hi-jacking of another well-respected artist's work & name (he's a Mudcatter so I'll leave him to speak for himself if he cares to). Text of Bragg article is here, and I'll try to put a clickie at the bottom because the text contains several links. Billy Bragg prompts Myspace rethink All your content belongs to Rupert? By Andrew Orlowski Myspace says it's revising its legal terms and conditions after songwriter Billy Bragg withdrew his songs from the website in protest. Myspace is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News International, a bete noir for Bragg for more than 20 years. On 18 May, Bragg's management withdrew the song files, citing the T&Cs. Bragg said the terms allowed News International to reuse his content without remunerating the artist. "The real problem is the fact that they can sub-license it to any company they want and keep the royalities themselves without paying the artist a penny. It also doesn't stipulate that they can use it for non-commercial use only which is what I'd want to see in that clause. The clause is basically far to open for abuse and thus I'm very wary." It's the return of the old favorite, the ambiguous ownership contract. Myspace is actually using a boilerplate text designed to allow it to republish the content. Five years ago Microsoft was forced to change a similar, but even more acquisitive click through contract. Microsoft's Passport sign-on permitted the company to: Use, modify, copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, publish, sublicense, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any such communication. The terms included the right to grab trademarks and business plans. Microsoft retreated after a storm of protest. But Redmond wasn't the first to attempt this, nor has it been the last. Apple had introduced a similar click through before retreating, and two years ago Google attached almost identical terms to its Orkut service. That was in 2004, the bloggers' love affair with the ad giant was still untarnished, and very little protest was heard. In response to Bragg, Myspace says the T&Cs are confusing and affirmed that it had no claim on artists' materials. "Because the legalese has caused some confusion, we are at work revising it to make it very clear that MySpace is not seeking a license to do anything with an artist's work other than allow it to be shared in the manner the artist intends," Jeff Berman told the New York Daily News. "Obviously, we don't own their music or do anything with it that they don't want." All clear? Not quite. In the much hyped "Web 2.0" world of "user generated content", punters are expected to contribute their works for commercial exploitation for nothing. While MySpace is pretty unambiguous about copyright, exploitation isn't so much a distant temptation, but an integral part of its business. You can find the T&Cs here.® Link (I hope): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/08/blly_bragg_myspace/ |
|
09 Jun 06 - 06:41 PM (#1756322) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST This has been discussed at length elsewhere. Most agree that there is nothing sinister in the terms, which are required to ease the day to day running of myspace. See www.longdogs.co.uk and the bbc board for the debate. |
|
09 Jun 06 - 07:13 PM (#1756334) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: John O'L That's comforting. |
|
09 Jun 06 - 08:40 PM (#1756380) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe I trust them SOOOOO much.... just so much, and no further... |
|
09 Jun 06 - 09:12 PM (#1756404) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe "Most agree that there is nothing sinister in the terms, which are required to ease the day to day running of myspace." "A word means just what I want it to mean" said Humpty Dumpty. "But..." said Alice... With all those clever highly paid lawyers on staff, having put out something that many people clearly believe gives the shysters free run, why would they do that unless they really wanted to? And if they are really so stupid as really not to be able to tell the difference, why would you REALLY want to deal with them anyway? This 'trick' (think $2 whore!) has been tried on before many times, and only when sufficient resistance built up, did those trying it on back away from it. Remember, all those highly paid lawyers CLAIM that they are EXPERTS on 'precedent'... which is WHY they charge so much... And if nobody is looking, well, maybe we can make money out of it... Check out the TOS of 'Cafepress' now... :-) |
|
09 Jun 06 - 10:22 PM (#1756444) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: CarolC How is this thread not about music? |
|
10 Jun 06 - 04:20 AM (#1756556) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Dunno Carol. -------- I think foolestroupe has it right, and sorry Guest 9 June, 6:41PM, it is something to be concerned about. Read the new terms and conditions carefuly remembering that they may well apply what they say there. |
|
10 Jun 06 - 06:53 AM (#1756587) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe "How is this thread not about music? " Because some narrow minded anal retentive made a ... well whatever... - and I can now say that since this is now hidden in BS... :-P |
|
10 Jun 06 - 07:09 AM (#1756598) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean I was wondering myself why this thread got banished below stairs but didn't want to sound whiny. Thanks for saying it for me, you guys - |
|
10 Jun 06 - 10:04 AM (#1756673) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: mack/misophist It may be worth remembering that Rupert Murdoch owns MySpace.com. Do you trust him? |
|
10 Jun 06 - 10:18 AM (#1756680) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe Haha! |
|
10 Jun 06 - 10:54 AM (#1756694) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Sure. Just as far as I could shot-put a grand piano. |
|
10 Jun 06 - 10:57 AM (#1756696) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bee-dubya-ell This thread is not about music because for the same reason some threads are closed, some posts are deleted, and some members have left this forum: lousy judgement and/or impaired reasoning on the part of one or more forum moderators. And this thread will doubtlessly remain not about music because getting some of our moderators to own up to their lousy judgement and impaired reasoning is pretty damned unlikely. (And, Joe, I've already printed a copy of this post, shredded it, stuffed it into my sanctimonious pipe and am smoking it as I finish typing. I've smoked better, but it's not bad.) |
|
10 Jun 06 - 11:05 AM (#1756700) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST hahahahaha....meow....meow...meow |
|
10 Jun 06 - 11:53 AM (#1756735) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Metchosin Bee-dubya-el, I think it less likely that it was lousy judgement and/or impaired reasoning and more just plain insular ignorance. After all, it wasn't Pete Seeger that pulled out. Or maybe Rupert Murdoch told them personally that this thread was BS. LOL |
|
10 Jun 06 - 12:39 PM (#1756760) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Joe Offer The thread was moved to non-music because I made an honest mistake and saw a lot of words and didn't notice the reference to music. When such things happen, the appropriate response is to ask nicely and privately that the thread be moved to the music section, which is what Bonnie did. Accusations and excoriations are not particularly warranted or appreciated. This would be a much more peaceable world, if people could only realize that our fellow human beings do make mistakes (as we do ourselves), and that mistakes should not be viewed as hostile actions and excuses for counterattack. The Clones I have no reason to move a thread or do other editing actions for sinister reasons. Why would we bother? Please don't accuse us of such. -Joe Offer- |
|
10 Jun 06 - 01:32 PM (#1756787) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo Dewy-eyed Friends Of MySpace (and thus, by association, apologists for the Dirty Digger of Wapping who smashed the UK print unions two decades ago and who inflicted Fox TV on our transatlantic cousins) take a very blinkered view of the implications of meekly handing over all rights to their work just for a bit of free publicity. Guest 6.41 pm says: Most agree that there is nothing sinister in the terms. Most? On the fRoots forum AND even at the BBC, rather a lot of warning bells have been rung (despite being somewhat swamped by acres of space hijacked by a Longdogs (this is a band fansite) escapee under the illusion that MySpace was about to save the world and solve all its problems). I for one am glad to find that a few are beginning wake up and heed these. Here is a clause recently added to the 'terms and conditions': Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com. 1. By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") on or through the Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com, a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services. Wide-ranging or what? Of course, MySpace is a fun place to poke around in and discover new music that's really worth discovering, though it gets tedious among the excess of dross. But I really don't think Murdoch is in it for the philanthropic purpose of providing the new electronic version of the floor spot at folk clubs. Do you? |
|
10 Jun 06 - 03:17 PM (#1756887) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum I don't see any issues with makin my music or photos available through Mypsace. Nor have I have not heard any issues raised by any of the other widely published and widely dirstributed artists on Mypsace. My agreement with them says that they are not on the hook for paying me royalties for my music. That they can make it available to users of their services. Makes sense to me. |
|
10 Jun 06 - 03:21 PM (#1756889) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Unless you have a different agreement to the rest of the world, it says they can do rather more than that. |
|
10 Jun 06 - 03:36 PM (#1756896) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Billy Bragg is a tosser anyway - Jet Setting self appointed Champion Of The Pretend to be non-existant not-working class. Skinhead turned lefty songwriting moneymaker shit. |
|
10 Jun 06 - 05:33 PM (#1756955) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Murdoch is a menace to civilisation. Off to read the Myspace terms. Back soon. |
|
10 Jun 06 - 05:42 PM (#1756957) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Countess Richard has part of the puzzle above. The next bit to look at is the definition of "Services" - "and any other features, content, or applications offered from time to time by MySpace.com in connection with the Website (collectively, the "Services")." So although the licence a user gives to Rupie the Swagman is non-exclusive - it can be for ANYTHING AT ALL that Rupie decides to do with its website. IE Bragg is wholly right. And it gets worse. "MySpace.com may modify this Agreement from time to time and such modification shall be effective upon posting by MySpace.com on the Website. You agree to be bound to any changes to this Agreement when you use the Services after any such modification is posted. It is therefore important that you review this Agreement regularly to ensure you are updated as to any changes" So if Rupie posts a retrospective change to the terms, to validate anything he did in the past that he was not allowed to do, when you next use the website you agree to that retrospective change. It doesn't suprrise me. Not one little bit. For UK "consumers" however the Unfair Terms in consumer contracts regulations might offer some help. However, just to help Rupie stitch users up further, look what you have to do if there is a dispute: - "Disputes. If there is any dispute about or involving the Services, you agree that the dispute shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to conflict of law provisions and you agree to personal jurisdiction by and venue in the state and federal courts of the State of California, City of Los Angeles. Either MySpace.com or you may demand that any dispute between MySpace.com and you arising out of this Agreement must be settled by arbitration utilizing the dispute resolution procedures of the American Arbitration Association (AAA) in Los Angeles, California." Wonder whose side they'd be on then....... |
|
10 Jun 06 - 07:57 PM (#1757021) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Here's the link to the BBC Myspace thread: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio2/F2142825?thread=2380796 And the fRoots one: http://froots.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1292 The benefits of Myspace are huge! At the touch of a button, music is now being whizzed around the world like never before! The other day, on my page, I was playing Seth Lakeman's music and I had a link to his site on the main page. Someone sent me a message, later that day, from Maine in the USA, to say that they'd just heard Seth's music after finding my page and liked it so much that they'd downloaded all three of his CDs from iTunes immediately! Diane (the countess)has been doing her utmost to cause chaos over Myspace, as you'll see in the BBC thread. But..the benefits far outweigh the risks (in my opinion) It is putting artists in touch with other artists and those artists can now also be in touch with their audience too...from a safe and private distance. I can now e mail an artist's page to all sorts of people and say "Here....LISTEN to this music! Isn't it SENSATIONAL!" It is the most magical thing, it really is! Murdoch didn't invent Myspace, he just bought it recently. Ian Anderson of fRoots is behind it, as are other artists on the BBC thread. I'd read what *they* all have to say, before making any decisions on what Diane is saying. There are now over 80 million people in Myspace....there is a whole folk community in there, from musicians to dancers, folk festivals/magazines to radio programmes. It is like it's own music industry now, but one in which we all have a say. Everyone is helping each other, everyone is supportive. If you're paranoid about it all, then just have some samples for people to hear. I've found nearly 600 wonderful musicians from all around the world and some of that music has been staggeringly beautiful! To the extent that I've bought CDs almost immediately!...CDs from artists whom I would probably never, *ever* have heard of if I hadn't been in Myspace. And...they are all here: http://www.myspace.com/lizziecornish And far from going on messageboards to try and put artists OFF Myspace Diane, I'll say once more what I said to you on the BBC, and that is, that perhaps you could do far more good by getting your own page and trying to help all the artists that you admire to spread their music as far as it will reach. Lizzie :0) |
|
