Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy

Zonk posted about 7 years ago | from the arr-they-like-their-piratical-music dept.

Music 211

langelgjm writes "When people talk about the failing business model of the traditional record company, they often only offer vague suggestions as to how things would work otherwise. But a concrete example of a music scene that thrives on piracy is to be found in Brazil, in the form of tecnobrega. From the article: 'While piracy is the bane of many musicians trying to control the sale of their songs, tecnobrega artists see counterfeiters as key to their success ... Ronaldo Lemos, a law professor at Brazil's respected Getulio Vargas Foundation, an elite Rio de Janeiro think tank and research center, says tecnobrega and other movements like it represent a new business model for the digital era, where music is transformed from a good to a service.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086521)

Way to try to justify your criminal activity, slashfags.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (5, Insightful)

oliverthered (187439) | about 7 years ago | (#21086557)

just because something is against the law doesn't mean that it's wrong.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1, Interesting)

AndyST (910890) | about 7 years ago | (#21086641)

just because something is against the law doesn't mean that it's wrong.

I think you got that wrong. Who is to judge on which laws to abide? Keep the democratic principles, even if they sometime bother you.

The other direction is right. Not everything that is allowed by law is ethically justified.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (2, Funny)

orclevegam (940336) | about 7 years ago | (#21086755)

Laws have never struck me as democratic. I don't remember ever voting for the DMCA.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1)

AndyST (910890) | about 7 years ago | (#21086799)

I don't remember ever voting for the DMCA.
So only laws that you voted for apply to you?

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (4, Insightful)

orclevegam (940336) | about 7 years ago | (#21086857)

I don't remember ever voting for the DMCA.
So only laws that you voted for apply to you?
That's not what I said. I said laws never seemed democratic, not that they don't apply. I do feel however that it's everyone duty to not follow unethical or immoral laws, and if arrested for violating those laws to take it to the highest possible court they can in the hope of getting the law overturned.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1, Offtopic)

AndyST (910890) | about 7 years ago | (#21087215)

Still they are democratic, you may just as well be the only one disagreeing. Again, how can you claim justification not to follow such laws but ask for criminals to be locked away? I'm sure they disagree with their verdict. Democracy includes accepting other citizens' votes until votes/laws etc have changes by the same democratic means.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (2, Interesting)

orclevegam (940336) | about 7 years ago | (#21087443)

First, I never voted for the DMCA, and I know a whole bunch of people who would much rather it never became a law. The senators voted for it, not the citizens, and so if I choose not to follow the DMCA it doesn't mean I'm refusing to follow the vote of the citizens because they never voted for it. Also, because of the way our legal system works, just about the only way to have a law repealed is to be arrested for violating it and to appeal to the supreme court. Finally, I'm not asking for criminals not to be locked away, but the fact is, until you've been convicted and run out of appeals you aren't legally a criminal, therefore if you get arrested for violating a law, appeal it to the supreme court and have the law overturned, you're not a criminal. There's also a difference between saying you're innocent of a crime that you either committed but didn't want to be caught for, or didn't commit and are falsely convicted of, and saying you're innocent of a crime because you don't think it should be illegal in the first place. If you fall into the later category it's your duty to appeal to the supreme court and convince them of why exactly it is that that law should be repealed.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1)

fmoliveira (979051) | about 7 years ago | (#21087555)

They are not. People dont vote for laws. A lot of them doesnt reflect the will of the majority.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21088399)

>I do feel however that it's everyone duty to not follow unethical or immoral laws

If I think the laws against murder are unethical, then, by your lights, it is my duty not to follow them?

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1)

orclevegam (940336) | about 7 years ago | (#21088625)

Yes.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086931)

King Copyright: I am your king.
Woman: Well I didn't vote for you.
King Copyright: You don't vote for kings.
Woman: Well how'd you become king then?
[Angelic music plays... ]
King Copyright: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Copyright, was to carry the DMCA. THAT is why I am your king.
Dennis: [interrupting] Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' laws is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1)

Kamots (321174) | about 7 years ago | (#21086969)

Ah... so lets say that there was a purely hypothetical law saying that if you know a Jew you have to turn them in so they can be summarily executed... you wouldn't call this morally wrong and disobey it?

Or... that wasn't democratically decided on?

How about slavery in the US then?

Law and ethics/morality are seperate, although (sadly) they're often confused.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#21087025)

I think you got that wrong. Who is to judge on which laws to abide? Keep the democratic principles, even if they sometime bother you.

The other direction is right. Not everything that is allowed by law is ethically justified.


I think it swings both ways, sometimes things allowed by law are unethical and something disallowed by law aren't always unethical. Legalist systems represent one idea of morality and their complexity often results in unintended consequences.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087391)

Both directions apply.

Illegal does not necessarily equate with unethical.
Legal does not nessesarily equate with ethical.

It is illegal to sing happy birthday in public without royalty payment. This is not an unusual example. Copyright is long enough, where even when all authors are dead, some corporation is there to collect.

Currently, legal bribery by corporations plays a large role in forming laws. It should be no surprise that monopolies of many kinds are protected by the government at the expense of citizens.

RIAA,MPAA bought laws to extend the copyright monopoly to 95-120 years.

Drug companies would like to extend patents to milk every possible penny out of a discovery, even at the expense of human health.

Industrial farm companies, like ADM have extended patents to cover biological life, and would like to push things like terminator seeds for profit at the expense of humans.

Microsoft enjoys a unchecked monopoly granted by software copyright monopolies that last 95 years.

Software companies patent the most trivial algorithms, with these granted monopolies often slowing innovation.

Even with 95 year monopolies, media companies would like to further restrict media, by using DRM to encrypt media. The DMCA was bought by the media companies to protect DRM.

The release of expiration of copyright monoplies into the public domain stopped in 1975, and will be dark until 2018. At 95 years after media publication, the majority of publications are likely lost. I regretfully expect RIAA,MPAA to try to extent the copyright once more in 2017 fully to 120 years to beyond 2043.

