Off the grid

Just a note to wish you and your families a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year. I have made an executive decision not to post to this weblog for the next couple of weeks unless something amazing happens between now and then. I have a had a big year that among many other activities has included two international conferences, attending an Australian conference, and I am teaching Intellectual Property Law at the moment (summer semester). Thank you for reading my site and your support, I hope you have found it interesting, informative and on the odd occasion a little entertaining. Best wishes for the holiday season and I hope you will return next year to follow more of the major developments in the music/internet scene.

Sal

Dan Bull - Dear Mandy

Here is a recent clip from Dan Bull in relation to proposed legislative changes to copyright law in the UK which may well see the introduction of a three strikes policy. This is a great clip in which Bull reflects on the stupidity of many of the changes due to be introduced by the Digital Economy Bill.



Further Reading
TechDirt, Dear Peter Mandelson... Dan Bull Sings His Opposition To Kicking People Off The Internet (30 November 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091130/0445237119.shtml> at 9 December 2009

TechDirt, UK Record Label Boss Resigns From BPI/IFPI Committees Due To Mandelson's Digital Economy Bill (4 December 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091204/1128277207.shtml> at 8 December 2009

TechDirt, UK Politicians Pushing Back On Mandelson's Digital Economy Bill (3 December 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091203/0906507179.shtml> at 8 December 2009

BBC News, Web giants unite against Digital Britain copyright plan (2 December 2009) <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8390623.stm> at 8 December 2009

ArsTechnica, UK "Pirate Finder General" law innocuous now, could get ugly (22 November 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/uk-pirate-finder-general-law-innocuous-now-could-get-ugly.ars> at 2 December 2009

ArsTechnica, Queen: We sank the Armada, we can sink some P2P pirates! (19 November 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/queen-we-sank-the-armada-we-can-sink-some-p2p-pirates.ars> at 21 November 2009

TechDirt, UK Digital Economy Bill As Bad As Expected; Digital Britain Minister Flat Out Lies About ISP Support (20 November 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091120/1137337023.shtml> at 21 November 2009

guardian.co.uk, Mandelson seeks to amend copyright law in new crackdown on filesharing (19 November 2009) <http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/19/mandelson-copyright-filesharing-murdoch-google> at 21 November 2009

The Register, Ofcom talks to spook firm on filesharing snoop plan (19 November 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/19/ofcom_detica/page2.html> at 21 November 2009

TechDirt, UK Gov't Official: Innocent People Won't Get Kicked Off The Internet; Trust Us (12 November 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091111/1412276902.shtml> at 14 November 2009

The Register, UK.gov denies innocent will be hit by filesharing regime (10 November 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/10/simon_filesharing/> at 12 November 2009

The Register, EU block to Mandelson's filesharing laws removed (5 November 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/05/telecoms_package/> at 7 November 2009

Electronic Frontier Foundation, UK and Three Strikes: What Not to Do in an Election Year (28 October 2009) <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/uk-and-three-strikes-what-not-do-election-year> at 1 November 2009

Digital Music News, British Legislators Soon Voting on Three-Strikes... (29 October 2009)
<http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102809uk> at 1 November 2009

guardian.co.uk, TalkTalk threatens legal action over Mandelson's filesharing plan (29 October 2009) <http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/29/talktalk-threatens-legal-action-mandelson> at 1 November 2009

TechDirt, As Expected, Mandelson To Introduce Plan To Kick File Sharers Off The Internet
(28 October 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091028/0501446707.shtml> at 28 October 2009

The Register, Mandy declares 'three strikes' war on illegal file sharers (28 October 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/28/mandelson_three_strikes_file_sharing_clamp_down/> at 29 October 2009

IASPM ANZ – Day 3

Yesterday was the third and final day of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music conference (Australia/New Zealand) in Auckland NZ.

I attended a number of presentations today which were fantastic, in fact I had a hard time selecting what to see because there were so many good ones to choose from.

Andrew Whelan – Free Music and Trash Culture: the reconfiguration of musical value online

Andrew spoke at length about the impact of the digital environment on music. He considered the loss of economic value and suggestions that this leads to a loss in aesthetic and affective value. Furthermore he discussed the over abundance of music and perspectives that suggest that this results in transient, adhoc and frivolous interactions with music and inturn reduces the worth of music.

Andrew also considered the potential benefits of the democratisation of music and Attali's perspective that the ability to remove art from the constraints of capitalism and ability of listeners to select their own soundscape as being a step forward.

He also went on to outline the additional consequences of free online distribution with particular reference MySpace profiles, netlabels, 'cracked' software and the quantity of material available to sample. He discussed how open licensing has in fact resulted in musical subcultures that are thriving in what many others consider to be a difficult environment.

He played examples of 'counter music' such as DJ Lovechoad who sampled and remixed Gnarles Barkley. Other examples included Butress and O'Kneel who have remixed Enya on the album Mash Up Your Ass as well as remixes of the Ass of Bass by Alex Tune. Andrew later discussed mashups generally, stating that they are essentially a redemption activity that seeks to recycle the old and reuse it in a way that enables a form of revival.

Andrew also referred to the abundance of music available on the internet through music blogs such as http://mutant-sounds.blogspot.com; http://rhhb.blogspot.com and http://progotfrong.com/blogpost.com. He also noted the Mega Super Mammoth mp3 Bloglist which lists all of the weblogs devoted to mp3s as a further illustration of the mass of music available on the internet. While initially much of this music was located on peer to peer networks, the development of bit torrent and weblogs has seen a steady transition onto the world wide web, enabling the music to become more accessible than it used to be. In debating the free cost of this music Andrew noted that the fact that it is free is sometimes used to depict it as being of poor quality and yet the labels in the genre that he is referring to are well respected despite the lack of cost associated with the music.

Cathrin Jaeger – The Digital Revolution and Its Beneficial Effects on New Zealand Independent Record Labels

This was a great paper that considered the reaction of independent record labels in New Zealand to the challenges of the digital environment. Interviews were conducted with seven labels who were questioned about their use of web 2.0 applications. It was found that while the independent labels retained the role as talent spotters but they are also increasingly taking on the role of the major record labels in bringing music to an international audience (distribution and marketing).

The independent labels interviewed clearly recognised the benefits of cost-free word-of-mouth promotion by fans and have embraced the use of social networking sites where news about new bands and songs can be easily accessed. This in turn results in audiences having a much broader range of music to select from and enjoy far greater exposure to a diversity of genres which assists the unique New Zealand musical sound.

She made an interesting point about MySpace being a musical encyclopaedia but also noted the increased use of Facebook. Independent labels are using Facebook to enable both communication with fans and marketing as well as market research. She stated that this architecture facilitates the building of a large number of fans in a short amount of time and that a large fan community can in turn help to attract external sponsors.

Steven Knopoff (and Graham Strahle) - What Happened to High Fidelity? Portable music, the Internet and the changed culture of listening

Steven Knopoff (and Graham Strahle) presented a paper titled 'What Happened to High Fidelity? Portable Music, the Internet and the Changed Culture of Listening' that concerned sonic realism and the changes in technology which have in fact seen a reduction in sound quality and compromises made to ensure digital files remain easily transferrable. In turn there has been an acceptance of a poorer quality product by consumers and the loss of sound quality has largely been ignored. Even CDs are seen as being of reduced sound quality despite the noise reduction this has been furthered by mp3 compression. One example can be found here: http://mastering-media.blogspot.com/2008/09/metallica-death-magnetic-sounds-better.html

Steven also noted that some music manufacturers are also doing what tv advertisers have done for a long time in increasing the volume of the songs when recorded/mixed in order to try to out do each other in capturing the attention of listeners. Increasingly the expectation of listeners is one of stylised naturalism for sound quality even in live performances.

The limited sound quality of iPods is not new but the portability of the songs has made a strong contribution to changes in listening behaviour (which initially began with the portable radio and then the walkman). He noted that there are a greater number of playback technologies now than ever before, however most listeners gravitate to one type (the iPod) due to social and commerce related factors rather than sound quality. The basic parameters of an acceptable mp3 player include large storage capacity, low cost as well as speakers and headphone that are good, small and cheap.

He concluded that while there remain niche pockets of people that retain the desire of high fidelity, there has been a gradual dissolution and replacement of sound goals with technological advances.  

There were many other great papers that I attended both on the final day of the proceedings and throughout the past few days that I haven't had a chance to write about. All that attended agreed that it had been a very successful conference with the diversity of disciplines and the topics of the papers, not to mention the fantastic people, being the cornerstones of a wonderful association an enjoyable and productive exchange of ideas. The discussions after each session I attended were indicative of the provocative nature of the contributors as well as the benefits of having the chance to share time with people in the same field and related areas. The next IASPM ANZ will be in Melbourne in 2010.  

IASPM ANZ – Day 2

Today was the second day of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music conference (Australia/New Zealand) in Auckland NZ.

Liz Giuffre - Trivial Music: a preliminary study of the resurgence and value of music quiz programs on Australian television.
I attended a number of presentations today which were fantastic including Liz’ Giuffre’s paper on the resurgence and value of music quiz programs on Australian television (Spicks and Specs; and Rockwiz). Liz noted in particular the lack of research of these programs compared with the extensive coverage of Australian Idol and questioned both why it is that these programs have not been explored in detail as well as their emergence on public broadcasters rather than commercial television. Both shows enjoy continued success with Spics and Specs in particular being a very high rating show.

Katelyn Barney - Songs of Hope, Healing and Forgiveness: musical responses to the National apology to the Stolen Generation.
I also attended an excellent presentation by Katelyn Barney on the ‘Songs of Hope, Healing and Forgiveness: musical responses to the National apology to the Stolen Generation’. She started by showing the ‘It’s Time’ clip which is a collaborative effort between Russell James and Will i am along the lines of the ‘Yes We Can’ Obama clip. The song/video uses aspects of the apology to the Stolen Generation by Kevin Rudd (13 February 2008) as well as singing by Clifton Bieundurry (an Indigenous man from the Walmajarri people of the North West Kimberley). The clip is available here and is well worth watching.

Katelyn also spoke at length about songs by indigenous artists: Les Collins – Great Moments and Emma Donovan – Ngarranga. She also spoke about musical responses from non indigenous Australians including the new verse to Kerry Fletcher’s - Sorry Song and Susie Keynes – Sorry Song.

This was a very interesting presentation which I enjoyed a lot.

There audience questioned the accessibility and effect of these songs on both indigenous and non indigenous people. In particular there was a suggestion of a co-ordinated effort to increase the number of YouTube hits of these songs and how to spread the word (viral marketing seems like too crude a term here) through other indigenous communities to ensure that these songs reach a wider audience. I asked Katelyn why she hadn’t mentioned the new version of Paul Kelly’s ‘From Little Things Big Things Grow’ - she indicated that while this was one of the most well known musical responses to the Stolen Generation apology, that she had spoken about it on an earlier occasion and was simply exploring other artists responses for the purposes of this paper.

Sally Hawkins - Contemporary Australian Political Musicians: authenticity and the integration of culture and activism.

Naturally I also attended my own presentation today... I spoke about the comparative authenticity of four contemporary Australian artists: John Butler Trio, Blue King Brown, The Herd and the Hilltop Hoods and in particular the suitability of the term ‘political artists’ with respect to these bands. I considered authenticity of genre, use and ethos by examining recent political songs released by these artists, the frequency of political releases over time, the percentage of political songs on an album by album basis as well as the use of the internet – the artists websites, Facebook and MySpace profiles - to demonstrate a personal commitment and involvement in current political issues. Particular points worth noting include the very high percentage of political releases by Blue King Brown, the increase of political releases by The Herd over the course of their career and the drop off in the frequency of political releases by the John Butler Trio in recent years (does not include the single ‘One Way Road’ due out early December 2009 or the new album April Uprising). Furthermore the very effective use of Blue King Brown’s website and MySpace profile and the John Butler Trio’s use of their website, Facebook and MySpace profiles for political activism, was an important part of this paper. I was really pleased with the way my presentation went and was given very positive feedback afterwards.

Pictures from IASPM Day 1

A warm Pacific welcome.

Dr. Kirsten Zemke

IASPM ANZ – Day 1

Today was the first day of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music conference (Australia/New Zealand) in sunny Auckland NZ. The conference started with a warm Pacific Welcome which included some traditional music and dancing.

Dr. Melenaite Taumoefolua from the Centre for Pacific Studies, Dr. Gregory D. Booth an Ethnomusicologist from the University of Auckland, Dr. Shelley Brunt the Chair of Aus/NZ IASPM and Dr. Kirsten Zemke, conference convener and ethnomusicologist at the University of Auckland, opened the conference.

I attended a number of fascinating papers today all worth mentioning however given time and space constraints will restrict this post to just a couple.

Adrian Renzo – Seamless: re-evaluating medley records of the 1980’s
This was an excellent presentation which considered the place of medleys from the 1980’s as part of the origins of the modern day mashup. Medley’s such as Stars on 45 were seen as a cheap recycling venture of record labels and took a particular place in Disco culture. Renzo discussed the arbitrary nature of the transition between songs and how in the 1980’s the merger of songs was undertaken with a clean cut and instant move to the next song. He noted that in the 1990’s, with developments in technology, there was a change in the way that songs were put together. From this time there was a far greater tendency to layer the tracks over each other in the transition from one track to another. Seg-ways became much more important with Renzo noting that a single facet of one song enabled the movement from one to another. He noted that the narrative logic or the textual ideas of the songs were unimportant to the transition between them. An important distinction between the medley’s of the 1980’s and 1990’s compared with the mashups of today was the involvement of the original artists – these days it is highly unlikely that original material is contributed to mashups nor are the original recording artists usually involved. This was an excellent presentation – both entertaining and very educational.

John Egenes – Remix Culture: the folk process in the 21st century
John Egenes from the University of Otago presented a paper on how the internet and technology are responsible for the blurring of the line between the performer and audience (creator and consumer). He noted that consumers of music are increasingly the producers of music which in turn results in changes to notions of creativity, individuality and intellectual property. The division between creator and consumer is no longer clear but for a very long time the separation has been taken for granted. There is a steady transformation from a top down culture to a bottom up one.

In addition to the democratisation of creativity, those artists that remain identifiable and separate must also contend with alterations to the environment in which they work. Open access is now given to artists through the internet with fans demanding communication with artists and direct feedback to the creators. Furthermore, with open access to music, the artist has lost control over when, where and how consumers interact with their art.

He stated that young people don’t listen to albums anymore instead they download single songs and create their own playlists. An album is more commonly seen as something to be broken down into its individual components. Likewise, with the aid of technology, individual components of a song are remixed together to create new songs. He stated that remix signals a fundamental shift from music as a commodity or product, to a process.

While initially an aural culture, Egenes stated that for the past couple of hundred years society has been focused on visual culture which emerged with text and focuses largely on individual creativity. He stated that the aural culture of society is remerging with computers augmenting the folk process. He noted that the financial worth of music is also being replaced with the value of online reputation. He considers online reputation as increasingly becoming a very important personal currency.

Henry Johnson – Chordophones, Aerophones and iPhones: the value of interactive mobile applications in the mediatization of music performance.
Henry Johnson spoke about the use of touch screen mobile phones such as the iPhone and how this has created instant access to music as well as new forms of production. He linked these new innovative features to the mediatization, globalization and consumption of music.

In particular he discussed iPhone apps such as the iKoto, iShauhachi and ecShamisen which are digital versions of traditional Japanese instruments.