10 Jun 06 - 10:32 PM (#1757102) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Lizzie, forget the rose tinted spectacles. As a lawyer, I long ago learned that if someone puts in their contract with you that they can swindle you, they will. It's nothing to do with the benefits - it's the terms and conditions. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 02:07 AM (#1757191) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo And pointing out the all important T&C to starry-eyed artists who foolishly imagine The Digger is handing out a free lunch can scarcely be described as 'causing chaos', rather the reverse. There's a growing realisation that it's not just a loss leader to forgo performing rights on four tracks slapped up on your MySpace site in the expectation of selling millions of CDs in compensation. Yet another new clause has just crept in: a back-up or residual copy of the Content posted by you may remain on the MySpace.com servers after you have removed the Content from the Services, and MySpace.com retains the rights to those copies Scary, right? Once you're caught, you're caught. Yes, there are what look like enormous initial benefits in being able to access music more easily by subverting MySpace, loopholes that Rupie's shit-hot lawyers are plugging as fast as they can because, whatever Ms Cornish tries to tell you, Murdoch isn't suddenly in business to give you something for nothing but purely for his usual reasons, to rip off anyone he can. Can you really feel comfortable about colluding in this in the certain knowledge that you are acquiescing to the negation of hard-won artists' rights? Only those who thought it OK to cross the Wapping picket line or who hold NewsInt shares could go along with that. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 10:12 AM (#1757204) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish So....the other side of all this then, is to walk away. Shut your music down completely! Own it 100%, lock, stock and barrel! Never let ANYONE hear it EVER....because Heck!...if you do...someone might be recording it! They MIGHT pass it on to their pals, free of charge...and then *they* might do the same.... And worry not that your music is suddenly becoming heard by many people, worry not that those people, far from buying a Myspace Greatest Hits CD will be buying music DIRECT from YOU...and telling their friends, passing your page around the world (I found Seth Lakeman on a Russian one the other day).... Show of Hands of course, have been TELLING people to copy their music for years! At every single gig they stand on stage and give people their permission to record the show, then to copy their music and send it on to others, with their blessings....because they KNOW that whilst they may lose a few CD sales, they will gain many more. And along with those extra CD sales...they will also gain new people who will become part of the Show of Hands world. Many of those people who learnt about Steve and Phil through 'copied' music will, no doubt, be at the third sold out BIG GIG at the Royal Albert Hall next Easter...tickets for which went within days! If someone ELSE owned Myspace Diane, would you be ranting quite so hard??????? How much is this about Murdoch and how much is about Myspace? And do you really think that Murdoch is going to make an absolute fortune selling 4 tracks of people's music? Perhaps it's because you're *not* in Myspace that you don't understand the strength and incredibly postivie benefits of it. But..I'll leave you to spread your negativity....as you always seem to want to do..... Lizzie |
|
11 Jun 06 - 10:21 AM (#1757207) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Nothing like adding Mad Lizzie's confusion to a discussion is there? |
|
11 Jun 06 - 10:32 AM (#1757211) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge No, the other side of the coin is to provide low quality streaming from your own site, using the free webspace your ISP gives you. If anyone rips you off, you can sue them (or MCPS/PRS can do it for you). If being heard matters so much you give your work away, fine, post it to myspace, and even play in those disgusting "pay to play" scam venues. Read my lips. If you post stuff to myspace Rupie can (non-exclusively) do what he likes with it, even in direct commercial competition with you. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 11:45 AM (#1757240) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish So what *is* ol' 'Rupie' going to do then Richard? Could someone please explain to me exactly *WHAT* he may be planning? People can already download from Myspace, if the artist has activated the button. There'll be millions of people who probably already have their own Myspace CDs, made up from a variety of artists. Do you seriously think they'd pay good money to buy one of Rupie's? Would anyone from the folk world buy a Rupie CD? I don't think so. I just need to know in 'easy to understand terms' what you and Diane think Mr.Murdoch has apparently got planned for everyone in Myspace, that's all. I'm intrigued. And why, as I said before, if you're really worried, can't you just put samples on your page, as some people do anyway? End of problem I'd have thought, if you've a problem that is, in the first place of course. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 12:00 PM (#1757246) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Lizzie, it doesn't matter what anyone THINKS could happen. The point is what the law SAYS could happen. Nobody is stopping anyone else from using MySpace. But circulating the hard facts of the case ARE of interest to some. I know opinions are sharply divided on this matter, but arguing opinions, from any angle, is futile and will turn this thread - like so many others - sour. I'm beginning to wish Joe had left it in the basement - |
|
11 Jun 06 - 12:13 PM (#1757251) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Metchosin According to Billy Bragg's site there, the part regarding the back-up copy and MySpace's rights to the copy has now been removed from the fine print. It appears some good stuff does come about from getting your shirt in a knot. I noticed that my daughter's band has removed their music from the site until such time as things get sorted. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 12:33 PM (#1757267) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Sorry Bonnie, I've just been through all this before on the BBC board. I'll leave you all to it then. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 12:55 PM (#1757279) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: hesperis I read the terms, which is why I only put up one 30-second clip on myspace, and a couple of photos. Everything else is on my own website. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 03:02 PM (#1757345) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Of course the REAL test of MySpace's intentions hasn't been posed yet. Wait till someone gets a mega-worldwide hit with a song that's subject to those T's & C's. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 03:47 PM (#1757371) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Where there's a hit there's a writ. Spot on Bonnie. With all the music put up there sooner or later a recording or a musical work or some lyrics (a literary work) posted is going the become valuable. Rupie is going to want a large sum of money to release the rights his T+Cs give him. Scamster. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 05:09 PM (#1757412) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Funnily enough, I'm reading (and had started before seeing the article that sparked off this thread) Simon Garfield's "Expensive Habits: The Dark Side Of The Music Industry" which deals with the huge lawsuits and losses and career-stalling legal delays incurred by famous & successful artists because of having signed a ruinous contract, usually hastily and without professional advice, with stars in the eyes and nothing in the fridge. It's enough to run your blood cold. |
|
11 Jun 06 - 07:02 PM (#1757490) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe "Lizzie, it doesn't matter what anyone THINKS could happen. The point is what the law SAYS could happen." "When I Rule The World, I'm going to murder an entire ethinc group, and as many others as I can", he said. They all laughed, "No one is that crazy!" "Of course the REAL test of MySpace's intentions hasn't been posed yet. Wait till someone gets a mega-worldwide hit with a song that's subject to those T's & C's. " |
|
11 Jun 06 - 07:15 PM (#1757502) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Ralph Lizzie. If you have actually enjoyed my music, then please respect what I say. MySpace is a way to fleece artists of the rights to their own music. No question about it.. No amount of enthusiasm from you will change that. Mr Murdoch is not in this for himself. He is in it for what he can get. Can't imagine him singing a shanty....can you? You may have not heard of Bonnie, or the wonderful music that she plays, you may not have heard of Billy Bragg. But realise that MySpace sucks. Let it go. There is enough injustice in this world without promoting more. Ralph |
|
11 Jun 06 - 07:21 PM (#1757516) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe Just keep scouring the TOS for the bit that goes... "posting a fragment of a work by a copyright holder assigns all rights in perpetuity for the entire work to MySpace"... He has to sneak that one in when everybody is looking away... |
|
11 Jun 06 - 11:55 PM (#1757701) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge It's already there, see above. The only minor saving grace is that it is on a non-exclusive basis. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 02:50 AM (#1757743) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister For what it's worth - I'm as sceptical as most of you about Murdoch and his T&Cs (hey, I was living in Wapping when he moved in and remember how he got the local police to protect his workers instead of keeping the neighbourhood safe). What we decided to do with my music samples was to keep them deliberately low fi, so if anyone (RM or someone else) decides to rip them off - or "own" them - they're not getting the best quality recordings. He can only claim the recordings, not the songs themselves, so that should be some form of control. It has resulted in one unpleasant message from someone who decided to inform me I should invest in better recording equipment, but I think I can cope with that level of feedback. But we may decide to pull out of the whole thing - so far the main messages I've been getting have been from fellow musicians anyway. Anne (Lister) |
|
12 Jun 06 - 03:21 AM (#1757752) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge No, the T+Cs grant rights in the music words and recording. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 04:47 AM (#1757784) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Nigel Paterson I had, at one time thought that 'The Halliard' might benefit from inclusion in MySpace. Having read most of the debate here & elsewhere & the T&C several times, I wouldn't touch it with the mandatory ten foot barge pole. Nigel Paterson (The Halliard) |
|
12 Jun 06 - 05:16 AM (#1757796) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Kenneth Ingham What's all the fuss Rupert is a nice guy! |
|
12 Jun 06 - 05:23 AM (#1757801) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Tabster's not kidding about being aware of Rupie's doings in the Wapping days. I can remembering driving to see her one evening during that time and having to stop the car when it got surrounded by a group of men demanding to know where I was going and what I wanted. J-j-just v-v-visiting a friend I squeaked, and they let me through without further incident or any real unpleasantness (though being physically halted by a gang was pretty unpleasant). I suppose they realised that a lone woman in a small aging canary-yellow Renault wasn't going to pose much of a threat. To try to steer this back on track, it shows you the impact Rupie and his dealings can have on society. You don't get street-vigilance over philanthropic acts. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 05:26 AM (#1757803) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST The terms would be of concern regardless of who owned myspace. As far as I can see, the only difference "nice guy Rupert" makes to the situation is that the knowledge that he has a proven track record of being a ruthless bastard does IMO add to the likleyhood of what could happen under the terms actually happening. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 06:17 AM (#1757829) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Ralph, You are entitled to your opinion, and I respect that, but I am also entitled to mine as well and therefore, I would ask *you* to respect that. To be honest,I'm fair fed up with you telling me what to do and to dampen my enthusiasm etc.etc. I would rather die than give up an ounce of my enthusiasm or love for this music that I have found! So....I'd suggest we agree to differ. You enthuse your way and I'll enthuse mine! And PLEASE stop being so patronising as to suggest that I've not heard of Bonnie or Billy! Sheesh!!!! AND.....It strikes me that nearly all the criticism that comes on these threads is from people who don't have a Myspace page in the first place, and who are therefore totally unaware of the power that this site has to promote music and support musicians, in a way that's never happened before. SO...could someone 'legal' out there please tell me what the problem is with people just putting 'long snippets' on there then? Are you actually thinking that even if you so much as put *one line* of your song/s on Myspace, then Rupie will grab 100% of the rights to your song/s for evermore? Or is it that he is saying, a bit like an estate agent would, "Hey, without my site people may never have discovered your music in the first place, so therefore I want a bit of the action?" I'd appreciate it if the reply to this could be printed in easy to understand language, as I am of course a *complete and total idiot* as those of you who have watched the BBC board have no doubt obviously realised, if you've not already been over there and told me to so or to er..."Go away and leave you all alone" that is. And have you all written to Myspace to get this sorted, as Billy has suggested? If not...I'd suggest you spend less time in here moaning and far more time over there helping to get it worked out properly. I've already written to them. No doubt Rupert Murdoch has signed a contract of a very different sort for me, for doing that, but hey..I'm an ex Radio 2 Folk & Acousticer and I love to live dangerously! ;0) Billy has asked as many people as possible to help him on this, so get out there and do just that! |
|
12 Jun 06 - 06:30 AM (#1757839) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Lizzie "I'll leave you all to it then." Please do. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 06:42 AM (#1757844) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Lizzie, someone "legal out there" has made numerous posts explaining in no uncertain terms what the problem is. You just don't want to see it. And: If you really care about the well-being of all the artists you endorse (and I don't think anyone doubts your sincerity) - DO YOU HONESTLY WANT THEM TO BE AT RISK OF GETTING RIPPED OFF in the way they stand a real chance of being? |
|
12 Jun 06 - 07:03 AM (#1757850) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo Hasn't it occurred to LC that those who have declined to place their work on a MySite page, thus handing it on a plate to a shyster known not for philanthropy but for megalomaniacal designs on world media domination and who screws anybody who gets in the way are merely taking care to hang on the what's theirs? No, clearly not. Nor has it occurred to her that those who are simply interpreting the obvious in the T&C have a head start of at least 30 years of musbiz experience and have seen too much happen to friends that they don't want to see again. Try respecting that. As Bonnie says, it's not what anybody thinks might happen. It's about what the law allows right now. Grow up, LC. Go and listen to the replayer where Steve Knightley is somewhere, drivelling on the Today programme on R4 this morning. It's more your level. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 07:13 AM (#1757854) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Same old, same old Diane (coutness). You can throw whatever insults you want to. I just want a specific answer to the question above about snippets of music etc. You've no idea what is happening in Myspace or of the community in there, not just folk, but 'world'. And 'GUEST' if you're too cowardly to hurl verbal daggers under your own name....then please, don't expect me to read them. As I stated above, I'd say to get behind Billy Bragg...and...because of the magic of Myspace, here IS Billy's page, where you can read not only his Blogs, but also many replies from other Myspacers and from Billy himself. Heck!...you could all even get your own pages and rush over there to communicate with Billy personally. http://www.myspace.com/billybragg |
