Okay, well I have to ask, how many of us have 12"s with uncredited
samples? Probably almost everyone here. I think there is some slight
hypocrisy in making the Beastie Boys bad guys cus they are rich and Mr.
Newton a good guy cus he claims he might go bankrupt. The Beastie Boys
usually use samples in a fairly original way, and they haven't broken
the law, according to the US court system. So, outside of some alien
ethical standard (and capitalism is certainly not ethical), how can one
judge that Beastie Boys are doing something which is somehow wrong? I
really fail to see how a six second flute sample represents some horrid
stealing of Mr. Newton's property. I think restrictions on samples
should actually be loosened, that would only benefit the electronic
music community, as many producers excel in the creative use of
sampling. As for the ones who excel at Not-so-creative sampling, and
make a lot of money, I don't see what can be done, make quality material
and don't worry about how rich pop musicians are getting. If you want
to sell out, just sell out, but don't expect to get rich as an artist in
some little niche genre that most people don't get.
The bottom line is, if there is a bad guy in this case, it is the "big
record labels", but what's new about that? I doubt the Beastie Boys are
directly involved in this, besides when they originally sampled the song
years ago, and as for Mr. Newton, the Beastie Boys apparently contacted
HIS record label. So was it unethical for Mr. Newton's label to give
permission? Maybe, but then again, isn't that the reason for owning
your label, your own recordings and recording right, and all aspects of
it? Because we all know the major labels don't have artists interests
at heart. I'd say that techno is about being strong and self-reliant,
building a following, finding ways to survive. NOT about expecting to
win within the mainstream system (esp. the courts) where we know the
game is not balanced in favor of independants and small players. It
would be nice to change things to be more equitable, but for now we live
in a corporate-capitalistic system, it seems like any idea of some more
FAIR or JUST situation would have to imply some kind of change.
Complaining that the Beastie Boys are "stealing" within the current
system is somewhat misleading. It is the job of the courts to decide
what is stealing in this cases and apparently they have decided.
/dave...cyborg k
***
Okay, if you are still interested in hearing more of my opinion,
following are some more comments related to Mr. Prince's post.
Actually playing music IS manual labor. I know, I do it for a living.
Hauling around gear and setting up equipment is not fun, it is
definitely manual labor, but that's what being a musician IS. Skilled
labor. Live performance, not just the production of a round little
commodity that people can play in their homes. This is how musicians
have typically survived; the idea of a musician who creates music and
doesn't perform is relatively new, really something that probably
developed this century (and composers often conduct their works even if
the don't "play" instruments per se.) Only in our advanced capitalistic
system with its extreme division of labor would the idea of a
non-performing musician come up.
I By the way. I write "classical" new music (string quartets, tangos,
etc.) and I don't expect to make money on royalties (ASCAP seems like a
joke if you aren't some big name). I don't think you can expect to make
much money doing that kind of serious creation. It is nice if artists
can find ways to make money, but I don't believe our economic system is
very conducive to this. I often arrange pieces for big bands or other
ensembles, this isn't manual labor, but I don't charge for the idea
behind what I'm arranging (it isn't my pieces) I charge for the time and
effort i put in to making an arrangement that fits people's needs. That
is still LABOR (although not manual). The rights of performance and
royalty still go to the original composer which the performing group has
to take care of. As for original music, the primary ways to make money
would be to sell my own CDs, (not expect to make a living off of
royalties on CDs someone else sells), sell scores, write original music
on commision, and perform or direct performances of my own works. Only
if I am enough of a business person to sell my own scores or CDs, which
are actual physical commodities, do I really feel I am being paid for
something other than my labor.
I wouldn't venture to make the comparison to visual art, I think it's
inherently a different medium and has rather different issues involved.
However, I would venture to say that the value of a painting at least
has a connection with the fact that it took some type of skilled labor
to create it.
/dave
Brian 'balistic' Prince wrote:
Tuesday, August 13, 2002, 1:31:26 PM, a knob was tweaked and out came:
TDCJ> actually, a great number of jazz tunes are compiled in the "real"
TDCJ> book, or in a "fake book" which doesnt contain some of the tunes
TDCJ> in the "real" book and theyre all considered standards which many
TDCJ> musicians play. the idea of owning a sound is stupid. the idea of
TDCJ> caring makes no sense unless youre doing it for money. when i put
TDCJ> my first tunes up on the web in MP3, anyone who wants can sample
TDCJ> them, take them for free, whatever. making money from music like
TDCJ> that is ridiculous, IMO. getting paid for live gigs is cool, why
TDCJ> not go gig some more?
Artist reduced to manual laborer . . . yeah, sounds like fecking
bliss to me.
What next? Selling tickets to watch a writer type a book that will be
given away for free at the end of the session? Should I give up on
selling my paintings and just charge people to see me make them?
"Artist" does not always equal "performer"
Devalue originality and it will disappear.
-------------
Brian "balistic" Prince
http://www.bprince.com - art and techno
Strokes of Defiance EP . . . soon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
