Author: Dr. David C Lowery

Platinum selling singer songwriter for the bands Cracker and Camper Van Beethoven; platinum selling producer; founder of pitch-a-tent records; founder Sound of Music Studios; platinum selling music publisher; angel investor; digital skeptic; college lecturer and founder of the University of Georgia Terry College Artists' Rights Symposium.

David Lowery to speak at Copyright and Technology Conference 2012 NYC Dec 5th.

Please join me.  Judging by last weeks fireworks it should be fun! We have a Trichordist friends and family discount code.

Code: 100GBRJYH  Get’s you in and registered for $100!

From the website:

This special day-long event will examine the latest developments and technologies in the fields of copyright and content security.The nation’s leading experts in the fields will join GiantSteps Media Technologies, publisher of the Copyright and Technology Blog, and Gotham Media for a special program.

This conference is fully accredited for 4.5 CLE Credits by the NYS CLE Board. Financial assistance will be available and discounted rates will be available for government and non-profit attorneys.

Registration: $399 Before November 1; $450 After November 1

http://www.gothammediaventures.com/commerce/orderform.php?id=113

by Dr. David C Lowery

Google’s Serial Obfuscation: Music Canada,BPI, Billboard Question Whether Google Has Really Lowered Pirate Sites Search Rankings

Back in August Google announce it would push down search rankings for pirate sites.  This was greeted with a lot of hoopla by both opponents and proponents of illegal piracy.  But it now appears that this announcement was just newspeak from the GOOrwell Ministry of Truth.

Graham Henderson at Music Canada has just posted an article that puts Google’s claims into question.   In the article Still Searching for Results in Google’s Wasteland of Illegal Sites and Takedown Notices  Henderson details the emptiness of Google’s claims.  A search for Carly Rae Jespersen’s Call Me Maybe  results in zero legitimate music sites on the first page.  The lone exception is the Google owned YouTube.  It’s not till the second page of results that  the 800lb gorilla of the digital retail, iTunes shows up!   Not only does this illustrate the difficulties facing artists it illustrates how tough it is for the legitimate music tech companies to reach their customers.  It’s odd that the myopic music tech companies like Pandora still seem to think it’s the artists that are the enemy.  They refuse to acknowledge that Google is eating their lunch.

It get’s even worse.  We looked at every single link on the first page of search results for “Call Me Maybe Download”.  Google has no incentive to push these infringing links down.   Every link except one apparently generates revenue for Google!!   How?  either directly through Youtube,  by (illegally?) selling advertising on the site hosting the infringing links, or using one of googles many other tools to generate revenue.   We give you the evidence here:

Here is the first page of search results.

Clicking through to the links reveals Google’s DoubleClick serving advertising directly on each these sites or evidence that they have in the past. 5 of these links definitely generate revenue for Google.  Two other  links resulted in queries to Google for ads  but in this case didn’t directly receive ads.  The last two use other google tools to generate revenue    Just like the online pharmacy case Google is complicit in what appears to be illegal activity.  Maybe now the election is over the Obama administration will pursue this.

BeeMP3’s ad traffic has been decimated of late, but google is still selling their android app.

by Dr. David C Lowery

Lobbyist For CCIA Makes All Kinds of Wild Claims About Copyright Management Organizations. BMI ASCAP SOCAN SAMI Included in Charges of Corruption.

I don’t even know what to say about these statements by Jonathan Band, one of the long-time lobbyists for the Computer & Communications Industry (read Google).   The whole thing just seemed kind of crazy to me.  To be clear I don’t have a dog in this fight.   Just curious where these allegations come from.  Cause I researched a bit and I don’t really see anything to justify most of these charges.

Perhaps our readers can help?

But otherwise he does do a good job of answering a question that has always been of interest to me: Google’s acquisition of Rightsflow.

Listen for yourself.

Memo (2)  Jonathan Band at Michigan State University  Law School.

by Dr. David C Lowery

Mellencamp Character Assassination. The New Republic Bravely Stands Up For Corporations and Criminal Groups That Exploit Artists.