|
12 Jun 06 - 07:13 AM (#1757855) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish ...or even...(countess)...Woops! |
|
12 Jun 06 - 07:33 AM (#1757865) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo I'm insulting Murdoch. It may be the same old but I've been doing it for a very long time, I do know what I'm talking about and I know as much about what's happening on MySpace now as I did about what was occurring on the Sunday Times then. LC on the other hand has clearly absolutely no idea what she's talking about and is insulting my friends. I'm telling her to stop it. I don't think I'm alone in wanting that. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 07:43 AM (#1757873) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon Sorry Lizzie, I started off accidentaly posting my first 2 posts in this thread without a name and then continued as anon rather than correcting what was a genuine mistake on my part - I shouldn't have done that. I am Jon Freeman, my posts are 10/6: 4:20AM, 3:21pm - 11/6 10:21am - 12/6 5:26am, 6:30am. And I do think you are a troll and a handicap to any reasonable attempts at discussion. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 08:00 AM (#1757887) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Russells goat Not everyone agrees with Billy, http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=81619316&blogID=130719844&MyToken=c27802ce-7a42-49e8-8b0d-ac0517 |
|
12 Jun 06 - 08:28 AM (#1757915) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: John Hernandez Yes, not everyone agrees with Billy Bragg. But the blogger cited above, in addition to saying some harsh words about Bragg, calls MySpace, "the church at which my cultists gather." Well, MySpace is not a church, even for cultists. It is a commercial enterprise, and its sole purpose is to enrich Murdoch and his News International Corporation. The Terms and Conditions may not be a plot aimed at Bragg in particular, but they are completely one-sided in favor of the corporation. That should be expected since they were drawn up by lawyers for only one side. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 08:34 AM (#1757921) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish What a great shame you feel that way Jon, but it is your freedom to think that way. Nothing else to say to you I'm afraid, except that I hope you're feeling better. I've just been on Azizi's thread about African music, it's really interesting. I put the Myspace link to Ayub Ogada's beautiful music on there, I'd never heard of Ayub until I went into Myspace. We now have his CD and we'll be looking out for his next one as soon as it comes out. Utterly stunning music...and guess what? Azizi loves it as well....and Ayub's page is now whizzing it's way around Azizi's friends as well, on the other side of the world. Here IS Ayub: http://www.myspace.com/ayubogada It is truly amazing. Lizzie :0) |
|
12 Jun 06 - 08:37 AM (#1757924) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean And the website said blog appears on? One, two, threeeeeeeeee - it's - MYSPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE !!!!!!! What a surprise. I don't take seriously any anonymous post that begins "Get your claws, with the filth inches thick under the finger nails, back in you glorified busking hobo. Put down your well thumbed copy of Das Capital and engage your brain for a second or two. You've got problems with myspace, the church at which my cultists gather..." and deteriorates from there. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 08:57 AM (#1757939) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Anyway I read somewhere they censor their blogs. You write something they dont like & off it comes. So anything you read there is one-sided anyway |
|
12 Jun 06 - 09:00 AM (#1757941) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Hmmmmm. Those of a nasty, suspicious nature could even begin to wonder whether that un-named flamer was someone from MySpace? Trying to insult a protester by calling them a commie is usually a dead giveaway... |
|
12 Jun 06 - 09:11 AM (#1757946) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe I tried to complain about that poster using the word 'fart' and they insisted on knowing who I was. Sounds like a Commie Plot to me... wait on, Murdoch, OK, Fascist Plot, then... |
|
12 Jun 06 - 09:40 AM (#1757960) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: John Hernandez "What a great shame you feel that way Jon, [sic] but it is your freedom to think that way. Nothing else to say to you I'm afraid, except that I hope you're feeling better." Wow, what did I write that someone is concerned about my health? My point is that the Terms and Conditions offered by MySpace are completely one-sided because they were drawn up by lawyers for only one side. I work for a general contractor and I know when contracts are drawn up by only one side they are always one-sided. When contracts are drawn up in negotiations by lawyers from both sides they are always more equitable. That's not a choice MySpace offers. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 09:41 AM (#1757961) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean The open letter to Billy Bragg in the MySpace blog appears to have been written by the same Guest who posted the link to it here, one Russell Brand (who mentions his goat in his own subtext). Interesting profile he's got (not sure if he's taking the piss or not, Gawd I hope so): http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=816193 |
|
12 Jun 06 - 09:42 AM (#1757962) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon It was not to you John, it was to me (Jon). |
|
12 Jun 06 - 10:21 AM (#1757983) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum I just don't see any dangers. I cannot loose my intellectual property. I have agreed not to hold Myspace resonsible for any royalty fees for distribution of my music (words or photos) through their site and I have guaranteed that I own the rights to music (pics and thoughts) I put there (or that the music is in the public domain). These are all reasonable things to me. A quick look at Mypspace members shows that the Mypsace contract has passed the legal scrutiny for these folks, American folk/bluegrassers: Tim O'Brien , Willie Nelson, Gillian Welch, Dolly Parton, Reba McEntire, Doc Watson, Tony Rice And for these Celtic performers: Lunasa , Altan, The Chieftains, David Francey, Alasdair Fraser, Natalie Haas, Rachel Hair, Tommy Makem, Battlefield Band These are just my friends or my Myspace freinds. There are many many other professional musicians who've agreed to put up their music - and there are thousands of semi-pro and amatuers as well. What would Myspace gain by getting into an ugly distribution rights issue with me, with Dolly Parton, with Tommy Makem or with a class action suit by all of us? Would they really risk all by a dodgey intellectual rights issue for the SALE of music for any of us? They may be evil, but they're not stupid. It is in their best interest, to take advantage of the "pull power" of our music to their site, so they can sell advertizing. That is their obvious motive - and that's OK with me. That is obviously OK with many many other artists. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 02:42 PM (#1758211) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Hello Lizzie, I'm a lawyer, read my lips. Jed, sorry, but you only retain non-exclusive rights to whatever you put on Myspace. So you do lose your intellectual property rights. You lose joint ownership in them to Rupie. And do you think Rupie is scared of a lawsuit, no matter from whom? They are his hobby! Read the contract before signing it. If it is not fair to you don't sign it. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 03:21 PM (#1758248) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum do you really believe Myspace will attempt to claim royalties or mechanical license fees for my music? |
|
12 Jun 06 - 03:34 PM (#1758255) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister Whether or not RM wants proceedings to be legal under State of California legislation I think he or his minions would have a hard time claiming any form of ownership of my songs (other than the low fi recorded samples) on the words of his T&C. At any rate I will email MySpace and raise my objections and see what happens next. I'll keep you all posted. Anne |
|
12 Jun 06 - 03:45 PM (#1758265) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister OK - this is what I've sent to Customer Services: I am concerned about the Terms and Conditions of MySpace, following the public withdrawal of Billy Bragg. I hadn't realised that the assumption by MySpace of rights over my intellectual property and recording would be so complete, and that in agreeing to waive my own royalties I appear to have given carte blanche to MySpace to take over my material. Can you let me know whether there are any plans to re-word the agreement to reduce this assumption of control? If not, I will regretfully have to cancel my participation in the whole procedure. I'm an independent songwriter and have always been careful to avoid allowing anyone else any rights over my material. I'd appreciate a prompt reply. As I said, I'll keep you all posted! Anne |
|
12 Jun 06 - 03:49 PM (#1758268) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Richard does this mean they still can hold on to your rights even after you've ended your MySpace agreement? And that they'll take a hunk of your pie but YOU pay all the fees and royalties even if it arises out of some action of theirs? I'm not sure if I understand the last sentence right. And what exactly does non-exclusive mean in legal talk? Fully-paid WHAT? Sorry I find this confusing Term. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while you use the Services or are a Member. You may terminate your Membership at any time, for any reason. MySpace.com may terminate your Membership at any time, without warning. Even after Membership is terminated, this Agreement will remain in effect, including sections 5-17. EVEN AFTER MEMBERSHIP IS TERMINATED, THIS AGREEMENT WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT, INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-17 And guess what number 6 is: 6. Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com. By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") on or through the Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com, a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services. This license will terminate at the time you remove such Content from the Services. But will they still own a piece of you? - - You agree to pay for all royalties, fees, and any other monies owing any person by reason of any Content posted by you to or through the Services. You grant them a royalty-free worldwide license, royalties which you yourself have to pay? |
|
12 Jun 06 - 04:54 PM (#1758312) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Distinguish fees that may be payable to anyone else for any part of your work - eg if you used a sample and have to pay for it - from the money raised by your work. If you owe someone royalties for Rupie's use of your work with the sample in it - you pay it not him. The other side of it is you getting the royalties for your own work. How to explain "non-exclusive"? Hmm. You write a song. Copyright arises automatically (even in the USA, since the USA joined the Berne Convention). Only you can authorise anyone to do any of the acts restricted by copyright. That's exclusive. It excludes everyone else, unless you permit what they do. A non-exclusive right, someone else can permit things, as well as you. So if you give Rupie a non-exclusive right (for example) to authorise downloads of your music, either you or he can authorise that thing. So if you get offered a paid-for contract for downloads of your music, if you are prepared to accept 1 cent per download, but Rupie is prepared to accept 0.5 cents, he gets the contract and you get nothing. If you get offered a songwriting contract or a music publising deal (invariably only ever offered on an exclusive basis) you can't give the exclusive rights to the songs you put on mysapce 'cos Rupie already has concurrent non-exclusive rights with you. Did I make that clear? |
|
12 Jun 06 - 05:36 PM (#1758347) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum I can't imagine placing anything on Myspace that was not already published - therefore my licensing rights already limited to mechanical license. My permission is NOT required for mechanical license of a published work. I understand the dangers of placing UNpublished works on Myspace - but I don't see that I have anything to loose with published works. ASCAP already tracks performance roylaties (radio play) for me - and my mechanical license agreements for those also publishing my sonsg are still in effect. Am I missing something? |
|
12 Jun 06 - 05:46 PM (#1758359) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean What's the deal with this? > EVEN AFTER MEMBERSHIP IS TERMINATED, THIS AGREEMENT WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT, INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-17 And guess what number 6 is: 6. Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com. |
|
12 Jun 06 - 06:14 PM (#1758382) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Bonnie, you can't get your rights back from Myspace. Jed, if Rupie decides to offer a service associated with Myspace that replicates anything your music publisher exclusively has, you have just put yourself in breach of your music publishing agreement and the Myspace terms in one fell swoop. Why not check with your music publisher "Uh, I'm thinking of putting one of the songs you have on Myspace and here are the Myspace terms for you to check". Wait for the explosion! US has compulsory mechanical licence for published works. UK does not (abolished it in 1988), other places vary. What about commercial downloads? Ooh-er Missus! |
|
13 Jun 06 - 02:40 AM (#1758643) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister Um ... Richard, if the US has a compulsory mechanical licence for published works, how is it that I'm dependent on honest folkies to pay me when they record my songs? Because nothing - nothing! - ever reaches me via ASCAP or Harry Fox. And that I know of at least two recordings for which I've never received a cent? And on a different tack - to quote again 6. Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com. By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") on or through the Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com, a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services. This license will terminate at the time you remove such Content from the Services. Isn't the last sentence significant? So if I remove my content from the services, the license is terminated. Surely? Anne |
|
