Please Explain to a Dummy!

John Bechtel · From: Nashville, Tennessee, R.I.P.

I am PC illiterate and don't really understand much about the internet, since I only use WebTv. Could someone please explain:? I always hear so much about Music~Piracy on the Internet, but; what I don't understand is WHY/HOW does the music become available on the Internet in the first place. Why is it there???

------------------
“Big John” Bechtel
’04 SD–10 Black Derby w/3 & 5 & Pad
’49-’50 Fender T–8 Custom
’65 Re-Issue Fender Twin–Reverb Custom™ 15” Eminence
web site

Les Pierce · From: Shreveport, LA

I think the big debate is over "Peer to Peer" down loading. This would be me, storing songs on my hard drive, that I've copied from CD's or old tapes, and allowing you to use something like Bearshare, to copy them directly to your hard drive, (which I don't think you have in your setup, anyway).

The songs are not really on the Internet, but the Internet is used to allow the transfer from computer to computer. So you can see how it could be confusing as to the who is violating the law.

Les

John Bechtel · From: Nashville, Tennessee, R.I.P.

As the bear said in the “Little Black Sambo” story, ‘Oh’!

------------------
“Big John” Bechtel
’04 SD–10 Black Derby w/3 & 5 & Pad
’49-’50 Fender T–8 Custom
’65 Re-Issue Fender Twin–Reverb Custom™ 15” Eminence
web site

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

simple..

you convert a CD or songs to MP3..

You upload and store your MP3's of these CD songs somewhere up in Internet land...on server space which is assigned to you or that you lease. Or as mentioned above, your own home PC which is accessed by an Internet IP address.(file sharing, peer to peer)

You post in a forum such as this the address for those MP3 files of the songs so we can listen to them or download them.

You have now just shared the songs with countless minions and violated Copyright laws.

and..it gets worse..

You make a cool CD of you playing of some of these songs..you either give them away for free..or..as enterprising as we all are..you sell them for a few nominal bucks to recapture the cost of the making the CD of your cool playing.

YOU DID NOT pay for the mechanical License in this process for each song..

Now you have really done it..You stole the music and resold it for a profit !

Do not pass Go..
go directly to Jail.

see how it works

With the ability to convert songs to MP3, the ability to send large files over the Internet, the ability to store files somewhere up in Internet land..the ability with HI SPEED Internet to download large files..etc...we have entered into a brave new world...

Not too many years back when a common hard drive was ony 800 megabytes..we all found Internet locations to store stuff..most were even free...music, photo's etc...you could log on to some server somewhere and store tons of stuff in your private folders. And once stored you could EMAIL everyone on the planet with the addresses for everything you had stored in your folder so they could ALL access it...and..download it...

Today we have access to web providers( Hosting Servers) that will allow you to have your own website with tons of space for a minimal monthly fee..some web providers offer space for free..so now you send all of your CD MP3 songs to that web address and share it with the rest of us.Thank you very much...

Now multiply that equation by about 50 million...

The new PODS allow folks to store as many as 2000 CDs..available for Interent upload and sharing if desired...

Multiply that by about 50 million...

then multiply it by about 2 cents per song..if shared..and you should get what all the beef is about...

t

[This message was edited by Tony Prior on 01 July 2005 at 03:47 AM.]

Jim Phelps · From: Mexico City, Mexico

Les and Tony are correct, and that's not all.

Technically, if you are walking down the road and whistling a song you didn't write, you are guilty of copyright infringement. If you are playing a song you didn't write in a bar or VFW hall and not paying union dues or payments to BMI or ASCAP, you're also guilty.

They're not after anyone for this yet, (in some places, in the case of live performances, they ARE) but I'll predict right here and now that they will get worse about this before they get better.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

Jim, I think it is on the road to getting better already with the Music sites such as Wallmart and I Tunes offering tunes for as low as 88 cents..and entire albums for about $9..with priviledges for about 10 copies...

This is a good start, it allows us to purchase only the songs we want and we can legaaly make a few copies...

We no longer have to buy a full lousy CD to get just a couple of songs....which I believe is what started this whole mess to begin with...

It's all about the money..as long as BMI and ASCAP folks are part of the $$$ process things will improve.

But..I do believe they are not done making examples of those that are really out there on the fringe, copying everything in site and sending it off to everyone they know...

At some point these monster LABELS will figure out how to capture the primary income from the Internet rather than the local record store...

If I was one of them thats what I would do...

100 million folks surf the net each day..
how many go into a record store ?

