Category: Artists Rights Watch

Intellectual property — Our forgotten constitutional right? | Fosters

This story originally ran on Constitution Day, but we just got hipped to it now. Worth the read.

Cyber-piracy increasingly costs the U.S. economy money that instead of creating and supporting jobs goes into the pockets of criminals. The government must act, and swiftly, by exercising its constitutional responsibility to ensure that this trend is reversed. This may require breaking some new ground and should be done only after careful, principled debate, with respect for liberty and adherence to our other, equally important, constitutional rights.

If the framers could understand this matter in the eighteenth century, we must believe the current Congress can grapple with it today. Previous efforts to update our intellectual property protection system were defeated in a flurry of misinformation. The proposed legislation may have been opaque and overly broad, but the concerns expressed by many conservatives and libertarians were overstated.

On this Constitution Day, let’s remember that even in the Founder’s concept of a limited federal government, it is the proper obligation of that government to secure the property of its citizens against lawlessness. Protecting intellectual property is a property rights issue. There is a difference between liberty and lawlessness: We should favor the former and oppose the latter. On Constitution Day we should think about the protection of intellectual property rights on the Internet as a logical, contemporary extension of the basic Constitutional rights of authors, scientists and inventors that our framers set forth so plainly two and a quarter centuries ago.

READ THE FULL STORY AT FOSTERS:
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130919/GJOPINION_0102/130919239/-1/FOSOPINION

by Trichordist Editor

The Misconceptions of Music Piracy | DeepWit Recordings

A fantastic and detailed exploration of the issues from the perspective of a Deep House, Independent, EDM Label.

The second biggest misconception I have run across about piracy is that it does not hurt sales.

The first question I have to ask people when they say this to me is, have you actually done a test to prove this hypotheses?

I have, and from what I have seen, from a small labels perspective is YES without a doubt it effects our sales. I can also say, being involved with a fairly recognizable Deep House producer, that when we take down illegal download sites for him, it can make all the difference between making it into the top 100 and not.

Maybe this does not hold true for all labels or artists, but I can certainly say for my label we have more lost revenue (my estimate would be about a third of what we could be making instead goes to piracy) then we get fans in return for this “free” promotion.

READ THE FULL POST AT DEEPWIT RECORDINGS:
http://deepwitrecordings.wordpress.com/tag/why-music-piracy-hurts-musicians/

by Trichordist Editor

Silk Road Arrest Shines Light on ‘Dark Web’ | ABC News

The wild west wasn’t wild forever, and neither will the internet be… Sooner or later the good guys will catch up to the bad guys and people will value law, over lawlessness. This bust proves that the issues musicians and creators face online is not so much about technology, but rather how that technology is used.

The FBI’s takedown of a billion-dollar black market website that allowed users to sell and purchase illegal items has shined a spotlight on the “dark Web,” which masks users’ online identities while providing a shield for everyone from hackers to journalists and the police.

Ross William Ulbricht, 29, was arrested Tuesday and charged with a battery of conspiracy crimes allegedly committed through his Silk Road website, which has been called the “Amazon of illegal drugs” or the “eBay of illicit substances.” It was described by the FBI as “the most sophisticated and extensive criminal marketplace on the Internet.”

READ THE FULL STORY HERE:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/silk-road-arrest-shines-light-dark-web/story?id=20460774

by trichordist

Copyright: The Inverted Human Pyramid | The Cynical Musican

You are no doubt aware of the hearings currently being undertaken by the US House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet – part of a major review of existing copyright law (and if not, I just told you). As can be expected in this enlightened (or, at least, interconnected) age – recordings are available on the web and I’ve been trying to catch up with the debate.

Whilst watching the hearing from two weeks ago (with representatives from the “rights holder side” present) I couldn’t help feeling that none of the witnesses was able to articulate just why copyright was so important to the nation as a whole – not just the small portion of it that actually owns marketable copyrights. Given that the House of Representatives represents all Americans, it would seem that such an explanation is deserved.

This got me thinking of how I would go about explaining it and I offer it for your reading pleasure.

READ THE FULL POST AT:
http://thecynicalmusician.com/2013/08/copyright-the-inverted-human-pyramid/

by Trichordist Editor

The End of Quiet Music | The New York Times

There’s a lot to take away from the recent opinion piece in the New York Times from Alina Simone about the new (but not better) realities for musicians and creators. Here are two paragraphs that have resonated with us, asking the important questions about where we are, and where we are going.

Instead of helping these musicians, we tell them they just have to adapt to the new realities of the music economy. And short of embedding MP3s in toilet paper, they have. Bands have demonstrated remarkable creativity in trying to monetize whatever they can to make up for the inability to, er, monetize their music itself. They will come over and play Xbox 360 with you or personally record your outgoing voice mail message.

We’ve placed the entire onus of changing-with-the-times on musicians, but why can’t the educational, cultural and governmental institutions that support the arts adapt as well, extending the same opportunities to those whose music provides the soundtrack to our lives? If they don’t, Darwinism will probably ensure that only the musical entrepreneurs survive. I can’t say if the world of music will be better or worse off if that happens, but it will certainly be a lot louder.

READ THE FULL STORY HERE AT THE NEW YORK TIMES:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/the-end-of-quiet-music/?_r=0

by Trichordist Editor

Meet the Free Market Royalty Act, an Elegant Solution to Some Complex Issues | Billboard

This guest post at Billboard is a great overview for understanding the “Free Market Royalty Act.”

Representative Mel Watt (D-NC-12) has introduced the Free Market Royalty Act (H.R. 3219), one of the most intriguing royalty proposals in years. The bill accomplishes two principal goals: Watt starts the process of getting the government out of the music business by eliminating the compulsory license for digital audio transmissions, and extends the sound recording public performance right to all audio performances.

