General Music Chat

Well,

Don't get me wrong on this. Jimmy and Kramer et al, "ARE" buying the songs, and even if they ARE breaking the law technically on occassion, they are NOT sharing and distributing, and THEY HAVE purchased... so... these are not the guys the Labels are after.

I commend them for honoring the spirit of intellectual copyright laws.


.

Oh, well, I DO buy them before I share them for teaching. Does that mean I'm still in your good graces?

Get a rope !

He stole. Send him to jail.

Not jail. Why punish me via taxes for this guy? Put him to work filling in potholes that the Transportation budget can't seem to afford because other departments keep siphoning from it.

I know the law allows you to use a copyrighted CD just like you would a book...you can make a copy (only one) and let your friend use it as long as you're not using it at the same time. I myself never got into the whole download pirated music and movies thing because A) I think the quality is inferior B) I enjoy collecting stuff, especially albums and CDs C) I just think it's wrong. However I'm no saint; I've covered songs and not paid royalties. But if I do cover someone's song I make sure that I've at least purchased a copy of the original work (that's why I have over a thousand albums and two thousand CDs lol).

How long will it be before they decide to come after those of us who cover copywrote music. Didn't I hear somewhere here not long ago someone sued a band covering his songs ? How many of us would be found guilty of such atrocities ? MY FOOT !!!

It would be a shame to cause a man to lose everything he owned because he liked someones songs enough to play them for other people. The guy who got the big fine was just a dumbass.

But one more day in Paradise !!!!

well hmm

I don't know if I break the law or not, but there's a pretty stark difference between what I do, and what my co-workers do, for instance.

When I need to learn a song, I have a setup at home where my laptop is plugged thru my guitar workstation and then thru my mixer/recorder, so I can play along with youtube, pandora, or whatever medium, if it's audio from a PC, I can capture it. I use the recorder to capture backing tracks (free shared stuff), and I play along with youtube to learn. I only actually record free-use stuff though.

If needed, i PURCHASE the mp3 from amazon, on an as-needed basis.

Like Jimmy, I personally prefer a hard copy, either cd or whatever, especially when it comes to "listening" music. I buy a lot of older music and stick to digital remasters that are hi-fi, fay beyond what mp3 can do. I even have some 5.1 surround music dvd's for my home theater (Fragile by Yes ROCKS in 5.1!)

Now my co-workers...

they download everything, have GIGS, and one even has a TB of illegally downloaded music on a RHDD. I see them watching movies on their PC's that released in the theater only last week, and sometimes movies that aren't even out yet. They have no respect for the art, other than they like it, but they have this newfound sense of "entitlement". I don't care if they share it back out or not, what they do is WRONG. They also have the same cocky attitude when confronted about it.

usually it's equal to "I don't give a sh*t about starving musicians or big labels.."

I know I'm the odd man out, but I see it like speeding.

Yep, everyone does 70 on the highway. Nobody cares about the consequences. And yes, there are consequences. Doesn't change the fact that it's illegal. Doesn't change when someone gets pulled over and charged for it. I have no sympathy when someone bitches about getting a speeding ticket. a SUV hit a guard rail doing 70 a few weeks ago, killed 2 kids that we're in the back seat, not wearing seatbelts.. another law people willfully ignore.

Not that downloading a song results in 2 kids dying, but just that every illegal activity has victims, even if they are twice removed, as such with the starving artist.

Same can be said about smoking pot. A LOT of crime happened to get that pot into your hands. I'm ALL ABOUT legalizing it, because prohibition is the real cause of the organized crime that revolves around it, but at the same time, while it is illegal- there will be victims to get it into your hands, like it or not.

This is a problem I see with most americans.. we indulge selfishly while willfully ignoring the consequences our actions have on others. We even do it to each other, our fellow americans. It's no wonder we're so divided as a society.

How long will it be before they decide to come after those of us who cover copywrote music. Didn't I hear somewhere here not long ago someone sued a band covering his songs ? How many of us would be found guilty of such atrocities ? MY FOOT !!!

