An Important Read for Music Fans

[Analogman]

What does Bob Lefsetz have that I can steal that might be worth something? A blogger's opinion has no worth or importance.

 

He is a lawyer. He is well known in the entertainment business. I read his blog all the time. I don't always agree with him, but he often puts out some interesting stuff to read.

 

What's funny though is that even though he comes from the time of albums, he always goes on about:

And the public is gonna say that fourteen dollars for a CD with one good track is stupid.

 

And he often rants about older artists bitching about the way things are these days.

 

I sometimes think the way things are now are most likely better for those who are not in the get rich quick disposable top ten. With the internet, you can of course reach many more people that a record company who does not really care about you would probably do.

 

I think one of the guys in Rush said a while back that it use to be you toured to promote an album, and made money from record sales. And now, you tour to make money and put an album to let people know you are still active and touring.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

He is a lawyer. He is well known in the entertainment business. I read his blog all the time. I don't always agree with him, but he often puts out some interesting stuff to read.

 

What's funny though is that even though he comes from the time of albums, he always goes on about:

 

And he often rants about older artists bitching about the way things are these days.

 

I sometimes think the way things are now are most likely better for those who are not in the get rich quick disposable top ten. With the internet, you can of course reach many more people that a record company who does not really care about you would probably do.

 

I think one of the guys in Rush said a while back that it use to be you toured to promote an album, and made money from record sales. And now, you tour to make money and put an album to let people know you are still active and touring.

 

I'm fully aware of who he is A-man. I just think he's an embittered malcontent

[Analogman]

I'm fully aware of who he is A-man. I just think he's an embittered malcontent

 

Oh - he certainly fits that title from time to time.

[LouieB]

Let's go back to the beginning and ask one simple question. Did this poor intern really steal music? Is it wrong to borrow a CD and rip it into a hard drive? Somehow it may be wrong(ish) but not really stealing. No one has yet answered my scenario of letting folks rip personal paid copies of CDs from someone else. There is nothing in any of these articles that says that the intern downloaded this material from websites giving away copywritten material.

 

Once again, everyone has borrowed copywritten material,everyone. Mix tapes/CDs fit this as does taping off the radio/TV. Buying bootlegged material of any sort also. Buying used CDs, books, movies, etc. doesn't help any artist and could be construed as stealing,

 

Oh and by the way, the difference between artists who are dead or alive or rich or poor - makes no difference.

 

This is all a good discussion for us all, but beating up on Emily White is kinda silly. She didn't sell music to anyone and we don't know where she got it from either.

 

LouieB

[Analogman]

It could be one of those things that just goes back and forth forever.

 

I don't have an iPod, iPhone, nor do I mess with Mp3 files. I figure if I did, I would be more inclined to snag tracks instead of buying cds.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Mr. Heartbreak. Maybe you should read the article before you respond. That would answer many of you questions/comments. And you do know there are many sites that allow you to preview songs before you purchase. You don't need to download anything to check it out.

I did read the article. That's why I responded. I just don't agree with a lot of his points.

And yes, I am aware that many sites allow me to preview songs. For an artist with whom I am unfamiliar, I will give them a chance...on my own terms.

[Kim Bodnia]

Oh and by the way, the difference between artists who are dead or alive or rich or poor - makes no difference.

 

The difference is music that's in the public domain and music that isn't.

 

 

Ummm... I call bullshit w/o some sort of documentation.

 

Think what you like to think. There's plenty of examples of copyright infringement that may seem absurd (or silly). Like this one or this one

 

The fact is I didn't write copyright law. If someone wrote a song, and he or she wouldn't allow you to sing it in the shower, that's infringement because you don't own the lyrics.

[ih8music]

Let's go back to the beginning and ask one simple question. Did this poor intern really steal music? Is it wrong to borrow a CD and rip it into a hard drive? Somehow it may be wrong(ish) but not really stealing. No one has yet answered my scenario of letting folks rip personal paid copies of CDs from someone else.

 

Is it stealing? Yes, it technically is. As was mentioned before, making a copy of any copyrighted material (music, books, movies, etc.) is a violation of that copyright and is stealing.

 

But is it wrong? That's debatable. If I copy a CD for you because I think you'll like it and it turns out you don't, then I don't think you (or I) are under any obligation to purchase anything. But if it turns out that you love it and play the music frequently, then yes, I think it would be wrong for you to not purchase your own CD (or me to purchase it for you, since I'm such a generous friend).

 

There is nothing in any of these articles that says that the intern downloaded this material from websites giving away copywritten material.

My impression was she got the bulk of her music library from the radio station where she works. She said something like she'd sit at her laptop all day long ripping CDs.

[Doug C]

I read Emily White's piece on NPr the day it came out. I took it as it was intended, as a response to Bob Boilen's piece "I just deleted all of my music". He talks about trusting the Cloud. White was basically saying that it didn't really resonate with her as she never really owned CDs. I didn't think about the "stealing" issue at all, but Jesus, she sure is being pilloried all over the comments section of her story and all over the internet.