13 Jun 06 - 03:25 AM (#1758655) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Ralphie Ralph, You are entitled to your opinion, and I respect that, but I am also entitled to mine as well and therefore, I would ask *you* to respect that. To be honest,I'm fair fed up with you telling me what to do and to dampen my enthusiasm etc.etc. I would rather die than give up an ounce of my enthusiasm or love for this music that I have found! So....I'd suggest we agree to differ. You enthuse your way and I'll enthuse mine! And PLEASE stop being so patronising as to suggest that I've not heard of Bonnie or Billy! Sheesh!!!! Lizzie. Apologies for the Bonnie and Billy bit. Glad to know that you listen. With great respect, I am not talking about enthusiasts here.(Like yourself, and nothing wrong with enthusiasm) There are a lot of fine musicians on this board (and others) who are trying very hard to make a living by playing music. We are a suspicious lot. I know of many people who have had their fingers burned by getting "into bed" with unscrupulous agents, Record companies, etc, etc. Personally, I wouldn't even answer the phone to Mr Murdoch. And the thought of giving up my rights (all of them) to such a place as My Space. ....! Well, I might as well respond to the Nigerian Scam... "Yes, I'd love to look after your 50 Million Nigerian dollars, here is my bank details and my PIN number" Sorry Lizzie. You are a fan of music...Good, Enjoy... But don't start telling struggling artists how to run their lives. (Quote from Lizzie) "It strikes me that nearly all the criticism that comes on these threads is from people who don't have a Myspace page in the first place, and who are therefore totally unaware of the power that this site has to promote music and support musicians, in a way that's never happened before." And the reason why the critics of My Space don't have a page on My Space......???? Go Figure Ralphie |
|
13 Jun 06 - 03:51 AM (#1758663) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge As Countess Richard points out "a back-up or residual copy of the Content posted by you may remain on the MySpace.com servers after you have removed the Content from the Services, and MySpace.com retains the rights to those copies" Secondly, Rupie can change the deal any time he likes "MySpace.com may modify this Agreement from time to time and such modification shall be effective upon posting by MySpace.com on the Website. You agree to be bound to any changes to this Agreement when you use the Services after any such modification is posted. It is therefore important that you review this Agreement regularly to ensure you are updated as to any changes" |
|
13 Jun 06 - 05:27 AM (#1758699) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Geoff the Duck Trusting R Murdoch to look ater your financial interests - it's a bit like asking Myra Hindley in to do the babysitting. That said, I doubt that it would mater much exactly which big business owned the site. Anyone who imposes a dodgy contract does not do so for the benefit of the unwary possible victims. I seem to recall that a few years back a lot of mudcatters had music on a site called MP3.com and were fairly happy for a while until the bosses of the firm started messing them about in favour of people they thought they could make big cash from exploiting. The result was lawsuits and finally the web site closing down. The name was then bought by some other firm and used for diferent purposes. I'm not sure how much overlap the problems with myspace and MP3.com might have, but as soon as somebody thinks that they can make a swift buck, make sure that they don't have a contract which makes it legal at your expense. Quack! GtD. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:12 AM (#1758711) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Ralph! You are driving me nuts at present! Grrrrrrrrr! OoooH! Grrrrrrrr! ;0) I'm not 'ordering' musicians to go and get a page. If people have such closed down minds, well...there is nothing I can do about that. Each to their own. But just as much as YOU think I'm bossing you and others around...I think you're doing exactly the same, by constantly advocating the people should NOT go into Myspace. There are TWO sides of this coin. Over 80 million people are in there now. And the people whom I have been talking to, are not the sort who'd buy a Rupie Compilation Album! I've had e mails from some people which say that THEIR lawyers HAVE looked into all the details and they are entirely satisfied! I know that Richard is saying the opposite, but as Jed said earlier....do you really think that the big stars, who can afford the best lawyers in the WORLD would be in there, if there were such major problems?????? AND....even if Rupie tried something on....do you seriously think that he'd get away with it, with an army of music lawyers in there? These guys are used to dealing with music contracts, they do it every day of their lives for the mega stars. I truly cannot believe that they've ALL overlooked something which Richard apparently has not. I'm just saying that to dissuade people is wrong. Tell people to read the small print and get it checked....fair enough...everyone should do that anyway. But to say people shouldn't use it purely because Rupie owns it now..well..that way lies madness, in my opinion. I am totally, 100% with Ian Anderson on this one (shock! horror!) ;0) Ian has said many a time something along the lines that this is a very valuable site. He can see the positives, just as I can. Do you honestly think that Ian would have his music playing on there if he was worried? LOOK!: http://www.myspace.com/vulturama I can understand Billy's reaction, but whilst I appreciate what he's doing, in trying to get the legalities made clear to everyone, even those without highly over-paid lawyers...I think it has been an over-reaction. The amount of music that I have discovered Ralph, from right around the world is mind-boggling! The places that site is taking me to cannot be over-enthused about! It does not just open up music, it opens up people and it opens up minds. It is uniting the world in a way that has never happened before. The other day I 'fell' into the songs of Vinnie James, such wonderful songs about what is happening in this troubled world of ours! http://www.myspace.com/vinniejames Oh, his words are so wise! We immediately got his 'All American Boy' CD and every single song just took me to yet more places that I want to be. Yet, I'd never have found Vinnie had it not been for Myspace! Music like his can make such a difference to this world and our children. And NOW, through his page...Vinnie has 'a voice'...He CAN let his music be heard right around the world and we are all switching in and listening to him, believe you me! He is part African, part Native American and the wisdom he has...well, it gives you hope for the future. Through Vinnie's page I have found many Native American sites. And Oh...you can literally feel the pain of the Native American people coming off their pages! And when you read what they say, realise their wisdom and how we should all be adopting their outlook, not only for ourselves but for the sake of this incredible planet..well, it makes you rage inside that they have been so overlooked for so long! And the anger of the Hawaiian people too. And as you move from country to country you begin to see that so many of us are feeling the same....sick of the way the world is at present, wanting desperately to change it, knowing that we HAVE to! Yes, it's ironic that one of the world's richest corporate businessmen is now in charge of this wondrous site, but maybe...just MAYBE..he was 'meant' to buy Myspace for a purpose that even he never dreamt of. Perhaps even Rupert Murdoch is having his eyes opened in a way he never has before! MAYBE...even HE is tuning in and watching...watching as the Native Americans begin to link with others around the world, taking their wisdom with them, as the indigenous peoples of the planet begin to stand up and say "ENOUGH!"....as we all begin to realise that actually, we are all ONE PEOPLE! And it is happening through their music Ralph! There have been three phrases I've seen recently in Myspace which won't leave my head: "Turning one voice into millions" "We are all in this together" And.... "Nothing changes if nothing changes" I'm afraid that I have come to realise that there is a certain element within the English Traditional world which *wants* nothing to change, in any way whatsoever. But it IS changing...and you cannot stop it. BUT...it is changing for the better! British music should be known about on the other side of the world, just as people's music over there, should be known about, discussed and played over here. Myspace gives the world that opportunity! AND...it is a golden opportunity, not just for Rupert to make more money from advertising, but for millions of others, in a very different way. If you don't want to know, fair enough. But I'd say it is unfair to do all in your power to put people off. Tell them the anxieties you have by all means, but then let people make up their own minds and explore deeper. The legal advice on this page comes from just one person, I believe. There is no way that we know that it is correct, any more than we know that it is not. These are all just opinions. With great respect Richard, I'm sure there are thousands of lawyers who have perused Rupert Murdoch's contracts with a magnifying glass, month after month, before advising their clients to put their music up on site. I'm with Jed Marum on this one. See his posts above. Oh....and TALKING of Jed....I found his music yesterday and it is wonderful!! Yesterday afternoon Jed was in my living room...hour after hour....and he lives in Texas! But we were playing his music over and over. Take a listen to 'Soul Of A Wanderer'...it will bring tears to your eyes, the way that Jed sings it...such tenderness! http://www.myspace.com/jedmarumband ...and all I know Ralph, is that my world would be that little bit less bright if I'd not found Jed's music, and way darker if I had not found Vinnie's. And each time this happens, another star is lit, another light comes on in my life....and I pass those lights on to my children too. Would I ever want to lose the sheer *beauty* of the section of the human race that I have found, which lies within Myspace? NEVER....EVER! Lizzie :0) |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:15 AM (#1758713) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Is there a difference between the "license" and the "Agreement" (note capital letter)? In the T&Cs (at least until Rupie changes them without warning) you get the Term, which is shown first, in which it says the bit about the Agreement remaining in effect even after you leave. The only place where it says the license will terminate when you remove your stuff is under Clause 6, which comes AFTER the term. The two statements appear to contradict each other - or is there some distinction between "the license" which ends, and the "Agreement" which doesn't, even after you've terminated the license as per the terms of Clause 6? Does the Term take precedence over Clause 6? My spell-checker turned "Rupie" into "rupee". Apt. - - - Term. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while you use the Services or are a Member... You may terminate your Membership at any time, for any reason... MySpace.com may terminate your Membership at any time, without warning. Even after Membership is terminated, this Agreement will remain in effect, INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-17. [My caps - BS] And then, a bit further down in No. 6 6. Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com. ... This license will terminate at the time you remove such Content from the Services. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:19 AM (#1758716) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Lizzie, PLEASE!!! There are NOT two sides to this coin. There is ONE: the legal side. This thread is not about opinions or wishes or what music one loves. Its about GETTING RIPPED OFF. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:52 AM (#1758728) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo LC: Nothing changes if nothing changes What kind of a meaningless platitude is that? John Tams: Nothing changes it all stays the same Some things do - like peeps with selective hearing. Richard Bridge is going to be highly amused at this slur on his legal experience. Unlike him I'm not a lawyer but am merely qualified to translate contracts in three languages. Unsurprisingly, I've always looked askance at clauses which assign ridiculously stacked advantages to one party and wonder how on earth pens ever touched parchment. In a different life though I've also known many a struggling artist who signed stuff in desperation and without advice just to get a start, or whose rights (non-exclusive or at any rate shared) were transferred over their heads to a different and very much less co-operative owner. Life's tough enough without struggling to get back what's yours and future potential victims need all the advice they can get to avoid falling into the rip-off trap. (Note to Bonnie: last time . . .) |
|
13 Jun 06 - 07:12 AM (#1758735) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Well, if you're so well qualified in legal things Diane, it's a great shame that you let your tongue run you into libellous conversations over on the Radio 2 board recently then! And you did it in only one language. Personally, after seeing your 'legal' knowledge on that thread I'd run as far in the opposite direction from you, or your opinions, as fast I possibly could! I'm sure Richard does his job very well. I expect Dolly Parton will be on the phone to him any minute! And Bonnie...there are always TWO sides to everything. Thank you. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 07:27 AM (#1758746) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo VERY last time (and purely to correct LC's bollox-spouting: (1) I am NOT legally qualified (except to intermediate in French law) (2) It is not 'libel' to point out matters of fact which a party finds uncomfortable and would prefer not to have mentioned. It is 'potentially defamatory' , in which the burden is on the plaintiff to prove loss. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 07:40 AM (#1758752) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Don't you go giving me any of that nonsense! You actually had to apologise...possibly for the first time known to man, woman or beast!! The repercussions from that outburst the other day could have been dreadful! And did you care? NO! The only thing you cared about was slamming into someone, with as it turned out, the wrong opinion. And once again, Ian Anderson publicly disagreed with you on that one too! So once more, I also re-iterate what I have said. By all means tell people about your 'anxieties' but then, let them make their own decisions. Oh and Richard, to quote you.."Read my lips"....Has Dolly phoned yet? |
|
13 Jun 06 - 07:54 AM (#1758764) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Is there a difference between the "license" and the "Agreement" ??? |
|
13 Jun 06 - 08:11 AM (#1758771) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo This is completely off-topic (though actually related, hypothetically and in an odd way) to the actual subject matter of this thread. Just in case anyone knows (or cares) what LC is blathering about, I'll make this brief statement: (1) I apologised for the flippant way in which I had raised a serious matter (as I do often) concerning music distribution which has 'potential repercussions' on ARTISTS. Irony does not always come over well on line. (2) It was no 'outburst' but evidence from an ongoing investigation into said distribution methods which had been put to the company concerned with no reponse. Since it is permissable to speak of those involved here (though not at the BBC) the precise matter may well re-emerge in this forum. It has before. (3) Ian Anderson does not disagree with me. We have differences of emphasis on MySpace but on the matter of ripping off artists, we are one. (Oh, and by the way, he thanks you very much for directing people towards Vulturama . . . ) End of . . . |
|