In the UK, pubs that have bands playing carry a PRS Music License. The reason for this is that if you perform music within your pub or bar, it is classed as a public performance. If you use copyright music – from live bands and karaoke through to music quizzes and background music (radio, CDs, TV and DVDs) – to lawfully do so you require the permission of the copyright owner for every piece of music being performed.

A PRS Music Licence allows you to lawfully play a vast repertoire of over five million songs, written and published by their members (of the Performing Right Society) and those of our affiliated societies throughout the world.

As a covers band, you don't need to do anything but perform. As long as the venue has a PRS License....you're lawfully permitted to play your covers!

How long will it be before they decide to come after those of us who cover copywrote music. Didn't I hear somewhere here not long ago someone sued a band covering his songs ? How many of us would be found guilty of such atrocities ? MY FOOT !!!

In the UK, pubs that have bands playing carry a PRS Music License. The reason for this is that if you perform music within your pub or bar, it is classed as a public performance. If you use copyright music – from live bands and karaoke through to music quizzes and background music (radio, CDs, TV and DVDs) – to lawfully do so you require the permission of the copyright owner for every piece of music being performed.

A PRS Music Licence allows you to lawfully play a vast repertoire of over five million songs, written and published by their members (of the Performing Right Society) and those of our affiliated societies throughout the world.

As a covers band, you don't need to do anything but perform. As long as the venue has a PRS License....you're lawfully permitted to play your covers!

I believe in the U.S. venues that hire cover bands must have some kind of license from ASCAP, otherwise they can be fined by ASCAP. I don't believe there's any way a cover band could be legally liable for playing the cover tunes. If so I have never heard of a cover band being sued, except in one instance where a very famous singer (I'll leave his name out for now) who went to some dive somewhere incognito and by chance heard a local band play one of his tunes and subsequently sued the band. This whole issue really burns me up. How on Earth did the CD industry ever get started when we know damn well how easy it is to download the CD's any where in the world? All of these lawsuits should be summarily dismissed. There's probably many millions of people all over the world who have downloaded music and movies for that matter. Suing a few people isn't going to solve the problem. What will solve the problem is creating a media (like vinyl for example) that are impossible to make perfect copies from. The digital age has been wonderful in many aspects, but it's been terrible for musicians in a lot of ways. If I ever become a recording artist (I'm hoping THIS year) I hope I have the opportunity to sell my music on something that is not downloadable. I wonder if recording artists who play their own material at a venue that has not bought some sort of license (ASCAP) could theoretically be sued? This whole thing is getting ridiculous. One of the very best ways to have your music promoted is by bands covering it. I wonder how many countless albums, CD's etc. have been bought by people after hearing that music covered by somebody else? I can't tell you how many times I've asked a performer about a specific song they performed and then subsequently I bought that album or CD. It's sad but the CD industry needs to be radically changed in some way to help musicians make a better living...

.

In America a performance license is required to PLAY covers live, in a public venue. The band is assumed to be profitting from the songs, and the copyright holder is due his share. It doesn't matter whether the VENUE has the license or the ARTIST. But one of them has to be covered under it.

Typically they go after the VENUE and NOT the ARTIST, as they expect the venue to have the deeper pockets, and with a line of bands coming and going, it makes more sense to go after the club to maintain the license. I am unaware of them ever going after an artist, when the club didn't have a license, but it is within their rights to do so.

I'm sure alot of musicians would be surprised the laws reach that deep!

.

I know a band here that only gigs by creating music on the spot. They have absolutely no prepared tunes, either cover or original. Maybe that's the safest way to go...

Up here in Canada P2P downloading is legal, uploading is not. There is an extra charge tacked on to the price of things like blank disks, Ipods etc. to offset downloading.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1025_3-5121479.html

Up here in Canada P2P downloading is legal, uploading is not. There is an extra charge tacked on to the price of things like blank disks, Ipods etc. to offset downloading.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1025_3-5121479.html

That's an interesting approach.

But who gets the extra fee? The government or the musician's unions?

.