The iShauhachi, attempts to emulate a bamboo flute which is 55cm long with four finger holes. The app emulates the finger holes (4 for the basic user and 5 for an advanced user). The player must blow into the microphone on the iPhone to create the dynamics of the wind instrument. Henry stated that while the app did go someway toward creating a digital version of the original instrument, the quality of the sound sample used in the app is not very good. For an example of the iShauhachi in use see: http://www.youtbube.com/watch?v=K36fMLIFUVg

The iKoto is a traditional 13 string Japanese instrument. The iPhone tries to recreate this instrument through an app which has the same number of strings. Given the size of the phone, the spacing between the strings creates some difficulties but nonetheless basic compositions are possible. Henry suggested that while the sample sound of the app is very close to the original, there is no way for the player to change the dynamics of the string plucking, limiting the digital replication of the instrument.

There are currently two ecShamisen apps available for the iPhone. The digital version of this instrument has greater dexterity than the real instrument, however again, there is no way for the player to change the dynamics of the string plucking. Uses of this app include practising or learning how to play the original instrument.

Primarily Henry sees these apps as gadgets rather than instruments. However, he suggests that they could have a real use despite the size limitations of the device. For those with no experience with the traditional instruments, these apps may provide an opportunity for use and production that would not have been possible otherwise. Experiential learning and cultural exposure are enhanced by their existence. However he does not consider that they will ever replace the real instruments.

Henry noted that the mobility of the device enables it to be used in many environments and is not dependent on a tv screen, computer and/or mouse. While the player is restricted by the physical limitations of the size of the device, it nonetheless transforms music production and performance in terms of availability and ease of use. This enables a type of musical tourism with musicians able to use instruments that in the past were only available in specific geographical locations. However there remain some geographical restrictions, for example, Apple has not yet made the Taiko available for purchase by New Zealand iPhone users.

This talk was excellent and provoked a lot of discussion about the use, function and value of mobile touch screen interactive musical instruments.

Overall this was an excellent start to the IASPM ANZ conference. The people, as always, make the conference and combined with papers of a very high standard which are both educational and interesting it has been a fantastic day.

IASPM ANZ

This week I am traveling to Auckland in New Zealand to present a paper at the Australia/New Zealand branch of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music's conference - "What's It Worth". My paper is titled 'Contemporary Australian Political Musicians: The Integration of Culture and Activism'. I will be discussing the comparative authenticity of four Australian bands and whether they can be considered 'political' artists (it is an interesting study but perhaps more useful for my PhD than wider society).

The conference is being held at the University of Auckland on Friday 27th November to Sunday 29th November inclusive - you can read more about it here.

Some of the other presentations I am particularly interested in seeing include:

• Egenes - Remix Culture: The Folk Process in the 21st Century
• Johnson H - Chordophones, Aerophones and iPhones: The Value of Interactive Mobile Applications in the Mediatization of Music Performance
• Griffiths - Weapons of Mass Resistance? Radical Musical Responses to 9/11 and the War on Terror
• Giuffre - Trivial Music: A Preliminary Study of the Resurgence and Value of Music Quiz Programs on Australian Television
• Milicevis (presented by Borota) - Cyberspace and Music
• Jaeger - The Digital Revolution and Its Beneficial Effects on New Zealand Independent Record Labels
• Knopoff - What Happened to High Fidelity? Portable Music, the Internet and the Changed Culture of Listening
• Novak - Digital Music in Everyday Life
• Borschke - Archival Auteurs: MP3 Blogs and the Aesthetics of Social Distribution
• Strong - The Triple J Hottest 100 of all time 2009 and the Social Construction of MVsical value

These all look like excellent presentations and I can't wait to hear the papers. If you are around Auckland contact the conference organisers about coming along to see some papers! Otherwise, I hope to be blogging about some of the presentations while I am there. I am also hoping to get some other academics/PhD students together to see if anyone is interested in starting an organisation like FMC/Creative Freedom - hopefully a senior academic will volunteer to chair a working party to get something like this established.

Sally

ACTA

This is a presentation from Michael Geist published on his website and BoingBoing yesterday. Here Geist outlines the history and current state of negotiations on the ACTA Treaty.

The treaty was initiated by the USA in 2004 as a response to counterfit copyright products with a focus on the importation and cross border movement of pirated goods. Negotiations moved forward in 2006 with Australia joining the process in 2007. Since this time the scope of the Treaty has expanded dramatically. Furthermore serious concerns have emerged with respect to how this process undermines WIPO, has been conducted behind closed doors without sufficient transparency and consultation, and the potential need for dramatic changes to domestic copyright regimes in many countries. Some have suggested that this is in effect corporate interests dictating international copyright policy and the globalisation of protectionist copyright standards in order to protect economic interests.

Specific areas of focus for this treaty include border measures to reduce illegal imports, the internet, as well as the enforcement of intellectual property rights through civil and criminal penalties. The treaty relates to commercial infringement and significant wilful non-commercial infringement (ie. is not dependent on financial gain).

Aside from the substantive issues with respect to the content of the treaty the most significant concern is how the negotiations have been conducted. A number of countries including Canada and the EU have sought greater transparency with those outside of the content industry (including academics and the public) being deliberatly excluded from the consultation process. In the United States the Electronic Frontier Foundation made an application for disclosure of docuemtns relating to the treaty under their Freedom of Information laws however access was denied on the basis that it would be contray to national security. At this stage it is anticiapted that the treaty will be publically available in its finalised form in 2011.

While it is being negotiated in secret there are little opportunities to challenge its substantive content. What should be taking place on a global, domestic and local level is grass roots action against the lack of disclosure and consulation. If there are likeminded people around the globe that care about the direction this treaty appears to be heading, hopefully they are able to mobilse locally and then coordinate with others to bring this to the attention of the citizens and law makers of their countries. I am on my way now to check for the Anti ACTA Facebook page...

Further Reading
Michael Geist, The ACTA Threat: My Talk on Everything You Need To Know About ACTA, But Didn't Know To Ask (12 November 2009) <http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4530/125/> at 13 November 2009

BoingBoing, Everything you want to know about the scary, secret copyright treaty (12 November 2009) <http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/12/everything-you-want.html> at 13 November 2009

Michael Geist, ACTA Posts <http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_tags&task=view&tag=acta&Itemid=408> at 13 November 2009

WikiLeaks, ACTA <http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=ACTA> at 13 November 209

EFF, Anti Counterfitting Trade Agreement <http://www.eff.org/issues/acta> at 13 November 2009

EFF, Government Blocks Release of Documents on Secret IP Enforcement Treaty (29 January 2009) <http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/01/29> at 13 November 2009

National Business Review, NZ should not sign international piracy agreement (9 November 2009) <http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/nz-should-not-sign-international-piracy-agreement-114686> at 12 November 2009

TechDirt, More ACTA Details Leak: It's An Entertainment Industry Wishlist (3 November 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/1308526784.shtml> at 9 November 2009

ZeroPaid, Anti-Piracy Treaty: Global DMCA, “Three-Strikes” (6 November 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/87211/anti-piracy-treaty-global-dmca-three-strikes/> at 8 November 2009

ArsTechnica, Secret ACTA treaty can't be shown to public, just 42 lawyers (15 October 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/these-42-people-are-shaping-us-internet-enforcement-policy.ars> at 29 October 2009

TechDirt, ACTA Negotiations Back On... White House Shows Small Group Proposed Text Under NDA (14 October 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091013/1854546514.shtml> at 24 October 2009

Digital Music News, USTR: We Can't Be Open About ACTA Because We Promised We Wouldn't Be (*Lobbyists Not Included) (28 September 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090925/0801256322.shtml> at 5 October 2009

ArsTechnica, EFF, libraries: Keep your ACTA out of our Internet! (19 July 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/acta-no-internet.ars> at 26 July 2009

ArsTechnica, Transatlantic coalition calls for "halt" to ACTA talks (23 June 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/transatlantic-coalition-calls-for-halt-to-acta-talks.ars> at 30 June 2009

TechDirt, Consumer Group Wants ACTA Discussions Stopped Until Consumer Rights Are Represented In Negotiations (29 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090628/1640555388.shtml> at 30 June 2009

ZeroPaid, Consumer Groups Want to Halt ACTA Negotiations (25 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86492/consumer-groups-want-to-halt-acta-negotiations/> at 25 June 2009

TechDirt, EFF, Public Knowledge Drop ACTA Lawsuit, Realizing 'National Secrets' Claim Will Block Them (18 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090617/1918145270.shtml> at 19 June 2009

TechDirt, Obama Administration Reiterates Its Support Of Secretive, Industry Written ACTA (15 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090614/1819325224.shtml> at 19 June 2009

ArsTechnica, ACTA transparency: can shame work where lawsuits fail? (7 May 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/acta-can-shame-work-where-lawsuits-fail.ars> at 15 May 2009

Electronic Frontier Foundation, Government Still Blocking Information on Secret IP Enforcement Treaty (6 May 2009) <http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/05/06> at 10 May 2009

PC World, Groups Complain of Continued Secrecy About Trade Pact (7 May 2009) <http://www.pcworld.com/article/164472/groups_complain_of_continued_secrecy_about_trade_pact.html> at 10 May 2009

TorrentFreak, Leaked ACTA Draft: More Power to the RIAA (14 April 2009) <http://torrentfreak.com/leaked-acta-draft-more-power-to-the-riaa-090414/comment-page-4/#comment-548998> at 26 April 2009

TechDirt, Remember How ACTA Wasn't Supposed To Be A 'Major' Change To Copyright Laws? (15 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090414/1750504513.shtml> at 19 April 2009

Intellectual Property Watch, The ACTA Threat To The Future Of WIPO (14 April 2009) <http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/04/14/the-acta-threat-to-the-future-of-wipo/> at 19 April 2009

ArsTechnica, Obama adminstration pledges "transparency" on ACTA (6 April 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/obama-adminstration-pledges-transparency-on-acta.ars> at 11 April 2009

ChannelRegister, US outlines secretive international piracy deal (9 April 2009) <http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/04/09/international_anti_piracy_deal/> at 11 April 2009

PC World, US Trade Office Releases Information on Secret Piracy Pact (8 April 2009) <http://www.pcworld.com/article/162716/us_trade_office_releases_information_on_secret_piracy_pact.html> at 11 April 2009

The Star, Anti-counterfeiting treaty talks heat up (30 March 2009) <http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/610257> at 3 April 2009

ArsTechnica, Obama administration won't release secret ACTA docs either (13 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/were-not-releasing-acta-docs-says-us-again.ars> at 23 March 2009

BoingBoing, Partial list of corporate lickspittles who are allowed to know what's in the secret copyright treaty the Obama administration claims is a matter of "national security" (14 March 2009) <http://www.boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html> at 22 March 2009

Australian Bureau of Statistics: Arts and Culture in Australia: A Statistical Overview, 2009

I was reading with interest the recent report from the Australian Bureau of Statistics concerning arts and culture in Australia. The data provided in the report while addressing a number of different aspects of the participation and purchase of music nonetheless is a collection of data from different periods in time, lacks any real cohesive character and is for the most part incapable of providing a basis on which an overall assessment or analysis can be undertaken. What follows is a summary of some of the main areas the report addresses however it is worth noting that the data is very dated and unrepresentative of the present day situation.

Attendance at Concerts
The following graph notes that popular music concerts in 2005-2006 were the most popular form of entertainment with 25% of people interviewed stating that they had attended a concert in the previous 12 month period. Over 39% of concert goers attended more than one event in a year.

12.1 ATTENDANCE RATES FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS(a) - 2005-06


Forty percent of respondents that attended a popular music concert were within the 18-24 year age group. This reduced gradually with each age group with fewer that 7% of those aged 75 years and over attending a concert.

Wholesale of Music
Disappointingly the ABS have chosen to reproduce the wholesale music statistics provided by the Australian Recording Industry Association for the year 2008-2009. I have written about these statistics before here . Notably however, these statistics do not represent all music sold in Australia rather just those that are members of ARIA.

Household Expenditure on Music
The Australian Bureau of Statistics report that pre-recorded CDs and records are at best in the mid range for items on which Australians spend their household income. Overall Australians spent 4% of the income in the 2003-2004 period on cultural experiences.

3.1 AVERAGE WEEKLY HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE ON CULTURE(a) - 2003-04


Notably this data does not appear to include digital sales however on average Australians spent $1.60 per week on pre recorded CDs and records and $0.05 per week on cassettes and tapes in 2003-2004. On a yearly basis Australians spent $646m per year on CDs and records and $19m on cassettes and tapes.

Factoring in inflation over the period between 1984 and 2003-2004 there was a gradual increase in the amount of money the average household spent on music followed by a drop. In 1984 Australians spent $0.68 cents per week on music, in 1988-1989 this rose to $1.21 per week. In 1993-1994 this rose again to $1.29 per week, and again in 1998-1999 to $2.07 per week. In 2003-2004 average weekly expenditure on music dropped to $1.65 per household.

Output of Cultural Industries
The output of the Australian cultural industries is quantified through reference to the Australian National Accounts and an earlier report by the Australian Bureau of Statistics titled Australian Industry, Catalogue No. 81550.

The Australian National Accounts indicate that in 2004-2005 pre-recorded audio and video tapes, disks and records that were either manufactured of published amounted to $1.723m or made up 4.1% of all cultural goods and services.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics report Australian Industry, Catalogue No. 81550 further demonstrates the output of cultural industries. Comparing 2006-2007 to 2007-2008, the report provides detailed data with respect to motion picture and sound recording activities breaking the analysis into the following categories: Printing (including the reproduction of recorded media), Publishing (except internet and music publishing), Motion picture and sound recording activities, Broadcasting (except internet), Internet publishing and broadcasting, Library and other information services, Heritage activities and Creative and performing arts activities.


In conclusion the Arts and Culture in Australia: A Statistical Overview, 2009 report is a cobbled together collection of outdated data with a distinct lack of consistency with respect to its collection and analysis. Whilst perhaps useful as independent components this report does little to provide a holistic or useful depiction of Australians involvement in music. This report whilst indicative of the level of production, exposure and consumption of arts in Australia appears to be the only one ever prepared by the Australian Bureau of Statistics and without a history of statistical analysis of these aspects of Australian society and our interaction with the arts it is not possible to make a comparative analysis or establish trends over time. A more useful approach would be a survey addressing each of these issues in turn at the one time with ongoing repetition enabling a far clearer understanding to be gained as to the experiences of Australians with the arts.

Further Information
Australian Bureau of Statistics, 4172.0 - Arts and Culture in Australia: A Statistical Overview, 2009 (21 October 2009) <http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4172.0Main%20Features12009?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=4172.0&issue=2009&num=&view=> at 31 October 2009

Career Suicide in Progress - A Poem For the Brilliant

By Sally J Hawkins
(this is an email I sent today to Larry Brilliant who remains an advisor to Google despite is more recent redeployment to Skoll)

Larry is a brilliant man with talent of depths unknown
He rides the skies of making dreams and seems a wonderful type of guy
There is a young lady sad and lost with many a dream that dies
She needs some help to find her way and therefore in hope she writes

A long and difficult tale goes here but there is simply just not time
To tell the troubles that she has faced and to explain in depth just why
The hand she needs is to relocate to a land where her talent can thrive
And to do just that there is but one last thing to for her to try

A busy parent in a country town in Australia way down south
Is not the place that she needs to be rather Berklee in Boston now
Part way through a PhD in IP/Internet Law
With political music the central focus she hopes to find a new door

A fellowship program, scholarship, a supervisor and a new life
Would only be possible with the help of another like the man to whom she writes
Aspiring for a career that dances to Hammond’s Song of the Unicorn
Challenging the basis of regulation, in Boston she can’t go wrong

In the long term the Future of Music Coalition or academia is for me
But the laws and changes that need to take place are not in my coun-t-ry
The spark within me will never die and I will never quit
A chance from you would mean the world and to make my mark on it

With a smile and a wink this poem is penned (or typed more accurately)
Please write back and let me know if there is any chance you might help me
I have not approached David Kusek but you might if you wish
He is VP of Online Ed and the author of a book not to be missed

Thanks for taking the time to read my plea and listen to what I have said
If it would help my CV can be sent and you can find me on the web
My blog address is listed below and my email on the header
To meet with you or have the chance to talk would also be pleasure.