I’m sort of delighted by this. I mean I went to a very liberal college and there’s a certain kind elitist and dim knee jerk liberal I really dislike.  Dorm room revolutionaries who end up unwittingly doing the work of the man.  The kind that end up blogging for The New Republic.

Recently John Cougar Mellancamp wrote a piece in which he criticized the music business.  In particular he criticized them and his fellow artists  for not standing up to  large corporations like Google who have monetized illegal file-sharing by selling advertising against illegal download search results and also by providing advertising directly to file infringing sites.

The New Republic-always the class act-decided to respond with a character assassination piece.   They sent the remarkably ignorant Lydia DePillis (on twitter @lydiadepillis)  a 3 year real estate journalism veteran to “School” the 40 year music business veteran John  Mellencamp on the history and future of the music business.  It’s freaking hilarious.  Not only does this “professional” journalist not understand that  the main point is that Mellencamp is criticizing the music business for not protecting artists she wanders completely off topic and makes historical claims that have no basis in fact. Further she incorrectly disputes Mellencamp’s facts.

I’m just gonna give you one example.  The 3 year journalism veteran claims that search engines don’t make money off the searches for illegal downloads.   it took exactly 3.2 seconds for me to disprove this…

That is Google advertising against a set of infringing links.

Also she then dismisses and mocks Mellencamp’s correct claim that Google makes plenty of money serving ads on sites that it knows are infringing.

Here is Google’s Doubleclick serving an ad for Jeep on the that same site http://www.dilandau.eu   A site that Google’s own transparency report ranks as the 24th most copyright infringing site in the world.  Isn’t knowingly providing money to an illegal enterprise a RICO predicate?

It is sad but not surprising to see The New Republic standing up for the right of giant corporations and criminal groups to make money by exploiting artists songs.  The New Republic has totally lost it’s way.  They are now for the big corporations and against the little guy.

If The New Republic has any journalistic integrity left it  needs to correct the falsehoods in this article.  Further they should apologize to Mellencamp for the nasty tone of this article.  I’m sure they won’t but it’s worth a try.   Maybe tweeting at the author will work better @lydiadepillis .

by Dr. David C Lowery

Untruth in Advertising: Pandora’s Misleading Plea To Listeners On Behalf Of The Internet Radio “Fairness” Act.

For those of you that have not been following closely.  The “Internet Fairness Rado Act” is a bill  that is being championed by Pandora Radio.  Pandora radio has been pushing it’s listeners to write their congressmen on behalf of Pandora and in support of this bill.

But Pandora has not honestly explained the bill to their listeners.  They portray the bill as a fix to “discrimination” that internet radio suffers in comparison to traditional broadcasters.  This is simply not true. In addition there are all kinds of nasty things  in this bill that don’t really have anything to do with Pandora.

Here’s how you know you aren’t being told the whole story: The bill is also backed by Clear Channel and other traditional broadcasters.  This is not poor little Pandora vs the other big broadcasters.  They are on the same side. It’s big media vs the artists.   Feel duped?  Write Pandora. Click Here.

So for a little bit of fun we have decided to make an honest and fair version of the Pandora’s plea on behalf of the Orwellian named Internet Radio Fairness Act.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From the Pandora website

Their text is in black.  Our  more “truthy” text is in red.

INTERNET RADIO FAIRNESS ACT

An important piece of legislation has been introduced in Congress to help end the long-standing discrimination against internet radio fire the copyright royalty board judges.  These judges have made rulings that Pandora did not like in  the past.  This bill also muzzles any group that acts on behalf of  “rightsholders” (artists) by threatening prosecution under The Sherman act for “impeding” any direct licensing between broadcasters and record labels.  Direct licensing deals  often allow record labels to take artists performance royalties and apply it to un-recouped balances. As it stands now these royalties must be  paid directly to artists.  This effectively muzzles artists,songwriters and their unions. This bill infringes free speech!   We’re asking that you contact your representative today to urge them to NOT support the Internet Radio Fairness Act.

