All Songwriters Read And Stand Up

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nashstudio
  • Start date Start date
N

Nashstudio

New member
There is a thread going right now in the Recording Techniques section about songstealing and as a songwriter I am getting quite a bit of flack for standing up for my rights as a writer.. He is getting songs off napster which I am not entirely against

BUT!!!!!



Then he is ripping and burnning to CDs which is not only against the law but bullshit and wrong its stealing...

So hopfully some songwriters in here will help stand up for what is ours, our songs. There are no opinions when it comes to stealing its wrong and thats all there is to it....

"This is my hardwork, things I have lived, my art, it is not to be stolen. "





https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=26637
 
Nash,

Be honest here or else....have you EVER copied a friends album, tape, CD, etc?.......
 
Hmmm... well I avoid copying when I can (I have max 3 tapes copied from friends), but as a songwriter I would be happy to have people breaking the law to have my stuff :)

How much money is lost? Hmmm.... well royalties aren't THAT much of selling CD's (the record companies are the ones who make a big loss there) so there is no big financial issue for a musician/writer. Correct me if I'm wrong here...

And as for burning the stuff.... it would be upsetting if he was SELLING the 'compilations' that he made up...that I think is unacceptable.

It's a tricky situation. However, as MP3's go, I hear that the technology IS around to encrypt the things and license them out etc... so there IS a way of controlling the sound officially, but face it, you're never going to stop it.
 
As a prolific songwriter I have found Napster a blessing, it finally gives me chance to download songs from all the artists I had considered buying but obviously I can't afford 50 cd's per week.

If I enjoy the artist then I buy the cd, yes I may burn compilations for myself, so what. As far as I am concerned Napster is providing a wonderful service and Lars Ulrich can kiss my gonads the bald bastard!
 
Napster = Tool

Hey... I just did a ton of research on the whole Napster debate for an argumentative paper. I am angry at people who use Napster as a substitute for buying the CD. I know a friend who "owns" probobly 20-30 burned CDs, all from Napster. But Napster, just like any tool or technology, is not inherintly bad. It has it's good uses. I'm all for spreading live versions of concerts and songs VIA napster. Many bands encourage the trade of these tapes anyway. So it has it's good points; it just needs to be CONTROLLED.

Now, what the previous post said about only losing a little money because of a small royalty is a bad thing, methinks. Songwriting is not a 9-5 job... You don't punch in and punch out and get your two weeks paid vacation. If your songs aren't selling, YOU DON'T EAT THAT NIGHT. So it is EVEN MORE IMPORTANT for the smaller songwriters than it is for the record labels. THEY WILL SURVIVE, they have the pure massive fincial capital to stay afloat if sales slump. Little songwriters do not. IT IS IMPORTANT for the songwriter. If you don't get paid to write your songs, no one will write anymore songs, and that would be a bad thing.

This is coming from a kid who HAS USED NAPSTER. Yes, I have MP3s on my computer. I, however, have not let this substitute buying a CD, EVER. In fact, I didn't like a certain CD when it came out, but I got some MP3s anyway, and I grew to like it. Now I own the CD. Yes, I ACTUALLY BOUGHT IT. Happened a few times.

There is a difference between copying music onto an audio tape and getting MP3's and burning them to CD. The tape quality stinks, for one, it degrades over time, and you can't jump to any track you want to at any time. This inconvienience/sound comprimise is often enough to drive people to buy the CD. The MP3 overvomes most of those hangups. The quality is decent, it never degrades, and you can skip to different tracks. Why buy the CD??

Oh, and I think that this can and probobly will be stopped, or slowed to the point of making it impractical. The record industry is, by and large, very focused on crushing Napster, and then burning it's dead body in effigee. But Bertelsmann is trying to save it with an agreement to make it legal.... Either way, (and lets hope option #2) Napster as we know it now will not be in existance in the near future.

That's just my 4-5 cents. I did not intend to offend, i just have some resonably strong oppinions on it.
 
Nash, can you honestly say that you've NEVER taped a movie off of television before? The studios that make the movies probably feel the same way you do. Movies are copyrighted and they probably think that people should just to buy the video. It's something we all do, so how can you be so harsh on someone when, let's face it we all have done something similiar. I do understand were you're coming from and it's one thing to voice your opinion, but it is possible to state your opinion without personally attacking other people who have different opinions.