Yours sincerely

Sally J Hawkins


http://www.ocarr.blogspot.com
http://www.ocaustralia.blogspot.com

Lily Allen's Bull

Just thought to post a link to this great YouTube clip in which Dan Bull comments on Lily Allen's recent statements regarding file sharing and the music industry. Allen has stated in recent weeks that there should be far greater regulation of music sharing. Lily initially supported the introduction of a Graduated Response Scheme in the UK with the ultimate sanction of disconnection. In response, many have suggested that Allen was misinformed about the impact of file sharing on the music industry. Allen has altered her position to support a Graduated Response Scheme that does not include disconnections but rather uses throttling to deter internet users from breaking copyright law. I have written in the past about how even the lesser offense of throttling is a poor policy choice, restricting the ability of users to access legal music just as much as it does illegal music.

The fantastic musical letter from Dan Bull can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY

More information:
TechDirt, A Song For Lily Allen... And A Little Conversation (28 September 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090927/1825076330.shtml> at 5 October 2009

Digital Music News, The Allen Factor: Suddenly, the Artist Message Gets Modified... (28 September 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092509allen> at 5 October 2009

ZeroPaid, Lily Allen Deletes Anti-P2P Blog, Quits Music for Acting (25 September 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/87061/lily-allen-deletes-anti-p2p-blog-quits-music-for-acting/> at 1 October 2009

TimesOnline, Blow for music industry as Lily Allen says Peter Mandelson's plans too draconian (25 September 2009) <http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article6848502.ece> at 1 October 2009

Future of Music Coalition Policy Summit

The FMC are holding a policy summit between the 4th and the 6th October 2009 at Georgetown University in Washington titled “Music, Technology, Policy and Law Go Back to the Future”.

Panel topics will include
• Visionary presentations on the music-tech space
• Ten years after Napster
• Practical tips for musicians
• New business models
• Future of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act
• Intellectual property, privacy & network rights
• Possible remedies to the challenges of the sample license clearance process
• Screening of Copyright Criminals documentary

For those unable to attend, selected portions of the Summit will be webcast on Monday, Oct. 5 and Tuesday, Oct. 6. Video and audio archives will be made available after the event.

More information can be found here and here.

Post/cards/email/screen savers/statements from the Rainbow Region.

There are very few guarantees in life however when people pull together as a community and set out to achieve common goals they can indeed change the world. Music can often be part of the catalyst for change with anthems developing a sense of belonging and helping to reiterate messages of solidarity, and narratives telling stories and educating people about events that have taken place. But the reception and use of these messages are dependent on exposure to them.

Music concerts are one forum in which music and community combine to create an environment and atmosphere where shared identity and purpose become paramount. The most famous of these was Woodstock held in the United States in 1969. This year has seen ongoing celebrations commemorating this festival. Forty years later it seems timely to ask what the ripple effect has been with some suggesting that little in the world has in fact changed for the better.

As a general observation it seems that society has long forgotten the messages of 1969. Artists and music that speak out about injustice, war, poverty, sexism and many other forms of political speech have drifted away from the forefront of our culture into the underground with the majority of the populous having little opportunity to access them. So was that sense of community merely a moment in time in which people felt the need to pull together?

The answer is No. In pockets of the world there remain people dedicated to the causes that were important at that time. While I have not had the pleasure of spending a lot of time in San Francisco, my understanding is that this is one place in which the values of Woodstock remain. I am very fortunate to reside in the Northern Rives region of NSW, Australia, where a similar perspective is taken

One local town, Nimbin, is in fact a sister city to Woodstock. Here, as in many other parts of the region, you will commonly find VW Combies (or the modern equivalent, the Subaru) with bumper stickers such as: “Think Globally, Act Locally”, “Practice Random Acts of Kindness and Senseless Beauty” and “Magic Happens”.

I was reading in my local community newspaper (The Northern Rivers Echo) yesterday that a photo documentary on the alternative culture of the Northern Rivers, commonly referred to as the Rainbow Region, is being sent to the United States as part of the celebrations for the 40th anniversary of Woodstock. This cultural exchange is taking place to help illustrate the ripple effect of the festival in other parts of the world.

Complete with rainbow flags, colourful clothes and long hair, there is a spirit here that never dies. The community care for the environment, are passionate about art, speak out against injustice, look out for each other and mobilise at a moments notice when there is action to be taken. There are many vegans, vegetarians and a diverse range of religions and cultural practices. Some people live in Multiple Occupancies (Communes) where the sense of community is even stronger. Many of the services offered here are done by community groups who seek out opportunities for grants to provide them for the towns.

There is art everywhere with the local markets teeming with hand made creations and a sea of local musicians that often busk to support themselves. My local market, The Channon Market, is one such example - when you go in the gates, if you are lucky you will be given a free buskers token to place in the case of your favourite performer who can then exchange that for money from the market committee. If you haven’t eaten Jan’s Lemon Myrtle ice cream (not turtle), then you haven’t lived.*

There are number of small villages scattered around. My town has 400 beautiful people. I once thought to myself that the people that live here do so because they don’t fit in anywhere else. Here it is a collection of ‘others’ in the most magnificent sense. We are unique individuals where non conformity with the mainstream takes pride of place.

There are rolling green hills, sub tropical rainforest (albeit not as much old growth as we would have liked to keep), waterfalls, and pristine beaches. I have two waterfalls near my house – Whian Whian falls where we like to swim in summer (tragedy of the commons when the tourist bus visits though) and Protestors Falls, the site of a massive environmental protest. There are rock formations that tell the ancient history of the Bunjalung people, the local indigenous community, with Nimbin Rocks and Mount Warning (the names given by white settlers) just two examples of the land that they hold in their hearts. A postcard tells a million stories.

I climbed Mount Warning once. It is the highest most easterly point in Australia – the very first place in the country to see sunrise. From there you can see all around with breath taking views of the coastline (including Byron Bay, one of the most famous beaches where you can watch whales at the lighthouse but only at the right time of the year) and the hills that stretch almost all the way to the horizon. I was pretty unfit at the time and I struggled to get up to the top – the last part consists of a chain where you must pull yourself up with all your strength. Ironically enough though walking down, whilst significantly easier, still had some impact with sore knees and wobbly legs (combining with my natural lack of coordination) making the journey difficult at times.

In recent years I have thought a lot about leaving. It has proven to be one of the most difficult decisions I have never been allowed to make. While I don’t consider myself to be of the status of ‘community icon’ (we have a lot of those) it takes at least ten years to be considered a ‘local’ (I grew up in Melbourne and sea changers don’t count for a long time) – if I leave I may never get back in.

But it has been achingly obvious to me for some time that while I share many things with the magnificent people that live here, there are some things that are very important to me that I cannot share. Some of the freest thinkers, some of the smartest most connected people live here but for the things that I think about there are largely only analogies and there are little opportunities for conversations on a detailed or conceptual level. For a person that speaks in symbolism, living literally at a dead end proves to be a visionary challenge. The knowledge here is on wheels. Not motorcycles as such but the local library is in a ‘bus’ that travels around to the local public schools and towns. Although I have a network here, academics in my field don’t seem to stay long. The isolation is physical as well as mental.

In the past I have referred to Lismore, the largest town in the area, as a gold fish bowl – it is in the bottom of a volcanic crater. It is safe and secure but at times very limiting. Once I sent someone a groovy card with a picture of a goldfish with snorkel and goggles on it and its head stuck out of the bowl. A family friend showed it to me when I was in Los Angeles (on my way to Northern California) and I said: “ohhh.... that’s me.” (I wrote on the left of it). I was out of the bowl for that briefest moment in time and it reflects the way I like to think.

I actually love living here just as much as I get frustrated by it. It is the tyranny of the tangible.

A common phrase around here, part of the eco tourism scene, is leave nothing but foot prints and take nothing but pictures. Making the great leap forward for me however would mean taking everything this region has given me and propagating it for the future. Perhaps life is not too short to do somethings twice and if I go it will be with the will to return for my restful years when relaxing is much more of a priority.

As we here in the Northern Rivers reflect on the ripple effect of Woodstock we can only think of how to make it happen again in the size of a Tsunami for if the world were more like the people and the environment around here it would be a much better place. I hope to be at the Centre of Everything to make sure that happens. But the weather remains to be seen.

IASPM ANZ

The Australia/New Zealand branch of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music is holding its annual conference in November in Auckland. The title this year is WHAT'S IT WORTH? with the theme of ‘Value’ and Popular Music. It will be held from 27-29 November 2009 in the Fale Pasifika Complex, Faculty of Arts at the University of Auckland, New Zealand. The organisers state:

The theme of this year's conference seeks to generate discussion and debate around the ‘value’ we ascribe to popular music(s). ‘Value’ relates to music as commodity and economic project, but social, cultural and aesthetic perspectives profoundly inform any measures or contentions of ‘value’. This theme is particularly timely given recent technological developments that are radically re-shaping the ways in which music is produced, distributed and consumed.

I will be attending and would recommend anyone else interested in this field to go as well. Papers will cover a whole range of topics including new technologies, copyright law, music in every day life including communities, subculture and politics as well as artistic and aesthetic value, authenticity, performance and many other areas.

You can find out more information about the conference here and here.

The Chinese Ministry of Cultural Censorship.

I was reading with despondency today an article by Digital Music News which states that the Chinese government is going to require that all music hosted off shore but accessible from within China be approved by the Chinese Ministry of Culture before beign digitally distributed.

According to MacWorld (quoting the Wall Street Journal): "Online music providers will have to submit to the Ministry of Culture the lyrics of each foreign song, translated into Chinese, along with evidence proving they have permission from the copyright owners to sell and distribute the songs..."

This does not reconcile well with USA calls for strong piracy controls from within the country and indeed smells a lot like using piracy as an opportunity to further control the messages conveyed to the people.

Whilst one cannot second guess what criteria will be applied in determining the suitability of songs, it may be questioned that such a scheme could be used to prevent the reception of songs with overt political characteristics. Other songs may nonetheless be used in a political way but songs with clear political sentiments may be directly at risk.

In August last year, the Art of Peace Foundation released an album titled Songs of Tibet with its release coinciding with the Beijing Olympic Games. The Chinese government responded by blocking access to iTunes for a short period of time.

Similarly, it was reported in March 2008 that following a Bjork concert in which she made a direct link between her song ‘Declare Independence’ and the struggle for freedom in Tibet, Chinese officials suggested that in the future all foreign artists would be screened prior to gaining entry to the country.

This essentially opens the door to the further regulation of free speech in China. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression, whilst not exactly the same, are arguably so closely related as to come within the ambit of the same fundamental human right. Expression concerns not that which is simply spoken but that which is expressed in other ways – in this case music – but in other examples recognised by western legal systems, expression has been seen to encompass a wide range of communicative activities including those taking a physical form.

In Levy v Victoria [1997] HCA 31 Brennan CJ stated (at page 5):

Speech is the chief vehicle by which ideas about government and political are communicated. Hence it is natural to regard the freedom of communication about government and political implied in the constitution as a freedom of speech. But actions as well as words can communicate ideas. In the United States where “freedom of speech” is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, non-verbal activity which expresses ideas may be protected as a form of speech. Thus a “protest by silent and reproachful presence” or by a burning of the flag of the United States have been held to be protected by the First Amendment....

The freedom of discussion implied in the Constitution of the Commonwealth, unlike the subject of protection under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, does not require consideration of the connotation of “speech” or of the conduct which might be thought to constitute a form of speech. The implication denies legislative or executive power to restrict the freedom of communication about the government or politics of the Commonwealth, whatever be the form of communication, unless the restriction is imposed to fulfil a legitimate purpose and the restriction is appropriate and adapted to the fulfilment of that purpose. In principle, therefore, non-verbal conduct which is capable of communicating an idea about the government or politics of the Commonwealth and which is intended to do so may be immune from legislative or executive restriction so far as that immunity is needed to preserve the system of representative and responsible government that the Constitution prescribes.

Music with overt political characteristics is clearly a form of speech or expression that comes within the globally recognised standard of human rights and yet in this case the Chinese government appear to be restricting the opportunities for its reception by attempting to control what comes into the country. Music of this nature has the ability to empower, educate and mobilise citizens often to address injustices and to create awareness of the potential for, and prevent, future disasters. However, here the Chinese government is seeking to restrict access to music, under the guise of piracy prevention, for its own political purposes which include restricting the access of its citizens to information about current events.

As I wrote in the paper I presented to the International Association for the Study of Popular Music in Liverpool earlier this year, ‘moral progress is a part of social progress and refers to changing attitudes to concepts such as freedom, equality, justice and truth. Social and moral progress depend heavily on knowledge and are affected (and effected) by the production and reception of information.’ (Bierstedt, 282). If China censors music by limiting the messages that citizens can receive, there will inevitably be a restriction to social progress and perhaps even retrogression.

Further Reading
Digital Music News, Instead of Anti-Piracy, China Offers Music Censorship... (9 September 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/090809china> at 10 September 2009

MacWorldUK, China tightens rules for online music providers (7 September 2009) <http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/news/index.cfm?newsid=27099> at 10 September 2009

The Register, iTunes, and Sting, banned from China (22 August 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/22/itunes_blocked_china_tibet/> at 28 August 2008

The Register, China pardons iTunes (but not Sting) (26 August 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/26/china_pardons_itunes/> at 28 August 2008

TechDirt, China Realizes It Doesn't Need To Block All Of iTunes (26 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080825/2219562089.shtml> at 28 August 2008

Digital Music News, iTunes Reinstated In China... Tibet Album Now Included (27 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/082608ituneschina> at 28 August 2008

TechDirt, China Blocks iTunes After Olympic Athletes Download Pro-Tibetan Music (21 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080821/0312442052.shtml> at 25 August 2008

guardian.co.uk, China blocks iTunes music store (21 August 2008) <http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/aug/21/china.blocks.itunes> at 25 August 2008

Digital Music News, Will the Ban Boost Sales? Tibet Album Pushes Past 10,000 (22 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/082108tibet> at 25 August 2008

Digital Music News, Great Firewall Growls: China Blocks iTunes Access (21 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/082008itunes> at 22 August 2008

The Age, iTunes blocked in China after protest stunt (21 August 2008) <http://www.theage.com.au/news/technology/itunes-blocked-in-china-after-protest-stunt/2008/08/20/1219262358153.html> at 22 August 2008

OpenContentAustralia, Bjork in China (11 March 2008) http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/03/bjork-in-china.html> at 10 September 2009

Bierstedt, Robert. 1974. Power and Progress McGraw Hill, New York

The Age: The Herd

Just a note to suggest that you check out this recent article by the Melbourne newspaper, The Age. The article writes about the 40th Anniversary of Woodstock, the lack of protest music today and the changes in technology that effect/affect they way that political messages are presented and received. Interesting article and well worth taking a look at:

The Age, Spirit of Protest is Alive, Just Different (15 August 2009) <http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/spirit-of-protest-is-alive-just-different-20090814-el5e.html> 2 September 2009

Absence

Hi just a note to say that due to the illness of a family member I have been unable to post to his page - sorry for the interruption and any inconvenience. I hope to be able to post again soon and thank you for your understanding.

GetUp are increasing the pressure on the Australian Government in an attempt to prevent the introduction of a widespread censorship program - from their latest email:

A decision on the Government's internet censorship filter could be just weeks away. It's crunch time for our campaign.

Live trials are nearly complete on the filter technology which will allow the government of the day to add any 'unwanted' site to a secret blacklist. This isn't China, Saudi Arabia or Iran - we could see a mandatory filter of all internet traffic right here in Australia as early as this year.

The Government could yet put the internet filter where it belongs: in the bin. But that will only happen if politicians feel the heat in their home electorates.