Show me the money !

t

Jim Cohen · From: Philadelphia, PA

Jim, to clarify, it is usually the club/bar owners who pay license fees to ASCAP and BMI, not the individual performers who show up there for one-night stands.

As for whistling, well, that's why I only whistle original material in the shower. I don't want to get arrested while I'm buck nekkid!

Roger Rettig · From: Naples, FL

....and I wouldn't want to be the guy that arrests you!

RR

Jim Phelps · From: Mexico City, Mexico

Tony, yes buying a few songs may be getting cheaper, but I was speaking about the "copyright police" which I don't believe will ease up, but most likely intensify.

Jim, yes of course the club owner is actually the one who pays the BMI/ASCAP payments... the way I worded the sentence implied "you" but meant anyone...

Joey Ace · From: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

There are also songs on line because the writters want them there.

If you wrote and recorded a song you are free to put it on the 'Net, or whistle it in Jim's shower.

Many Inde bands are doing just that. Their way of thinking is it is getting their name known, which could pay off in the future.

[This message was edited by Joey Ace on 01 July 2005 at 09:07 AM.]

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

Yes Jim, I understand, that are many facets to this issue..and you are correct..the copyright Police are going to get tuffer..I agree..

And Joey raises a good point as well, but I seriously doubt that the INDIES are the cause of all current concern, I think it's Jimbeaux whistling Metallica songs...

t

[This message was edited by Tony Prior on 01 July 2005 at 09:12 AM.]

Jim Phelps · From: Mexico City, Mexico

I don't care what someone's whistling, how'd they get in my shower?

edited for crappy typing, as always

[This message was edited by Jim Phelps on 01 July 2005 at 09:33 AM.]

Steinar Gregertsen · From: Arendal, Norway, R.I.P.

Singer/songwriter Janis Ian has written a very interesting article about this, here's a quote:

quote:
One other major point: in the hysteria of the moment, everyone is forgetting the main way an artist becomes successful - exposure. Without exposure, no one comes to shows, no one buys CDs, no one enables you to earn a living doing what you love. Again, from personal experience: in 37 years as a recording artist, I've created 25+ albums for major labels, and I've never once received a royalty check that didn't show I owed them money. So I make the bulk of my living from live touring, playing for 80-1500 people a night, doing my own show. I spend hours each week doing press, writing articles, making sure my website tour information is up to date. Why? Because all of that gives me exposure to an audience that might not come otherwise. So when someone writes and tells me they came to my show because they'd downloaded a song and gotten curious, I am thrilled!

Who gets hurt by free downloads? Save a handful of super-successes like Celine Dion, none of us. We only get helped.

The whole article can be found here.

Steinar

------------------
www.gregertsen.com

Jim Phelps · From: Mexico City, Mexico

Interesting article, and interesting it's about exposure, and written by Janis Ian.

I thought she was dead?

Steinar Gregertsen · From: Arendal, Norway, R.I.P.

Dead? Obviously not, here's her official website.

Steinar

------------------
www.gregertsen.com

Jim Phelps · From: Mexico City, Mexico

Thanks for the article and the link, Steinar.

Well, my earlier post saying, "interesting.... thought she was dead..." is actually a bit of a joke, you see...

I really did think she'd passed on years ago, and now there's an article about "exposure" written by her.... see the irony there?

Anyway I'm glad she's still around, I always thought she had a beautiful voice and was...I mean is.... and extremely gifted songwriter.

Joey Ace · From: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

The jam band Phish was a major concert draw, and they encouraged fans to copy and distribute their work.

It's an interesting marketing ploy, thinking outside the box. If the majors aren't gonna make any money for you, why make money for them?

Steinar Gregertsen · From: Arendal, Norway, R.I.P.

Jim,- aha! I get it.......

Anyway, with 25+ major label albums on her CV I'd say she's highly qualified to have opinions on this, and it's interesting to see an artist going in favor of free downloads, and claim it's actually a good thing, contrary to what the major labels claim.

Personally I believe people would buy more albums if the major labels released more good music, and used more resources on allowing an artist to grow over time, instead of just spitting out one-hit wonders who's basically clones of last years one-hit wonders. Simple as that.

Steinar

------------------
www.gregertsen.com

David Doggett · Posted 1 Jul 2005 2:23 pm

I see Janis Ian's point. Along the same lines, the Dixie Chicks said they made very little off their CDs, most of their income comes from their live shows. The CDs just help get them exposure and bring people in to the performances. That information is a real downer for all us unknowns who get $10 a night, but wish we could make a hot CD and make money off of it.