13 Jun 06 - 08:29 AM (#1758777) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Er..no...Ian Anderson actually came on to disagree with what you appeared to be insinuating and he stood up completely for the company that you were so eager to try and malign. And it was a pleasure to put Ian's site on here. Lizzie :0) |
|
13 Jun 06 - 09:18 AM (#1758805) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: dwditty I like myspace. Lots fo hits...met lots of other local musicians...and I keep in touch with my kids, to boot. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 09:20 AM (#1758809) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Is there a difference between the "license" and the "Agreement" - re my post of 6:15 - ??? |
|
13 Jun 06 - 09:27 AM (#1758815) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo LC: Save it for the Celtic Music No 7 thread which should be along by and by. This will contain (as usual) a dedicated reservation for those who like to flaunt their complete ignorance of how the music industry operates and equate, amazingly, the wearing of a suit with truthfulness. Bonnie: I'm not sure but I'm trying to get it charified. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 09:43 AM (#1758832) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon I like myspace. Lots fo hits...met lots of other local musicians...and I keep in touch with my kids, to boot. That's fine dwditty. I don't think anyone is disputing there are not useful sides to myspace. The point of this thread (at least to me) though is over actual terms and conditions on the site which as far as I can see (and a lawyer has explained) could be of concern to artists. If someone else can offer a different legal interpretation of what is written down, I'd be pleased to read it... |
|
13 Jun 06 - 09:53 AM (#1758842) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Ralph Lizzie. I refuse to be lectured/hectored by you on this subject. You assume a lot, and actually know very little. I had the honour of working with John Peel for over 30 years. Andy Kershaw for at least 20. Verity and Fiona on Late Junction since it's inception. I have also produced several CD's (Not least being Nic Jones "Unearthed") The whole point of this thread (as I see it) was to make people aware of the dangers in giving up the rights of their work to someone else....no more, no less. I will not apologise for warning artists to avoid such a place as My Space. If you want to find artists/tunes/songs/ etc...Just ask the questions here!! I've learnt an enourmous amount from the good people of the Cat. From all parts of the world. All given (nearly!!) with good heart and good spirit. Knowing how some artists have been ripped off by various shysters over the years. I'm hardly going to give a glowing endorsement to, what is a frankly, very dodgy outfit run by a very rich foreigner. And to finish, that, as someone who didn't even have the courage to come up to me at Sidmouth in Feb to say hello. How dare you assume that you understand what my agenda might be. End Ralph |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:26 AM (#1758859) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum ... and so, apparently all of the artists who believe the naysaying, Rupie haters are simply blowing smoke are idiots. I think a quick look at those of us signed to Myspace (some listed above) show just how many idiots there are. And perhaps chicken little was right. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:36 AM (#1758863) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Ralph...Grrrrrrrrr!!! I didn't come up to you at Sidmouth because you had already started ranting at me on the Radio 2 board! You didn't seriously expect me to feel at ease about saying hello? But I was grinning at you, from ear to ear. And you grinned back too! AND...YOU are lecturing ME! I don't much care who you know or have known in the past, present or future! I'm just saying that you have a right to your opinions over Myspace and I have a right to mine. AND...as I am in there a great deal and have come into contact with loads of wonderful people, ONLY because of Myspace...and have discovered an absolute wealth of musical treasure in there, I will continue to sing it's praises! Everywhere I go people tell me to write how THEY want me to write, to only talk about what THEY want me talk about, to not use Smilies, to not write overlong pieces, to not talk about Myspace or Show of Hands or a thousand other artists who don't fit in with the English Traditionalists Right Accent Club, to not DARE to write about what is happening in this world around us, and then to talk about songs that are highlighting it!! All the time.."Don't! Don't! Don't!" Well I DO and I WILL! I too have learned a great deal Ralph. A GREAT deal about the people I choose to support, about the people I have respect for...and I have had NOTHING but kindness and civility shown to me on Myspace. It is a great place, with many, many lovely people in there. I stand by all that I said above. And I will NOT change my mind, despite the continual heckling that goes on. I think we should simply agree to disagree and both respect each other's opinions. Lizzie |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:40 AM (#1758868) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: katlaughing Jon, I agree. I am interested in the legal issues. The personal rehashing would be better dealt with by PMs, imo. FWIW, over the years I have found hundreds of musicians, right here at Mudcat, whom I would never have known about and have their CDs as a result, as well friendship with some. Didn't need any myspace to accomplish that!:-) Richard, thank you for sharing your legal expertise. My brother has been looking into ways of putting his music up on the web. I'd seen a little bit about myspace, but will NOT recommend it, esp. based on what you have told us. Much appreciated. kat |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:43 AM (#1758872) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: dwditty There is not much doubt that posting anything very dear on the internet is risky....yes even here on mudcat. There are creeps everywhere. Perhaps MySpace is a ploy to garner rights to all the world's music, in which case they are off to a pretty good start with nearly a quarter of a million musicians posting there. Perhaps they have strong language in their terms to limit their liability due to the actions of some of their users. One thing I have learned is that no legalese is immune to "interpretation," so it doesn't much matter what the terms say. SOoner or later some lawyer will get some judge to agree with an interpretation that causes one party to win and one party to lose....this is our justice system. This discussion is useful in that it may help some people decide if they want to use MySpace services or not. In my case, it is not a life or death issue. I make music for enjoyment. Were it my livelihood, I would probably guard it closely, but for now I get a kick out of knowing that someone thousands of miles away is listening to my music. If I get ripped off, I will decide then if I want to pull off of MySpace and end their "rights" to my product. If you are concerned about the terms of MySpace, by all means don't use it. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:09 AM (#1758889) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum You see dwditty - that is my point. Music is my livelihood and my passion. Myspace offers me some very useful networking opportunities and posting my music there offers me some no cost "advertizing" as well. I sell on-line, CDs and MP3s every week to people who found me through Myspace - and I am developing good business contacts as well. The huge stars, carefully marketed and managed by the big star making machnery also see the value in Myspace - and, like me have judged the agreement in question to be benign. I really believe this whole issue is manufactured and counterproductive. Myspace is a genuine help for mid-level professional artists like me. I would never place any unpublished works that I wanted to protect there - but I would always be careful how those are published anyway. I just don't believe there is any merit to the naysayer's arguement in this case. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:09 AM (#1758890) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon That makes sense dw. Jed Marum, numbers of people doing something has and never will mean much in this way. How many people even bother to read small print for starters? How many people get swept along by a craze for another, etc . I'm trying to understand the legal business and am listning to what people have to say on this subject. Blinding me with numbers will not work nor will calling people who are trying to understand the terms, idiots. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:10 AM (#1758891) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean If you CAN end their rights to your product, Ditty. Richard has stated pretty unequivocally that you can't, and he's a legal professional. I still have that question nagging away at my mind which I first voiced in the 6:15 post - to wit (all together now, one, two three): Is there a difference between the "license" and the "Agreement" ??????? |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:13 AM (#1758894) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Alba MySpace. My Music. My Choice. No Thanks. Decided that a while back. Thank You as always Richard for the Legal Information. (I trust your advice a hellava lot more than I would trust any of RM's Legal Crew!) Best to All J |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:20 AM (#1758899) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Jed, it's not so much "nay-saying" as nay-QUESTIONING. There are some pretty big issues to consider here. I have a lot of respect for the various opinions I've heard voiced, but what I want is hard fact. What I DON'T want is to see people polarised in opposition to each other. We all love the music and value interesting ways of discovering new talent. But that's not in debate. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:23 AM (#1758901) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: dwditty Bonnie, Back to my point about the legal system. It doesn't matter what the terms say about the rights...it only matters whose lawyer makes the better argument. It is a risk no matter what. If you do not want to take the risk, I would be hard pressed to argue that it is not the best choice. That said, I am still taking it. I may be a fool, but I am my own fool. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:41 AM (#1758915) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister I too have made friends on MySpace, but quite frankly I don't think it's worth continuing my involvement there if there's a risk that my songs might be ripped off by Murdoch. I joined initially because it was warmly recommended by various friends and fellow musicians - but I don't think they had read the T&Cs, any more than I paid much attention to them at the time. I feel older and wiser now. Yes, it may be a wonderful place to find new music and new friends, but it's a potentially hazardous place, too, for an independent songwriter. I'm leaving my music hanging in there for a few days, until I can get a clear response to my message to the Customer Services Dept. So far the response that's arrived has had nothing whatsoever to do with my message to them, which doesn't bode well. But can we please have some legal clarification of the wording, as requested by me some messages back and by Bonnie, repeatedly since? Does anyone know? Because it sounds to me as if the licence wittingly or unwittingly granted to Murdoch ceases once the music on the site is removed - and if the licence ceases, so does the risk of exploitation. That's if the word "licence" is being used in its usual sense. Oh, and hi, Ralph! Anne |
|
13 Jun 06 - 11:43 AM (#1758918) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Ralphie Point taken Lizzie. Don't suppose you'll want the next PJD cd then. OK R |
|
13 Jun 06 - 05:42 PM (#1759201) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: JedMarum Jon - of course the legal and marketing folks for very big name artists reviewed very carefully the terms of contract. I doubt very seriously ANY of the stars actully set up their own Myspace pages. These are marketing decisions made by big time promo teams. You can be certain they read every bit of fine print ... and of course, I would not accept that out-of-hand as my only proof that the agreement was OK - but it is a strong indication. I am in good company. The numbers and stature of those artists and their opinions ARE meaningful to me. And certainly you don't see anywhere in my text where I called someone an idiot. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:05 PM (#1759235) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon Guess I must have missunderstood Rupie haters are simply blowing smoke are idiots." then Jed. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:25 PM (#1759243) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister I think the Big Names and their promo teams are well able to take care of their own interests and, if necessary, pay the legal costs of taking Murdoch to court. That doesn't mean smaller fish like me are swimming in safe waters - I can't afford to lose the rights to my recordings, nor can I afford legal costs to deal with a Californian court. Murdoch won't be trying to pull any kind of a fast one with the Big Names - that's clearly doomed to all kinds of failure - but the Big Names are worth having on MySpace to pull in lots more people. I'm not a conspiracy theorist and have consistently tried to see the sunnier side of the whole thing, but unless and until I hear directly from MySpace that their intentions are pure, unsullied and clear of ambiguity I remain dubious. Anne |
|
13 Jun 06 - 06:46 PM (#1759252) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Lizzie, why the hell don't you look up who I am and what my track record is? My former partner James Wolsey and I, and some of our assitants, some years back, acted for some bands whose turnover was bigger than the GDP of many countries, and probably each of them as much as all those you cite put together. You want to dream on, dream on. You can take a horse to water...... Out of this thread now. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 07:11 PM (#1759271) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Jeri What Jed said was "and so, apparently all of the artists who believe the naysaying, Rupie haters are simply blowing smoke are idiots." |
|