At this crucial time, can you contact your local MP about internet censorship?

Yes - I will request a meeting
Yes - I will send a message

103,564 Australians. That's how many of us have fought together to uphold our democratic principles.

Now let's make sure our politicians see how passionate (and how many) we are.

Picture the scene in your local politician's electorate office. The fax machine is running out of paper - it has a pile of messages every morning. Staffers have received dozens of meeting requests and the telephone message-bank is full. Voters have made it clear: draconian and unaccountable internet censorship is unacceptable in Australia.

Can you make it happen before politicians return Canberra in a fortnight?

Yes - I will request a meeting
Yes - I will send a message

Since we started this campaign in May, it has been revealed that the Government's secret blacklist includes everything from euthanasia and abortion sites to local dentists and tuckshops. It's easy to see how this filter would be open to abuse. We all want our children to be safe online, but the proposed internet filter will miss the vast majority of unwanted content while limiting our online freedoms and holding back the digital economy.

Now is the time to put this internet censorship plan to rest. Thanks for being part of the campaign.

In hope,
The GetUp team.

PS - A decision on the Government's plan to censor the internet may be only weeks away. Fax your local representative today or request a meeting with them to stop internet censorship and protect our democratic values.

Sal

Off The Grid

Just a note to let you know that I will be away for the next week and will not be posting to this site.

Sally

RIP: A Remix Manifesto

I have been a little slow to write about the film RIP: A Remix Manifesto - it has been available to stream for a short time now but I wanted to get a copy of the film that I could keep before deciding whether or not it might be included in my research.

After some delay in gaining access to the film - Australian's cannot download from iTunes USA nor is it available outside the USA from the official website - I finally got a copy off eBay. (It was advertised as a Region 1 DVD but it turns out it has no region coding at all. I have an old DVD player which I was guessing/gambling would have played the Region 1 DVD anyway).

This is a great film which discusses remix culture and the incredible imposition of copyright law. It primarily focuses on the music remix artist Girl Talk however also discusses mashups of other forms of culture as well as the more open attitude to culture taken in countries such as Brazil. With a number of similarities to the movie GoodCopyBadCopy, this film differs largley in the way that is is made - it itself in parts is a mashup of culture, some old and some new.

Indeed, there are a number of curious aspects to the way the film has been put together. At first I wondered whether these would amount to embarrassing errors - for example, it is specifically stated that this film is about a war over ideas however it is an elementary error to say that copyright law regulates ideas. Copyright law in fact regulates expression and is expressly differentiated from laws that regulate ideas. Other intellectual property law such as patents regulate ideas.

In addition to this, the movie characterises Napster1 as being a decentralised file sharing network when of course it is well known that Napster1 was in fact a centralised file sharing network - it required a centralised server in order to index and pass files from one user to another.

Why would this film state two obvious errors? (perhaps there are more that musicians or remix artists would find that are not obvious to me).

It is my view that this is done deliberately to act as an illustration. By including errors in the film, this film serves as the perfect example as to why we should be entitled to remix. Culture of the past is often imperfect, can be added to, altered or changed in a way that makes it more relevant, useful and (in this case for those of us with a background in law) more enjoyable. It is my belief that the errors in this film are intended to invite discussion as well as corrections. If so, I consider this to be a brave tactical decision and one which enables further promotion of the film, increased relevance in the future, as well as aiding in the wider dissemination of the central messages of the film through ensuring people discuss it. [I also wondered whether it might be to bait IP lawyers to remix it in case the creator is sued and he needs some back up.... :-) ]

Just as music mashed up by GirlTalk in part gains its popularity through the ability of people to relate to the samples of songs they already know, any adaptation of this film would refer to the original at the same time as serving as a new creation. In fact in parts of the film, remixes of this very film are used. Completely displacing the notion that the purchased copy is a finished product, the creator has allowed all of the footage of the film to be uploaded to the internet and openly invites others to remix it.

Indeed the very fact that I was unable to purchase this film except via eBay and only then if it would work in my DVD player serves as a further example of the impossibility of the staggered releases of record labels and other media organisations, as well as the impediments of DRM. Of course I would try to purchase the film from eBay (as I am sure many other people have). The creator appears to be very cleverly demonstrating the futility of trying to close culture when the internet is always on and will always allow people to connect and share regardless of the attempts to prevent this. At present it is not even possible to purchase the film for private use in Australia - I could only view the copy I have because of what American's call the First Sale Doctrine. Had this copy been Region 1 encoded and had I not had an old DVD player my rights would have been lost altogether.

OR MAYBE there are no errors in the film at all and this is a lesson in not buying from the authorised supplier? How do I know I have the 'official' copy? perhaps it is a mashed up pirate version... I doubt it, I checked the sellers reputation and store but it is an interesting aspect to the experience of trying to get a copy of this film and the nature of its subject.

I am in the process of trying to organise a non commercial use license to show this film at the Southern Cross University Mixed Up Reels Flim Club night on 8th September 2009 (I am told the licesend copy of the film will arrive next Monday so ...fingers crossed... )

If you're not nearby - stream it, go along to see it at one of the other screenings, or buy it. You will be impressed by the creativity of the footage, the clarity of the message as well as be inspired to become a creator. Great flick!

FridgyDidge

I just love this photo of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's fridge - it's cool! (pun intended).

Licensed under: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Generic 2.0 License
Quinnums PhotoStream Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/quinn/ / CC BY-NC 2.0

Recent Developments

Two things have occurred this week that are worth a brief mention.

The first is a campaign by Get Up to challenge donations to political parties. Urging Australians to sign a petition to stop corporate and third party political donations as well as cap the amount of money individuals donate to campaigns their email states:

Politicians are elected to work for their employers - the Australian people. But someone else is writing their cheques: to the tune of millions of dollars. Will you join us in calling for an end to corporate and third-party political donations?

Developers given unfettered access to public land; mining companies' rights trumping traditional owners'; childcare services next to poker machines - we may get to vote every few years, but can we match the influence of large corporate donors?

Who's going to change it? The political parties addicted to big dollar corporate sponsorship? This change has to come from those who have a legitimate say over how the country is run: the Australian people. And we need to seize this rare opportunity, while the issue is in the headlines.

I have written previously about Public Choice Theory and how powerful corporate actors in essence dictate policy with respect to intellectual property law here. I refer to the disablement of public governance structures through political campaigns and financial pressure as in effect creating conditions of Private Governance which is perpetuated throughout the world through international treaties and free trade agreements.

Those interested in reading more about the campaign and signing the petition should visit:
www.getup.org.au/campaign/TheBucksStopHere


The second development worth mentioning is the handing down of a preliminary decision in the case of Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd v EMI Songs Australia Pty Limited [2009] FCA 799. This case concerns allegations of copyright infringement against EMI and the composers of the famous Australian song ‘Down Under’ who are alleged to have used a substantial portion of the song ‘Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree’. While Jacobson J does not consider the substantive copyright argument in the preliminary decision, he has determined that copyright does vest with Larrikin Music Publishing and that the copyright claim can proceed.

Plagiarism was initially raised as an issue on the popular Australian music quiz show Spicks and Specks two years ago. If copyright infringement is established the award of damages is likely to be very high given the popularity of the ‘Down Under’ song.

Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions

I wrote recently about a report released by the Australian Government called: Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions and how the Government is considering the positive and negative impacts of three strikes policies. I wrote to Senator Conroy this week outlining the nature and aims of these proposals, provided a summary of the current state of three strikes programs around the world, outlined the reasons as to why this is a counter productive and unnecessary approach and discussed the most appropriate alternative that should be employed instead – a voluntary or compulsory licensing scheme.

Here’s what I wrote about viable alternatives:

The fact remains that there are far better alternatives available to the government and the music industry to ensure that financial rewards remain for the production of content. These include voluntary collective licensing or the blanket licensing of music. Differing primarily in whether consumers and copyright holders are forced to participate, these schemes enable users to pay a flat monthly fee for the unlimited access to music, use technology to track the downloading of songs and use the collected funds to compensate artists for the use of their works. Whilst requiring some development to be introduced, such a scheme would enable the unrestricted exploration of culture, increase competition in the creative sector by providing an even playing field that does not operate in favour of strong media corporations and address all of the concerns raised above.

Proposals have been developed in the United States by the likes of Professor Fisher, Professor Netanel and the Electronic Frontiers Foundations. At present in the United States, Choruss, a corporation set up with connections to Warner Music, are trialling licensing schemes of this nature in colleges. Trails have also been undertaken by Professor Fisher at Harvard University in other countries.

There is real potential to implement a licensing system in Australia. ABS data as at December 2008 states that there are 6,680,000 Australian non dial up subscribers. Applying a monthly tax to these subscribers of $5.31 per month would recoup the entire sales of the Australian Recording Industry Association for 2008 - $425,638,008. Over a 12month period each non dial up connection would go up $63.72. While on the face of it this appears to be a fairly minor increase, other options are also available - this simply represents the maximum cost placed on the maximum number of people.

A broadband levy or licence could also be scaled to accommodate only the loss of income to the record industry. Taking the peak of 2001 where total sales were $647,620,000 and relating this to the total sales for 2008 of $425,638,008 shows a total drop in sales of $221,981,992. To simply recoup the difference, broadband subscriptions would rise by only $2.77 per month. The levy could be adjusted annually to accommodate the changes in lost income and the number of subscribers. As the number of broadband subscribers increases the monthly levy would be reduced.

Another option would be to spread the levy to include dial up services as well and implement a tiered structure. In this scenario, dial up services would increase by as little as $1 per month, reducing the impact on broadband subscribers. While all internet users would be supporting the music industry, those with the faster connections and greater capacity to download music would pay more of the costs.

Creative Commons and the Curse of Verification

I am a huge fan of Creative Commons. Many people do not know that I was actually the one that initiated the development of the Australian Creative Commons Licenses. I attended the internet law program at Stanford University in 2003 where Lawrence Lessig lectured on internet regulation and the Creative Commons project. I told Professor Brian Fitzgerald at the Queensland University of Technology about it and he agreed to supervise my independent research project the next semester on this area. I mention this as a prelude to what I am writing about today because I want to be clear that I support this organisation and am very much in agreement with their goals and ethics (note that both of my blogs are licensed under Creative Commons Licenses).

It is with some concern that I have read that the new licence verification system introduced to Google Image Search which is designed to assist users to find and use images which are openly licensed, is proving to be less than successful. Many people have licensed works incorrectly and as such the technology is reported to be producing a number of false positives – that is - listing files that are in fact under copyright.

A few years ago, over the course of a year (2006), I attempted a statistical analysis of Creative Commons Licenses in Limewire and much the same took place. The Limewire software, in co-operation with Creative Commons, enables people to tag files as being openly licensed and allows users to verify the existence of these licenses. Right clicking on a file gives the user the option of ‘viewing the file’ and when viewing the file the user has the option of 'verifying the file'. By clicking on the verification link the software automatically goes to the web page that the uploader has given and checks that the license is on the given page.

More times that I care to state this technology was faulty. Many times uploaders incorrectly tagged files as being openly licensed when they were not. Other times the verification link would link to a page that had a Creative Commons license but was not the correct page for that file. These results, while highly disruptive and very very annoying, can be attributed to uploaders being ignorant or deliberaltely doing the wrong thing. However in other circumstances, the verification link would report that the file could not be verified and yet when one went to the web page that was listed with the file, there was in fact a Creative Commons license on the page and it was for the correct artist.

Reading today about these similar problems with image verification brought back the intense frustration I felt at the time of doing that statistical analysis. What I was trying to establish (with, as it turned out, less than perfect research design) was that there was a growing trend of correctly licensed Creative Commons files. My results did in fact show an increasing trend, however the process or method involved in verifying each license was exhausting and time consuming because I could not rely at all on what the technology told me. Before writing this blog post I went into Limewire to see if it had changed but it hasn’t. There were many files which were clearly uploaded and tagged incorrectly and others that did not verify that should have – Brad Sucks is on Jamendo and is openly licensed but the verification process in Limewire will tell you that it can't be verified.

Many a time I sat there and questioned the effectiveness of this technology.

And yet here again a similar mechanism has been put in place and the system is reported to be achieving the same results.

My concern here is two fold.

Firstly I worry about the artists that are genuinely trying to use open licensing and file sharing networks as part of their business or communication model. This mechanism does little to make the process of negotiating a file sharing network like Limewire much easier. While it is good to have the search mechanism in place the results are far too inconsistent to suggest that it is sufficiently effective.

Secondly I worry about Creative Commons. From my view these imperfect technologies open the organisation up to a secondary copyright liability claim. Just as file sharing networks state that it is up to the public to use their technology lawfully and that they are not responsible for the illegality that takes place, so too Creative Commons appear to distance themselves from responsibility. However there is scope in my mind to suggest that knowingly producing and promoting technology that has the potential to ‘induce’ or mislead a user into thinking something is licensed when it is not, is a dangerous game to play.

Just as the likes of Lawrence Lessig (and myself) advocate for the registration of copyrights, so too should Creative Commons be doing more to ensure that works are correctly licensed. While I understand the logistics of this are immense and the costs prohibitive, the answer does not lie in releasing technology that works, at best, once in a while. I appreciate the need for these search mechanisms and they are in some ways better than nothing but the risk here is that the whole organisation could be held liable for secondary copyright infringement. It would be an unpopular lawsuit but the disclaimers are simply not enough.

In the USA Grokster case and in the Kazaa case in Australia the same arguments were made – that the users were responsible, that it was not the primary purpose of the technology, and that they disclaimed liability; and this was not enough. I hope that those at Creative Commons have better arguments than these otherwise there could be trouble ahead.

I am a huge supporter of this organisation please don’t mistake this criticism as anything other than genuine concern. This litigious environment has had many casualties and I would hate to see this organisation on that list.

Further Reading
The Register, The tragedy of the Creative Commons (16 July 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/16/creative_commons_fail/> at 22 July 2009

Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions

I have been reading with interest the report released last week by the Australian Government titled ‘Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions’.

Interestingly the Government appears to have considered the lobbying of the content industry in relation to a three strikes policy but does not openly or whole heartedly embrace this as an option. Instead there is acknowledgement that many from the internet industry as well as members of the public consider this to be an unworkable and unnecessary solution:

“A number of submissions received during the consultation phase for the development of this paper argued that a role for Government exists in addressing the apparent popularity of peer-to-peer file sharing of music and movies, without the necessary permissions of the relevant copyright owners. File-sharing is cited by the content industry as a barrier to further investment in sustainable and innovative content initiatives in Australia.

One solution proposed by copyright owners is a “three strikes” or “graduated response” proposal under which copyright owners would work together with ISPs to identify the ISP’s customers who are suspected of unauthorised file sharing and the ISP would then send a notice on behalf of the copyright owner to that customer advising of this allegation. After multiple notices, a series of escalated steps could be taken with respect to the customer’s account.

Several submissions were received which opposed this proposal for reasons including the lack of judicial oversight of administering sanctions based on private allegations, the lack of public transparency about the process and concern over consumer rights.

The Government recognises a public policy interest in the resolution of this issue. On the one hand, the Australia economy benefits from a sustainable content industry and from a general respect for legal rights. On the other hand, issues relating to due process and consumer privacy are important.

The Government is currently working with representatives of both copyright owners and the Internet industry in an effort to reach an industry-led consensus on an effective solution to this issue.” [at pg 38]

Indeed a recent survey conducted by itnews shows that only 1% of 1411 respondents think that the Australian Government should introduce a 3 strikes policy; 4% consider a 3 strikes policy to be preferable to individual file sharing lawsuits, while 95% believe that it is not the role of ISPs to police the internet.

The report is available here and the Government is asking for members of the public to contribute to the discussion on the policy direction Australia should take and case studies which can be used as further examples (don’t use the html version cos half the pages appear to be down).