Yes, there is a theme here. Government granted monopolies that last 20, 95 years are bad.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (2, Insightful)

Logic and Reason (952833) | about 7 years ago | (#21087415)

Who is to judge on which laws to abide?
This may shock you, but you are the one who gets to decide which laws you obey and which you disobey. You may use your morals, your "democratic principles," or even a coin flip to decide this, as you see fit. Of course, the law isn't going to give you a get-out-of-jail-free card for any of these reasons.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1)

DiceRoller (1178315) | about 7 years ago | (#21086661)

If I was a start up musician I would post my music for free and give copies to all the pirates. That way your name gets out there and people would listen to free music. Then have a concert or two to get your sales up. Sell cds or make a website that has something else with it if you buy it on that website. There are lots of ways to get piracy to help you to become famous. You could even dress up like a pirate!

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087635)

You should tell that to the sheep down here in Texas.

My god is it frustrating to talk to people who actually think your behavior should be determined by that of the law.

And yes... I still talk to them, just reserve my infuriation for their ignorance on one of the principles of Freedom.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (1, Funny)

MM_LONEWOLF (994599) | about 7 years ago | (#21086739)

now now, there's no need for insu- , wait, my pirated copy of xp just froze up. give me a second.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (2, Informative)

Nosklo (815041) | about 7 years ago | (#21087279)

Way to try to justify your criminal activity, slashfags.
Being a Brazilian "criminal" as you wish to say, I would like to state:
  • Nobody purchases original CDs here. People just get them on the streets, with "3 for 5 reais" price tags (~$1 each CD)
  • Trash music is everywhere. It is hard to listen to good music nowadays, be it in the radio, the clubs, or the stupid loud car sound systems around the city.
  • Musicians get almost nothing selling CDs by normal means (recorder company contracts etc), if you're not a TOP 20 you make more money with shows/presentations anyway, making it very good to spread your music - the more the better
  • "Lend me your CD so I can copy it" is normal practice, creating even many "pirated pirate copies" which are copies of pirate CDs purchased on the street.
  • Soulseek, donkey2k, kazaa are your friends. You find everything Brazilian.
  • There are a few websites promoting local FREE AS IN SPEECH music/art. Like Estudio Livre [estudiolivre.org] .
    Good stuff in these websites make me want more, make me want to know the artist behind them. Lately I was chatting with "Varios Um", a Brazilian artist which has very good FREE songs published here [estudiolivre.org] .
I have very few original CDs and don't feel any pressure into purchasing more. If things keep this way I will keep downloading free licensed and unlicensed content. The same applies to movies and games.

Re:Brazilian Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy (2, Informative)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087645)

Nobody purchases original CDs here. People just get them on the streets, with "3 for 5 reais" price tags (~$1 each CD)

I do. I would rather buy music on a one-song basis from iTunes but due to this widespread piracy here, Apple doesn't seem to give a shit about Brazil.

Trash music is everywhere. It is hard to listen to good music nowadays, be it in the radio, the clubs, or the stupid loud car sound systems around the city.

Why is that? Maybe it has to do with the music industry being overwhelmed by these favela freeloader fuckers with no music talent but with a beat box and the street commerce that is driving artists to a difficult situation, while the very good Brazilian music people enjoy from London to Tokyo is having a hard time just surviving. Tom Jobim (the guy who wrote "The Girl from Ipanema") used to complain that an artist could never get filthy rich in Brazil, even though even Frank Sinatra recorded The Girl From Ipanema and Bossa Nova plays worldwide daily on thousands of radios ever since the late 50's.

Musicians get almost nothing selling CDs by normal means (recorder company contracts etc), if you're not a TOP 20 you make more money with shows/presentations anyway, making it very good to spread your music - the more the better

The music industry's to blame here. I remember back in the 90's when Real had dollar-parity, CDs here cost the double what they would cost me in New York. Now the cancer has spread and there's no stopping it.

Streets of Brazil are overwhelmed with street vendors ("camelôs") who pay no taxes and sell pirate products.

Yeah. Brazil's the future. You wanna see how bad it gets you just look at what's going on here.

Why Brazil? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086541)

Why go to Brazil to report on this when you can witness the exact same thing happening in just about every country's independent music scene?

Re:Why Brazil? (1)

shaitand (626655) | about 7 years ago | (#21086595)

Because that is the country CNN wrote the story about. Why not Brazil?

Read the last paragraphs. Brazil is 1st in change. (2, Interesting)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | about 7 years ago | (#21087203)

From the story: "Tecnobrega producer Beto Metralha said the music developed out of necessity in a place where few musicians could afford to pay a whole band and most music consumers don't take home enough money to buy non-pirated CDs. The average ensemble consists of little more than a keyboardist and a singer, sometimes accompanied by an electric bass. The signature shuffle rhythm is derived entirely from a single program on an electronic keyboard."

And: "Brazil's top-selling Banda Calypso, whose "brega" sound paved the way for tecnobrega, claims to have sold more than 4 million CDs nationwide, avoiding traditional distribution networks and marketing its CDs directly through news stands and other unconventional outlets."

And: ' "Before you couldn't get your record played on the radio if you couldn't afford payola. Now if a song hits big with the aparelhagens, the radio has no choice but to play it," says Metralha. "The dynamic has changed." '

Brazil seems to be ahead of the rest of the world in creating new forms of music. It's not surprising that cultural changes in how music is distributed happen in Brazil.

Welcome to 2006 (4, Informative)

Smidge204 (605297) | about 7 years ago | (#21086599)

Looks like someone finally got around to watching Steal This Film [stealthisfilm.com] .

=Smidge=

Re:Welcome to 2006 (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086629)

Actually I learned about this from the documentary Good Copy Bad Copy http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/ [goodcopybadcopy.net] which I think I read about on /.

How do you counterfeit data? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087127)

If you perform a cover of a song, record it, and sell it as if it were the original song performed by the original artist, maybe THAT is counterfeiting.

But if you give away a byte-for-byte duplicate of a digital recording of an original performance, what you are giving is exactly the same as what comes on the CD. That hardly qualifies as counterfeiting.

We just use the word to make the act seem harmful to the consumer, when in fact it is not.

