Grab the coffee!
We are humbled and overwhelmed as without a doubt the biggest story of the week for Artists was the debate inspired by David Lowery’s “Letter To Emily” in response to a post by an intern at NPR’s “All Songs Considered.” What followed was an out pouring of support by musicians, artists, creators of all kinds and music fans. We are grateful to everyone who took the time to read David’s thoughtful words, discuss, retweet and repost on Facebook. In a few short days the voice of artists sharing the response resulted in attention from major media news outlets such as Time Magazine, USA Today, The LA Times, The NY Times, MSNBC, Forbes and countless others. The point is not so much whether these outlets agreed or disagreed with David in part or in whole, but rather that the voice of artists uniting on the issue of fair compensation became unavoidable as a mainstream topic of conversation. Probably our favorite report of the week came from Digital Music News who stated, “Our Digital Innocence Just Died. And David Lowery Killed It…“.
We also want to thank all of the artists who also spoke their minds in the comments, Tweets and other posts. We want to continue to support you and invite you to suggest posts if you’d like to write on the Trichordist as many of you have.
Of course there were some who disagreed, but that’s why it’s called debate, right? At least this time both sides were heard. Although we had no idea that so many of you guys would pass it forward to your friends and fans—hundreds and hundreds of thousands of you—we were really impressed by your efforts and the overwhelmingly positive support you gave to David.
Hypebot and WhoSampled present information and an inforgraphic on 30 years of Sampling which appears to directly contradict claims made by anti-artists rights groups about the benefits of innovation in copyright when all stakeholders are compensated fairly.
Interesting reports from Japan passing a law that would jail illegal downloaders:
Pirates really don’t like going to Jail…
Pirates and Jail part two… Appears that Judge in Germany favors Fair and Ethical Internet:
Digital Music News reports on how Major Advertisers appear to support YouTube Piracy:
In related news Hypebot reports Google/YouTube to take legal action against YouTube to MP3 sites:
Amanda Palmer signs a distribution deal with the Cooking Vinyl Record Label:
Most artists sell less than 100 Downloads per year, probably not what TuneCore and Jeff Price want to hear. Digital Music News reports on the economic reality for most musicians:
4 thoughts on “The Trichordist Random Reader Weekly News & Links Sun Jun 24”
Not that SOPA and PIPA were the model of clarity, but notably missing from the debate were the very voices raised in response to Mr. Lowery’s letter. With so many pirate/rogue sites being located outside the US, it would have been helpful to have the artists’ side of the debate presented by more than just professional organizations like the MPAA and the RIAA.
If artists are to be heard, they must engage in order to offset the din raised by those whose constant refrains denigrate artistic rights.
That’s why I spent a week on capitol hill with some other musicians in May.
Good work, David — your essay is especially meaningful as I lost one of my best CDs to ‘All Songs Considered’ a few years back. NPR struck me as highly partisan, and inattentive to the work of independent musicians. I summarily revoked the license that was extended to them.
If I may offer a suggestion. It seems to me that two dynamics are in play. One is that of persons who pirate works (to me they do exhibit situational ethics).
The second dynamic is that of legal means of distribution/performance versus illegal means of distribution/performance. The former have played by the rules, with contracts being formed providing for recompense to the creators of musical works. These range from the major and minor labels to sites that have contracted to peform and/or distribute works.
The latter are, of course, the ubiquitous sites that have chosen to pursue a business model bypassing the creators of musical works altogether. These sites, in my view, include linking sites created specifically to secure income by facilitating others to illegally download musical works.
Perhaps I am mistaken, but having read several of your articles I believe it is the second dynamic that underlies most of your moral/ethical concerns. Yes, fans do take advantage of these sites, but then this is the result of such sites pursuing business models that do violence to the rights of those involved in the creation of musical works.
Comments are closed.