-tkr
 
Stealing is not an opinion,



As far as have I ever copied a TV show yes if I was not home to watch it sure but what I am taping is on FREE TV and the writers ETC are not going to get any less money if I am there to watch it live or tape it.. Friends, Survivor, Etc they get paid per run not per viewer. Now as far as copying tape from a friend who hasn't but I was a child when I did that, I had no money to buy albums and I didn't know how anything worked.. Let me again say this because it seems quite a few missed it.... I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST NAPSTER ITS GREAT TO PROMOTE YOUR MUSIC AND FILESHARING ON THE COMPUTER IS A BEAUTIFUL THING, I don't think it will ever replace buying albums it just lets you sample music and decide if you like it.. BUT the burning thing is wrong and just because you can't stop it doesn't mean you should just use the old expression if you can't beat um join um.... I am one of the fortunate few that gets to do what I love for a living, and I have a strong stance against the pirating and stealing of music. Just last week I/We songwriters in Nashville had to fight CMT for taking the songwriters names of videos and make them put them back. Just remember it all starts with a song............. ;-)

Peace
 
Actually, I was refering to copyrighted movies that air on TV like Titanic or Deep Impact and not free TV shows like Survivor or Friends. Movie studios lose the money that they would make if people went and bought the video instead of taping it from television. Not to mention it is also taping of copyrighted material. It's just that we don't always stop and think about things like that when we pop in a video tape or when we download a song from napster and burn it to a CD. I'm not saying that you don"t have a point because I do understand what you are saying. It's just that I felt you could have made your point just as well without being so hard on the poor guy personally.

-tkr
 
Here's what I can offer

I loved Napster as a tool.
About 2 months ago, the guitarist in my friends band got very sick, and I was asked to sub for a few gigs. I had to learn a bunch of cover tunes really fast. I was able to downlaod all the songs I needed to learn. Otherwise it would have been very difficult and costly to locate/ purchase all that stuff.
I have also used Napster to locate and listen to old songs for a Music Appreciation class I teach. What a great tool. I can find Gregorian Chant right next to Metallica right next to Jaco Pastorius. I can hear artists I would never listen to otherwise.
And I can sample artists I would probably never take the time to seek out otherwise. When I find one I really like, I support them by buying their music.
But here's the thing: all the music that I don't like enough to buy, and would never buy otherwise, I still hang on to. That's the only part I can't rationalize. If I am only using it for research, or I have decided I don't like it enough to support it by purchasing it, then I should get rid of it, right? But Heaven help me, I CAN'T!!!
It's right there on my hard drive, and I can't press the delete button.
Something inside me tells me that since I've got it, I may as well just keep it.
The way I see it, Napster will only ensure that big label music such as {insert your most hated band here} will survive, while lesser known, more creative and off-center songwriters will find it harder and harder to make a living.
And lastly, I think when you give anything away for free, that's what people believe it is worth. It's called perceived value. The only music I give away for free is music I never plan to do anything with. Using Napster or the internet to get your band noticed sounds like a good idea and can work very well, but there is a huge gap between being on a website and creating income. If you give your songs away for free, you will need an even longer bridge. People will still share it, and there's nothing you can do about it, but at least you can say you got paid once for it. If you gave it away, you can't even say that.
Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
Napster and Songwriting

The facts are that it is the year 2001, and technology is a way of life. The facts also are, that for the younger generations, to be allowed to take without compensation is stealing, and if this practice becomes common, they will grow up with that as a way of conducting themselves. This means that the way we think of music now, will be, and already has, changed forever. The facts are also clear on the 'artists' mentality, meaning, that as an artist myself, I have resigned myself to the fact that most talented people don't ever realize their potential now, how can we as a society, let this be the 'norm'???? haven't we learned from the past ??? I can think of several names, in the historical sense, that never derived a dime from their music, and now they are dead, and someone else is reaping the finacial benefits from their work. I know for my own music, that I will never see any substantial $$$ from it. I also know that music in general is an inspiring thing for most of us, and that when deep into it, you could care less about any of the outside world, and if you are inspired, this plane of existance sort of fades away. I've been taken away several times myself, in fact they are coming to take me away right now........
I do not condone or will ever use napster or any other CD quality replacement software, it is WRONG.!!!!!
I, however live in a free society, and understand that mine is only an opinion.
 
