I agree with everything you just said, but if any artists (in this informed
day and age) signs a recording contract with a mega label that rips them
off, it's their own fault. I agree, the internet is the best thing thats
happened to the underground artists and I too love the way it cuts out the
mega labels. What I was referring to was the artists signed to the small
labels who really need every penny just to survive.
>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.
I agree that this statement is some what suspect from the guy in Metallica,
but it is THEIR creation and no one elses to do with as they please
(including sell it off as a commodity to a record label). Every artist from
Professor Longhair to Miles Davis, has and is playing for money and needs
the money to continue. As long as an artist is true to his/herself and their
art, I wouldn't hold them in any more contempt for being financially
successful/popular than if they weren't.
--------------------------
JJ
http://www.mo-fro.com
mofro@mo-fro.com
"Down South jookin"
>From: "Steve Catanzaro" <stevencatanzaro@sprintmail.com>
>To: "christopherotto" <cotto1@gl.umbc.edu>, <acid-jazz@ucsd.edu>,
>"Jo-Jo Samuel" <jojo6732@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: (off topic apologies) RE: Metallica is suing my school
>Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 14:01:17 -0700
>
>****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
> >
> >
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 16 2000 - 16:20:27 MET DST