Re:Welcome to 2006 (1)

langelgjm (860756) | about 7 years ago | (#21087475)

I don't recall tecnobrega being mentioned in "Steal This Film, Part 1". You may have meant "Good Copy, Bad Copy." [wikipedia.org]

brazil? (1)

MM_LONEWOLF (994599) | about 7 years ago | (#21086601)

my question is why "Brazil" is in the title. the us, maybe, but brazil?

Re:brazil? (1)

orclevegam (940336) | about 7 years ago | (#21086827)

my question is why "Brazil" is in the title. the us, maybe, but brazil?
Because the article is about how a Brazilian music genre is using file sharing to promote bands. Something that only a handful of artists in America are exploiting (Trent Reznor comes to mind, as well as Wierd Al Yankovic, both of which clearly know their fans).

Re:brazil? (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | about 7 years ago | (#21088219)

I'm ashamed to say it took me a minute to get it. What's interesting to me is that the article says they've transformed music from a good to a service, ie you don't pay for the song, you pay for the performance. That's exactly the way it is for the artists in the US right now, they make their money off of the tours and make a pittance from the sale of CDs. The music industry keeps looking more and more corrupt all the time...

ps it was the grateful dead that I first heard of using this business model, they'd let anyone copy their music that wanted to, they'd just make sure that anything sold at their concerts had their logo on it.

don'tdownloadthissong (1)

MM_LONEWOLF (994599) | about 7 years ago | (#21086635)

or weird al's "Don't Download this Song", which can be found on his website. i think it's the best media out there that shows the consequences.

tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1)

slackoon (997078) | about 7 years ago | (#21086645)

The concept of tecnobrega as discussed in the article is an interesting one. If you are planning on being a stage band and making your money off of the shows you perform then it's great. However what happens if that's not our thing. For a hugely sucesful artist who's shows are sold out they are being stolen from with no added benefit at all. This "tecnobrega" only favours the new or the unsuccesful.

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (3, Insightful)

ericrost (1049312) | about 7 years ago | (#21086877)

If "your thing" is not practicing your craft, and is instead to try to get us to pay you in perpetuity for the favor of having once played some music, go fuck yourself. You need to earn your money just like everyone else. You earn it by doing something. That something can certainly be performing music. I truly enjoy live music. I pay a lot of money for concert tickets. I buy SWAG at the shows.

I wish I could just sit back and let everyone who read my specs pay me a royalty for the favor of doing my job. Instead I have to produce new content. I could do this by charging per document I PRODUCE, but I choose instead to be an employee. Doesn't really change the model, though, to remain an employee, I must continue to produce useful work. Otherwise they'll show me the door.

Being and artsy fuck doesn't exempt you from needing to contribute.

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (2, Interesting)

SCHecklerX (229973) | about 7 years ago | (#21088105)

no mod points today, but this pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter.

There is no right to being rich just because you sing or are in a band. Play local shows, get paid for doing it. Use CDs and downloads to *PROMOTE* your music. If you become popular enough, play bigger shows.

On a somewhat related topic: Why anybody would actually pay for lossy downloads not encoded, tagged, or named the way you keep your own collection is beyond me. How about either providing in FLAC or sell CDs for $5?

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1)

FLEB (312391) | about 7 years ago | (#21088331)

There is, however, a right to control production of things which you have produced. You missed that one. A primary reason that "right" is inconsequential is because there's no ability to enforce. If it weren't for the security guards enforcing the gates of the venue, might we not be saying "There is no right to get rich simply because people can hear you singing. Get a day job."?

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1)

ericrost (1049312) | about 7 years ago | (#21088649)

No, I agree that artists should be paid. I think they should be paid for experiences that I cannot reproduce myself (live performances). I also think that painters should be paid for the paintings they produce by their hand. I don't think I should pay for a photo of that painting to show on my desktop.

As I said, I pay a lot of money to go see live performances because it is an experience I value. I buy SWAG there specifically because I know that's how artists make their money on tours. I recognize the basic economics of the situation. When I couldn't make my own cd's or store the data, the data in a portable form was added value. Now hard drive space is cheap as are CDR's.

You cannot, through technological means or any other, fight the basic economics. No matter how much you whine about "your rights". Its not about getting a "day job" its about providing added value, if you don't provide that, you don't get paid. In art, business, or any other endeavor.

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21088743)

It's quite insulting when people are prepared to pay money for overpriced t shirts and ring tones, but are not prepared to buy your actual recorded music. Ring tones outsold singles in the UK for the last two years....

I think musicians should cast off the chains of the RIAA, and stop giving in to the public's demands for zero cost music. Make tickets for live shows cheaper, and use them to promote the album, not as a way to get more money than the album for an hours entertainment with average/poor sound quality.

Oh, and by the way, the reason you only get paid once for the documents you produce is that they have very little appeal outside your workplace. Produce something like music that appeals to millions of people and you will find it easier to get royalties. And it has to be under 3m30s and contain no difficult words, harmonies or rhythms.
Try it.
   

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1)

ericrost (1049312) | about 7 years ago | (#21088879)

It's quite insulting when people are expected to pay money for overpriced instructions for their computers to imitate your music. Ring tones outsold singles in the UK for the last two years which shows that people will pay for something useful that they can't get for free.

I think musicians should cast off the chains of the RIAA, get off their ass, work for a living by performing. Make tickets for live shows more expensive, and use the album to promote them, not as a way to get more money than the than sitting in their living room while you listen to average/poor sound quality reproductions of their work.

Oh, and by the way, the reason you should only get paid once for the recordings you produce is that they add very little value. Produce something like performances that entertain to millions of people and you will find it easier to earn a living.

Try it.

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (2, Insightful)

king-manic (409855) | about 7 years ago | (#21086935)

The concept of tecnobrega as discussed in the article is an interesting one. If you are planning on being a stage band and making your money off of the shows you perform then it's great. However what happens if that's not our thing. For a hugely sucesful artist who's shows are sold out they are being stolen from with no added benefit at all. This "tecnobrega" only favours the new or the unsuccesful.

