****RANT WARNING*******RANT WARNING*****RANT WARNING***
Well, with respect to all fellow musicians out there, I don't think the
problem is with Napster / MP3 type technology.
The problem is with the original thieves of the music business... the record
companies. Let's take the Backstreet Boys as an example. Do you think that
10 years from now, they're going to feel they were ripped off by the record
company? Of course. Everyone does.
1. Record companies steal half of an artist's broadcast royalties in
"publishing," an anachronistic term since they only "publish" the music of
people they have under recording contracts, and then, only in recorded form.
(They farm out the odd piece of sheet music to subpublishers, which costs
the artists even more money.) This practice should be CRIMINALIZED!
2. Record companies don't even make records anymore, but they still take 10%
right off the top in gross units sold to cover "breakeages." Well, CD's
break a lot less than LP's, right? At least, that's what the record
companies told us when they wanted us to replace our LP's with CD's (perfect
sound forever.)
3. Even the TOP recording artists, the GENIUS level worldwide treasures of
art and culture, feel happy with a return of 15 cents on the dollar for
THEIR work. And, all these young musicians are trying so hard to get a
recording contract so they can GIVE the record company 92 cents on every
dollar. Why? Because without paying 92% of their money to the record
company, the record companies will not relinquish their ILLEGAL hold on
radio stations, to say nothing of MTV, VH1, etc...
Many radio stations will not play records unless they are bribed by record
companies. Some companies were CONVICTED of payola by the Feds under Rico
statutes (invented for mobsters), but does payola still exist? What do you
think? Heard any big stations loosening up their playlists lately? And what
is radio, anyway, but free advertising for the record companies? (Gotta love
net radio y'all, Mark Turner, Gilles P., rock on!)
4. Sure, the government went after Microsoft. But look at the dwindling
number of record companies. Capitalism may be cool but it's turned out to be
a giant game of Monopoly, and the great majority of us are a few dice rolls
away from total (economic) annihilation. (Thank God for the Net... a get out
of jail free card!)
So, I'm sure Metallica and others like them get upset by watching money
leaking out under the door, but they should really be throwing their mighty
muscle at the RECORD COMPANIES....
Now that the net is here, we need some defectors from the record
companies... Chuck D. is so hip to this all, but we need MORE. We need
Metallica to do NET ONLY releases. We need gigantic acts like Santana and
N'Sync to forego record companies altogether.
Musicians, you are SLAVES to the record company. Let the world Napster
away... record companies are already superfluous, and they're about 5 years
from extinction.
I for one will not miss them, and I will always LOVE to pay good artists for
their music, direct from their own SITES!!!
-"All musicians, remember, we all work for tips."
---- Duke Ellington
----- Original Message -----
From: christopherotto <cotto1@gl.umbc.edu>
To: <acid-jazz@ucsd.edu>; Jo-Jo Samuel <jojo6732@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: (off topic apologies) RE: Metallica is suing my school
> i agree - for me being the little guy doesn't mean having a 2k computer
and
> going to a 20k a year college. personally i think it isn't all bad since
> even though metallica may not need the extra money from records alot of
> independent label acts probably do, and maybe this can help them out.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jo-Jo Samuel <jojo6732@hotmail.com>
> To: <acid-jazz@ucsd.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 5:55 AM
> Subject: Re: (off topic apologies) RE: Metallica is suing my school
>
>
> > I don't see this that far out of scope since this stuff effects all
music.
> >
> > I realize it's hard to feel sorry for anybody who's made millions of
> dollars
> > selling their music, but i feel less sorry for some jerk-offs who steal
> > peoples soul to sell it on the internet and then hide behind this fake
> vail
> > of being the little guy. I personally know how it feels to bust your
ass,
> > break your bank account, family and everything else to pour your soul
into
> > your music only to have some worm put your music (without your
permission)
> > on one of these MP3 sites. It's not about money since I'm broke and
> > completely happy. It's about holding onto the only thing that some
artists
> > have.
> >
> > JJ
> >
> >
> > >From: "Manire, Aaron D" <amanire@indiana.edu>
> > >To: acid-jazz@ucsd.edu
> > >Subject: (off topic apologies) RE: Metallica is suing my school
> > >Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 17:12:55 -0500
> > >
> > >Ahem... IU *had* a ban on napster. I think this is the URL
> > >http://www.savenapster.com/ that Sibyl mentions.
> > >
> > >interesting site, although I don't quite share the author's taste in
> music
> > >
> > >My take on mp3 piracy is this:
> > >
> > >If I like and respect the artist enough, I will buy the released vinyl
> > >complete with cover art, white sleeves, plastic wrapping, new record
> scent,
> > >etc. I am predisposed to imagine that most people would feel the same
> > >towards honoring their favorite artists and buy the cd. And we all
make
> > >higher quality choices than by being able to preview the album. We
have
> > >the
> > >luxury of thinking to ourselves, "am I going to listen to this two
years
> > >from now?" So by evolutionary terms, this change shifts the financial
> > >rewards for a musician such that the returns from classic, enduring
music
> > >will gain relative to the loss taken by artists who focus on transient
> > >hits.
> > >The crap to quality ratio improves for *hardcopy*. Questions such as
> > >whether D'Angelo's album is a classic become even more emphatic. (I
own
> > >the
> > >vinyl btw). I don't think Metallica has a case, legally or morally.
> > >
> > >According to the drummer, Lars Ulrich, "We take our craft - whether it
be
> > >the music, the lyrics, or the photos and artwork - very seriously, as
do
> > >most artists,.. It is therefore sickening to know that our art is being
> > >traded like a commodity rather than the art that it is."
> > >
> > >What a lie. He didn't mind when it was *in deed* commodified by
whatever
> > >label they signed to.
> > >
> > >pardon the rant,
> > >Adario
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >Aaron -
> > >IU had reached an agreement with napster which would 'legalize' it
> > >provided that it and various other web clients would be a low-priority
> for
> > >the server. However that works. The napster boy and his posse were here
> > >this week to talk about it, though I didn't/couldn't go. My supervisor
> > >here at the digital library program keeps us all up to date on the
whole
> > >melodrama, including sending us all the url of the site devoted to
> getting
> > >campuses to 'give us our napster back.'
> > >
> > >-s-
> > >
> > >On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Manire, Aaron D wrote:
> > >
> > > > Isn't that bizarre? IU has a ban on napster, too. Check out the
> > >article:
> > > >
> http://www.idsnews.com/news/2000.04.14/campus/2000.04.14.metallica.html
> > > >
> > > > Paz,
> > > > Adario
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 23:11:10 MET DST