13 Jun 06 - 07:40 PM (#1759304) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon Thanks for the clarification, I think, Jeri. To be honest, while I read one way the first time, even though you have emphasised part, I not clear as to who is calling the idiots. I don't see why the artists who believe the naysaying (effectively agreeing that Rupies terms are wrong) would be calling the Rupie haters idiots. Maybe it's one of those different sides of the atlantic things or maybe I've just had a bad day (struggling to get my head round a microcontroller board) and my brain is tired. Aoplogies to Jed if due. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 08:12 PM (#1759331) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Nice going, Lizzie. Probably the single most important contributor to this thread and you just HAD to piss him off didn't you? He might have been able to help with that license/agreement confusion but no chance of that now thanks to you and your obsessions. Yet another discussion polluted. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 09:07 PM (#1759364) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe And we thought killing off Farty Marty was progress... Sigh! |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:03 PM (#1759399) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Well, it's been a long day. Thought I'd go for a wander around the net and clear my brain a little, maybe browse some music stuff. So I surfed about here and there, and landed in a nice-looking website that serves as an e-retailer for assorted small-label & independent non-commercial/mainstream CDs, as well as sheet music. I run a little publishing company so I thought I might consider placing some stock with them. Their sales policies and assorted money matters seemed quite straightforward, so I clicked on the Terms & Conditions (which to be fair were not hard to access or to read). And I got the most incredible feeling of deja-vu. (Richard – if you see this – thanks for making me aware of a lot of things I'd never even thought of before. I'm sorry you're gone.) Anyway, below is the relevant excerpt – notice how certain phrases sound eerily familiar, things like "perpetual" and "non-exclusive" and "sub-licensable". They also want you to waive moral rights. There's a bit at the end about terminating your sales agreement with them, returning stock etc. But not a word about nullifying that license. What is going on that you're expected to hand over these sorts of rights to an ordinary SALES RETAILER (and they will only handle things initially on a sale-or-return basis, which is already pretty risk-free)? This is a small outfit run by what do appear to be honest, quite aproachable & sincere people (and the type of music they deal in is never going to make anyone rich). So how common IS this sort of thing? Do Amazon & MusicRoom require stuff like this? - - - XXX may change these terms at any time by posting changes online. Please review these terms regularly to ensure you are aware of any changes made. Your continued use of the site after changes have been uploaded means that you agree to be legally bound by these terms as updated and/or amended… Intellectual Property Contributions to XXX [i.e. placing your CDs or sheet music for sale on their retail site] Where you are invited to submit any contribution to XXX (including any text, photographs, graphics, video or audio) you agree, by submitting your contribution, to grant XXX a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, sub-licensable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, play, and exercise all copyright and publicity rights with respect to your contribution worldwide and/or to incorporate your contribution in other works in any media now known or later developed for the full term of any rights that may exist in your contribution, and in accordance with privacy restrictions set out in XXX's Privacy Policy. ??????? |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:28 PM (#1759425) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: jeffp It is entirely possible that the "big names" have negotiated their own individual agreements with MySpace. Agreements which do not have the language in question. |
|
13 Jun 06 - 10:30 PM (#1759427) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe You should read my webpage, where I say on teh bottom of my homepage :-) ========== Public Notice: The sender of any Unsolicited Commericial Email agrees that sending any Unsolicited Commericial Email of any type to rhayes or any of the other email addresses on this complete web site at "homepage.powerup.com.au/~rhayes/" and all associated local pages automatically assigns to the owner of this web site perpetual free use of any assignable copyright material in the content of the Unsolicited Commericial Email and any and all assignable copyright material on any web sites (and any other material published in any form) mentioned in the Unsolicited Commericial Email and associated websites. The Sender of any UCE/SPAM agrees that they will submit a vote for any sites that The Author of this Site desires, in any Internet Web Competition. Unsolicited emails advising details for pickup of "Free Electronic Postcards" may constitute Unwanted UCE/SPAM. The Current Rates and Charges for Processing Unsolicited Commericial Email are on this separate page. The sending of by any party and receipt by me of any Unsolicited Commericial Email indicates understanding and acceptance of this notice. For purposes of this notice, merely making one's e-mail address accessible to the public shall not constitute a request or invitation to receive messages. Note that claims of not having read this notice before sending any Unsolicited Commericial Email will not be recognised. I have a policy of not only refusing to buy from spammers, but advising everybody else I know not to buy from them or indeed their products as well as organising termination of their internet facilities for TOS breaches. UCE/SPAM may just turn my mind against various pseudo-religious/humanitariran ideas expressed in that UCE/SPAM - I will still organise termination of internet services of the sender. If any part of this Public Notice is rendered invalid by Law, the rest remains in force. This is a Public Notice (originally published on 26 August 1997 and subsequently modified) for the purposes of Australian Law, and may be modified without prior notice. Note: Some images may be displayed on these pages as a result of legal assignment of copyright to me under the terms of my Anti-UCE/SPAM Public Notice. Web Sites referenced in unwanted UCE/SPAM messages may have been the source of some of these images. Please do not steal these images. ================ Referred terms... :-) Regarding all Unsolicited Commercial Email. This notice is to be considered A Public Notice for purposes of Australian Law. The Current Rates and Charges for Processing Unsolicited Commericial Email are on this page. Notice to all Senders of Unsolicited Commercial Email Upon receipt of Unsolicited Commercial Email as per this notice and addendum to my regularly posted .sig file attached to my outgoing email, you will be rendered a bill for: Mail processing (15 minutes or part thereof) AU$30.00 Mail Volume (1MByte or part thereof) AU$10.00 ------------------------------------------------------------ Total AU$40.00 Note: All rates are subject to change without notice. ---------------------------------------------------------- Accounts are strictly 90 days, a substantial recovery fee (currently AU$100) and interest will be charged after that time. All payments are to be in Australian Dollars. Cheques must be drawn on an Australian Bank. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia and the National Bank of Australia each have a branch in New York. Due to the difficulties of international funds tranfer, I am prepared to consider realistic offers of acceptable (to me) goods and/or services to at least the equivalent value (before any Customs, Excise and other Import Duties and Sales Taxes which will also be paid over and above that value) including if necessary the international recovery fee (plus a minimum AU$10 processing fee). Note that I am also prepared to offer more detailed personalised Proof Reading Services on Unsolicited Commercial Email. Prices for that more detailed personalised service are much more expensive. The sending of any Unsolicited Commercial Email indicates understanding and acceptance of this notice. Note that claims of not having read this notice before sending any Unsolicited Commercial Email will not be recognised. This is a Public Notice (originally published on 26 August 1997 and subsequently modified) for the purposes of Australian Law. Robin Hayes (Address) Have a nice day! Robin ++++++++++++++ Fun, isn't it? |
|
14 Jun 06 - 06:31 AM (#1759575) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Russells goat Bonnie, Russell Brand is a comedian or so he thinks anyway. Billy replied to the thread, http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=81619316&blogID=130719844&MyToken=3754229c-f904-417e-9692-ba2483 |
|
14 Jun 06 - 07:21 AM (#1759607) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Fair enough - I thought so, but these are paranoid days... |
|
25 Jun 06 - 02:29 AM (#1768504) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Liam In all this discussion of the concern about MySpace's terms, has anyone noticed clause 9 of the BBC's for their messageboard? Those are very similar, wrt the contributor granting the BBC a non-exclusive licence to anything they place on the BBC's servers. http://www.bbc.co.uk/terms/ Namely "Where you are invited to submit any contribution to bbc.co.uk (including any text, photographs, graphics, video or audio) you agree, by submitting your contribution, to grant the BBC a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, sub-licenseable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, play, make available to the public, and exercise all copyright and publicity rights with respect to your contribution worldwide and/or to incorporate your contribution in other works in any media now known or later developed for the full term of any rights that may exist in your contribution, and in accordance with privacy restrictions set out in the BBC's Privacy Policy. If you do not want to grant to the BBC the rights set out above, please do not submit your contribution to bbc.co.uk." |
|
25 Jun 06 - 05:44 AM (#1768564) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Yes Liam, but you can't add your music to the BBC in he way that you're encouraged to do on myspace. The BBC is also regulated by the govt, the governers and OFCOM, no one regulates myspace. Does the right issue go for adverts as well? Could Rupert sell off say, the Show of Hands song Roots for a hair dye ad? |
|
25 Jun 06 - 06:02 AM (#1768570) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST I know it was a long way up this thread, but for the record I seriously doubt that Russell Brand posted the link to his own blog above. He's a comedian, TV presenter on Channel 4 (he presents a Big Brother show) and MTV, and a columnist for the Guardian. Hes also a ex-heroin addict and describes himself as a "sex addict" - he was in the tabloids last week for sleeping with Kate Moss. I do like the idea that he hangs around mudcat trying to plug his own myspace blog, but I'm sure its not true... |
|
25 Jun 06 - 06:31 AM (#1768578) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Liam >>I know it was a long way up this thread, but for the record I seriously doubt that Russell Brand posted the link to his own blog above. He's a comedian, TV presenter on Channel 4 (he presents a Big Brother show) and MTV, and a columnist for the Guardian Phone him up and ask him. He's broadcasting his regular Sunday morning show live on BBC Radio 6 at the moment. It is rather more entertaining than listening to Parky. |
|
25 Jun 06 - 06:52 AM (#1768582) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon ...but you can't add your music to the BBC in he way that you're encouraged to do on myspace. Interesting though and again something I think people should at least be aware of. BBC are an odd lot with the boards BTW. A few of us have been modded out for posting maybe a verse, link to an arrangement, etc. of our own work on the grounds it infringes copyright. I've also seen traditional songs suffer the same fate. On the other hand, I've seen cases that I'm sure clearly do breach thier rules copyright stand. That, unlike some of the comments I've read lately, is one of the genuine mysteries of the BBC moderation system. |
|
25 Jun 06 - 07:18 AM (#1768590) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean My apologies to Russell Brand |
|
25 Jun 06 - 07:22 AM (#1768592) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Re the clause Liam has pointed out: In the original article which kicked off this thread (if anyone can remember back that far) Andrew Orlowski writes: "It's the return of the old favorite, the ambiguous ownership contract. Myspace is actually using a boilerplate text designed to allow it to republish the content. Five years ago Microsoft was forced to change a similar, but even more acquisitive click... Apple had introduced a similar click through before retreating, and two years ago Google attached almost identical terms to its Orkut service. That was in 2004, the bloggers' love affair with the ad giant was still untarnished, and very little protest was heard." The bloggers' love affair with the ad giant. Hmmmm. Anyway, I have since seen the offending clause pop up in a number of places, some of them quite alarming such as ordinary retail sellers' terms & conditions (my post 10:03) so it's something a lot of outfits are obviously latching onto. I STILL think that we won't know for sure what the actual consequences are until there's some real money at stake. Like when some MySpacer has a global smash hit with a song. There have been precedent-making lawsuits over this sort of thing before, and that could well be another. A final word on MS (MySpace, not Micro$oft): Before a lot of people jump in saying what a good thing MySpace is for artists' exposure & contact, etc: PLEASE – WE ALL AGREE ON THAT. As a useful, even fascinating, fun way to hear/display new talent and make new friends, it's great. Ian (I think it was Ian?) describes it as a do-it-yourself John Peel show, which is the best definition I ever heard. But that's not in dispute. It is the question of how vulnerable these artists are, and I don't think that's been really proved yet because it's probably going to take a landmark law case to settle. And I STILL don't know the difference between "the license" which ends, and the "Agreement" which does not (my post 6:15). An agreement that doesn't terminate with the removal of one's material is something I would sure want to know more about before submitting to. There has been a truly thundering silence on this topic which suggests that no one else knows either. |
|
25 Jun 06 - 07:46 AM (#1768598) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo The alternative take on that crucial clause on content was made thus by a contributor to Billy Bragg's site: That clause does not mean myspace owns the content. it says they have a licence to that content. there's a big difference. The publisher/writer/etc. still owns all rights... but myspace gets to store, display, and use the content. It's like software, you the rightful (non-pirate ) owner are granted a licence to use the software -- but not to make copies of it or use the code etc. This clause i think basically protects MySpace from hassles over the fact that copywritten content is all over their site. by posting content here, you're granting MySpace a licence to actually have it on their site and display it to the world. (anything you create is automatically copyright to you BTW, unless you put it in the public domain, of course... and interestingly i'd interpret this licensing clause as meaning myspace isn't public domain, which means you keep ownership of anything you post say in your blogs... which is good)... so the ownership of the content is not in question... but according to that clause it seems like myspace basically gets to do whatever they feel like with the content... it protects them, it allows the site to function smoothly for everyone... but it doesn't seem to protect MySpace from "re-using" content or from giving it to other people. and that's where IMO the problem might be I quote this not because I agree with it but because it's the only coherent, non-hysterical, contrary point of view I have come across. I think it's too complacent and I, like Bonnie, would be very wary indeed of entering into a contract that doesn't end with the removal of material. However, I've never heard of Russell Brand either and really don't know or care if this reduces my credibility in the nu-media blatant self-promotion stakes. |
|