And this is bad because? If your already successful and you can fill the biggest venue in any city then more money is the difference between a Rolls Royce or a Maybach. You can always set up endorsements for more money, sell media with added features, private shows etc... When your struggling to start any hand up will help. Right now it's a lottery mentality, 100 starving artists to each journeyman who lives off the industry. With a more distributed model there would be more people who can make a living off of music and less of a lottery. I'd imagine with more people making a living at it this would increase the amount of creativity.

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086965)

Legalities aside, this is how capitalism works. Some entrepreneur develops a product which is somehow superior or costs less. People buy this product. Other companies are "hurt" because their product is inferior or costs more and consumers are not willing to buy it. These companies either compete better or close down. In the case of the music labels, to some extent they have rigged the system to protect their (dying) methodologies. In the case of the established artists, they are going to have to learn to play by the new rules assuming the music labels are not successful protecting their practices. I DO have sympathy for these artists, but it is no different (in my mind) than the sympathy I felt for all the aerospace workers when their industry dried up and many of them were out a job. Guess what most of them did (I assume)? Retooled and transferred into a different industry. IMO, those artists better start retooling.

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1)

TechMouse (1096513) | about 7 years ago | (#21088119)

And what percentage of musical artists do you think fit into this "hugely successful" category? I'm willing to bet it's a vanishingly small minority.

So do we configure the music business model to benefit those who already make tons of money, or do we set it up to help those who are struggling down at the bottom of the pile?

For anyone not well versed in the ways of the music industry machine, I strongly recommend a read of an article by a man who knows [negativland.com] ...

Re:tecnobrega , is it for everyone (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | about 7 years ago | (#21088279)

For a hugely sucesful artist who's shows are sold out they are being stolen from with no added benefit at all.
There's no benefit for them at the moment, but what about three years down the road? A few years ago Britney Spears was the hottest of all the shits, and now she's nothing. However, widespread piracy and some good marketing could get her back to where she was if she were to produce more music.

The worst case scenario is that a hugely popular artist will become even more popular and thus be able to charge more for concert tickets and get larger venues.

"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | about 7 years ago | (#21086687)

You can't make money giving away music...except for taper/trader friendly bands like the Grateful Dead. And I doubt 50 Cent got any royalties from mix tapes with his early stuff, but the bling comes from somewhere.

It's kinda like saying, everyone complains about Microsoft but there are only vague suggestions about alternatives.

trippy, dude. (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | about 7 years ago | (#21086769)

Well, I bothered to RTFA. It mentions both mixed tapes for hip hop and trading tapes for the Grateful Dead. Both well established, time tested schemes.

So what's "vague" about these "suggestions"?

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (1)

Xiaran (836924) | about 7 years ago | (#21086873)

I think the point is that CDs are dead/dying... digital exchange of music == a sudden and dramatic drop in supply scarcity. There are many other revenue streams artist can and do pursue to make money... live shows... endorsements... tee shirt sales... licensing of their intellectual property. None of this is vague. The people really making the noise are the ones with the most to lose from traditional music distribution channels changing. Some big name bands accasionally do but Prince recently gave his new album away free in a newspaper in the UK... radiohead did their thing etc.

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (1)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087307)

There are many other revenue streams artist can and do pursue to make money... live shows... endorsements... tee shirt sales...

Yes, I can fully picutre in my imagination how Brazilians would be creative with this too, from what I've seen at the (few) major artists that ever step here for a performance: fake tickets, pirate t-shirts looking just like the original, etc.

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (1)

Xiaran (836924) | about 7 years ago | (#21087369)

While you have a point I think its a lot more difficult to catch someone selling a fake shirt outside a gig(if you wanted to) or selling a fake ticket than someone downloading a mp3 from a torrent.

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | about 7 years ago | (#21087113)

RTFA - It says they make money from Live performances .... they treat the copying of CD's as advertising, and they do make money at this ...

It's only we in the First world that pay to advertise a product ....

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | about 7 years ago | (#21087269)

You can't make money giving away music

Accurate if your entire business model consists of selling tracks of your music on a tangible media.

Inaccurate if you include live shows, merchandise, et cetera.

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087381)

Way to completely miss the point, champ.

o rly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087791)

I think Jonathan Coulton [jonathancoulton.com] would disagree withyou, since he earns a living giving away his music for free (and encouraging his fans to do the same).

Re:"vague suggestions", my shiny metal a$$ (2, Insightful)

SCHecklerX (229973) | about 7 years ago | (#21088173)

You can't make money giving away music.


Giving away CDs and downloads as promotion for your live shows seems like a good idea to me.

Tanstaafl (1)

Cycloid Torus (645618) | about 7 years ago | (#21086711)

The tendency for technology to provide support for basic producers (music, videos, EFF, etc) is wonderful. It is also very threatening for large organizations based on the scarcity principles of "old" economics.

Seems like its time to re-read my dog-eared copy of Moon Is A Harsh Mistress (Heinlein).

Maybe we are getting closer to the future after all.

Re:Tanstaafl (1)

rucs_hack (784150) | about 7 years ago | (#21086901)

Nah, 'Citizen of the Galaxy', that has teh pirates!!111one.

Possibly my favoite after 'Friday'.

Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (3, Insightful)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 7 years ago | (#21086729)

This is an excellent example of how what we think of as ethical derives not from a god, but rather from evolved justifications of behavior. There's a mighty struggle going on to re-define taking music without the author's permission as ethical, based on the ego-soothing concepts that it's really in their interest.

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (1)

fmoliveira (979051) | about 7 years ago | (#21086975)

Our ethics should be based on what makes our life better, and things that people can agree on.

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (2, Informative)

Xiaran (836924) | about 7 years ago | (#21087053)

With regards to your sig... one space after the period was not really started by the internet... but became the new typographic convention once everyone started using mostly proportional fonts. Its the defacto typographic standard these days and has been for quite some time. THe fonts these days are designed with having a single space in mind. Im not a graphic designer but have many of them as friends.

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (1)

SCHecklerX (229973) | about 7 years ago | (#21088227)

Well, it's hard to teach this old dog new tricks. I shall continue to use two spaces after each sentence end, and also after my state and before my zip code in address blocks. Neener!

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087321)

The idea that the mathematical representation of an idea is ownable property is repugnant, and you may be assured that while it can exist in an ethical framework, it is not a universally accepted tenet and it is not incorrect to reject it.

