|
File
Sharing, a dialog Ted:
There was a sidebar in an article about filesharing in a recent issue of Newsweek
that listed the top 50 most downloaded artists. I saw it and was surprised to
see that I've only owned music by five of artists in the entire list and never
downloaded anything by any of them--my computer doesn't have a lot of memory,
anyway, so I don't really have any of the software. What I have mostly downloaded
are files that artists make available themselves on their websites or through
a website like Amazon.
Rick: Most
people would think it's a waste that I even have a computer. All I really use
it for is email and writing with an occasional burning of CDs. Personally I've
never looked at the music that interests me in the disposable way today's youth
do.. I mean...I understand why they download. But for me it was the sheer joy
of the new album...with its cover art and information. I never even look at
most of the stuff people have burnt for me because the package has no character
whatsoever. But hey...I'm a dinosaur...and proud of it. The
cliche "I'd do it for a song" is more true now than ever. But the morality
of the whole thing is quite mirky. I don't feel sorry for the music industry.
But I do for up and coming artists. Ted:
Part of the industry's problem is that they've downgraded the album. There's a
few artists that are aware of how to make a meaningful record, but the industry
doesn't seem to care. The other problem is that the cat is out of the bag as far
as how cheaply CDs can be manufactured. I mean, if they're so cheap you can burn
5 or 6 of them and mail them across the country to me without bothering about
reimbursement, than there is just no reason that they should be selling for $16
or whatever. The new technology is a
mixed bag for younger artists. On the plus side, it makes it easier for them to
get their music out. One club I frequent in LA sends out a newsletter and they
include links to the websites of the bands that are coming there You can download
a couple MP3s and decide if you want to go check them out, & if you really
like the MP3s you can decide to buy the CD, which the bands can produce cheaply
on their own without dealing with the record industry. Some bands go so far as
to give out demo CDs at their shows. It's probably not so good for the people
on major labels, but the internet is a godsend for Indie bands. Me,
I like downloading obscure stuff from artists I already own their regular stuff--like
that Crosby & Garcia gig I sent you a link to and from Pete Townshend and
Bob Dylan's websites. They have unbelieveable live stuff that's yours for the
taking. I downloaded the Fall on the BBC from their website--one was a radio session--the
other was video. Townshend has a free video of a song from every stop on the last
Who tour on his website. Rick:
Here's my personal policy concerning burning CDs for other people. If it's an
artist who is wealthy and so and so isn't going to buy it anyway...like my sister
in law and Elton John's most recent (which is quite good, actually)...then I'll
make a copy. If it's a newer artist and so and soisn't going to buy it anyway
but might really like it and buy a release in the future...I burn it for them.
Or if it's a friend and I know they can't afford it right now and just love music
... sometimes I burn it. The record industry is no different than any other mega
capitalistic enterprise. It's as if it's patriotic and American to make as much
money as posible and fuck everybody else. People bitch about the culture but no
one ever points the finger at FUCKING CAPITALISM. In
an odd sort of way file sharing has made performances more important again. That...I
think is good. Because real music...is LIVE music. Ted:
Yeah, that's why I have one of those "Live Music is Better" Bumper stickers.
Actually, it's probably why the Who, Kinks, Stones, Neil Young and Dylan, among
others, mean more to me than the Beatles. I mean, I've seen those guys; they're
REAL to me. The Beatles? Not so much, "A Hard Day's Night" notwithstanding.
The Ramones, on the other hand, are more real to me that several people I know. As
far as copying music, the questions I look at are "Is it easy to get in the
first place?" If it's out of print or otherwise hard to come by (reminds
me, I owe you a neil young boot), no harm in passing it along. If it's a new artist
(or new to the person you're copying for), you are probably, as you suggest, actually
helping that artist by turning some one on to them that might attend a show or
buy a later release--might even buy a legit copy of that release if they like
it enough -- I've bought LPs and CDs that I owned personal tape recordings of
before because I liked it and owning the record beat the Maxell tape. And I know
people who say the best thing about being on Ka-Zaa is that the people who are
into bands you like, you look at their files and see what else they are into and
find stuff you've never heard of. Last, for me, having owned and sold more records
in the last ten years than the average thrift shop, I don't feel bad copying something
that I used to own. Rick: You're
different than most...you are very articulate about music and are a musician.
What I see as the basic situation here...outside of the fact the industry isn't
getting their $$$$$$ is that kids - this is their culture. They have no ethical
sense about it one way or another. At least the majority I think. I have a guy
who works for me who somehow thinks downloading and burning is some sort of political,
morality driven rebellion against greed. He sees it as a crusade. Remember our
exchange about most people beingsimpletons? Bingo on that here too. I don't buy
the argument either way. but like always a money system is applied...and in some
ways necessarily so...to something that could possibly be artistically pure.
Yet the corporate guys I can't even look at. Before I get in over my head philosophically
let me merely say this. And I believe you will agree with me. I have never...at
least since the age of 13...thought of music as "songs". I don't think
anyone who has been a musician thinks that way...except those who want "hits"
perhaps. I mean...I don't collect "songs". I collect music. Know what
I mean? There's a difference in attitude...approach...and possibly self image.
I didn't warm up to the Beatles that much either...at least not after the Sullivan
performances. Having an aversion to all things popular I actually liked the Dave
Clark Five better at first. "Magical Mystery Tour" won me over. But
they weren't real in the same sense as even the James Gang.
|