This bipartisan bill will  NOT end royalty rate discrimination against internet radio and bring greater fairness to our industry. Because such discrimination does not exist.  It may however keep Pandora’s stock price high while insiders sell  millions of dollars of shares amonth. Today, the discrimination disinformation is extraordinary. In 2011, Pandora paid over 50% of revenues in performance royalties, while SiriusXM paid less than 10%.  But comparing shares of revenue is extremely misleading.

This is because

1) Pandora chooses to play one commercial an hour whereas Sirius plays approximately 13.

 2) Sirius relies on subscription (lots of revenue) while Pandora relies more on advertising (much less revenue)

3) Sirius airs a lot of non music programming.  

Internet radio brings millions of listeners back to music, plays the songs of tens of thousands of promising working artists, enabling them to build their audience while receiving fair compensation. That’s why we want to pay artists 85% less. We would like artists to be unfairly compensated so we can profit more. 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you are a pandora listener,  and you received this very misleading communication from Pandora and you now feel duped?  Write Pandora and ask them some hard questions.  Ask them why they failed to mention the bill fires the copyright  judges.  Ask them why they failed to mention  the Sherman Act is in the bill?  Ask them why they failed to mention they want to muzzle artists groups during direct licensing negotiations? Ask them why they never mentioned that Clear Channel is also behind this bill.  Write them  Click here.

You can also write the congressmen and senators who introduced this bill:

Representatives Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Jared Polis (D-CO) along with Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR).

by Dr. David C Lowery

Techdirt Is A Never Ending “Dumb Off”

A long time ago my good friend Dan Vickrey of the Counting Crows  explained to me the concept of  a Dumb Off.   Essentially this is what you call an argument between two people  that actually agree.  Generally this is because one or both  parties insists that the other person is saying something that they are not.  In the music world these Dumb Offs usually occur in the van or on the bus after the show when people are really really drunk.

In the internet world  they occur (with  alarming frequency) on Techdirt.

Most of you are not be familiar with Techdirt.com.  Allow me to explain.   This is an obscure blog that is run by He-who-was-named-on-the-Google-Shill-List (Mike Masnick)and his Canadian sidekick Barnacle Boy – I mean Leigh Beadon.   We at The Trichordist mostly know about this blog cause every time they write about us we get a barely perceptible  extra dozen views.    They generally write minitrues that benefit Google/Oceania  when argued in the broader much more popular  tech blogs. The reason you’ve never heard of Techdirt is cause this is the place where they try out these arguments  before they turn them over to the thinner, better looking and more professional  bloggers.  Bloggers that likely went to Harvard or Yale, not Cornell.

Last week I heard Techdirt ran a story claiming I was wrong about my claim that Copyright is in Human Rights treaties.  I was curious since they (once again) were rebutting something I never said so I decided maybe I should read this article.  It took a while. I fell asleep three times  and it was only after an injection of cheap Guatemalan adrenalin that I managed to finish it.

In yet another attempt to discredit us, Barnacle Boy- I mean the unsuccessful  Canadian hip hop artist Leigh Beadon falsely and knowingly claims I say copyright is in human rights treaties.  To bolster his case he links to an article that I didn’t write and says nothing of the kind. But these kind of real world facts have never stopped the Google policy id– oops  I mean Techdirt  from writing stuff like this before. What the linked article does say  and what I often say is: Artists’ Rights (not copyright) are enshrined in Human Rights treaties. These rights are then expressed on the national level in copyright laws.

Whoops, your bad.

Looks like we are agreeing on this one point.   Thus I declare this a  Dumb Off.  In my band you get a $250 dollar fine for participation in any Dumb Off.  Pay  it to the tour manager.