I urge all those interested in helping artists and ensuring that we are able to realise the true potential of the internet by sharing our culture to make a submission. Submissions can be made:

By email:
DEFutureDirections@dbcde.gov.au

Snail mail:
Assistant Secretary, Digital Economy and Convergence Branch
Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
GPO Box 2154
CANBERRA ACT 2601


Further Reading
itnews, Conroy vows to tackle illegal file sharing (15 July 2009) <http://www.itnews.com.au/News/150133,conroy-vows-to-tackle-illegal-file-sharing.aspx> at 22 July 2009

ZeroPaid, Aussie Govt Wants “Appropriate Solution” for Illegal P2P (20 July 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86668/aussie-govt-wants-appropriate-solution-for-illegal-p2p/> at 22 July 2009

Not Off The Grid Just a Little Time Out

Just a note to say that I will not be able to post again for a couple of days – flying back from Liverpool over the weekend. Hopefully Monday I will have a couple of other posts from sessions I have attended at IASPM this week. I also have some comments from readers to approve – these should also be up on the site early next week.Thank you for your comments - I will publish them as soon as I can (along with attending to the other mass of information in my inbox!!!).

 

The International Association for the Study of Popular Music conference has been fantastic – I really hope you have enjoyed reading about some of the presentations. I have recently found out that they will be publishing some of these papers in a journal, hopefully later in the year. If I find out when that happens I will be sure to let you know. For me this conference has been very inspiring with the diversity and high standard of each of the presentations giving me enourmous confidence for the future of the music industry and scholarship. My only complaint is that I couldn't go to all of the sessions. See you on the flip side ~(geographically)~.

IASPM: Day Five

This morning it was again difficult for me to decide which presentations to go to.

 

The first paper I saw was called 'Away with protest song!' by Jan Fairley. Jan began by noting the difficulties in the use of the term 'protest song' suggesting that it was a label that was used to connote a definitive body of songs when in fact it is not that determinable. She played examples of the song We Shall Overcome used in connection with Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson and noted the statement of Mavis Staples at WOMADelaide in which she stated "If he [Martin Luther King] can preach it, we can sing it. We joined the movement to sing freedom songs." Jan noted that the PBS website, Strange Fruits, suggests that there are 8 time periods in which protest songs can be said to have been written.

 

Jan then went on to consider and compare the position of cancio protesta in Cuba, stating that songs written to reflect on the position of people in that country were done so without the influence of western artists and that most artists in Cuba rejected the label of cancio protest as they did not sit down to deliberately write songs with the intention of protesting. Jan stated that it was not until recently that a Colombian rock group Aterciopelados led by Andrea Echevarry wrote and released a song about the USA dropping bombs in country side in the name of the war on drugs, that there was a deliberate choice to adopt the term cancio protesta.

 

I found this presentation interesting. As my research concerns two western jurisdictions I am not extensively familiar with the place of songs of this nature outside of these nations. While I personally do not take issue with the label 'protest' or 'political' music and think that it is useful and necessary to enable discussion and debate (as with most labels) I nonetheless appreciate that not all cultural backgrounds associate the same meaning to these types of terms.

 

 

The second paper that I saw presented today was by Aekyung Park titled 'War, Gender and the Popular Song – with a focus on the Military Popular Song under the Total Moblization System'.

 

Aekyung discussed 1940s Korean protest songs and in particular analysed the gender issues in military songs between the onset of the Sino-Japanese War in 1937 and the Pacific War in 1941. At that time the basis of Japan's cultural policy was one of censorship and prohibition, with full scale control by the authorities. The need to fight against enemy countries like the USA and UK was at the heart of the cultural policy.

 

Korea began to produce militarist songs only after the Sino-Japanese War however these were pushed aside by the popularity of love songs and jazz and almost no militarist songs were released from the middle of 1938. The intense dissemination of militarist songs began in 1942.

 

Aekyung noted that the militarist songs of this time used the female – mother, wife or lover – as the voice of propagandize militarist ideology stating that "the woman as a soldier's helper and war collaborator, internalizes the value of devotion and self-sacrifice". Aekyung gave the example of the Song of Military Nurse (Columbia Records, January 1938) with lyrics reinforcing these ideas.

 

This was a very interesting presentation and highlighted the use of song in times of war and the characterisation of women as empathetic to both conflict and the caring and nurturing of political ideas.

 

 

The third paper I attended was by Kalina Zahiva – Why Do Words Have Songs? Kalina discussed the traditional perception of lyrics as secondary to melody, rhythm and voice. She stated that in reality lyrics are held to be of lower importance than music by music scholars. Typically lyrics are not seen to have their own artistic value – at best they are attributed a sociological, political, gender and/or psychological value.

 

Furthermore those in Literary Studies traditionally perceive sung poetry as popularised, and/or folkorized; as bad poetry especially with respect to popular music where it is considered the 'weak' element of a predominantly mass art without its own artistic value.

 

Kalina went on to discuss the setting of the lyrics as instrumental to their acceptance or attribution. They are able to suggest affiliations, incorporation, togetherness, and contribute to the formation of identity. Lyrics written with a deliberate setting are different to those written in a spontaneous setting and this can assist in determining or affect their purpose. She also discussed the setting of the lyrics as constructive of memory, how the text builds, modifies and generates memory. Setting can also invoke an aesthetic claim and contribute to perceptions of quality and genre. Finally she considered the effects of setting on the effects on memory, the development of new meanings and as a rearrangement of the literary process.

 

This was a fantastic presentation which I very much enjoyed and it provoked much discussion about the role of lyrics and the approaches taken to both their composition and analysis.

 

 

Later in the day I was also lucky enough to see a presentation by Matt Stahl titled 'Indentured Servants, Rich Whiners, or Workplace Democrats? US Recording Artists and Californian Labor Law'. This was a great presentation which considered the contractual arrangements of artists and labels in California.  He stated that recording artists are considered to be employees under Californian labor law (2855 of the California Labor Code) – the law establishes their engagement as being a personal services contract. Important elements of the contractual arrangements include exclusivity, assignment (can be transferred to another label if the company the artist is signed to is sold), as well as duration & option periods.

 

He went on to discuss the duration of recording contracts in California in greater detail. The seven year rule that applies to all engaged in contracts for personal services is designed to remove the employee from an open ended arrangement. Initially the term was limited to a 2 year period but has been extended over time. In 1987 changes were made to the labor law which specifically excluded recording artists from this limitation period. These changes were designed to reinforce changes that had been made to recording contracts following a 1979 dispute with Olivia Newton John (Olivia Newton John v MCA). Newton John refused to record further albums under a recording contract (non performance) which triggered a change in practice by labels from setting time limits on the contracts between artists, to specifying obligations in terms of the number of albums they were required to produce and the damages artists would be liable for if they did not.

 

In 2002 Senator Kevin Murray sought to repeal the 1987 change through SB 1246. The RIAA, label executives, recording artists and artists' attorneys testified before a hearing of the State Senate Judiciary Committee. Matt played some excellent sound bites highlighting the divergent views of those that gave statements for and against the repealing of the legislation. The move to repeal the law ultimately failed with Matt suggesting that their loss was directly attributable to the lack of political and employment theory that artists and their attorneys argued.

 

He also noted that aside from Louisiana there is no other State in the United States that limits the length of recording contracts and how this creates ongoing problems for the bargaining power of artists. Furthermore he noted that these changes had a wider impact with contracts formed in other States able to designate California as the venue for the resolution of disputes.

 

This was a fantastic presentation both in content and style. It was well put together, provided an excellent level of explanation and enough detail in order to comprehend the events that have taken place and their wider implications. I would however, suggest that there is a greater part to this equation, with the United States having a highly corrupted political system with campaign donations 'assisting' to determine the content of the legislation that is passed. I would argue that the result would have been the same regardless of what arguments the artists' and their representatives made. Public Choice Theory would suggest that the Californian representatives would not be in a position to risk losing the economic stability provided by the content industry and would therefore not be in any position to bring in more restrictive laws. Furthermore, as Matt noted, with the vast majority of other States failing to provide any legal limitations, even if it had been successful, the most likely result would be the nomination of an alternative forum for dispute resolution outside of California.

 

IASPM: Day Four

The hardest part of this morning was trying to decide which presentations to see – there was so much to choose from.

 

First I went to Alenka Barber-Kersovan's paper on 'The Construction of Patriotism in the Propaganda Video „For the Freedom" from the Croatian Civil War 1991/1992'.

 

She played a segment of the film and a song recorded by a Croatian popular musician which urged other European countries to help stop the war. The song was sung in English in order to increase its appeal outside of the country with images of the destruction of war, children and the landscape helping to depict the country as weak and vulnerable and in need of assistance. This was a fascinating presentation and I found the video and the talk very informative and interesting.

 

The second paper I attended was "From ghetto laboratory to the technosphere" by Dennis Howard. This was a great presentation which discussed the cross national origins that have led to the development of hip hop – from blues and roots, to Jamaican reggae to hip hop. He discussed the hierarchy that has developed in Jamaica and how western music is most often considered to be of a higher or better quality than that which is composed and recorded at home – he noted that Bob Marley was not played in Jamaica until he had been taken up by the western media. Dennis also noted that for some time there was no copyright in Jamaica which saw all R&B music and reggae copied and distributed at will. Furthermore he discussed the adoption of technologies in the production of the music and mentioned how western technologies were altered and used in different ways in third world countries.

 

The third paper I saw this morning was "Poietic processes in sample-based hip-hop" by Marco Lutzu. Marco discussed the process and equipment used in the composition of hip hop. He discussed producers and the relationship with sound, noting that it is archived, sampled, edited, played, drawn, visualised, then embodied according to genre specific compositional rules and finally humanised which is the point at which it is included in a larger work. He concluded that "the creation of sample based hip-hop beats is a poietic process with several specifications. By relying on a great use of technology, sharing particular listening behaviours, conceiving the pieces by functional layers, basing himself(sic) on an ethical and aesthetical system in which the quotation mustn't become plagiarism, and having a close and direct relationship with the sound, has made the producer a new kind of music creator."

IASPM: “Dare to Be Free”: The Dixie Chicks’ Existential Conversion

By Jim LeBlanc

 

Jim LeBlanc gave an excellent presentation today about the events that took place with respect to the Dixie Chicks and the statement by Maines in 2003 at a concert about George Bush that she was 'ashamed that the President of the United States was from Texas'. Jim's presentation focused on the 2006 single Not Ready to Make Nice which he played at the end of the talk.

 

Jim gave the background to the event and details regarding the hostile response from conservative fans of the band (I have written about this earlier here).

 

He then went on to discuss the musical aspects of the song including the different instruments that are used, dynamics, repetition, the use of overdubbed cathartic whaling, and the conclusion of the track which consists of a gradual silencing of one instrument at a time.

 

Despite not being mentioned by Jim, discussion from members of the audience included questions about the openness of the lyrics and the way that they might be interpreted in another way should they heard by someone who did not know the background and the inherent difficulties in attributing a political label to the song without the context. Jim referred to specific parts of the lyrics in which reference is made to death threats received by Maines and how she was told to 'Shut Up and Sing'. Jim suggested that there were not many other contexts in which these lyrics could be relevant but conceded that without additional context there may, nonetheless, be alternative interpretations.

 

With respect to the philosophical basis of this paper Jim suggested that the existential conversion was apparent when considering the response of the Dixie Chicks and their determination to take what others were making of them (which they had little control over) and to make something for themselves out of it. Indeed one member of the band apparently stated that: "Now that we have fucked ourselves anyway, I think we have a responsibility to continue to fuck ourselves." They did this by refusing to apologise, standing up to those that sought to silence them, engaging in a public debate about the events and at later concerts, using a multimedia presentation about other political issues such as abortion, with the subtitles of truth and freedom. The band took advantage of the public outcry and used it to re-characterise themselves.

 

  

Further Reading

 

OpenContentAustraliaResearchReview, Shut Up and Sing (10 April 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/04/shut-up-song.html> at 15 July 2009

 

Wikipedia, Not Ready to Make Nice (12 June 2009)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Ready_to_Make_Nice> at 15 July 2009

IASPM: Money for what? An exploration in music crowd funding or “P2P finance”

By Francesco D'Amato

 

Francesco presented a paper on the Do It Yourself business model where members of the public contribute creativity, knowledge, skills, provide suggestions, judge works, provide feedback on recordings and/or money as a part of the recording and distribution process.

 

He focused in particular on Crowdfunding which is the contribution of money by web users to help support creators. This is seen by some as an alternative to the traditional ways of production. Franceso discussed the attributes of some of the most popular platforms for crowdfunding, two of these were:

 

ArtistShare

He stated that this is currently the most popular platform for musicians seeking to use an alternative business model with some profiting more than they would had they signed to a major record label. The platform seeks donations from users and in turn provides them with rewards such as special content, personal relationships with artists and access to the creative process. ArtistShare is not a profit sharing model.

 

SellaBand

This platform sets a goal amount to be raised of $50,000 with users buying shares of $10 each. Fans are given a split of the revenue produced from the recordings with 10% of the funds going to the website operators. Investors and artists receive 50% each of the money while the site takes a five year licenses for the music including both the copyrights and exploitation rights to the music. Investors also receive non economic rewards such as a free copy of track(s) and their names listed in the cover credits.

 

This was another interesting talk which focused primarily on the different aspects to each of these platforms. There have been a number of artists that have successfully used this business model independently of third party platforms in recent times which were not within the scope of this presentation but nonetheless it was well worth seeing and very informative.

IASPM: iPod Culture: Issues of Sociability and Democratisation in the Musical Experience

By Melissa Avdeef

 

Melissa Avedeef presented a paper on the sociability, democratization of identity and musical taste for those in the iPod Culture.

 

The 'iPod Culture' is a term that refers to digital natives [TAPSCOTT, D. (1997)] - those that have grown up surrounded with technologies such as the internet, mobile phones and mp3 players. While it connotes the sector of society that fall within the age category of 20 years and younger, this group of people is not limited to just those that have iPods or other similar technology, but includes all those that are effected by the existence of the hardware and software that saturates society with communication and cultural exposure.

 

Melissa's research consisted of quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews on young people engaged with music and technology. The surveys and interviews were conducted to gain a view of both the personal and societal perspectives on the relationship between individuals, music and technology.

 

The development of new sociability in IPod culture

Highlights of the findings of the research include the belief by the youth that music should be omnipresence - that it should always be there for them when ever they want it and that their access should be immediate. In discussing how respondents obtained music, most indicated that they got it by downloading from file sharing networks or from friends with few responding that they purchased CDs.

 

When asked whether they thought these technologies were making them antisocial respondents indicated that this was not true, that they were not becoming more isolated but more sociable as the instant and unimpeded access to culture promotes conversations rather than preventing them from happening. Interestingly older generations also suggested that this technology did not make people less sociable but that it does make it easier for people to remove themselves from social situations if they wish to.

 

Melissa suggests that while it is a value judgment to state whether there has been a positive or negative impact on sociability, that nonetheless there have been apparent and identifiable changes. One example of this is changes to social norms with respect to listening to mp3 players while in a conversation with another person. The majority identified two instances in which listening to iPods are considered rude – when a person is talking and they have to repeat themselves and/or when their music is so loud that it can be heard by the other person that does not have the earbuds.

 

The diversification of musical taste in relation to the online fragmentation of identity.

Melissa's research also suggests that as technology converges musical tastes are becoming increasingly divergent. People are relying less on traditional media to tell them what to listen to and acquiring music on the internet means they can access a whole range of culture that they could not access to before. When asked, most people stated that they "listened to everything".

