I’m against the idea that the old infrastructure is a given, now that most of it is at best unnecessary and at worst actively damaging to the vital relationship between artist and audience.

Well said. It’s refreshing to hear this from a successful artist such as yourself.

Thanks for the links. As for the weird fight, you need to go back to the beginning to put that into context as well.

Cheers!
Jon

For a bit of context on where I’m coming from, I’d suggest going and reading a few other posts on my site, where this was first posted, that hopefully put it in context… For the record, I’m not anti-infrastructure. I’m against the idea that the old infrastructure is a given, now that most of it is at best unnecessary and at worst actively damaging to the vital relationship between artist and audience. Build the team you need as the need arises, don’t spend what you haven’t got, and don’t make the music you were born to make, not that some marketing dickhead tells you is going to sell…

anyway, here’s a handful of posts that might help:

• Indepependent Music Manifesto• Transformative Vs Incremental Change• Spotify: Are They The Bad Guys?• If Spotify Is The New Radio, The Artists Are Winning.

There are lots more, should you be interested, but those four probably frame this particular article well.

Steve

Incidentally, do you think Dreddsnik is right and that I’m wasting my time trying to enlighten you? Or do you think it’s possible that you might be convinced to neutralise copyright in your work, such that your fans are liberated and need no longer live in fear that you might sue them?

I think you’re taking a lot out of context. The first comment post in this thread shows that you have some misconceptions about my beliefs. My fans have no fear that I might sue them. So, not sure where you’re coming from.

A musician doesn’t WANT to sue the artist who flatters them by remixing them, but they need the power to sue them just in case they haven’t first paid for a license to do so.

Musician’s don’t sue people who remix because they didn’t ‘pay a license’ anyway. That doesn’t happen. What happens is someone uses their work and simply doesn’t bother to fill in the forms and the ‘musician’ (writer/composer) doesn’t receive his revenue stream (royalty) which his livelihood often depends upon. That’s how the system works. Nobody asks artists to pay licenses ‘up front’ in order for people to ‘cover’ or ‘remix’ their work. The rule is simply that when you release, you declare the use so that those people’s works that you are using receive their share. This part of the system isn’t ‘unfair’ and it allows tons of people to work and expand upon other people’s work. It’s only ‘if’ someone’s interpretation would show the work in a negative light (e.g. for example a parody or something that endorsed the use of class A drugs for children, etc.) that an composer or artist would refute that use.

Personally, I believe that copyright should be reformed. I believe that the length of copyright should be reduced and ‘use it or lose it’ should be enforced. I believe that if anyone is to own copyright on works, it should be the creator. If the creator decides to enter into an agreement and ‘lease’ the copyright to a third party, I believe the length of time for use should be limited and reversion back to the creator be a period of something like a decade (but, only if the copyright is being used actively.)

If one comes here to talk about alternative ways of getting your art, whatever it is, to the fans without the middle man, your time is well spent.

If one here to use a very badly thought out law as a baseball bat type of negotiating tool, then one might be wasting time.

Trust me Crosbie, you’re wasting your time. And ours.

Billy, a lot of us don’t think he is wasting our time. Sorry.

A musician doesn’t WANT to sue the artist who flatters them by remixing them, but they need the power to sue them just in case they haven’t first paid for a license to do so.

If you can’t conceive of ever needing to sue anyone, why are you so desperate to retain the power to do so?

Incidentally, do you think Dreddsnik is right and that I’m wasting my time trying to enlighten you? Or do you think it’s possible that you might be convinced to neutralise copyright in your work, such that your fans are liberated and need no longer live in fear that you might sue them?