Now normally we’d ask for a correction but we’re not exactly sure who to ask? See we are not entirely sure that Masnick  and Beadon actually exist.  Reading Techdirt one might be forgiven for assuming Masnick and Beadon are simply mildly sophisticated AI from some half assed Google AI project tucked between Google’s space program boondoggle and the driverless car boondoggle.   Certainly Masnick’s attempts at humor AND Leigh’s rhyming style fall into the unfortunate  “Uncanny Valley” between human and robotic. Thus lending credence to our theory.

So we ask:  Are they programmed to make corrections?  Or do we just write the AI programmers and ask for the correction? This is uncharted territory for us.

So however much we have enjoyed seeing Techdirt bravely taking a stand against human rights treaties and morality itself,  and however excited we are about using this against them later,  we do have to correct the record.  You just can’t make shit up.  Even on the internet.  Here is the main blog that The  Trichordist published on Artists Rights and Human Rights.    This was written by Chris Castle.

The Human Rights of Artists

…These rights resonate in a number of international and national documents, but a good international agreement to consider first is the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that was ratified by the United Nations General Assembly on December 16, 1966. It is important to remember that human rights are fundamental, inalienable and universal entitlements belonging to individuals, individual artists in our case. As a legal matter, human rights can be distinguished from intellectual property rights as intellectual property rights are arguably subordinate to human rights and actually implement at the national level the human rights recognized as transcending international and national intellectual property laws…

Ergo a “Dumb Off”.  I think the judges will agree. $250.

by Dr. David C Lowery

Pandora Comes Out Of The Closet; Confirms Clear Channel and Pandora “More Than Just Friends’

Editor’s note:  The Internet Radio “Fairness” Coalition Launched yesterday and as we predicted this is just old line radio broadcasters (including Clear Channel) cross-dressing as Internet Radio Broadcasters in attempt to trick public into supporting this bad bill. 

Hey music  business journalists.  Hear that?  It’s the wake the fuck up alarm.  And it’s telling you that The Trichordist was right all along: Pandora is simply bearding for Clear Channel. It says so right here.

This is not about making rates “fair” for Pandora. Pandora already has fair rates, it’s not musicians problem they don’t want to sell more advertising. Pandora plays 1 minute of advertising per hour compared to satellites 13 minutes an hour.

If this bill were really about Pandora getting fair rates why the fuck would  both Pandora and Clear Channel  be supporting this bill?  Do you really think Clear Channel wants to help Pandora steal more audience share from them?  No of course not.    That’s why, by every measure (including wordcount) ,90% of this bill is serious special interest bullshit. Things like:

*Fires Current Copyright Judges

*Mandates what new judges can consider as “evidence”.

*Judges can’t consider previous rulings.  Or as we prefer to call it “the Orwellian He who controls the past controls the future clause.”

*Eliminates requirements judges have experience in copyright or economics.

* Stands the anti-monopoly Sherman Act on it’s head by using it to limit free speech  of performing rights organizations, industry associations, artists guilds even unions.

This bill is so shitty it may achieve the impossible: Bipartisan consensus.

Conservatives hate it cause it’s crony capitalism.  Silicon valley asking the US government to fix their business model.  Most real businesses outside  profitless-innovation-land  (Silicon Valley) negotiate with their suppliers instead of running to the Nanny State to fix their business model.   It’s 2012 Silicon Valley, grow up!

Liberals hate it cause it’s Agency Capture.  These large corporations couldn’t get their way with  the CRB so now they are trying to dismantle the board and remake it in their image.

We ask Tim Westergren to come clean. Quit pretending this fight is about his “cool” internet radio broadcaster being treated unfairly by “uncool” corporate broadcasters like Clear Channel.  You guys are on the same side!  No more bullshit.

The Internet Radio Fairness website was registered way back in June 2012. This has been planned for a while.   “Tim you go first, then we’ll launch this site later”  The contacts are all in Richardson TX. Pandora is not based in Texas.. which of these members of the coalition are based in Texas?.. .hmm.

by Dr. David C Lowery