 

Related to this are changes to personal identity brought about by new technologies. Respondents indicated that society has largely moved past the desire to remain anonymous on the internet and instead use the medium to extend and explore their personality. Technologies such as social networking enable an extension of the offline self and provide the opportunity to showcase different aspects of identity without the immediate consequences of physical space. These spaces allow the expression of negative thoughts about others which we would not feel comfortable doing in physical space – this is called the dis-inhibition effect.

 

Therefore the internet and digital technologies allow people to explore both musical tastes and personal identity with these being interrelated and fluctuating based on the dynamics and changes to technology.

 

This was a fascinating presentation which I enjoyed a lot. The research was well presented and very interesting.

IASPM: The Overdub Tampering Committee and Plunderphonics: popular music and resistance in the postmodern age

By Daniela Furini

 

Today I saw a fantastic presentation by Daniela Furini in which she spoke about, amongst a number of other very interesting things, The Overdub Tampering Committee. I had not heard of this group prior to this seeing this presentation and was fascinated to hear about their activities. According to Daniela, the group started a practice of deliberately downloading songs by well known artists and changing them by adding to and/or removing aspects of the tracks and then uploading them back to file sharing networks with the original song title so that others would download them without knowing that they had been altered.

 

Daniela stated that this practice was designed to challenge both the music industry and those that engaged in file sharing. The practice also highlights the intangibility of the music and how musical works are no longer fixed but rather take on a transient nature.

 

This was a fantastic presentation.

 

 

Further Reading

 

TorrentFreak, Have You Been Punked By TOTC? (7 January 2009) <http://torrentfreak.com/punked-by-totc-080107/> at 14 July 2009

IASPM: The Online Post-Rave Commons: Peer production and the production of offline social spaces for the Australian Psytrance Scene.

By Alex Lambert

Yesterday Alex Lambert gave an excellent paper on the relationship between the two primary social spheres for the psytrance movement. He discussed how doof parties bring together psytrance music, the social culture and the Australian landscape to produce what is in effect a tribal ritual. He also discussed the relationship between the events that take place in physical space and discussion forums such as oztrance.net.

The online discussion forums promote long and detailed conversations online and assist in the development of community. He stated that the forums are a form of commons - decentralized, non proprietary and collaborative, with the sharing of non rivalrous immaterial resources. He stated that the practices of the community defer to peer production, peer property and peer governance.

Peer production takes place with respect to the production of music, artwork, videos, photos, and knowledge through the collection of hyperlinks, discussion threads, music production tutorials and essays.

The creation of peer property consists of the sharing of music under conditions that enable sampling and remixing. Social norms of altruism encourage participants to surrender intellectual property rights. The forums themselves do not claim control over copyright however there is no formal copyleft licensing in place.

The sites are governed by the clustering of power through the architecture of the sites. While site managers and administrators and programmers retain some control over the site, they also delegate control by determining who can be moderators.

In Australia the scene is small in size which enables a dense trade in social capital, the development of social connections between production and consumption, DJ event producers and forum participants.

This was an excellent presentation which I found very interesting. The conflicting desire to hold the parties in a natural environment and yet for community and connections online, struck me as the use of two very different spaces by the members of this scene.

IASPM: The Reception of the Use of Technology in the work of Jimi Hendrix

By Jan Butler

Yesterday Jan Butler gave a great presentation on the construction of authenticity in the record industry in the 1960s.

At that time rock was in a state of flux with neither the industry nor consumers knowing exactly what rock and roll was or what would constitute a hit. In order to address this lack of certainty, the institutional structures of the industry and the roles and activities of members of the bands had to adapt in order to continue to make money. Changes to technology contributed to the ambiguity of the content and style of the music at that time as well as the stability of the industry itself. Furthermore, changes to the participants in the music industry were also important with the rise of rock culture intermediaries such as rock documentary makers, tour managers, and critics taking on the role of helping the public to mediate the changes that were taking place. These changes resulted in a change in market share between major record labels and independents which went from around 50% each to 60% for the major labels and 40% to independents.

Jan then went on to discuss Jimi Hendrix and how the gate keepers, particularly rock journalist and critics, focused on his recordings rather than live performances. While today Hendrix is remembered one of the greatest guitarists of all time and a fantastic showman, he was also a keen user of technological recording equipment. Indeed it was stated that his main motivation for live performances was to pay for recordings and the use of technology. Interviews and articles in the rock press in the USA were consistently positive with respect to his recordings however little commentary was provided with respect to his live performances.

For example, the Rolling Stone Magazine coverage of Hendrix's performance at Woodstock described the time of day when he performed, the names of two of the songs that he performed and what he wore however there was no mention of the quality of his live performance and no mention of his rendition of the Star Spangled Banner.

I found this presentation to be very interesting, particularly the discussion relating to how changing recording technologies drove alterations to the industry.

IASPM: Day One

This my first post from the International Association for the Study of Popular Music's conference, 'Popular Music Worlds - Popular Music Histories' at the University of Liverpool.

On Saturday I was lucky enough to have the chance to look around the city of Liverpool. Known for its popular music heritage, the city has a number of attractions which tell the history of music in this region. I went to see the Beatles Story, a museum dedicated to telling the story of how the members of the band got together, their personal histories, the events leading up to and including the height of their fame as well as the circumstances in which they decided to split up. It was a fantastic display of memorabilia and the audio guide provided some interesting and informative commentary about the life and achievements of the band.

There was also an area displaying pictures of the Lennon and Ono Bed-In in which they protested and actively asserted the needed to Give Peace a Chance. Photographs reflected their personal perspectives, the journalists that interviewed them, the writing and recording of the song 'Give Peace a Chance' and explained the political statement they were seeking to make.

I also attended the White Feather exhibition which provides a family perspective to the life of John Lennon. Presented and complied largely by Cynthia and Julian Lennon the exhibition includes a display of family photographs, post cards and explains the events that took place with respect to John Lennon and his family.

Later in the day I took a bus ride around the city and visited The Cavern. While the original venue where the Beatles played over 200 shows and first met Brian Epstein no longer exists, there is a new establishment which includes a statue of John Lennon.

IASPM : Liverpool

First of all sorry for not posting a lot over the past week or so. I have been very busy preparing to go to England later this week. As I have blogged earlier, next week I am presenting my paper 'The Evolution of Culture: Is Political Music Still Being Heard?' at the International Association for the Study of Popular Music's Conference in Liverpool.

I hope to be posting from the conference to tell you about the great presentations I will be seeing – [tonight's post is a 'mobile blog' and I am in part testing out how my webmail posts are going to look (there is some limitation to the formatting I can use... but otherwise hopefully it should be okay)].

There are some fantastic papers being presented and it is very hard to know what to attend. You can check out the program yourself here.

Here's a list of some that look interesting to me:

Australian

Baker: PANEL: Australia's 'Cradle of Rock': Community, music and the museum that never was

Giuffre: Mediating the musical experience: the role of the Australian music media

Homan: PANEL--'All you can do is step back in time': the politics of historical narratives of Australian popular music

Lambert: The Online Post-Rave Commons: Peer production and the production of offline social spaces for the Australian Psytrance Scene

Technology

Avdeeff: iPod Culture:Issues of Sociability and Democratisation in the Musical Experience

Collins: "Get your geek on: What computer science methods can offer musicologists"

Harkins: The Sampler as Compositional Tool

Kirton: Technology and the Field of Popular Music Production

Maloy: "Stayin' Alive in Da Club": The Illegality and Hyperreality of Mashups

Industry

Letts: Who Sells Out?: Petra Haden in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

Sledmere: The struggle over talent in popular music

Stahl: Indentured Servants, Rich Whiners or Avatars of Private-Sector Democracy? Domination in the Recording Industry Examined Through the Critical Theory of Contract

Grossi: Popular music from the perspective of the fans

D'Amato: Money for what? An exploration in music crowdfunding or "P2P finance"

Rogers: Burning Out, Breaking Up, Fading Away: Musicians, Industry and Failure

Protest

Fairley: Away with protest song!

LeBlanc: "Dare To Be Free": The Dixie Chicks' Existential Conversion

Park: War, Gender and the Popular Song –with a focus on the Military Popular Song under the Total Mobilization System

Wheeler: PANEL: Sounds and Noise from the Edges--F*** the U.S.A.: The New Cosmopolitan Class and the Protest of Place

Furini: "The Overdub Tampering Committee and Plunderphonics: popular music and resistance in the postmodern age"

Hip Hop

Harbord: Is hip-hop the new minstrelsy?

Howard: From ghetto laboratory to the technosphere

Lutzu: Poietic processes in sample-based hip-hop

Other

Biddle: Between musicology and museology: archives, repertories and the logic of the musical fetish

Zahova: Why Do Words Have Songs?

Lebrun: Popular music festivals, 'alternative' identities and audience participation

Hill:Hippies, Inc.: San Francisco and the Commodification of the 60s

Shumway: The San Francisco Sound: the Politics and Aesthetics of Place

Webb: Infected by the seed of post-punk bohemia: Nick Cave and the milieu culture of early 1980s London

Butler: The Reception of the Use of Technology in the work of Jimi Hendrix

I doubt very much I will be able to see all of these, but I will try. Come along if you are in England/Liverpool between 13^th and 17^th July 2009.

Song of the Moment: Fifty in Five

UPDATED: I sit here and listen to the last song on the new Hilltop Hoods CD – Fifty in Five off the album State of the Art – and I am literally speechless.

Listen to this song. Read the lyrics.

This is a narrative about humanity. My interpretation of the title is that it reflects on the last fifty years of world events in five minutes and it does so with absolute style and precision.

I was listening to it repeatedly last night knowing that I wanted to write about it and yet hours later still feel that I cannot find the words to do it justice. I had thought to write up something about all of the individual events that the lyrics cover but what I really want to write about is the emotion that this song brings out in me. This song makes me feel sad, angry, disappointed and worried. The lack of repetition and the lack of chorus are indicative of the fact that this song is not an anthem. It is not there to make us want to do something. It does not try to bring people together to make a positive change. It is the epitome of sadness and the confronting, bitter truth.

The sheer volume of lyrics is overwhelming. I have written shorter essays than this. They cover an enormous range of topics and events with an international perspective that shows the wide spread damage and devastation of the corruption and decay of modern society. I hesitate to give examples because the nature of the lyrics are to mention so much in such a short space that not one thing is given priority over another; it is a list. I wonder if the composers had to restrict themselves and had to leave things out. Ironically we might applaud the level of detail and quantity of information they have included and yet the song itself is written to speak of the sheer dissatisfaction of how so much wrong has occurred in just fifty years.

It mentions the future but only in context and connection with the past. It is not at all hope for what may change or what may come next. It tells us how we have set ourselves up to fail. How stupidity, ignorance, lack of leadership and ourselves are to blame for what comes next: ‘the generation next will degenerate and die’.

In sections the song talks about the distractions that prevent us from seeing the destruction that is before us. Things like the Macerena, superman, chicken dance and botox. The song reflects on the youth – women getting fake tits and young kids in detox. My interpretation is that references to technology including the internet and 3g cellular phones are also negative statements about distractions and how we have the technology to communicate and yet we just don’t in the way that matters. The reference to how ‘mp3s saw the death of an industry’ reflects on how the loss of the music industry renders poets/musicians incapable of helping us to make sense of the world and to be the agents of social change that we so desperately need.

Towards the end, the lyrics move from merely being a list to using cultural references to characterise the distraction of society. It warps into text that includes numerous references to horror movie titles and the names of drugs – aspects of our culture that reflect the sentiments of the song: the terror and dependence that we suffer. At the height of the passion, questions are asked - a rhetorical question: 'what happened to the love?' and another that asks 'what happened to the cubs?' [they were fed to the wolves]. Questioning the loss of the positive motivations of the 1960's and the focus on the needs of children, brings an element of uncertainty to the lyrics when concepts rather than events are considered.

The musicality of the song is well worth mentioning too.

As with most hip hop, the lyrics flow without a break but here the lack of pauses and the perpetual motion illustrate how these events have taken place one after the other without room for reflection, without the chance to stop and take account of what’s happening. The flood of events and the flood of lyrics parallel a world that does not have a chance to take its breath.

At one stage the lead singer sounds like he is gritting or clenching his teeth in frustration or disgust. He is easily heard above the music but as the song builds he becomes louder, more predominant and has more and more angst. The incomprehensible sweet whispering layered above the tale reminds me of the sugar coating of the media but perhaps is really meant to be the spoonful of sugar to be taken with the medicine.

The music has moments that seem regular – when it is not overwhelming and provides a solid background to the text. At others times there are distinct samples and the integration of instruments and styles – a sample of Martin Luther King (the loss of hope), John F Kennedy (a small, barely audible sample that depicts that we can no longer hear or remember what he said), groaning/moaning (pain), helicopters, rifles, a bomb (war), a brass line from an 'olden days' song at the same time as the discussion of right wing overlords and refugees, the building of tension and urgency by the use of piano chords and the interposing of another voice which yells out key words (adding emphasis and trying to get our attention).

Indeed the dynamics of the song depend heavily on the change of colours in the underlying score with little change in the pitch and speed of the vocalist and drums that have a consistent tempo. The song does not noticeably speed up but rather the consistency illustrates the persistence and unrelenting nature of the chaos that we face.

When discussing the ozone layer and the how the earth is cooking itself the music becomes harsh and percussive which reflects the pain, discomfort and discord of the global suicide that is taking place.

Finally, at key points the music goes quiet with a small number of instruments playing a thin or light melody in the background. This gives the lyrics the space to make some points stand out from others: ‘A blowjob brought about the fall of a dynasty, and Mp3s saw the fall of an industry... Rich bleeding the kind, the blind leading the blind and history competes, no competing with time... The government and church on which we try to rely, both rob us til it hurts chasing lie after lie.’

The song finishes with resignation: ‘Can you believe what we have become? As we walk into the sun.’ The phrasing here speaks of how things are going to get worse; disgust and disbelief; and makes the statement that the end is here. This part is sung by a different vocalist which completely removes it from the body of the song.

The music at the end of the song is a solo piano - this contrasts dramatically with the thick and heavy instruments that come before it. The sound is much more melodic and has a sense of simplicity about it. The music in this section is far less challenging - more mainstream and verging on romantic in nature - perhaps highlighting the idea that this is the part of the message that everyone should hear or that we over romanticise the idea that humanity is good or that it will survive despite it all.

The contrast between the vocals and music in the last section of the song compared with what has occurred earlier depict how removed we are from our own history - how we look on these events as though they are someone elses responsibility and someone elses past. The very last vocal sound is a breath - the last gasp of air or a sigh - perhaps this the death of humanity or at least an expression of disappointment.

This is, at the same time, the most brilliant and yet most awful political song I have heard. I became very emotional after I listened to it tonight. I HATE THIS.

FUCK.

________

I was having trouble working out the origin of the brass line that I refer to above as the 'olden days' song as well as the whispering voice that is layered over the top.

Given the frequency of the whispering voice it is likely that this is the sample from a 1960s song called 2010 referred to in the following articles - see: GroopieBlog, Hilltop Hoods Preview State of the Art Tracks (6 April 2009) <http://www.pagesonline.it/groupieblog/archives/1880> at 19 June 2009 & all aussie hip hop blog, State of the Art Preview (10 June 2009) <http://allaussiehiphop.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/state-of-the-art-album-preview/> at 19 June 2009. There are 27 songs listed with this title on iTunes - none of these appear to be the original all having release dates after 1990.

The brass line is also an important sample. While I realise the parameters of the song suggest that only samples from the past 50 years are likely to be included this seems to be a type of sound much older than the 1960s - it has a serenade feel to it. It verges on a type of 'national anthem' and to me feels more like something from the 1920s or 1950s.

These are important samples to this song and I would like to trace their origins - much like the need for this song to trace society's past to reach a conclusion. The architecture of the internet and the lack of copyright registrations prevent me from knowing with certainty where they have come from. While I do not, at this point, wish to delve into a detailed discussion of sampling and copyright law (even though I could!) it is worth noting these as examples of how this form of culture can take elements of the past and say something new with them, provided the regulatory forces at work enable that to happen.