So the promotion a big label, big selling CD brings is an important function of major labels that Janis didn't mention. If you are a total unknown, how many people can you reach with your unknown website and CDs you give out at your small unknown shows? But suppose a major label picks you up and sends your CDs to DJs and music crits all over the world, and puts them in countless record stores, and puts an add in Rolling Stone - as they have done for Janis Ian and the Dixie Chicks. Now how many people are going to come to your shows? So there is hugh value in a deal with a major label, even if you never get a cent from the CDs.

But if the major labels can't make decent bread from your CDs, because of pirating, where's the incentive for them to do all that? Maybe one reason there seems to be a lack of interesting new talent on the radio and in the stores is because the labels can't afford to do the scouting, discovery and promotion they use to. I'm no fan of the big labels, I'm just pointing out that it is a complicated situation. Having everybody and his brother doing their own recording and promotion is not necessarily going to work. How does the poor listener sort through all those zillions of unknowns to find the gems? We may not like the big labels and the old system, but they did bring us lots of great stars in the past. It is not at all clear the best way to replace that.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

Janis Ian has 25 Albums ?

And her string of top hits include ...???

Considering her extreme views over the past 40 years I would say she is a NUT.

She makes Kramer look normal

t

Ganey Arsement · From: Louisiana, USA

I think the point Janis is making, and I have heard this from many independent/folk artists, the people who have the most to lose to file trading are the record company executives. They are in the business of creating images, spoon feeding material to artists and making gobs of money. There are literally hundreds of new artists on the scene each year, and only a small percentage of them make it, and of that number, an even smaller percentage make it big. Still, those that make it big make a lot of money, but not nearly what the label is making. Most Pop and Country artists make their living from live performances which includes revenue from ticket sales and SWAG.

Independent artists, such as Janis, create their own music, have more control over what goes on the CD, and make their living from live performances. Without the support of a label with a financial stake, free exposure is a welcome thing.

Steinar Gregertsen · From: Arendal, Norway, R.I.P.

Tony, if the number of major hits is what makes an artist credible or not in your eyes, then you must be a HUGE Britney Spears fan.... ?

David,- I know, the marketing bit is very important and not something most 'newbies' are necessarily capable of doing themselves. But I've also seen too many talented artists being all over themselves because of a 'big label' deal, only to be dropped after half a year, and by then they most probably owe the label money and can't even get their work back, because they're signed away the right to the masters (which is not unusual).

On the other side,- here's a true story:
A friend of mine, a very talented jazz/pop singer (she's affectionably called "Norway Jones" by some

), released her debut CD on a very small Norwegian indie label with only 3 or four releases under their belt by the time they released her work.
Thanks to Internet exposure (mostly "All That Jazz") she began gaining interest from Japan and other Asian countries. Her album is now licensend, and in the process of being licensed, to a total of eleven Asian countries, and she's going over this autumn for a 14-day tour. That's quite a number of potentional customers over there....

So,- there are middle grounds, it's not necessarily 'big label' or totally on your own, and in my experience the small indie labels have a much more relaxed attitude towards mp3 sharing than the big labels.

I don't believe the ral 'fans', who would have bought the CDs, won't do so because they've downloaded a few tracks from the Net. It MAY be the case with the Britney's of this world, but that's the labels own fault since they focus only on marketing a few 'hits' and fill the rest if the CDs with crap.
Downloading a Lindley track or two will never stop me from buying his albums, and I have in fact discovered several artists I'd never heard of and bought their albums, thanks to friends of mine who's sent me mp3s.

And don't forget that up until 15 years ago, didn't we use to copy friends LPs to cassettes, especially if we were only looking for a few tunes?

All that said,- I definitely see the problems of mp3 sharing, and I haven't really made up my mind yet. Just trying to see the issue from both sides.....

Steinar

------------------
www.gregertsen.com

[This message was edited by Steinar Gregertsen on 02 July 2005 at 07:37 AM.]

Herb Steiner · From: Briarcliff TX 78669, pop. 2,064

Jim, the woman singer/songwriter that passed on a few years back was Laura Nyro. Perhaps that's the person you were thinking of. She was a great singer and writer, and had a few big hits... if I recall "Stoned Soul Picnic" was one, and "Wedding Bell Blues" another.

Sorry for the thread hi-jack... y'all get back on topic now, please.
------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

[This message was edited by Herb Steiner on 02 July 2005 at 07:37 AM.]