We realized murdering people was a bad thing, we realized stupid laws against wearing purple were a bad thing, and we're realizing this intellectual property garbage is a bad thing. All three of these reflect understanding evolved over time. Jesus Christ, the idea that you can own a mathematical representation of an idea is itself an evolved understanding.

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | about 7 years ago | (#21087439)

There's a mighty struggle going on to re-define taking music without the author's permission as ethical

That was the norm for thousands of years of recorded history. The notion of copyright is a much more recent (i.e. modern times only) idea. The redefinition was the introduction of copyright, not the desire of some people to return to the previous system.

The situation in Brazil is somewhat unique in the world (and perhaps not the best example) because Brazil has among the highest (sometimes the highest, it fluctuates year to year) income inequalities on earth. There are multi million dollar mansions covering the hills around Rio, complete with walls, barbed wire, and armed guards with crime ridden and poverty stricken shanty towns visible through the distant haze from these mountaintop redoubts of the elite. Now, if you were living in a crap filled and crime ridden slum day after day with street gangs, violence, the highest murder rate on the planet and innumerable other hardships are you going to care about copyright? Certainly not, you would go to the local Internet cafe (when you had some cash to spend) and download music for copying and listening OR you might buy it on the street for a couple of Reals from a vendor's stall. You talk about the moral high ground, but would you want to pursue these people, who cannot afford your first world prices, for their last pennies simply for trying to get some entertainment that may serve to distract them, if only temporarily, from the miseries of their everyday lives?

If you are looking to bring up the copyright debate then the Brazilian context is perhaps not the best because it brings with it a lot of other baggage.

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (1)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087863)

The situation in Brazil is somewhat unique in the world (and perhaps not the best example) because Brazil has among the highest (sometimes the highest, it fluctuates year to year) income inequalities on earth.

Let me give you a recent number: 1700 X is the number between lowest and highest incomes.

Re:Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." (1)

mdmkolbe (944892) | about 7 years ago | (#21088641)

This is an excellent example of how what we think of as ethical derives not from a god, but rather from evolved justifications of behavior. There's a mighty struggle going on to re-define taking music without the author's permission as ethical, based on the ego-soothing concepts that it's really in their interest.

Within ethics there is a distinction between rules as ends (e.g. the ones that "derive from a god") and rules as means to satisfy the rules as ends.

For example, the speed limit is a means to achieve the end of not putting the lives of others at unnecessary risk. As such the fact that speed limits might be changed over time says nothing about whether other ethical rules are "derived from a god".

Copyright is the same way. It is and has always been a human construct. It was invented by humans 500 years ago to serve various ends which have changed over time such as censorship, promoting the useful arts or supporting artist's livelihoods.

Copyright is not an inherent right. So the fact that it might change over time is quite natural even for those who believe that some ethical rules are "derived from a god".

Misleading quote (1)

multisync (218450) | about 7 years ago | (#21086733)

From the article: 'While piracy is the bane of many musicians trying to control the sale of their songs ...


Who are these musicians who "control the sale of their songs?"

Re:Misleading quote (1)

doyoulikeworms (1094003) | about 7 years ago | (#21088261)

Radiohead.

Documentary "Good Copy Bad Copy" (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086741)

The well researched Danish Documentary(the Docu is spoken in English though) Good Copy Bad Copy [thepiratebay.org]
covered the Brazilian tecno brega movement and other examples of using digital content that are not necessary legal according to the Mega Corporations of content creation. Techno brega uses alot of sampling from major recording industry material. Tecno Brega artists give their content to bootleggers to distribute throughout Brazil. The artists themselves make no money from these CD sales instead they make money by throwing parties and burning recordings of their events to people who attend.

Thepiratebay link to a torrent download of this Documentary [thepiratebay.org] (Note this torrent is legal and the Documentary makers on their website which I linked to above created this torrent)
Streaming Flash Clip of the same Documentary from Blip.tv [goodcopybadcopy.blip.tv]

ah it all makes sense now (1)

deathtopaulw (1032050) | about 7 years ago | (#21086775)

i talk regularly in chatrooms on the p2p program soulseek. Soulseek has a massive south american userbase and I have discovered so many cool bands thanks to their members sitting in chatrooms and telling people to download their stuff

just think about how fast popularity can spread if it's not linked to monetary value

I, for one, welcome these overlords: (4, Insightful)

yoprst (944706) | about 7 years ago | (#21086875)

SELECT country_name, "Pop Music Scene Thrives on Piracy" FROM countries WHERE GDP_per_capita < some_limit

Up-and-comers use songs as advertisements (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21086951)

More established artists might feel different.

I don't see how this makes piracy more or less legitimate.

It seems like this is just another form of artist control that just happens to incidentally intersect the information-wants-to-be-free meme.

Before it was a good it was a service (2, Insightful)

szyzyg (7313) | about 7 years ago | (#21086981)

Back before edison and all those other people figured out how to record music the musicians had to play music live.

Re:Before it was a good it was a service (3, Funny)

AndersOSU (873247) | about 7 years ago | (#21087529)

See that's a common misconception. Actually Bach pioneered the micropayment financial system when he used Germany's ubiquitous surveillance to monitor and debit 5 pfennig from the bank account anyone caught humming any portion of "Christ lag in Todesbanden"

Misleading? (1)

east coast (590680) | about 7 years ago | (#21086983)

If the artist is giving this stuff away is it piracy?

It seems that the issue is getting a bit blurred between the concepts of giving something away and piracy.

I know it's not a popular idea but I still think that an artist should have rights to do what he wants with his creation. If they want to give it away for free to build a good fanbase that's great but that still doesn't dismiss people who are taking something without paying for it if the artist has put a price tag on it. Nor does it justify the downloading of a work even if it is offered freely from one source such as the Radiohead issue.

