Speaker: Copyright Must Change
2201 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 49 50 51 52 53 … 89 Newer→ Last
-
Obama Sides With RIAA, Supports $150,000 Fine per Music Track
ouchie,
gives on a hankering for a educational notice or three. -
Rob
Don, had you continued you might have felt a little less irritated (and seen past your own blinkers?)
:-) Yes, I did in the end. But that first sentence...And what Russell just said.
-
Lyndon
I haven't read the court memo submitted by the US Government. However, TFA says:
The government said the damages range of $750 to $150,000 per violation of the Copyright Act was warranted.
This range of fines might well be appropriate. It really depends on the nature of the infringement. The headline figure, however, is presented in a misleading way.
-
I guess this is a good time to note again that I think APRA is an admirable organisation, especially in the very large percentage of its revenue it redistributes to its members.
But they don't half do some politicking to those members.
-
where's the boom? what changed?
There were albums a plenty before that.
did it reflect in specific album sales ie multimillion sales of individual items - Sgt peppers shit loads but not anything else), or was it a market wide boom, in that all albums went up in sale.cos if its across the market it would seem like a change in attitude to the importance of owning recorded music in which case its a cultural change. no tie in to the advent of home taping though?
Firstly, nobody, as far as I can see, has said anywhere on this thread that there was a tie in to home taping, aside from you Rob.
Secondly..yes there were thousands of albums before Pepper but what changed things...nothing to do with a change in attitude to the importance of owning recorded music..the biggest selling records of all time were released in the 1940s.
Instead there were three things (and I'm talking the US, but where it led others followed)...firstly the arrival of programmed top 40 radio circa 1962, which had spread across the US about the time the second thing happened: the assasination of JFK. Bothl of which tied into the arrival on it's shores of the biggest musical phenomena of all time, The Beatles...a country needing a hit of good times had it delivered by a new radio format. But still, despite The Beatles selling very big, for the time, quantities of the albums you mention, the biggest selling US album of 1964 was the soundtrack to The Sound Of Music...kids still mostly bought singles as heard on Top 40.
The next thing was Sgt Pepper (which came after Pet Sounds and Blonde on Blonde, both of which inspired and are now seen as landmarks but were not massive sellers as Dylan simply didn't have the popular cultural penetration of The Beatles, and The BBs were a pop singles band who were not really taken seriously in the US). This far back it's easy to forget how much of a seismic wave Sgt Pepper caused. It was not just big, but it was the overwhelming cultural event of 1967, and was regarded as a whole unit ...almost as a 40 minute single. The album as the primary delivery mechanism for pop, which had now mutated into rock (although With The Beatles is now usually seen as the first 'rock' album style wise) was here.
Once again, as Danielle says, FM came along, at about the same time and ran with it.
That's your why.
Sinatra found out it ain't about being first but about being the first one that others notice....those albums hit a very small target market compared to The Beatles. You could also argue that James Brown Live At the Apollo was a concept album back in 1962.
Topographic Oceans
I think we can thank Yes for punk more than the rise of the album as a format.
-
"Under a CC Licence, creators give up certain of their hard-won exclusive rights for free, forever."
They forgot the quotation marks there. They must be about to crack.
-
They forgot the quotation marks there. They must be about to crack.
And an initial capital too. Just a slip, I think; perhaps the dreaded copy and paste at work.
They do say "open software licensing" (in quotes) where I fear they mean open source .
-
but it was the overwhelming cultural event of 1967, and was regarded as a whole unit ...almost as a 40 minute single.
That was certainly the intention, at the start. Then Paul slipped in "When I'm 64" and it all went to pot. Well, not really, still one of the greatest albums, but what the hell was he thinking!
-
That was certainly the intention, at the start. Then Paul slipped in "When I'm 64" and it all went to pot. Well, not really, still one of the greatest albums, but what the hell was he thinking!
It would be interesting to know which Beatles songs have raked in the most publishing revenue over the years. I bet that song is up there ...
-
3410,
It would be interesting to know which Beatles songs have raked in the most publishing revenue over the years.
My guess: Yesterday .