Here’s why this is a productive solution to a knotty problem.

READ THE FULL POST AT BILLBOARD:
http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/legal-and-management/5740706/guest-post-meet-the-free-market-royalty-act-an

by trichordist

Why Copyright Infringement is Theft | Copyhype

This post by  Devlin Hartline at Copyhype was Cross-posted on the Law Theories blog.

In the never-ending copyright debate, one often comes across certain words the usage of which both sides vehemently disagree upon. One such point of contention is the use of the word “theft” to describe copyright infringement. Ars Technica ran an article a few years back where Vice President Joe Biden was quoted as saying that “[p]iracy is flat, unadulterated theft.” Copyhype’s Terry Hart had a post a week later discussing the infringement-as-theft meme, mentioning the fact that even Justice Breyer, a copyright skeptic, had referred to deliberate infringement as “garden-variety theft.”1 The response from the other side of the debate was predictable, with the usual suspects demanding that copyright infringement is not theft—though the skeptics conspicuously neglected to define the word theft or to actually explain why it’s wrong to refer to infringement as theft.

READ THE FULL POST AT COPYHYPE:
http://www.copyhype.com/2013/09/why-copyright-infringement-is-theft/

by Trichordist Editor

SoundExchange and BandPage Collaborate to Put $2M in Unclaimed Royalties in Musicians Pockets | Music Industry News Wire

Music Industry Newswire reports on some good news!

WASHINGTON, D.C. /Music Industry Newswire/ — SoundExchange, a music industry non-profit focused on distributing digital performance royalties to recording artists and record labels, and BandPage, a leading solution for musicians to manage their presence online, recently teamed up to notify recording artists of unclaimed royalties with SoundExchange.

Together the two groups identified more than $2 million in unclaimed digital performance royalties for thousands of BandPage musicians who have not yet registered with SoundExchange. Bandpage musicians with unclaimed performance royalties will be notified by BandPage directly via email.

READ THE FULL POST AT MUSIC INDUSTRY NEWS WIRE:
http://musicindustrynewswire.com/2012/08/07/min5749_140533.php/soundexchange-and-bandpage-collaborate-to-put-2m-in-unclaimed-royalties-in-musicians-pockets/

by Trichordist Editor

David Lowery in The New York Times | Defining and Demanding a Musician’s Fair Shake in the Internet Age

The New York Times business reporter Ben Sisario profiles David Lowery on the artists rights in the Copyfight. Maybe advocacy is the new radio?

The issue has become hot as technology companies like Pandora and Google have replaced major record labels as the villains of choice for industry critics. Recently, Thom Yorke of Radiohead caused a stir by removing some of his music from Spotify and saying that the service would hurt new artists.

To his detractors, Mr. Lowery is a divisive ranter who pines for a lost, pre-Internet economy. But his knowledge of legal and technological minutiae — he is a lecturer at the University of Georgia’s music business program — make his arguments hard to dismiss.

“He’s telling his personal story and standing up to the big corporations who claim to support songwriters, even as they work to undermine our rights behind the scenes,” said Paul Williams, the songwriter and president of Ascap. “He hasn’t flinched, and I think that’s given courage to other artists.”

READ THE FULL STORY HERE AT THE NEW YORK TIMES:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/business/media/defining-and-demanding-a-musicians-fair-shake-in-the-internet-age.html?_r=0

by trichordist

@SFmusicTech Take Note – The 13 Most Insidious, Pervasive Lies of the Modern Music Industry… | Digital Music News

One of the most succinct and accurate assessments of the modern music business. As digital music hopefuls head to Nor Cal for @SFMusicTech the attendees should be aware that this conference has promoted many if not all of these “13 Most Insidious, Pervasive Lies of the Modern Music Industry.”

The list covers everything from “T-shirts & Touring” to “The Long Tail”  and from “Kickstarter” to “Streaming.”

Lie #1: Great music will naturally find its audience.
Lie #2: Artists will thrive off of ‘Long Tail,’ niche content.
Lie #3: The death of the major label will make it easier for artists to succeed.
Lie #4: There will be a death of the major label.
Lie #5: Digital formats will produce far greater revenues than physical.
Lie #6: “The real money’s in touring”
Lie #7: There’s an emerging middle class artist.
Lie #8: Kickstarter can and will build careers.
Lie #9: Spotify is your friend.
Lie #10: Google and YouTube are your friends.
Lie #11: If Pandora could just lower royalties, they could then survive, and really help all the artists out there.
Lie #12: T-Shirts!
Lie #13: ‘Streaming is the future…’

Here’s one in detail…

Lie #10: Google and YouTube are your friends.

The Lie: Google and YouTube have anything but their own profit-maximization goals in mind.

The Truth: This is business, not altruism, not matter how it gets spun. And, the interests of Google and rights owners are diabolically opposed and will continue to be so. Which also means that anything that is DMCA-compliant is ultimately great for Google, and fantastially bad for content owners.

So if you want exposure, go to YouTube. If you want a paycheck, find it somewhere else.

Perhaps the most encouraging thing about this story at Digital Music News is that we didn’t write it. As we’ve stated repeatedly more and more people can see the truth as plain as day that musicians are not empowered by the internet as much as they have been more exploited by it.

A very basic refresher is in order to all of these businesses who are using music as the basis of their business models online: NO MUSIC = NO BUSINESS.

READ THE FULL POST AT DIGITAL MUSIC NEWS:
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2013/20130925lies#r67vc32IgD2J_zeHZy7D0g

by trichordist