Jason Odd · From: Stawell, Victoria, Australia

Geez, Janis Ian a nut?.. I know who I'd rather break bread with thanks Tony.

Actually artists do generate money via CD sales, but not enough.

When you sign to a major, it kind of goes like this.

You sign up, it's a binding contract for X amount of years, you get money, which is an advance on future royalties.
(ok, I'm simplifying a bit.. but follow)

So you're getting a loan from your label.
With the loan you buy some new gear, a percent goes to your manager who helped broker the deal, or you pay off your old manager who got you work over the years until someone else convinced you to sign, where they probably already brokered a deal for a finders fee they skim from the label's deal without the band ever knowing.

Either way, the band is spending, someone picks a studio, most usually the label with a producer they know, or one who has had a couple of hit records in a style kinda like what the band does, or at least in the style in which the record label think the band will be more likely to make money.

This is way for a time everyone is Urban-Coutry, or all the rock bands had ddues that sounded like Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam.

Anyway, it's into the superbtichin' studio and the big bucks producer. The producer also gets a cut of the record, it's part of his deal with the label.
All of this is bankrolled by the label, but this is in reality part of the borrowing against future royalties concept.

So, the band is paying for this. Uh-oh.

Then the release and pre-release promotions begin, once again in most deals the band ends up footing a lot of bills, in the long run of course.

They're doing gigs, the road is where they make the money, the advance money is well and truly gone as everyone has bought cars, gear, downpayments on homes, you know the stuff they couldn't quite bankroll before.

The promo machine is running, the record picks up some airplay word gets around, the shows are killer and our little band is getting some serious airplay that starts to build.
The band plays on and on, the road is a killer, but a single takes off, the record is getting some great reviews, it's start was sluggish, but riding on the back of the single things are looking good.

They sell some records, not a massive samsh hit, but a real respectable record.
Time to get to work on another. If the record had been a mega-hit they could have toured it for two years, heck.. some labels make the bands wait and tour the hell out of it.
That's pretty much what Pearl Jam's label did, they had enough songs as their hits took them through 1991 well into 1992.
They'd have to wait until '93, and they actually held off for close to a year at their label's bidding.
Sure, there was some sweet talk and marketing encouragement.
"Oh, a second album right now will hurt the first one, it'll confuse buyers and your second one will slip through the cracks."

Meanwhile the money is rolling in, and yet.. it's not quite. You still get those statements about owing money for the studio costs, the photographer and the dude who's concept it was for the album cover, even though it was an idea you told them about, an idea for that first album that you'd dreamed off when you 12.

Exctly who are these people, better hire some lawyers to find out where this money is going, it'll cost an arm and a leg, but we better renegotiate this record deal, boy.. we went into that deal blind.

Maybe it's time to re-think that manager, what has he done lately.
Thank heavens for the road, of course we're touring so much it makes it hard to write new songs.
Gotta stop by studios while on tour, the new producer can fly in, although he wants a cut and ..wow, maybe if we cut down on spending we can pay off the label quicker.

It's hard though, that house needs some work, we're drkining ourselves blind to break up the mind-numbing touring, the label doesn't want a live follow up. Sure it would be quick and cheap, and the label concedes we are one hell of a live band, that's why we signed you. No-one in the band recalls ever see an A&R guy at a gig?, but it's a good call.

Still, a polished studio record might be the way to go, the new demos are great, but we've got this new producer who wants to take a shot, he's got a great track record, you guys will love him.

Oh, and by the way.. the label owns all the recordings you made.

You made every note, wrote, arranged and paid for the studio costs, but the label has them.
In five to ten years you'll have the option of buying them, until then?

Get on the road and make some spending money.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

Ok I take it back, shes not a NUT.

But she is commenting only from her side of the coin.

And I think she made a huge mistake,,Celine Dion does not get hurt..the WRITER of the Celine DION song gets hurt..Celine is still gonna get her live shows and paid a kazillion bucks..The writer of the HIT song that everyone downloads for free was counting on the total SALES to earn there income.

Janis knows this and I am suprised she would comment in the manner she did...

This whole exercise is discussed with the artist in mind..thats only legit if the artist is the WRITER. Janis is a writer, not just an artist.

She is giving a view based on what she is doing to survive this game as an INDIE.

My thought is she would love to have one of her tunes go GOLD...and get paid on the distribution volume...

T

[This message was edited by Tony Prior on 02 July 2005 at 11:50 AM.]

Forum Index > Music	Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next	Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic