Comments on CD Burning/Unauthorized Duplication etc.
I was curious as to some opinions on the subjects of CD Burning or Unauthorized Duplication. I have been in an ongoing discussion with a friend of mine on the subject. He is very much against it. I am against it on true independent releases, and for it on major label releases and artificial independent labels. In the case of my own release, I do not mind if it gets duplicated. My friend says I am crazy for thinking that way... He is also very much against audience taping. I happen to love it because it gives me a chance to hear live versions of music that will probably never see the light of day. I love it when someone tapes my music live, in fact I find it to be an honor. I am however against the sale of audience recordings. Then there is the subject of used cd's. I told him that when he bought a used cd he may as well have made an unauthorized copy...becuase the artist does not see any of the money past the initial sale of that cd. Or that when he sells used cd's to stores he may as well be selling audience tapes because he is now making money off of someone else's music. Any thoughts? I am not against selling or buying of used cd's. I just think it is an area that could use some commentary. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
on 11/29/02 11:12 AM, john schuller at superbadassmofo@hotmail.com wrote:
I was curious as to some opinions on the subjects of CD Burning or Unauthorized Duplication.
I have been in an ongoing discussion with a friend of mine on the subject. He is very much against it. I am against it on true independent releases, and for it on major label releases and artificial independent labels. In the case of my own release, I do not mind if it gets duplicated. My friend says I am crazy for thinking that way...
For the majority of the music discussed on this list, I don't think it's that big an issue. The bulk of us here tend to be really into what we're really into, and form a pretty active consumership, so we tend to buy probably 80%. I know that, if I know I can't someoneone into buying something I think they'd like, I'll burn 'em a disc. If my surmise is/was right, then that person will pay money to go see the performer, and buy future releases. As for true indies, I agree, but the problem so often is that you have little chance of buying that release unless the band comes to your town. Sometimes the only way the music gets to travel outside its home area code is that a couple of people decide to dupe the thing and send it to their pals.
He is also very much against audience taping. I happen to love it because it gives me a chance to hear live versions of music that will probably never see the light of day. I love it when someone tapes my music live, in fact I find it to be an honor. I am however against the sale of audience recordings.
Different bands have different philsophies. Obviously, the Grateful Dead mandate audience taping. NRBQ, on the other hand, especially Terry Adams, hate it. On the other hand, Terry looked the other way when he asked me to join the band and sub for their guitar player for a week, as about 35% of any given set had never been made commercially available, and I had to learn the material somehow. So even the guys who have hard and fast rules don't have iron-clad practices. My own personal thing on this is that hardly anybody ever makes thweir commplete output available, and -- especially if the band is improvising oriented -- the hardcore fans, who buy every legit thing they ever hear about -- are buying tickets to the shows and every other legit piece of merchandise. The trading of audience tapes (or downloads) is pretty much a non-issue in terms of general use. Live tapes and studio outtakes are going to circulate through the community any band establishes.The fans who aren't hardcore won't bother. The fans who are hardcore about it understand the difference between the legit releases and the other stuff that no harm is committed against the band by people hearing that stuff. Think of how many of us Brian Wilson fanatics are listening to SMILE and digging it. Hasn't hurt Brian's status one damn bit. skip h
Then there is the subject of used cd's. I told him that when he bought a used cd he may as well have made an unauthorized copy...becuase the artist does not see any of the money past the initial sale of that cd. Or that when he sells used cd's to stores he may as well be selling audience tapes because he is now making money off of someone else's music.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but I can't see how that theory works. When you sell a cd you don't want, you rarely make money, but rather lose money - say you spend $20, then perhaps get back $10, you have paid out $10 for a cd which you don't even own anymore! Similarly with the buyer, as you said the artist has already got whatever money they are going to with the initial sale. When someone buys it used, there is still only one owner, and hence shouldn't there still only be one payoff to the artist? J.
on 11/29/02 5:25 PM, Julian at germ@iinet.net.au wrote:
Similarly with the buyer, as you said the artist has already got whatever money they are going to with the initial sale. When someone buys it used, there is still only one owner, and hence shouldn't there still only be one payoff to the artist?
Tellingly, Garth Brooks was the only artist who contested this, and try to penalize retailers who bought and sold used copies of his box set. sh
participants (3)
-
john schuller -
Julian -
skip Heller