-
pg 64 anyone? now that's spooky
-
My guess: Yesterday
Usually named as the 3 most performed songs of all time:
Stardust
Yesterday
SomethingWhen I'm 64 was actually written years before Pepper, pre-fame, but I think it's on the album because his dad turned 64 that year, and it kinda adds to the intentional musical hall-ness of the record.
Now, Pepper is a record that lost something in translation to CD. Within You, Without You should never come after Mr. Kite.
-
Now, Pepper is a record that lost something in translation to CD. Within You, Without You should never come after Mr. Kite.
Things might be looking up ...
2009 CD remasters
All 13 original UK studio albums by The Beatles and Past Masters, Volume One and Past Masters, Volume Two will be released newly remastered sometime in 2009 on CD. The 2009 remasters will replace the infamously poor quality 1987 remasters. Mojo Magazine's Mat Snow was invited to hear 10 remastered tracks from 1968's The White Album and stated that they were "Better even than we'd hoped."
From Wikipedia.
-
2009 CD remasters
Dharni Harrrison, George's son, is suggesting that they may sidestep iTunes and make the digital versions of the 2009 remasters only available via their own website..which sounds like an incredibly stupid idea, seemingly coming from a mixture of greed and living in a sycophantic bubble.
Or maybe they're still enjoying fucking with Steve Jobs as some sort of retribution for the last court fracas over the Apple name.
-
3410,
sounds like an incredibly stupid idea
Excuse my ignorance, but why?
-
Excuse my ignorance, but why?
Because the chance of someone going across to a Beatles site, setting up an account, and then buying it, is far less than someone browsing at Amazon or iTunes and going..ohhhh...click. A huge proportion of music sales are driven by browsing.
-
seemingly coming from a mixture of greed and living in a sycophantic bubble
If they don't bloody hurry up, the last generation likely to pay for actual CDs (shit, even *I* don't buy them any more) is going to die off and they'll lose vast swathes of money anyway.
Also: I am buying Beatles Rock Band the day it comes out. :)
-
Also: I am buying Beatles Rock Band the day it comes out. :)
hell yeah!
-
enjoying fucking with Steve Jobs
that's as good a reason as any.
what happened to the whole internet gives you independence thing? -
Could be an entertaining trainwreck.
maybe they're still enjoying fucking with Steve Jobs
Especially as they still have Apple Records. A re-run of the 70s Apple Corps fiasco in fast-motion, with Jobs fuming on the sideline, would sell newspapers- and make a great doco- if nothing else.
Paul is still the original Apple Mac... -
Also: I am buying Beatles Rock Band the day it comes out. :)
It's my primary ammunition to persuade the Keeper of the Purse that we NEED as PS3 (or an X-Box or a Wii - I'm not that fussy. As long as it does blu-ray, I'll be happy)
-
It's my primary ammunition to persuade the Keeper of the Purse that we NEED as PS3 (or an X-Box or a Wii - I'm not that fussy. As long as it does blu-ray, I'll be happy)
So what you're saying is, you'll have anything, as long as it's a PS3?
-
Because the chance of someone going across to a Beatles site, setting up an account, and then buying it, is far less than someone browsing at Amazon or iTunes and going..ohhhh...click. A huge proportion of music sales are driven by browsing.
The major labels discovered this in the pre-iTunes days. They tried to be their own retailers, and the result was deeply lousy.
-
The major labels discovered this in the pre-iTunes days. They tried to be their own retailers, and the result was deeply lousy
Would love to see a Web-app iTunes or an alternative that offered mainstream music from an interface as good as eMusic. As a way to search, read reviews and purchase music it rocks. But no major label stuff :(
-
The major labels discovered this in the pre-iTunes days. They tried to be their own retailers, and the result was deeply lousy
so bomb party is pretty spot on the mark with this comment then.
All web applications like MySpace, YouTube, etc. do is exchange one form of corporate mediation - that offered by a record company - for another - that offered by a telecommunications/software company
or in this case a web retailer owned by a computer manufacturer.
all that talk of independence (you can do it all yourself now), smash the system (evil record companies keeping fans money from the "artists") but really its exactly the same as before except this time we have a net retailer taking its 1/3 for doing less than the previous retailer did (no actual stock, no shop floor and high street rent).
Artists can do it themselves but they're pretty much in the same position as pressing their own discs. The obstacles in their way as similar but different, but the net effect is the same.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.