25 Jun 06 - 08:02 AM (#1768602) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish I'm still with Ian Anderson on this, just as, I'd presume, that *for once* he is still with me. Would there be this much discussion and slagging off going on over Myspace, if Rupert Murdoch did not, at present, own it? Oh....and you may like to read this, seems Billy's making it in New York these days too, and don't just read about Billy, read what Myspace themselves are saying: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/424418p-358103c.html |
|
25 Jun 06 - 08:09 AM (#1768605) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Lizzie, this discussion is about the LEGAL TERMS not who owns the site. Whether it's a giant like Murdoch or some little Joe McNobody, if you're signing something over to them you need to know exactly what it is you're agreeing to be bound by. (I mis-typed "signing" as "singing" - wishful thinking, perhaps?) |
|
25 Jun 06 - 08:10 AM (#1768606) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Here we go again... |
|
25 Jun 06 - 08:22 AM (#1768613) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Bonnie, that's what the article in the link is about. Here it is, from the New York Daily Press: >>>Musicians' rights: Lost in MySpace? Rupert Murdoch Is Rupert Murdoch taking the "My" in MySpace.com a little too literally? Murdoch's News Corp. owns the popular networking Web site, having paid $580 million last July for MySpace.com's parent company. But now, according to some MySpace.com users, the media giant thinks it also owns anything and everything that's posted there. In recent years, the site has become the online venue for musicians to release their new material. Name-brand bands such as Weezer, Nine Inch Nails — and even aspiring rapper Kevin Federline — have debuted music on their MySpace.com pages. But popular English songwriter Billy Bragg claims the MySpace.com "terms of service" give Murdoch's minions the right to exploit their content as they see fit. Bragg has deleted his tunes from his MySpace.com page, which offers this explanation: "SORRY THERE'S NO MUSIC," because "once an artist posts up any content (including songs), it then belongs to My Space (AKA Rupert Murdoch) and they can do what they want with it, throughout the world without paying the artist." The troublesome fine print informs users that by posting any content, "you hereby grant to MySpace.com a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services." Sounds dire. But Myspace.com spokesman Jeff Berman says not to worry. "Because the legalese has caused some confusion, we are at work revising it to make it very clear that MySpace is not seeking a license to do anything with an artist's work other than allow it to be shared in the manner the artist intends," Berman says. "Obviously, we don't own their music or do anything with it that they don't want." Nice to know.<<<< That's what I was talking about, the LEGAL side of it. |
|
25 Jun 06 - 08:30 AM (#1768615) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Liam >>I've never heard of Russell Brand either and really don't know or care if this reduces my credibility in the nu-media blatant self-promotion stakes. Fortunately Russell does a weekly podcast for you http://www.bbc.co.uk/6music/shows/russell_brand/ |
|
25 Jun 06 - 08:36 AM (#1768619) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish And here is a similar article from the BBC...that Billy sure is getting around!! And again, at the bottom of the page, Myspace is saying the same thing..that they are NOT after artists music. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5065632.stm |
|
25 Jun 06 - 09:56 AM (#1768646) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Fine. I just wish they would explain the contradiction in the following, and also clarify whether "non-exclusive" means that they too are free to "license your content to anyone else". In short, what is the difference between "License" and "Agreement" and which has precedence; and does Clause (2) "Term" overpower subheading 1 in Clause (6) "Proprietary Rights…" ? The latter is reassuring, the former is not. I know they have already amended some of their contract stipulations in response to public protest, but perhaps a bit more modification is needed. At one time they could keep portions of an artist's work even after the artist had departed. This has now been scrapped - but only after objections were raised. If no one ever queries anything, nothing will happen. This whole question is certainly not going to threaten the continued existence of MySpace (nor would I want it to). But it might improve the artists' benefits. Capital letters to emphasise certain passages are mine, not theirs. 1 Eligibility… 2 Term. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while you use the MySpace Services or are a Member. You may terminate your Membership at any time, for any reason, by following the instructions on the Member's Account Settings page. MySpace.com may terminate your Membership at any time, without warning. EVEN AFTER MEMBERSHIP IS TERMINATED, THIS AGREEMENT WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT, INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-17. 3 Fees... 4 Password... 5 Non-commercial Use by Members.. 6 Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com. 1.MySpace.com does not claim any ownership rights in the text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, musical works, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, "Content") that you post to the MySpace Services. After posting your Content to the MySpace Services, you continue to retain all ownership rights in such Content, and you continue to have the right to use your Content in any way you choose. By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content on or through the MySpace Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com a limited license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Content solely on and through the MySpace Services. Without this license, MySpace.com would be unable to provide the MySpace Services. For example, without the right to modify Member Content, MySpace.com would not be able to digitally compress music files that Members submit or otherwise format Content to satisfy technical requirements, and without the right to publicly perform Member Content, MySpace.com could not allow Users to listen to music posted by Members. THE LICENSE YOU GRANT TO MYSPACE.COM IS NON-EXCLUSIVE (MEANING YOU ARE FREE TO LICENSE YOUR CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE IN ADDITION TO MYSPACE.COM), fully-paid and royalty-free (meaning that MySpace.com is not required to pay you for the use on the MySpace Services of the Content that you post), SUBLICENSABLE (so that MySpace.com is able to use its affiliates and subcontractors such as INTERNET CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS to provide the MySpace Services), and worldwide (because the Internet and the MySpace Services are global in reach). THIS LICENSE WILL TERMINATE AT THE TIME YOU REMOVE YOUR CONTENT FROM THE MYSPACE SERVICES. The license does not grant MySpace.com the right to sell your Content, nor does the license grant MySpace.com the right to distribute your Content outside of the MySpace Services. http://collect.myspace.com/misc/terms.html?z=1 |
|
25 Jun 06 - 04:23 PM (#1768894) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister Well, all I know is that they've made no attempt to answer the email I sent to their Customer Services Dept, asking them to clarify their policies with regard to copyright. So I suppose I'll have to take my songs off my pages ...*sigh* Anne |
|
29 Jun 06 - 03:53 PM (#1772211) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: hesperis Notice that the policy as listed in Bonnie Shaljean's post of 25 Jun 06 is the one modified by them as of 15 Jun 06. So I think we're looking at the "clarififed" version of the myspace terms. I do recall them being quite a bit more sketchy when I first signed up. How much do the sentences in parenthesis have weight in an interpretation though? Also, it still doesn't define what MYSPACE SERVICES actually are... although that's difficult to do without limiting adding new parts to the site such as video uploads, an area for filmmakers, etc. For a big company, I think this is probably the best they can do. It'd be a good idea to keep a sharp eye on the terms though as they can still change without notice. |
|
29 Jun 06 - 04:12 PM (#1772220) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon Hespiris, see this thread for the new terms posted to MC on 28th June 2006. |
|
29 Jun 06 - 05:18 PM (#1772263) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Chris Cole And Billy has now blogged his own comments http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=34570397&blogID=137856388&MyToken=64b01726-1bb3-4c42-83e9-12d889 |
|
29 Jun 06 - 05:32 PM (#1772268) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Chris Cole From Lizzie's post of 12 June 2006 < I've already written to them. No doubt Rupert Murdoch has signed a contract of a very different sort for me, for doing that, but hey..I'm an ex Radio 2 Folk & Acousticer and I love to live dangerously! ;0) Billy has asked as many people as possible to help him on this, so get out there and do just that! >> LOOKS LIKE YOU AND BILLY GOT THE RESULT HERE. WELL DONE. Let's sit and watch the apologies fly in now shall we? |
|
29 Jun 06 - 06:03 PM (#1772285) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Looks like BILLY and all the people who supported HIS call for action got the job done you mean. All Lizzie did was deny there was any problem. Now that it's over and sorted out she's very quick to jump aboard the let's-help-Billy train. But that's a new face she's showing. She doesn't deserve credit for getting this change made and NOBODY owes her any apologies. It's the other way around. |
|
29 Jun 06 - 06:05 PM (#1772292) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Anne Lister Breathing a sigh of relief here ... So now all you all have to do is toddle on over to My Space and become my friends! But I never did get a reply to my message to their Customer Services. I suspect Billy Bragg pulls more weight than I do! Anne |
|
30 Jun 06 - 05:42 AM (#1772548) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Pud - read Lizzie's posts. She has NOT been calling for change or working with Billy Bragg to bring it about. She has been consistently against it - until now. NOW she's celebrating this change, but it was one she did nothing to instigate, and no congratulations of any kind are due, much less apologies (for what???). She has called those of us who had questions or doubts about MySpace "detractors". But the new benefits favouring the artists only happened BECAUSE THOSE DOUBTS & QUESTIONS WERE FINALLY ADDRESSED. Nothing would ever have improved without public pressure, which Lizzie actively discouraged. So "looks like you and Billy got the result" just sticks in the throat. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 05:53 AM (#1772558) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo The pudding person is probably just another of madlizzie's logins, of which there are many. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:01 AM (#1772564) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon pudlover was in the BBC thread that prompted me to leave for a while encouraging Lizzie to be silly and accusing others of bullying, has turned up in this years Sidmouth thread, this thread making quite an absurd comment, etc. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:02 AM (#1772565) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: George Papavgeris I said, she said, he didn't...enough already. Having achieved a result/prize, are we going to argue now about who deserves any remnants of credit (after Billy Bragg)? Who cares? Why does it matter in the bigger scheme of things? So, Pudlover (Diane, I know the person, and it's not Lizzie) apportioned credit where it wasn't due - but for it to "stick in the throat" it must be coated with spite. Let's swallow hard, lighten up and celebrate the result. To paraphrase Robb: Workers 1 - Murdoch NIL! |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:10 AM (#1772572) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean George, I have to respond to your accusation of spite. It's not fair and it's NOT true. It's a matter of keeping the record truthful - such a blatant distortion of the facts as Pudlover posted is misleading and galling. So DO NOT impugn my motives. If you're going to wave all comments all away with one generalising sweep of the hand then please refrain from commenting yourself. You are adding to this discussion too. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:11 AM (#1772573) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon George, I agree with the move one bit. I think we had moved on with people like Bonnie and myself saying the victory was good news. But to shout LOOKS LIKE YOU AND BILLY GOT THE RESULT HERE. WELL DONE and hint at apologies to someone who argued there was no problem is provocative. If you say they are different people, I believe you, but it pretty similar style baiting. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:20 AM (#1772577) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: George Papavgeris They are indeed different, Jon. And I don't want to add to any provocation, Bonnie, I shouldn't presume to know your motives. But sometimes we have to swallow provocation too, to free ourselves for better things in life. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:21 AM (#1772578) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST George this looks like your first post in this thread. Did you actually READ all the others? Maybe you should before calling names. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:23 AM (#1772580) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Please don't preach to me. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 06:31 AM (#1772587) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: George Papavgeris Yes it was, Guest, and yes, I did. Neither did I call any names; feelings of spite are part of the human condition, we all have varying degrees of it at different times. Bonnie, apologies; no preaching intended - your life, your call. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 07:12 AM (#1772610) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST So how many musicians have been "ripped-off" by Myspace since it's inception then. Just curious. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 07:35 AM (#1772623) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon I'm not aware of any artists being "ripped off" but I believe old terms would allow an artist to be "ripped off". Being aware of a risk is not a bad thing. You wouldn't for example argue a ladder with a damaged rung was safe on the grounds that no one to date had a serious accident using it - or would you? |
|
30 Jun 06 - 08:17 AM (#1772660) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Fooles Troupe That ladder is perfectly safe just as long as no one tries to use it. MySpace can not rip you off, just as long as... |
|
30 Jun 06 - 09:29 AM (#1772708) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Hell of a lot of people using that ladder. |
|
30 Jun 06 - 09:36 AM (#1772715) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo Stairway to . . . ? There's a sign on the wall But she wants to be sure 'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings. In a tree by the brook There's a songbird who sings, Sometimes all of our thoughts are misgiven. Ooh, it makes me wonder . . . |
|