Proof positive the copyright regime is misguided? (5, Insightful)

Camael (1048726) | about 7 years ago | (#21086991)

This is what happens in Brazil, from the article:

While piracy is the bane of many musicians trying to control the sale of their songs, tecnobrega artists see counterfeiters as key to their success. Artists, who make their money off of live shows, deliver their CDs directly to the street vendors, who determine the price that market can bear. This "mixtape" phenomenon is popular in other parts of the world, including Argentina and the United States, where it is an integral part of hip-hop.
"Piracy is the way to get established and get your name out. There's no way to stop it, so we're using it to our advantage," explains Gabi Amarantos, who frequently appears on Brazilian TV on the strength of bootleg sales of her CDs (from which artists don't get a cut).

Technically, there is no copyright infringement involved since the artists themselves allow their works to be duplicated.

What is however interesting is that this technobrega movement severely undermines one of the arguments frequently cited by the RIAA in favour of stricter copyright laws, which is that piracy undermines the ability of the music and film industries to invest in the next generation of local talent by lowering revenues from current sales.

Also from the article :

"This year the multinational record labels will only release about 40 records by Brazilian artists, while tecnobrega artists will release around 400," said Ronaldo Lemos, a law professor at Brazil's respected Getulio Vargas Foundation. "The record industry argues if intellectual property isn't protected there will be no innovation. But tecnobrega has shown that's not true."

The original intention of copyright as stated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause/ [wikipedia.org] was :

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

Given that the tecnobrega movement has shown that copyright protection is not necessary to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, isn't it time to reconsider the whole basis of copyright law?

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

east coast (590680) | about 7 years ago | (#21087267)

What is however interesting is that this technobrega movement severely undermines one of the arguments frequently cited by the RIAA in favour of stricter copyright laws, which is that piracy undermines the ability of the music and film industries to invest in the next generation of local talent by lowering revenues from current sales.

Also from the article :

"This year the multinational record labels will only release about 40 records by Brazilian artists, while tecnobrega artists will release around 400,"


Actually, this doesn't undermine the RIAA position at all. Don't forget that as much as we like to target the RIAA as an entity we're forgetting the man behind the curtain: The record labels.

What the technobrega kids are doing is putting out their own works and hoping for a profit at a show. Labels can't do that. Labels live on the sales of the recordings and for a record company to take a chance on a new artist they're going to need to see sales from an existing artist to have the capitol to make it all happen.

If artists can afford to produce their music and tour without the financial help of others it's a really good deal. We're still not in a time where that is always possible and some artist simple can not fund their own releases while keeping food on the table. That is where the record companies come in.

People are still being very short sighted into seeing why record labels had and to a limited point still have a place in the music industry. There certainly has been a big turn around in the last decade but it's still not perfect.

And knowing that these kids are mixing up their works mostly on PCs, it makes me wonder how much of the software that they're using is pirated. While I don't think the manufacturers of professional music software are hurting too much it still makes me hope that those who are doing well for themselves will take the time to owe up and put some money back into an industry that they're making a buck off of.

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087769)

The fine article said a tecnobrega musician makes R$ 850 and said that it's a "decent salary." That is a wage you can only live on if you're willing to live in a favela.

The article also said tecnobrega puts out 400 albums/year vs 40 of the traditional music industry. Ask yourself which artist is able to carve out a confortable living, Caetano Veloso or tecnobrega.

Don't take this tecnobrega too seriously. You, as a US American, European or Japanese would not be able to live with the consequences.

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

s20451 (410424) | about 7 years ago | (#21087925)

Given that the tecnobrega movement has shown that copyright protection is not necessary to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, isn't it time to reconsider the whole basis of copyright law?

Sure, as soon as I figure out how to make money by performing software on stage.

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

Wordsmith (183749) | about 7 years ago | (#21088569)

You making money off your software isn't necessary to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Some people make software for money, some people make software for free. Some people make software for free and then try to make money off of related services. The latter two can still happen without any copyright protection.

Do you believe that if copyright was undone tomorrow, people would stop making art and creative works altogether? Many would stop, but everyone?

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

s20451 (410424) | about 7 years ago | (#21088663)

Do you believe that if copyright was undone tomorrow, people would stop making art and creative works altogether? Many would stop, but everyone?

Of course not, although in your way of thinking, it must certainly be a strange coincidence that the most innovative and creative nation on Earth also has some of the strongest intellectual property protection.

Also, you're admitting that "many would stop" producing software? So either IP laws are justified in light of the constitution or writing software is not a useful art?

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

Wordsmith (183749) | about 7 years ago | (#21088849)

I'm not sure what you're getting at in the last line. I recognize that software is a creative product of the same general nature as music, literature and so forth. If any of it deserves IP protection, it all does.

But I question both the need and the underlying justification for IP protection. It's an artificial construct, this protection. Traditional theft is much easier to identify as wrong - what you take from me, I no longer have, and therefore I am harmed, so the taking is wrong unless it's of something freely given. IP doesn't work that way. What you take from me, I still have; all I've lost is some nebulous exclusive domain over it, which may or may not be valuable. If you copy my song, or my software, my original loses no quality. I simply am no longer in a position to stop other people from also having it. I'm not clear why I, even as a creator, should have any right to demand that exclusivity in the first place.

But the constitution provides a justification - for the promotion of the progress useful arts and sciences. As a very hands-off, laissez-faire type, I don't even think that's a very good justification (I don't see it as the government's job to ensure art or science progresses), but there it is. So let's deal with it on those terms. While profit potential is -a- motivator for the promotion of useful arts and sciences, and a very powerful one, open source software, this music phenomenon and several other examples show other powerful motivators exist as well. IP law isn't absolutely necessary to promote arts and sciences, though it can help, and surely often does; in its current form, it arguably often hurts the process.

So the real question is, does the constitution's justification for IP law only apply if it's absolutely necessary to promote arts and sciences, or does it also apply if it's merely helpful. What if it's sometimes helpful, and sometimes harmful, as now is the case? As a proponent of liberty, I can't see either of the latter two as a strong enough rationale; it means restricting expression (of others' ideas, specifically) for possible, but uncertain benefit; I'm not OK with that.

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (2, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about 7 years ago | (#21087979)

What is however interesting is that this technobrega movement severely undermines one of the arguments frequently cited by the RIAA in favour of stricter copyright laws, which is that piracy undermines the ability of the music and film industries to invest in the next generation of local talent by lowering revenues from current sales.