I was also thinking about the place of this song on the CD. It is the last track and my first thought was that this was because it is the most serious of the songs - it is different from the content of the other tracks at least in its overt nature. On a more artistic level perhaps it is located at the end of the CD because this is the last thing, we as a society, want to hear or pay attention to - or because time is running out and our responses will undoubtedly be at the last minute.

I also took time to reflect on the fact that it is at the end of the CD from a tangible format perspective. Consider for a moment the nature of pay per song download stores and how unlikely it is that those that consume music on a song by song basis will ever hear this. Even the disconnection from the printed lyrics in the digital age presents a major hurdle to the consumption of the message of this song - lyric sites are on the web but their accuracy can sometimes be questionable.

A major label would definately hesitate to release this as a single but hopefully Golden Era Records don't. The loss of the tangible format presents may complications including the fact that things we need to hear cannot be packaged with the things we choose to hear - so many young kids will never hear this song - the world and the industry have indeed changed: we need to make it for the better.

[Imagine how long it took to compose this - the hard work and the dedication.... It is so rare to have a contemporary song so rich in detail; artistic and powerful... Will this make it to the mainstream media?...Imagine the beauty of the mashup that could be done with the video to this song... I could go on forever about this track but I have to stop here... for now...]

What’s the Deal with Record Labels?

Many of us sit back and wonder why it is that record labels act the way they do. I have written earlier about how the corporations law prevents them from making decisions based on morals and forces them to consider profits above all else. But what are the impacts for musicians and the music?

The Standard Deal
Typically record labels offer ‘standard’ deals to artists (especially the unknown ones) that have unfair and onerous conditions. Many artists, with the exception of those with a very savy manager or significant popularity, walk into a record label’s office prepared to accept any terms they offer. The artist believes that without their support they simply cannot create but the short term gains most often outweigh the long term benefits. Indeed it is not until sometime later, once the contract is in full swing, that they can really assess their needs compared to what they are being offered and by then it is generally too late.

All but the most successful artists are forced to work under terms which are financially unsustainable and grossly unfair, sometimes without access to resources that would help them to produce better music and without the ability to renegotiate.

With the exception of those that have an agreement that would be considered in law to be ‘unconscionable’, there is little that can be done but to find ways around the conditions that have been imposed.

Some artists seek the advice of organisations such as the Musicians Union but the contracts which already underfoot, are strict in their terms and there is little that can be done to negotiate a better deal.

Artists under standard contracts are left with little option but to rely on alternative forms of revenue – this has typically been in the form of concert ticket sales and merchandising which until recently were not part of recording contracts.

Those lucky enough to have a short term contract may have the opportunity to reconsider their options and look around for another label but this process itself is stressful with the old label looking over their shoulder.

For those artists that do have some success and are able to prove their worth, the length of the deal which often has clauses that enable the label to keep extending the current arrangements (option clauses) means they are trapped and must continue to work under the same conditions regardless of whether their needs or abilities have changed.

For others, those that are not as successful, the contracts may still be extended despite the fact that the label has no intention of supporting them in the future and yet they are not able to sign with another label or go out on their own as an independent.

Furthermore, even the most successful artists are forced to make ‘artistic compromises’ – in short this has meant that the labels can refuse to release music that they consider unworthy of financial investment or unlikely to be popular with the masses. For political music this is very problematic with songs deemed too controversial unlikely to be released unless they have an associated marketing angle.

One artist famous for a dispute with his record label is Prince/The Artist Formerly Known As Prince. Prince was in dispute with his record label, Warner Brothers, who had trademarked his name and owned all associated rights to the music marketed under that name. I remember well the jokes that many in the industry made at the time asking why he would pick the Love Symbol and such a silly name. The reason was that his record label could hold him to the contract if he used the name 'Prince'. By changing his name in this way he gained the benefit of both avoiding the terms of the contract he was in while negotiations were taking place and continuing to work based on the reputation he had already built.

However for most artists the results of ‘corporate patronage and indentured servitude’ are catastrophic. They are unable to plan their lives as they do not know from one day to the next what will be happening. They have terms that are financially unsustainable and demanding commitments that they cannot meet. Some struggle to work with the little that they have and others elect non performance. Pure and complete non performance of a contract is a breach of the agreement but by sabotaging themselves - writing poor songs, being unreliable, difficult to work with and generally uncooperative - some artists may be released from their deals. Others are retained, perhaps out of spite, and all lose whatever reputation they have developed to that point. They suffer career paralysis and eventually their popularity dies.

In all circumstances record labels control the recording copyrights and what was done in the past continues to be the property of the record label so the labels continue to reap the profits despite the ongoing frustration of the artist.

Enter the Internet
Up until the last decade this was the fate of the majority of musicians. However the internet has transformed the options for artists. They are much more likely to be able succeed without the support of major labels, for the most part superstar status still depends on it, but many more are able to connect with their fans and give them a reason to buy their music without having to enter into deals that are uncompromising and unfair. Those that were signed to a major label in the past, Nine Inch Nails and Trent Reznor being one such example, are refusing to get back into bed with the record labels knowing that they have the reputation, intelligence and experience which enables them to go forward without the help of others.

Indeed those that are signed to major labels can take advantage of this new form of communication. One recent example of this is DJ Danger Mouse who was prevented from releasing his new album because of a dispute with his record label. Instead he released a CD case with an extensive booklet of photographs and a blank disk, telling consumers to ‘Use It As You Will’ – implying that as the music was available on file sharing networks that they should feel free to download and burn a copy.

Some have stated that the digital environment creates a ‘competition issue’. Those that are familiar with trade practices law will know that many countries attempt to regulate markets to ensure that they do not become too concentrated – in Australia it is the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) while in the USA it is the Sherman Act (1890). (Kazaa unsuccessfully argued anti trust grounds in an early MGM v Grokster decision [1]).

The internet means that record labels are in competition with the entire world. It has the potential to create a much more open marketplace where there is far less control and concentration. While on the one hand this alters the power of record labels to dictate the terms, it also dissipates the potential for artists to penetrate the global market place and for some forms of music, particularly the political, this may have associated consequences.

The New Deal
Record labels have not responded well to the digital environment and the competition that they are now faced with. The tendency has been to do as much as possible to constrict the competition – lawsuits against emerging technology are just one part of this equation – the move to 360 degree contracts where they control every aspect of a musicians career and can make money from all parts of their business has been another.

But not all labels are taking that approach. There are number of record labels, such as Magnatune (‘We’re Not Evil’), that are attempting to work with artists rather than exploit them. This has typically meant less financial investment but greater understanding for the uniqueness of some artists and the need to ensure that they are comfortable with their contractual arrangements. However many artists are scared and do not know enough about these labels to make the change, perhaps more time will help them to see that they do not operate in the same way as the record labels of the past.

What Does it Mean for the Music?
Music is and has always been intangible. It is non rivalrous meaning that it can be duplicated without loss of quality and in infinite quantity. The artificial scarcity that was created by the reduction to material form (the CD) has now largely been replaced with unfettered and cheap supply. It is only natural that music should want to be free, to explore and communicate with as many people as it wants, and yet it remains in an environment where it can be difficult to assess who will permit this and who won’t.

Some, those of the old school, get angry with those that seek to enable the music to live out its intangibility. Some seek to enable the intangibility but fail to consider the implications of the lack of financial support that is needed to sustain a professional sector of creators. Others seek the mid point. They know that there needs to be more freedom and are willing to give it but also seek to create an environment in which the music is able to have some support without being dominated and controlled to the point where it can no longer reach its true potential. Those in this mid ground advocate a collective licensing regime. Whilst requiring detailed planning and foresight it is nonetheless achievable and would make an enourmous difference to the choices that are currently in place.

A collective licensing regime has been advocated by the likes of Netanel [2], Fisher [3], Lessig [4], the Electronic Frontiers Foundation and The Songwriters Association of Canada. Experiments have taken place in countries such as Canada and China (Fisher) and in the USA recent steps have been taken to trial different versions in colleges as a means to reduce illegal file sharing by students (Choruss).

While there is a way to go yet, these developments are both positive and essential. While some forms of music, the emotive and purely entertaining forms, will be produced in most conditions due to their social function, they can be produced to a higher standard under better conditions. Other forms of music, such as political music, require greater attention. This form of music in particular has an important social function but under negative community conditions – capitalism, closed or structurally deterministic architecture, neoclassicist copyright law and prohibitive social norms – it cannot achieve its potential as an agent for social change.

If the major record labels are going to have a place in musicians' lives in the future, they need to act now because they are running out of time. It is impossible to unscramble an egg - things will never return to the way they were before. It is time the labels realised this and got on with helping musicians to achieve their goals.

Further Reading

[1] Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al v Grokster Ltd et al 269 F.Supp. 2d 1213; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11329; Copy. L. Rep (CCH) P28,634; 2003-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P74,081

[2] N W Netanel, ‘Impose a Noncommerical Use Levy to Allow Free P2P File-Swapping and Remixing’ (2003-2004) Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 1-84

[3] William W. Fisher III, Promises to Keep (2004)

[4] Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity (2004) 301

ArsTechnica, Canadian artists' new/old plan: $5 to share music legally (24 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/canadian-songwriters-plan-5-to-share-music-legally.ars> at 29 March 2009

Electronic Frontiers Foundation, File Sharing: It’s Music to our Ears, Making p2p Pay Artists (2004) <http://www.eff.org/share/compensation.php> at 12 April 2006

EFF Deeplinks, More on Choruss, Pro and Con (20 March 2009) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/more-choruss-pro-and-con> at 11 April 2009

EFF Deeplinks, Danger Mouse Releases a Blank CD-R (18 May 2009) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/05/danger-mouse-inducem> at 29 May 2009

Future of Music Coalition, Major Label Contract Clause Critique (2001) <http://www.futureofmusic.org/contractcrit.cfm> at 16 June 2009

OpenContentAustraliaResearchReview, Capitalism and the Alcoholism of the Music Industry (18 May 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/05/capitalism-and-alcoholism-of-music.html> at 16 June 2009

Open Content Australia, Year in Review: Recording Contracts (18 December 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/12/year-in-review-recording-contracts.html > at 16 June 2009

TechDirt, My Keynote At The (RIAA Sponsored) Leadership Music Digital Summit (30 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090422/0407024607.shtml> at 3 May 2009

TechDirt, U2 Manager: Free Is The Enemy Of Good; And It's Moral To Protect Old Business Models (29 May 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090528/1919455049.shtml> at 31 May 2009

Testimony of William W. Fisher III before theSubcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness Committee on Education and the WorkforceHearing on: The Internet and the College Campus: How the Entertainment Industry and Higher Education are Working to Combat Illegal Piracy (26 September 2006) <http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/109th/21st/piracy092606/fisher.htm> at 17 October 2006

The Dues, “Record Earning” Deemed Oxymoronic (Issue 9 Vol 1) March 2006 <http://www.musicians.asn.au/ezine/archives/issue9/page2.html> at 16 June 2009

The Dues, How to Make it To The Top and Still End Up in Debt (Issue 2 Vol 1) <http://www.musicians.asn.au/ezine/archives/issue2/> at 16 June 2009

Wikipedia, Prince (musician) (14 June 2009) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_(musician)> at 16 June 2009

Good Copy Bad Copy<http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/> at 22 April 2008

Magnatune <http://www.magnatune.com/> at 16 June 2009

Musicians Union of Australia <http://www.musicians.asn.au/union/index.html> at 16 June 2009

Overseeing the Three Strikes Policies

There were some interesting developments in France recently with the Constitutional Council refusing parts of the proposed three strikes legislation. I have written earlier about the growing trend to disconnect users from the internet and some of the implications this is likely to have.

The policy itself is flawed for a number of reasons. One concern is the fact that it prevents people from communicating on a whole range of levels – as we all know internet access is a fundamental component of modern life and has a much greater social function than simply the sharing of music. It is the most open and immediate form of communication available enabling each and every person to communicate with friends, family, their local communities, their interest groups, the government and the world at large. Being disconnected from the internet because of the sharing of culture, from a basic free speech perspective, is an unjustifiable and disproportionate loss of human rights.

Furthermore with respect to the sharing of culture itself, the policy is both counter intuitive and counter productive.

The purpose of culture is to communicate. The underlying aim of entertainment or education is secondary to the broader aim of enabling connections and the exchange of ideas. Disconnecting users undermines the very intent of producing culture in the first place. Simply put, the sharing of culture is a natural and inherent component of its creation – most (but not all) artists recognise the importance of this but corporations typically do not.

In addition, these policies are counterproductive. Reactionary punishment for something that has occurred in the past is only of benefit when it outweighs the costs. While cutting a user off the internet may act as a deterrent to that person and perhaps others in the future, the more likely result is one in which alternative means of sharing are developed.

Disconnecting one user from the internet may simply result in another household member needing to have the internet connection in their name. It remains impossible to police who in that household is using the internet at a particular moment in time and as such it is unlikely to prevent the offender from sharing culture again in the future. The ever increasing development of digital devices with vast storage capacity means that the sharing of culture can take place on or off the internet and disconnections are more likely to make this harder to track and monetise than stop it from happening altogether.

The bigger problem and one that the music industry appears to either be ignoring or ignorant of, is that this policy actually stops users from consuming culture in ‘legitimate ways’. Not having internet access at all prevents users from accessing iTunes just as much as it stops them from using BitTorrent or Limewire. The collateral damage of these policies is therefore greater than what their implementation can achieve.

Countries that consider disconnection as the most appropriate sanction include France, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea. While France and New Zealand are both in the process of reworking their legislation, Taiwan has passed laws which appear to introduce a non mandatory disconnection regime. South Korea is the only country with a mandatory policy in place at present. In Ireland one ISP has agreed to implement a three strikes policy that includes disconnections, as part of a settlement agreement for a secondary copyright liability claim. Steps to introduce the policy nationwide have not been successful to date. It has also been reported that Italy is considering the introduction of a three strikes policy which has the ultimate penalty of disconnection.

In other countries, alternative penalties are being considered. The recording industry in the United States is in the process of trying to get ISPs to voluntarily embrace the policy but without disconnections. Some six month after the initial announcement not one ISP has agreed to implement the process. Similar moves are underfoot in the UK with increasing pressure on the government to introduce the policy, with the slow down of internet connections rather than disconnection being the ultimate sanction. Early next week the final Digital Britain Report is expected to recommend the introduction of this policy.

In all of these circumstances there is a common concern regarding the lack of judicial oversight. It is imperative that we ask the questions: why do we have judges and why is it okay that they be removed from this process?

Speaking broadly about legal systems in general, regardless of whether they are adversarial or inquisitorial, judges take a particular place in the system of democracy. Their independence from government and institutions (including corporations) is fundamental to their role. They are adjudicators that decide disputes based on evidence according to the laws which (in theory?) reflect the standards of the community. Largely only accountable through the media or on appeals, those that are placed in this position of authority must have extensive training in their field(s). In some areas of law strict liability is imposed by the legislature which removes their discretion however in many other areas they must have the capacity to make a qualitative determination of often complex and detailed events. The reasoning for their decisions forms a basis of knowledge on which others can act in the future to exercise their rights.

The desire of the content industry to remove the judiciary from the determination of copyright disputes is primarily born from concerns about efficiency and cost. In effect the three strikes policies seek to create a strict liability offence for the sharing of culture – where the presumption is of guilt and the offence proved by default rather than the more typical approach of innocence as a presumption. Much like a speeding ticket, the desire is to place the liability on the holder of the internet account without the opportunity for it to be rebutted. But here there is often more than one driver, there could be many potential users of an account and without the opportunity to defend an accusation, there remains implicit potential for injustice. Indeed, the name 'Graduated Response' appears to be a misnomer - there is no real graduation - there are 2 warnings and then the ultimate price is paid.