30 Jun 06 - 09:55 AM (#1772727) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Blimey! You lot have been busy with the usual vitriol! First off...I only wrote to Myspace giving them a link to this thread, mentioning Billy Bragg, who WAS the person who got this changed...and I merely suggested that they needed to sort it out, as it was causing chaos all over the place. I should imagine, that with 85 million people in Myspace, they had **millions** of similar e mails! I am not and do not claim anything of the credit for this in any way whatsoever. Right then, that's all cleared up then M'Lud!! ("No....no...Burn the Witch...Burn her!") Billy Bragg is the one who started it rolling and kept it rolling until he got the end he wanted. However, I have been saying in the past posts, that I've heard from people out in the US who've had never had problems with any of the legal side of all this, and it has been looked into by their lawyers as well. Go figure!! Good that Billy has got things on 'an easier to read plane' for everyone. Great! Well done that man! T'aint nothing to do with me though, in any way at all. And yes, Pudlover is one of my friends, and I'm very proud and pleased to have her as one of my friends....for she's warm, funny, loyal and loving....unlike many of the people on this thread, (or at least the way they have presented themselves to me is how I perceive them to be) and yes she really does know George too. And yes Jon, she has stuck up for on the R2 board...and she knows that I am very far from being what you think I am. Leave your spite and animosity off this thread and all the others and just get on with your life! You made a **very wrong** decision about me, you have to live with that, there is nothing I can ever do to change your decision. Move on...and stop boring the pants off everyone with your personal problems with me on so many threads!!!! Thank you! Diane...there is nothing I want to say to you at all, as I've had such a bellyful of your spite, lying and twisting lately. Thank you! If you want, join Myspace, and there you will discover a whole new, vast, wonderful and welcoming musical world. I f you don't..FINE!!! But for Gawd's sake...**either way**...GET OFF MY BACK!! Thank you all so very much!! Lizzie PS.....And I'm very sorry that now that Billy has got things changed you've all got nothing more to moan about...apart from Rupert Murdoch of course....or me....so...Happy Moaning!! |
|
30 Jun 06 - 10:19 AM (#1772752) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish Oh!! And one last thing!! Instead of sitting in here Moaning, Whining, Whingeing, Accusing, Lying....and er...generally being right pains in the whatsits (!!!)....I'd suggest that those, to whom that description applies, go into Myspace itself and listen to some ****** GREAT MUSIC!!! And here is a wonderful entrance to a Mind-Bogglingly, Open-Minded, Supportive, Kind, Loving and Moaning-Minnie FREE World Of Extraordinarily Rich And Varied Music!!!: http://www.myspace.com/georgepapavgeris I sincerely hope that you all enjoy that brilliant music above! THANK YOU!! Lizzie |
|
30 Jun 06 - 10:31 AM (#1772763) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo Diane...there is nothing I want to say to you at all Thank god for that. Hurrah! |
|
30 Jun 06 - 10:55 AM (#1772782) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Wouldn't it be better to get out, away from a computer screen, and either listen to, or even better, make your own music ? |
|
30 Jun 06 - 11:59 AM (#1772823) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish But that is EXACTLY what you CAN do with Myspace.....you can just click on music from around the world and carry on with your life....then click on a bit more...etc.etc.etc..... And....THEN...YOU CAN BUY THE OFTEN PROFOUNDLY BEAUTIFUL AND DEEPLY MEANINGFUL MUSIC FROM MUSICIANS YOU WOULD NEVER **ever** HAVE DISCOVERED *without* THE MAGIC OF MYSPACE.... ....AND..When it arrives...often from the other side of the world....you can put it on...in your own house, or your car...or your iPod whilst walking around.... ....AND...****THEN****....you can go home and WRITE to the very person who has made that wonderful music in the first place and who has brought yet more gorgeous sparkling lights and thoughts into your vision, your brain..and you can thank them and in no time at all.....you have new friends!!!!!!!! AAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!! Oh...give me strength! AND....You can EVEN take your music down to your local folk club/acoustic cafe.....whatever (!!!) and play it to loads of other people to hear, whilst they are tuning up and getting ready to play their own music....... AND....NONE of this would happen WITHOUT Myspace!!!!!!! Aaaaaaarrrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhh!!! I now have to go and listen to the wonderful calming music of Ayub Ogada, who, altogether now, "I *only* discovered through Myspace" and then I can remember how very *lucky* I am to know that all of this exists and ponder on the often negative behaviour of some people in here, who seem to want to go out of their way to STOP *ANY* of this from happening in the first place!!! Aaaaaaarrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!! Ayub! I need your music! Hurry up! http://www.myspace.com/ayubogada Ahhh....that is *so* much better. Lizzie :0) |
|
30 Jun 06 - 12:16 PM (#1772836) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: The Borchester Echo As I understand it, Guest was suggesting doing music for real, not in a screwed up cyber vacuum. Which would involve detachment from a computer keyboard. However, it's nowt to do with me. If madlizzie's resolve not to talk to me includes not insulting my friends and refraining from talking bollix about that which she knows nothing, I give thanks for tiny mercies. |
|
03 Aug 06 - 03:03 PM (#1800749) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge from www.Outlaw.com 31st July Billy Bragg has paid tribute to social networking giant MySpace after persuading it to change its terms and conditions. The site is owned by owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation and changed its terms after lobbying by Bragg. "With respect to the guys at MySpace I have to accept that within a week of me writing a letter to Music Week they had complied with my suggestion to change their terms and conditions, so more power to them, I respect that," Bragg told OUT-LAW. "I think MySpace acted in the spirit of the internet." Bragg has been campaigning for MySpace to change its terms and conditions, which seemed to give rights to music posted there to the Murdoch-backed company. Late last week the site did change its rules to reflect Bragg's wishes. The new terms and conditions make it clear that the company renounces all ownership rights to musicians' material. Previously, the rules had seemed to assert the company's control over material posted there, though the company claimed that that view was a misinterpretation of the rules. Bragg had taken down his music from the site when he realised what the terms actually meant. "Sorry there's no music," his MySpace site read until now, "once an artist posts up any content (including songs), it then belongs to My Space (AKA Rupert Murdoch) and they can do what they want with it, throughout the world without paying the artist." Previously, the rules said that a user would "hereby grant to MySpace.com a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services." The new conditions read: "MySpace.com does not claim any ownership rights in the text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, musical works, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, 'Content') that you post to the MySpace Services. After posting your Content to the MySpace Services, you continue to retain all ownership rights in such Content, and you continue to have the right to use your Content in any way you choose." "I think the thing I'm most delighted about is that the principle of the right of the producer of the material to ownership and the right to exploit their material seems to have been established on the largest internet community site of them all, which is MySpace, and that's really what I was most importantly trying to do," Bragg said in an interview. Bragg is as famous for his left wing politics as for his music, which includes 'New England', a hit for Kirsty MacColl. He helped found left-wing pop pressure group Red Wedge in the 1980s and performed widely at benefits for striking miners. "I want this to be an industry standard now," said Bragg. "There is a danger when corporations try to work out how to make money out of the internet. That is a danager, isn't it? The last thing we want is for people posting on their sites to have to have a lawyer sitting beside them." The new terms and conditions state that posting material automatically grants MySpace a limited licence to use and modify the content, but says that this is purely a technical issue. "Without this licence, MySpace.com would be unable to provide the MySpace services," said the terms. |
|
03 Aug 06 - 04:21 PM (#1800807) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: George Papavgeris Thta was ndeed an excellent result. It does leave me with the dilemma of whether to hail Billy as a hero for sticking to his guns and achieving it, or bemoan his subsequent praising of the evil corporation. I will discuss with my conscience and decide. It does however put the lie to the conspiracy theories that said Murdoch wanted MySpace so that he could get his dirty mitts on the copyrights of thousands of new songs; clearly not the case, as he relented so easily. It was too simplistic a target for him - no, he wants the medium, not the content. That has always been his approach after all. |
|
03 Aug 06 - 04:27 PM (#1800810) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: hesperis Yeah, really, the content would just be a bonus for him. Myspace being *the* best place to go for new music... that's way more important. (Btw, I'm on myspace and enjoying it.) |
|
03 Aug 06 - 04:37 PM (#1800819) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Jon I don't think there were too many conspiracy theories around. I think most of the "doubters" believed Murdoch would not be slow in taking advantage of the terms had a suitable oppertunity arisen. I still believe he (and many other businessmen) would have. |
|
03 Aug 06 - 04:37 PM (#1800820) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Scoville I got bullied last week into signing up for MySpace just so I could get into the musician pages (my best friend swore there were benefits if I just had the patience to wade through the teeny-boppers). I have to say I immediately found a bunch of musicians about whom I hadn't known before, and whose CD's I'll probably end up buying. I don't intend to spend a whole lot of time there but I'm glad the music policy was changed so people aren't scared off. (I also learned that my high school classmates are just as mindless now as they were in 1996, and that my college classmates are much more interesting (even the ones I didn't like) and use much less pink on their page templates. Go figure.) |
|
03 Aug 06 - 07:00 PM (#1800934) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge If Murdoch is caught out early enough he is savvy enough not to defend the indefensible. It's PR. Don't forget he can still change the terms any time he wants to. |
|
03 Aug 06 - 07:06 PM (#1800938) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Lizzie Cornish There speaks the lawyer eh? And....people will be able to remove their sites if that ever gets to be the case Richard. So, why not leave Myspace alone? It's doing some incredible things for music and for putting people in touch with each other right across the world. Or was creating a new doubt the intention of your earlier post today and your new post just now? Don't you just love lawyers! ;0) |
|
04 Aug 06 - 03:33 AM (#1801196) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge Lizzie, if peoples terms mean they can have you over, it usually means they will. There are no fairies at the bottom of the garden. |
|
04 Aug 06 - 03:54 AM (#1801206) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: George Papavgeris I know, Lizzie, it is too cynical a view for my tender idealistic soul too, but I bow to Richard's experience and the knowledge that humans have a natural entropy towards evil (one bad apple spoils the rest, if they can get you they will etc). I wish it were different, but it isn't. Richard, it does sound like a Murphy's Law of sorts - does it have a name? |
|
25 Oct 06 - 01:45 PM (#1868451) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Richard Bridge I hate to resurrect his again - and I am not re-reading all Lizzie's garbage above, but I've just been reading the myspace terms again. For a client this time. Do you realise that Rupie can decide to charge what he likes any time he likes - and I haven't found anything that says he couldn't make it retrospective! The expression you are looking for, George, is "Where there's a hit, there's a writ". |
|
25 Oct 06 - 11:14 PM (#1868814) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: George Papavgeris Yes, I remember seeing in the terms that he can charge. I don't see the business sense in that at the moment though. He makes plenty on advertising; the moment he decides to charge I'm outta there and I'm sure many would follow, enough to have an impact on his advertising income. He'd be shooting himself in the foot. But terms like that are the reason why I treat mySpace as an additional exposure/promotion/shopwindow opportunity, and not as my main portal (my website is that, where I have more control). |
|
26 Oct 06 - 11:15 PM (#1869636) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Re charging, my guess is that they will take the "premium services" route and ensure those who do pay have a "higher profile". |
|
28 Oct 06 - 11:32 AM (#1870778) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Cruiser This is one of the most informative threads I have ever read on any forum. I've learned a lot about MySpace. It highlights the real life struggles musicians face daily while trying to showcase their music on any viable venue available to them. If not for this thread, I would have likely never gone to the site and listened to the wide variety of good music offered there. Lizzie, I admire your enthusiasm notwithstanding the somewhat unfair criticisms of your intent by others. Thank you for taking it all in stride thereby allowing all the negative opinions, which are also very important, to be fully disclosed. |
|
28 Oct 06 - 12:05 PM (#1870796) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST Don't you just love it here? Bonnie starts a thread voicing concerns which proved founded. Lizzie comes along belittling any attempt to get to the truth at the matter and now we read Cruisers distortion. |
|
28 Oct 06 - 03:02 PM (#1870941) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: GUEST,Another guest >"Thank you for taking it all in stride thereby allowing all the negative opinions, which are also very important, to be fully disclosed." ?????? Excuse me?? If you'll re-read the thread I think you'll see the "negative" opinions were disclosed FIRST. Since when should anyone thank her for ALLOWING things? That's exactly what she doesn't do. And some of the points Richard makes sound more like legal fact than opinion. He's the one who should get thanked. |
|
28 Oct 06 - 03:08 PM (#1870950) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Bonnie Shaljean Better watch it, Guests. You'll get accused of spite. |
|
28 Oct 06 - 03:28 PM (#1870974) Subject: RE: MySpace policies - ? From: Cruiser Well, pardon the heck outa' me The guests and I will never agree And now returning to the fray, is that Bonnie lass All I can say is________________________ Have a fine, dandy day. Lest I be misunderstood, all of the discussion in this thread has been worthwhile. |