 

I read David Lowery's piece and have read similar blogs by him before. I agree with the guy, according to the law, it is stealing but his entire point seems to be, "after you understand my excellent logic and analogies, you will grasp that what you are doing is wrong and stop because you are basically nice people". But here is where I agree with Lefsetz about Lowery speaking into an echo chamber. At best, a small amount of people will change their behavior due to exposure to David Lowery's blogs. His analogies aren't perfect. For example, when he talks about how many illegal downloaders pay extra for Fair Trade coffee to insure the purchase is in line with their morals as far as the grower being paid, therefore they should want the artist to be fairly compensated also. He gives other examples but this isn't reality. The analogy falls apart. If the folks who buy fair trade coffee found a way to illegally acquire non-fair trade coffee for free with a near zero chance of prosecution, I posit that many, if not most, of them would rationalize their way to free coffe instead of fair trade coffee. It reminds me of Jeff Goldblum's line in the Big Chill about how rationalizing is more important than sex because we will go a day without sex but "when was the last time you went a day without a nice juicy rationalization?".

 

I agree with David Lowery that the artist should be compensated, I respect him and enjoy his music. He also is likely more intelligent than I, but if his solution is to appeal to morality, then he is a fool. Technology has rapidly changed and is still rapidly changing the music business, creating many problems and issues that need to be addressed and dealt with but trying to shame people into changing their behavior as a means to solving those problems is a waste of time.

[lost highway]

More thoughts on this:

 

I remember Jeff Tweedy once saying something like: "Music isn't a loaf of bread."

 

Intellectual property theft is one of the most abstract ethical accusations around. If you bit torrent an album someone spent 15 grand making are you taking away something that puts them at a loss? Do they have less goods? If you steal a riff from the Kinks is that wrong? If you get a decoded copy of Adobe Photoshop from your room mate is that hurting people?

 

It's cool to read the back and forth between these bloggers because they're both pissed off, and they're both kind of right. The music industry has permanently changed, the CD will soon be dead, and no one knows exactly how it all will end up.

[cooperissup3r]

 

Intellectual property theft is one of the most abstract ethical accusations around. If you bit torrent an album someone spent 15 grand making are you taking away something that puts them at a loss? Do they have less goods? If you steal a riff from the Kinks is that wrong? If you get a decoded copy of Adobe Photoshop from your room mate is that hurting people?

 

 

It's not that you're taking "it" from them...it's that you're not paying them for something society has deemed you should pay for, and that they feel like they should be paid for. If you created something, and you felt you could get paid for it, you'd want to get paid for it (unless you don't...but as we've seen, they charge money to play shows, they charge money for shirts, they charge money for records...so they DO want to get paid for it). If someone took the thing you created and made unlimited copies of it and then everyone is just giving it away, you'd be pissed. That's your creation and your intent was for it to be sold.

 

Take out the idea of "intellectual property" or whatnot...it's still a product, unless you've decided not to sell it. And it's easy for Tweedy to say "music isn't a loaf of bread" when he's in a great position to say that.

[Shakey]

Here's Bob Lefsetz's take on it. You can probably tell what his thoughts are from the title of the blog post.

 

And if you think being rich is everything, you never read Gregg Allman’s book, wherein he states:

 

"Money doesn’t impress me worth a f**k, and it doesn’t make me feel good. I’ve had it both ways – I’ve been rich and I’ve been broke."

 

Gregg’s all about playing music.

 

 

Love how Bob Lefsetz quotes Gregg Allman of all people. Of course Greg is currently on a freakin' BOOK TOUR (could there be anything less artistic) trying to sell as many books as possible and make as much money as possible. But of course for Gregg its all about playing music -- well that and sitting in Barnes / Noble selling books.

 

Bob Lefsetz's just a blowhard that likes to disagree with whatever.

[Doug C]

What does Bob Lefsetz have that I can steal that might be worth something? A blogger's opinion has no worth or importance.

A blogger's opinion is of as much importance as any other opinion. Also, the case could be made that as a well-known and successful entertainment lawyer, his opinion on this particular subject has more worth or importance than others' opinions, just as many likely feel that as a well known successful artist and as a university music business lecturer, David Lowery's opinion is of particular worth and importance.

[uncool2pillow]

I love the concept of writing and promoting a book is another way of selling out. Good lord!

[lost highway]

It's not that you're taking "it" from them...it's that you're not paying them for something society has deemed you should pay for, and that they feel like they should be paid for.

 

But that's what's up for debate. Society has not been able to collectively deem the inherent value of something that does not occupy physical space. It is not a settled matter. Musicians also have a pretty wide range of opinions about this.

[uncool2pillow]

But the law does not. Wilco and the Dead and lots of other bands are/were okay with taping. That's their right and it doesn't seem to have hurt their bottom line. They (and their labels, publishing companies, etc) own the right to their music, they get to legally control how to distribute. Anything that violates that is theft, period!