The costs of justice are well known. As has been well evidenced and a matter of much contention in the mass lawsuit campaign against individual users, the average person simply does not have the financial resources to defend themselves against civil litigation by major record labels - instead being forced to settle disputes regardless of whether they were personally liable. While this system was excruciatingly imperfect it nonetheless allowed some opportunity for redress.

The recording industry incurred costs too. While those that were forced to settle most likely covered some of the costs involved in their investigation, the initiation of John/Jane Doe lawsuits, the sending out of letters of demand and the running costs of the settlement payment centre, these expenses nonetheless existed and detracted from the viability of the initiative. It seems there was also momentum and assistance building for those seeking to defend these actions and this would have added significantly to the costs of the program, only being offset by the potential for massive damages payouts in the event that the lawsuit was successful.

The other aspect to the judicial system is time. There is often a significant delay between the commencement of litigation and the time when a matter is heard. Furthermore, there are often delays in the hearing of cases with some taking a number of months and there is an extensive delay in the hearing of appeals which are more likely in emerging areas of law or contention.

The aim of the three strikes policies are therefore to allow for the quick and inexpensive determination of disputes. Having said that; the French proposal was expected to cost $40 million to implement annually – money that should be in the pockets of artists. But as a society, what price do we place on free speech? Is this the type of human right that should be calculated quickly and cheaply?

Of course the content industry would respond with arguments about ‘theft’ and ‘property’. But as a community are we blind to the inherent implications of these policies? In my view the court system, imperfections and all, is a fundamental aspect of democracy and the oversight of the judiciary is of paramount importance to a legislative system corrupted by capitalism. Every bureaucracy makes mistakes and no matter what procedures are in place there remains opportunity for human and technological error and there must be a forum to redress complaints. The vulnerable and the weak need these avenues to remain open and we are all in that position when major corporations collude to achieve their profit lines. While the majority of internet connections are in the name of the parents, it is the children that will suffer.

France has seen the need for continued involvement of dispute resolution mechanisms, but so far, is the only country to have done so.

Further Reading

FRANCE
The New York Times, French Council Defangs Plan to Crack Down on Internet Piracy (10 June 2009) <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/technology/internet/11net.html?_r=1> at 12 June 2009

TechDirt, French Constitutional Council Guts 'Three Strikes' As Unconstitutional (10 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090610/1103345185.shtml> at 12 June 2009

The Register, France suspends Three Strikes (10 June 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/10/france_three_strikes_hadopi_suspended/> at 12 June 2009

ZeroPaid, France’s Top Court Rules “Three-Strikes” Unconstitutional (10 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86401/frances-top-court-rules-three-strikes-unconstitutional/> at 12 June 2009

WashingtonPost/The Associated Press, New French law on Internet piracy meets skepticism (21 May 2009) <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/21/AR2009052101770.html> at 29 May 2009

ZeroPaid, French Minister - Three Strikes Law Would See 1000 Disconnections Daily (24 May 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86288/french-minister-three-strikes-law-would-see-1000-disconnections-daily/> at 28 May 2009

ZeroPaid, French Arts Community Revolts Against French Three Strikes Legislation (30 April 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86130/french-arts-community-revolts-against-french-three-strikes-legislation/> at 3 May 2009

ZeroPaid, French ISPs: 'Three-Strikes' will cost us $40 mill Annually (10 March 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/10047/French+ISPs%3A+%27Three-Strikes%27+will+Cost+Us+%2440mill+Annually> at 12 March 2009

ITALY
TechDirt, Italian Politicians Look To Push Through French-Style 3 Strikes Law (21 January 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/0834043477.shtml> at 24 January 2009

UK
TechDirt, Study Says File Sharers Would Ignore Warning Letters; Recording Industry Gets The Wrong Message (10 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090610/0234295184.shtml> at 12 June 2009

ZeroPaid, UK ISP: Idea of Stopping File-Sharing is “Very Naive” (9 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86388/uk-isp-idea-of-stopping-file-sharing-is-very-naive/> at 12 June 2009

TechDirt, British Government Says No To Three Strikes (5 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1019495131.shtml> at 8 June 2009

BBC News, Web pirates placed in 'slow lane' (4 June 2009) <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8083866.stm> at 8 June 2009

ZeroPaid, UK Minister Says “Three-Strikes” too Draconian (5 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86371/uk-minister-says-three-strikes-too-draconian/> at 8 June 2009

ArsTechnica, UK ISPs refuse to play Internet copyright cops (12 May 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/uk-isps-refuse-to-play-internet-copyright-cops.ars> at 15 May 2009

IRELAND
TechDirt, Irish ISPs Point Out They're Under No Obligation To Follow Three Strikes Policy (17 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090315/2011434125.shtml> at 18 March 2009

The Register, Irish ISPs rally against record label anti-piracy threat (17 March 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/17/irish_isps_rally_against_irma_threats/> at 18 March 2009

Digital Music News, Irish ISPs Battle Back Against Three-Strikes... (19 March 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/031809irish> at 20 March 2009

Billboard.biz, Irish ISPs Reject Labels' 'Three Strikes' Demand (19 March 2009) <http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3icd8ec261b0f1e7f730729c488530e3ba> at 20 March 2009

ArsTechnica, Blackout Ireland rallies support against P2P disconnections (5 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/blackout-ireland-rallies-support-against-p2p-disconnections.ars> at 6 March 2009

Slyck, Ireland says Yes, Germany No to 3 Strikes (3 February 2009) <http://www.slyck.com/story1829_Ireland_says_Yes_Germany_No_to_3_Strikes> at 4 February 2009

The Register, Irish ISP Eircom in 'three strikes' file sharer crackdown (3 February 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/03/eircom_agrees_to_three_strikes_enforcement/> at 4 February 2009

Digital Music News, Big Precedent: Irish ISP Adopting Three Strikes... (30 January 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/012909eircom> at 31 January 2009

TechDirt, Irish ISP Accused Of Copyright Violations Agrees To Implement Three Strikes (29 January 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090128/1855013560.shtml> at 31 January 2009

ZeroPaid, Irish ISP Agrees to Three-Strikes Policy For File-Sharers (29 January 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9984/Irish+ISP+Agrees+to+Three-Strikes+Policy+for+File-Sharers> at 31 January 2009

EFF Deeplinks, Irish ISP Agrees to Three Strikes Against Its Customers (28 January 2009) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/irish-isp-agrees-three-strikes-against-its-users> at 30 January 2009

USA
Digital Music News, France Says No, But What About the US? (11 June 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/061009us> at 12 June 2009

Digital Music News, 6 Months, 0 Disconnecting ISPs: RIAA Still Coming Up Short... (4 June 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/06020riaa> at 8 June 2009

TechDirt, Six Months And Still No ISPs Officially Signed Up On The RIAA's Program (4 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0137485124.shtml> at 8 June 2009

NEW ZEALAND
Computerworld, Work continues on Copyright Act (4 May 2009) <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/593AE7BB01CE30EBCC2575AB0077BDC2> at 6 May 2009

TechDirt, New Zealand Denies It's Scrapping Copyright Laws (4 May 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090504/0440064740.shtml> at 5 May 2009

National Business Review, Entire Copyright Act to be scrapped (1 May 2009) <http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/entire-copyright-act-be-scrapped-101820> at 3 May 2009

TechDirt, New Zealand Officials To Scrap Copyright Law; Start From Scratch (30 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090430/1400034708.shtml> at 3 May 2009

ArsTechnica, "3 strikes" strikes out in NZ as government yanks law (23 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/3-strikes-strikes-out-in-nz-as-government-yanks-law.ars> at 29 March 2009

TechDirt, Musicians In New Zealand Protesting 'Guilt Upon Accusation' Plan (6 January 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090105/1232323289.shtml> at 7 January 2009

SOUTH KOREA
ZeroPaid, South Korea to Become 1st Country with "Three Strikes" for File Sharers? (29 March 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/85895/south-korea-to-become-1st-country-with-three-strikes-for-file-sharers/> at 30 March 2009

TechDirt, South Korea The Latest To Introduce Three Strikes Plan (11 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090311/0213404068.shtml> at 12 March 2009

TAIWAN
ZeroPaid, Taiwan Passes “Three-Strikes” Anti-P2P law (28 April 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86072/taiwan-passes-three-strikes-anti-p2p-law/> at 29 April 2009

TechDirt, Taiwan Sorta, But Not Really, Approves Three Strikes Law (28 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090427/1843094669.shtml> at 29 April 2009

OTHER
The Register, Billy Bragg: Three-strikes lobbying is 'shameful' (20 May 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/20/bragg_three_strikes/> at 22 May 2009

ZeroPaid, U2’s Band Manager Praises France’s “Three-Strikes” Law (8 April 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/85953/u2s-band-manager-praises-frances-three-strikes-law/> at 11 April 2009

ArsTechnica, Google: Internet disconnection a "disproportionate" penalty (17 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/google-cutting-internet-access-for-p2p-abuse-disproportionate.ars> at 23 March 2009

ArsTechnica, 37% of P2P users say they'll ignore disconnection threats (18 January 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20090118-37-of-p2p-users-say-theyll-ignore-disconnection-threats.html> at 21 January 2009

OpenContentAustraliaResearchReview, Graduated Response Update (29 March 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/03/graduated-response-update.html>at 14 June 2009

OpenContentAustralia, NZ Delays Guilt Upon Accusation (25 February 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/02/nz-delays-guilt-upon-accusation.html> at 29 March 2009

Digital Music News, Pirate Bay Martyrdom Continues... The Decision Stands (12 June 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/061109pirate> at 12 June 2009

The Local, 'Pirate Bay judge not biased': court (8 June 2009) <http://www.thelocal.se/19946/20090608/> at 12 June 2009

ZeroPaid, Court Review Says Pirate Bay Trial Judge Not Biased (8 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86385/court-review-says-pirate-bay-trial-judge-not-biased/> at 9 June 2009

EFF, RIAA v. The People: Five Years Later - White Paper (September 2008)
<http://www.eff.org/wp/riaa-v-people-years-later> at 14 June 2009

Free Music Archive.

I am a few days from really being back on this space but thought to let you know about the Free Music Archive. This site was started by WFMU, a freeform radio station in the United States.

The latest Creative Commons newsletter advises that the site was launched in April 2009. It hosts tracks available as free downloads using a number of licenses including Creative Commons. Users can download from a catalogue of 8,659 tracks (it was launched with 5,000 songs).

The site looks good but has some way to go in terms of growth and development. Nine thousand tracks is a good start but small compared to other sites such as Jamendo which, at present, hosts some 20,478 albums.

Like Jamendo, the Free Music Archive seeks to embrace new business models. It is intended that links will be provided enabling users to buy the full album and/or giving users the option of tipping an artist by making a deposit to the artists’ PayPal account (from what I can see these are not yet in place). Artist profiles also include tourdates allowing fans to both enjoy their art and support creators/performers by attending concerts.

Another good thing about the site is the album/track descriptions - these are much more detailed than what is found on many other sites including iTunes, eMusic and file sharing networks. The search function allows for key word searching of both the descriptions and the tracks which is a big improvement in terms of the architecture needed to help listeners find political music. One could well imagine the power of combing this design attribute with a much larger catalogue.

This site is in its infancy but is one to watch in the future.Take a look around and be exposed to some new independent artists. But be careful first to check that the license conditions permit uses that suit your needs.

More Information
Free Music Archive <http://freemusicarchive.org/>

Jamendo <http://www.jamendo.com/en/>

Off The Grid

You may notice that this weekend I have posted a number of new articles that some might say take a fresh approach to thinking about political music and the digital environment. I hope you enjoy them.

I am, however, preparing for a conference and for the next two weeks will be off the grid unless something major happens on the internet. I apologise for leaving this space for the moment. Please take a look at my other site OpenContentAustralia http://www.ocaustralia.blogspot.com/ at the end of the month to catch up on other developments in this area.

Capitalism and the Alcoholism of the Music Industry.

UPDATED: Imagine, if you will, the digital music environment as a person. The body, by analogy, is the music industry. The brain is controlled by the directors of the four major record labels with a small space for independents. The speech and actions of this person are therefore predominantly made and influenced by those in the majority who themselves are ‘under the influence’ of capitalism. Indeed this greed is an illness which well equates to alcoholism.

Reflect a little on what this person says and does. The expression is predominantly of one type – it talks about love, it talks about pain, personal struggle, and it entertains. It is often repetitive, reminiscing about times past and sometimes abusive. Much like a real person heavily intoxicated by alcohol it cannot rationalise the world’s events, it focuses on things that are subjective and is incapable of holding a sustained conversation about critical issues that face society.

It is unstable, it is obsessed with getting more of the substance which keeps it feeling this way. It is constantly reaching for the bottle – drinking every last drop of musician’s talent and then discarding them for another over and over again. Its behaviour fractures communities and it offers itself as a poor example to the young people around it who, through ongoing exposure, see this as the normal, as the acceptable and as the example by which others should live.

But it cannot see itself in the mirror. It is blind drunk and beyond being able to help itself. It has a poor memory of the events that have taken place in the past and has not learnt from its mistakes.

Capitalism is the music industry’s alcohol. Its dependency drives the need for it to get more all the time – so why does it act in such a destructive way? The answer lies within the structure of the brain.

The directors of the four major record labels owe a fiduciary duty to their corporations. This duty compels them to act in a way that ensures the greatest profits are produced. In the process of securing more and more money they seek to influence others to create freer (liquor licensing) conditions. Public choice theory describes the cycle by which major corporations threaten and pressure governments to enact new laws which work in their favour and this person, this drunk, exerts its irrationality on those that should be more concerned with helping society.

Indeed it stands on the precipice of self destruction. Despite its addiction, despite its nonsensical speech, despite its influence over governments, it is failing at an ever increasing rate to get enough money into its system. Each year the revenue of the major labels drops. Some of this money is channelled into independent artists who are now able to take more control over the body to create new expression. But on the whole, the industry is getting sicker and sicker.

Furthermore, while the industry explores the new veins and arteries of its recently evolved limb - the digital environment - network neutrality and the contamination of this new part of the body by capitalist priorities threatens its adaptation forever.

So what can we do to help stop this illness?

One approach would be to take this person aside and speak to them about their problems. Explain to them that what they are doing and why it is so destructive. This has already been tried. Academics such as Professor Lawrence Lessig, Professor Terry Fisher and Professor Neil Netanel and many others in the mainstream media and on the internet have tried to ‘intervene’ by writing about these issues. There have been open arguments with representatives of the record labels. They are aware of our concerns and yet they still do nothing.

Another approach is to cut of its supply altogether. File sharing networks are, in essence, the means by which others try to ‘steal’ the alcohol away from this person. But the illegality of these actions only enrage it more and help to perpetuate the discord between the industry and the world leading it to demand more protection and support for its habit. Indeed, the music industry needs some money to function otherwise it will suffer from withdrawal symptoms and be incapable of functioning at all.

Another approach is to wait for capitalism to take its course. The Corporations law and the fiduciary responsibilities of the directors should, at some point, create a tipping point – an acquired brain injury. They should arrive at an equilibrium whereby these companies have lost so much money and are so desperate that they eventually help themselves by introducing a collective licensing regime. But I do not trust them to do this in a way that will be inclusive.

What we actually need is for the government to step in.

This body needs a new brain – there needs to be a shift in control of the industry itself to ensure a democratic governance structure is in place with the capacity to think and act rationally. This will enable the industry to be healthy with enough money to support a professional sector of creators that are free to express themselves to the best of their ability. We need the internal controls to be in place to ensure that in the future, adaptation to new technologies is quick and effective.

More Information
Wikipedia, Alcoholism (17 May 2009)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism> at 17 May 2009