Nice stuff Aaron, just went to your site ;-)


Again my only bitch is ripping to CD, downloading is fine and its an awesome promotion tool. One of the really nice things about downloading is it forces bands to not put 2 good songs on an album and then fill the rest with crap because people will try before they buy now..
 
Thanks, Nash.

I totally agree w/ you on how bands are forced to fill an album w/ good songs now. I remember buying albums years ago that had 8 songs, and only 2 of them were good. Now many albums have up to 15 songs, and 7 or 8 of them are really good.
I have felt for a long time the popular music is moving away from the album paradigm. I don't think it will be long before songs will be released and sold one at a time. People will be able to choose the individual songs they want instead of having to buy all the filler that comes along with the good songs on an album. Album artwork sucks now anyway, so what the heck.
Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
I can't say I've ever downloaded anything from Napster, I can't even say I've been to the site, so I can't say I've ever ripped off music from the internet, and burned CDs from MP3s. I did rip off that little label on my matress that say's "DO NOT REMOVE UNDER PENALTY OF LAW". Does this make me a bad person? My take on the MP3/Napster thing is limited to: At this point in my game, I'd give my music away so people would at least be exposed to it. If I ever became sucessful enough in music to quit everything else I do for $$, I'd probably want to protect my interests, because hell, I'd be worth it then. Case in point: If it weren't for bootleged music, Metallica would still be in a basement somewhere. Kill 'em All got NO air play, niether did Ride the Lightning. It wasn't until Master of Puppets (and the fact that they toured with Ozzy) did they get any air time. No airtime, no publicity, no record sales, no money, no band... ..if it wasn't for cheap blank casstte tapes from Radio Shack to get the word spread. Just my take on it. I ain't pushing it on no one.
 
Dammit Tom, how could you rip the label off that matress.....SINNER!......
 
Listening to music for your own personal pleasure is not a criminal activity. It shouldn't be made into one either. Well, yes, it could be if we lived in a fascist state.
 
quality

hmmm.

I understand the idea that the songwriters are in trouble financially. BUT are these only small time songwriters? Surely songwriters who sell/license stuff to big groups/labels will recieve payment and not have to rely on royalties? I suppose people don't think of songwriters, do they? Can I ask what % royalties are generally paid, even if it is a % for your country or area. I have NO clue.


On a quality point:
I LOVE owning CD's. (I can't afford them and so don't have many, but then I do w.out copies!) I have always believed that packaging is not a supplement to the album but an integral component. having full albums on PC lacks the images, ideas, packaging that COMPLETE an album... in a way it's an insult to the artists: I don't care about the effort gone into the WHOLE project... I just want some of the songs!
And quality is often poor... jumpin and incomplete MP3's are plentiful. eg. I had the MP3 of Radiohead's "Everything in its Right Place" which was awesome... and I bought the CD. On hearing the CD version, I deleted the MP3! THere is a kick drum that runs thru the whole song that gives the tune a completely different angle, that you couldn't hear on the MP3 (44khz it was). So... this idea of compact CD quality sound is not entirely accurate.

cheers
 
That is a very flawed argument.

Eating for your own survival should not be criminal activity. But are you allowed to leave the grocery store without paying?

We are all free to create and enjoy whatever art we want. That's the freedom part. But if I paint a beatiful picture, and you take it from me, I don't think a judge would find "I really liked it" a very strong defense.

The only difference between a painting and a song is that a song is not tangible. That's why it's called "intellectual property". But it's property nonetheless.

Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
Looking at a painting is not stealing. Listening to music is not stealing.
 
True. Very true.

If.... you have permission. Libraries and art galaries and television and the radio are all permission.
The issue is not really looking or listening though, it's posessing a copy. And I guess the million dollar question is: do you have to have the creator's permission to posess a copy of their work?
Until the work has passed into the public domain, the answer is: yes.

Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
Technically everyone has permission to make a digital or analog copy of a composers work for personal use.

If I am an artist does it make me a criminal if I go out and paint a picture of a landscape that's on someone elses private property?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top