It's not so much that it undermines the argument, as it underscores it for what it is -- a business model they insist is necessary for the production of music, but which probably isn't.

Artists who embrace this self-publishing method don't need investment from the RIAA et all -- they make music, engage their fans, and help people to find and listen to their music -- then they coax them out to a show. They probably make a modest amount of money, but they don't have as much overhead, and they don't have middlemen to pay. They'll probably never be mega-stars either.

For the RIAA to invest in local artists, they need to find acts they think that they can sell, set them up with all sorts of help in producing something that is up to 'professional' standards, and then marketing it to as wide of a market as possible. In the process, the music tends to migrate to a boring degree of sameness, and the artists become beholden to the recording company, and has to sell a bazillion records to overcome the "losing money math" used by these companies.

They're not interested in groups which are locally marketed and have a good following. They're goal isn't to put music into the hands of people looking for it so they can actually hear good music. They're looking to find a group they can market to a very large amount of people -- ideally, conforming to whatever niche market they already have good marketing channels to get exposure to; take Clear Channel for example. Everyone, in every market, hearing a selection of songs chosen to maximize the commercial successes and sell records to the same established fan-base.

The RIAA doesn't care about artists who want people to hear their music and come to a live show in a local venue -- they don't make their money off live performances from what I know. The RIAA is making their money off the already recorded stuff, and to do that, they need to convince us that if it weren't for them, there wouldn't be any recorded music worth listening to. They just don't want you to know that an artist can make and distribute good music without their help.

There's a busker in the city I live in (Ottawa, Canada). He plays in the summer at an open air market. He's got a great whiskey-coarse voice, and plays some of the best steel guitar blues I've ever heard from a young-ish white guy. He sells his CDs out of his guitar case for 10 bucks a pop, and gets good tips for performing. I suspect he does alright for himself, because he always has a crowd, and always gets tips -- because he can sing, and he gives an earnest performance for the crowd. He may even actually play some club gigs as well, I've no idea.

I suspect these Brazilians aren't really all that different from local bands all over the place who manage to eke out an income by actually getting their music into the hands of people who otherwise wouldn't hear it. Unfortunately, the RIAA et al are trying to convince us that all of these "alternate distribution channels" are piracy so they can make people believe that any music not provided by them in a secure, DRM bundle must be illegal. They'd have us lock down any mechanism which they haven't vetted -- even to the exclusion of self-published artists who are encouraging you to give copies of their music to your friends.

Cheers

Re:Proof positive the copyright regime is misguide (1)

cas9574 (1178387) | about 7 years ago | (#21088685)

I don't listen to the radio. I don't want to hear the same songs over and over again for 10 years. More accurately I listen to the radio for an average of 1 hour per month. When I'm downloading music whether legal or illegal, I tend to triple my spending on legal copies of music. You can't buy music you don't know exists. While there are a lot of people out there who fancy themselves justified in mooching off the system, or trendy for bucking it, there are plenty of people that just want to find decent intelligent art.

In Soviet Japan (3, Interesting)

CurbyKirby (306431) | about 7 years ago | (#21087149)

... Manga copies Doujinshi.

In Free Culture, Lawrence Lessig describes the doujinshi (copyright-infringing comics) industry in Japan and describes how it not only fuels the market for "official" manga comics but can influence them as well.

These copycat comics are not a tiny part of the manga market. They are huge. More than 33,000 "circles" of creators from across Japan produce these bits of Walt Disney creativity. More than 450,000 Japanese come together twice a year, in the largest public gathering in the country, to exchange and sell them. This market exists in parallel to the mainstream commercial manga market. In some ways, it obviously competes with that market, but there is no sustained effort by those who control the commercial manga market to shut the doujinshi market down. It flourishes, despite the competition and despite the law. ...

Yet this illegal market exists and indeed flourishes in Japan, and in the view of many, it is precisely because it exists that Japanese manga flourish.


Linky: http://www.sslug.dk/~chlor/lessig/freeculture/c-piracy.html#creators [sslug.dk]

Freeloaders ahoy in Brazil (3, Interesting)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087199)

Just so you know, nobody listens to this in major cities. I don't think this stuff is nowhere near the airwaves of major cities. It's a very low-wage kinda subculture thing and as such gets very little attention. Except where it's lumpenproletariat galore, which is basically their scene, I suppose.

"Brega" means "tacky", having extremely bad taste. Like refrigerator penguins. Like when you try to interpret a fashion trend but get it all wrong because it looks so cheap and ridiculous. Imagine rednecks, but a 1000 times worse. Definitely not mainstream. And limited to a specific region of Brazil.

Low-wage Brazilians typically don't want to pay for anything. They get tax discounts after tax discounts. A typical porter or handyman is a tax-free guy. He gets free medical services and education (which both suck, BTW...), sustained by those that are between a rock and a hard place - the middle class that does pay a hefty 37% tax on income; and the businesses, industries, etc. That's 3-4 months working for the government. Yup. Doctors, engineers, consultancy firms - anyone who's not poor. The leftist corrupt government caters to these people, giving out more government aid and tax-cuts, because then they vote for them.

So why would they pay for music? They're already a bunch of freeloaders, anyway. If they're unemployed, they just pack up and go buy contraband products in neighboring Paraguay (they have a tax-free policy on imports, I think) to resell on sidewalks. No Union protest... Just their very own tax-free shortcut to survival. This is just how their life is. How fucked up. And now some foreigners and academics are fascinated with this...LOL.

Plus, that music sucks. Real bad.

Re:Freeloaders ahoy in Brazil (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21087719)

...But it's the only music out of Brazil that I've ever heard of.

It's not my favorite, for sure, but I can see the creativity and energy involved. More interesting, musically and academically, than the stogy old crap that everybody else is putting out. I probably just don't like it 'cause I'm getting old.

As for the lumpenproletariat nature of the listeners, well, that's always where the best music comes from. Rap, rock, jazz, blues, country...all of them were originally seen as low-class crap for the low-class subcultures. And, were originally seen as 'unlistenable' by the upper class. And all of them faded quickly into obscurity, of course. Er...