[cooperissup3r]

But that's what's up for debate. Society has not been able to collectively deem the inherent value of something that does not occupy physical space. It is not a settled matter. Musicians also have a pretty wide range of opinions about this.

 

put it this way: if someone gets an advance copy of the new wilco disc, uploads it to some torrent site or rapidshare or whatever, and people download that...that's stealing. this is a product that has been taken without it being paid for. tell me how that isn't stealing, please.

[lost highway]

It is legally theft. And crossing the street away from an intersection is legally jaywalking. I suppose people who's perception of reality is constantly clarified by law must really be struggling with the hemorrhaging of a corporate art market that is ravaged by every aunt, son-in-law and girl next door you know. They are all violating the law, and they go unpunished. Somehow the law never seemed to define the meaning of rock and roll, and how it is used.

[Vacant Horizon]

I'm fully aware of who he is A-man. I just think he's an embittered malcontent

 

same could be said for lowery.

 

i just bought two pretty hard to find CDs thinking i would really like them. well, they blow. maybe there's a reason they're out of print. now if i would have sampled them a little more closely in one way or another, i wouldn't be out $50. thing is, most shit people download, they wouldn't have bought in the first place or they would've been screwed with a bad CD. at this in with the shitty production and dynamics these days, bob has a point. i wish downloads were cheaper. no reason a song should be $1.25. piracy would all but be gone if songs were $.25 and albums $3 on iTunes. i wouldn't hesitate to buy something to test it out and then determine if i'm fine with the download or want a physical deluxe product.

[Vacant Horizon]

http://airgordon.tumblr.com/post/76078291/steve-albini-on-music-downloading

 

Albini

[Oil Can Boyd]

Wilco and the Dead and lots of other bands are/were okay with taping.

As are David Lowery's bands Camper Van Beethoven and Cracker.

[cooperissup3r]

It is legally theft. And crossing the street away from an intersection is legally jaywalking. I suppose people who's perception of reality is constantly clarified by law must really be struggling with the hemorrhaging of a corporate art market that is ravaged by every aunt, son-in-law and girl next door you know. They are all violating the law, and they go unpunished. Somehow the law never seemed to define the meaning of rock and roll, and how it is used.

 

i'd say jaywalking and downloading music are quite different. and it's easy to take and take when you're not on the side trying to pay their bills doing this as a living. and maybe that's the artist's fault for deciding this is what he/she wants to do for a living, but on some level we're just making it harder for them.

 

ps- we are discussing legality, therefore the legal/illegal-ness of the whole thing is settled.

[ih8music]

http://airgordon.tum...sic-downloading

 

Albini

 

I mostly agree with Albini's view of the situation here. Not all downloads are lost sales. People have huge collections of songs that they will never listen to again.

 

My distinction is that I think the downloaded mp3, once you've become a fan of the artist, should be paid for. He seems to think only physical goods like albums, t-shirts and concert tickets need to be purchased -- but most people these days (like the intern who started this debate) never purchase a physical form of music, and just realistically speaking they probably won't make it to a concert any time soon.

 

All I think is that if you've become a fan of an artist (or an individual song or album) you should pay them for it. The artist shouldn't have to wait for their next tour and hope you go and buy stuff then.

[lost highway]

Correct, we all know it is illegal. I don't think that was the core of the moral imperative in the original article. What is interesting is how consumers, musicians, and promoters/streaming services/ labels will move forward.

 

I am a musician, and I also run a recording studio where I work with underground bands. I have been performing music and recording music since 1996. The old model for the music industry never served anyone I knew. In fact it helped implode some of my favorite 90's groups: Jawbox, Jawbreaker, Engine 88, Shudder to Think, Seaweed, and it nearly smushed Samiam but they escaped with an indie. This weird transitional period has been slightly better in some respects, but not necessarily a huge improvement.

[Kim Bodnia]

The author seems to put all the blame on users downloading music. What about the music industry? Sales have declined in the past, well before the Internet existed and the reason is the music industry has been slow to innovate. The following research is by Lawrence Lessig:

 

 

While the numbers do suggest that sharing is harmful, how harmful is harder to

reckon. It has long been the recording industry's practice to blame technology

for any drop in sales. The history of cassette recording is a good example. As

a study by Cap Gemini Ernst & Young put it, "Rather than exploiting this new,

popular technology, the labels fought it." The labels claimed that every

album taped was an album unsold, and when record sales fell by 11.4 percent in

1981, the industry claimed that its point was proved. Technology was the

problem, and banning or regulating technology was the answer.

 

Yet soon thereafter, and before Congress was given an opportunity to enact

regulation, MTV was launched, and the industry had a record turnaround. "In the

end," Cap Gemini concludes, "the 'crisis' ... was not the fault of the tapers"

who did not [stop after MTV came into being] - but had to a large extent

resulted from stagnation in musical innovation at the major labels."

(Lessig, 2005,).

 

 

Also, I don't agree that we're being "misinformed" by the Free Culture movement. Just browse Creative Commons for a wealth of music that you can download and distribute without guilt.