So, that music will probably have a greater effect on the world than anything coming out of the big cities in Brazil. Ha!

Re:Freeloaders ahoy in Brazil (0, Troll)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087995)

As for the lumpenproletariat nature of the listeners, well, that's always where the best music comes from. Rap, rock, jazz, blues, country...all of them were originally seen as low-class crap for the low-class subcultures.

You ever read a biography about a Jazz musician, where his pop would beat the shit out of him if he didn't play the trumpet for 8 hours a day?

This is not the kind of music I'm speaking of. Consider Hip Hop. A major industry phenomenom. To me, the sound of retards. Tecnobrega is more like in this 2nd category. We're talking people with no musical talent (then again, I suppose anyone can push buttons).

Re:Freeloaders ahoy in Brazil (1)

synthespian (563437) | about 7 years ago | (#21087823)

I'm sorry my post was labeled a flamebait. Unfortunately, since I live here and am not just reading a Slashdot thread, I know what I'm talking about.

Re:Freeloaders ahoy in Brazil (1)

photomonkey (987563) | about 7 years ago | (#21087993)

This doesn't seem like flamebait to me. Offering a counterpoint is not picking a fight.

No need to look at Brazil (1)

The-Bus (138060) | about 7 years ago | (#21087225)

It's been happening here for a while. If you're a new band you can get critical acclaim and exposure at a level that wasn't possible say, fifteen years ago (unless you had a friend at Spin or RS that would do a write-up on you).

Kelefah Sanneh of the NY Times summed it up nicely in this article [nytimes.com] about Vampire Weekend [vampireweekend.com] :

For a proactive indie-rock fan in 2007 a debut album is more like an end product than a starting point. By the time that first shrink-wrapped and bar-coded CD finds its way into shops, the band will probably be old news, having suffered through many online cycles of hype and backlash. In a world that won't wait patiently for an album release date, it probably makes more sense to talk about a debut MP3, a debut YouTube appearance, a debut MySpace page.

In a sense this new state of affairs is really an old one, a throwback to the early 1960s, when concerts and singles ruled, and albums were merely compilations. And it probably makes bands (not to mention record companies) nervous: It means you can pick up fans faster, and lose them faster too.
I don't know how the economics work, but I'm sure that for certain bands, if they can give away an album to get people to come to a show, they may end up making more money that way.

Back To The Future (2, Interesting)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | about 7 years ago | (#21087257)

From the dawn of history, music has always been a service, and never a good. I don't see why the existence of ultra rich musicians should be seen as anything other than an anomaly.

This looks like... (1)

Yaa 101 (664725) | about 7 years ago | (#21087285)

This looks a lot like the cut-throat competition of the Jamaican recording industry until they signed the Berne convention in 1994, after that date they became irrelevant from a cultural point of view.

The real bane of brazilian musicians (1)

rabryan21 (1024373) | about 7 years ago | (#21087497)

While piracy is the bane of many musicians trying ...

No, I think the true bane of Brazilian musicians is the existence of this song [wikipedia.org]

American music scenes thrive on piracy (1)

athloi (1075845) | about 7 years ago | (#21087565)

I enjoy early music, which is medieval and before classical-styled ecclesiastical music. There are some who still practice it, and having their MP3s has allowed me to know what to buy when I do place that order through the pain-in-the-ass place in Ohio that actually has some of these CDs.

There's some merit to this (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | about 7 years ago | (#21087723)

Why spend thousands on schemes to protect digital music, why spend millions on promotional material?

Just post some tracks as mp3s on the website, let people copy it. Someone somewhere will buy it, you could sell the CD with a free t-shift and people would then buy it for the t-shirt.

This is how Metallica became famous, people trading their bootleg recordings of them.

In other news... (1)

mi (197448) | about 7 years ago | (#21087751)

  • Reinforced concrete barriers help keep skidding cars from hitting the oncoming traffic.
  • Steel armor plates reduce the impact of improvised explosive devices.
  • Kibbutz sets the clock based on the terrorist rocket-salvoes timings.

In other words, the presence of a work-around does not justify the actions which cause the problem, which, in this case, is "music piracy" also well known as thievery.

Exactly what it is... (1)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about 7 years ago | (#21088107)

music is transformed from a good to a service
Finally, someone gets it. Until the RIAA and co took over, that is exactly what music was, and is. They were trying to make it something it wasn't, which lasted for a while and is now failing. Time to get back with it and let music be what it really is.

A musician is paid for their service of performing the piece. Everything else in music (e.g. MP3s, etc.) is fair game for free trade, which in turn promotes the artist, which in turn drives performances. Break the cycle and the artists suffer.

"Live music"!!?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21088361)

The old "promotes live music" canard..

What about all those artists like Britney and Ashley? Record Companies invest so much time and money in their images, and in fixing up their vocals in million-dollar protools-equipped studios. "Live music" is simply taking away their right to sell CDs and appear on MTV.

performance = service?? (1)

jwiegley (520444) | about 7 years ago | (#21088565)

You mean I would actually be paying to see and hear the performance as a service rather than treat the sequence of air compressions as a good? I mean that would be like... well, like it use to be.

Go out and see your local philharmonic. I mean if you want to pay for talent, imagine having to put on the kind of performance they do. One and a half live performances a week for half the year. Oh yeah... your "set" might include a single movement lasting over 4 hours. ("For Philip Guston", composer: Morton Feldman. Or his unrecorded six hour String Quartet No. 2, the bows are never lifted off the strings.) In general movements are longer than rock/top-40/rap and close to scores of performers are expected to play in tune and in sync. Beethoven's ninth symphony, fourth movement is 25 minutes.

Yes. it's a service. Anybody can make several "takes" and then keep only the best one to sell. The value is in the talents of the performers. That is a service.

Re:performance = service?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21088845)

Off-topic, but for mr. Wiegley, there are even TWO recordings of Feldman's second quartet.

Not piracy (2, Informative)

pazu (99303) | about 7 years ago | (#21088671)

Why people are calling this "piracy" when the artists themselves are handing over the originals to be copied? This is not piracy, this is free, lawful, copying.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?