Violence and noodle soup
p2pnet news view | P2P | Music:- Jim Griffin, co-founder of the Pho list and the man behind Warner Music’s Choruss, recently launched a personal attack on me.
The pho list describes itself thus:
“A community of people who love noodle soup and the convergence of entertainment and technology.”
Someone left a link to Keith Knight’s http://www.kchronicles.com/ satirical cartoon on the right.
It isn’t about music, but it’s relevant because the link comes in a story in which discusses how and why Griffin accused me and p2pnet of promoting violence.
He was following in the footsteps of Vivendi Universal, EMI, Sony Music and, of course, Warner Music, founding members if the Korporate Kopyright Kartels.
They started out trying to kill file sharing, but all they did was to promote it, telling hundreds of millions people around the world about the P2P networks and MP3 downloads.
Similarly, Griffin’s rant perhaps opened the way to conversations between people who under normal circumstances would never have thought about talking with each other.
Fingers crossed.
Cheers!
Jon
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
August, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
August 3rd, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Wait! is there the insinuation that Griffins’ remarks are a wet noodle here?
August 3rd, 2009 at 3:55 pm
This is just another show that they do not know their own customers, excuse me consumers, since they started calling us consumers we have become anonymous surveys and stats for them.
If they only know what some of us do for a living they’d be surprised. Heck even i am surprised sometimes when we are sitting around and talking about this, knowing who people are and what they do.
I am amazed a private corporation like the Riaa and Mpaa can behave like they do and still expect us to buy their products with a smile.
I am all for supporting the artists, but i go straight to their sites and put w/e amount i can afford and feel like it is worth on their paypal acct’s or what they use. Thus i know the money has gone to the artist.
Actually i think a noodle have more intelligence than Riaa & Mpaa combined
August 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pm
His comments show the self imposed isolation that many, many people live in in some form or another. He really doesn’t know any better. He sees his way of life being heavily threatened because it’s antiquated and no longer sustainable. It’s not surprising that he would choose to attack.
Alas, to attack one of the most valuable members of the very culture he is fighting against shows his ineptitude. To fight something properly, it is best to know as much about what you are fighting as possible.
Also, as an aside to TheWilmerX, please do note that the artist is not the only one hurt. There are many more people involved in making a disc than the artist. The sound engineers, the mastering engineers, all of the support staff. Many of those people, while they may be fairly well compensated (and don’t for an instant think most of them are rolling in the bucks) they too depend on music sales in some form, and they too will be affected if too many people try to bypass the record company by giving directly to the artist.
August 3rd, 2009 at 6:00 pm
tinfoil, if people add value to an artist’s work, the value they add, their work, will be sought and rewarded just as much as the artist’s work.
Have another look at Kutiman’s work. His mixing is as valued to his audience, as the constituent artists’ works are valued by those artists’ audiences. Without copyright, all those who add value are free to add it without needing permission from a copyright holder. They can also get paid without such permission (CC-NC sucks). But of course, if some musicians get quite popular and can afford to pay sound engineers, then they may well do so, or their audiences may. Who knows? It depends on where the demand is coming from, and who is offering to meet it.
Without copyright there’s a completely free market. Anyone can do anything without permission – the way it should be.
What makes you think that without copyright no-one will want engineers?
August 3rd, 2009 at 9:54 pm
“What makes you think that without copyright no-one will want engineers?”
You make a good point CF. The word “engineers” can be replaced with just about any word having to do with the entertainment industry for that matter.
As an aside, I didn’t know recording studios were paid based on number of record sales. I would have thought this to be a area where the required services were paid for up front. After all, set fees for this kind of work shouldn’t be all that hard to figure out given any experience in the field (ie: the type of music, number of tracks, number of “records” required, etc). It would be interesting to hear from someone who does this for a living.
August 4th, 2009 at 12:35 am
“As an aside, I didnât know recording studios were paid based on number of record sales. I would have thought this to be a area where the required services were paid for up front. After all, set fees for this kind of work shouldnât be all that hard to figure out given any experience in the field (ie: the type of music, number of tracks, number of ârecordsâ required, etc). It would be interesting to hear from someone who does this for a living.”
Speaking from experience (twenty years with a rather well-known local group, 3 albums under our belt — session work on numerous other products): the vast majority of musicians (read: unsigned) pay up front for studio time, and CDs. Been that way since the days of audio tape.
Major labels? Dunno, but it would REALLY surprise me if studio time “cost” them in any measurable quantity. (Google “Van Morrison’s contractual obligation record”, and you’ll find a bunch of stuff he was essentially REQUIRED to record, just to fulfill a contract.)
So, if the major labels could waste that much tape back in those days, and the technological overhead is so much lower nowadays…..
August 4th, 2009 at 10:17 am
” Major labels? Dunno, but it would REALLY surprise me if studio time âcostâ them in any measurable quantity. ”
It’s a neat accounting trick.
Studio time is one of the things the artist has to pay back the label for.
If the studio is owned by the label, and the engineer on salary, the labels can
use this to charge the artists a nice hourly rate that eats into the advance, or
any royalties.
The Labels have many handy little tools like that at their disposal, all of which end up taking almost
everything an artist or band would make away from the band, and into the labels pocket.
Why do you think they guard the secrets of their financials so vigorously.
I speak from my own personal experiences with the labels.
The contracts they give you are an amazing read, but they count on young eager musicians
to be so impressed by the offer, they don’t bother to read it.
” So, if the major labels could waste that much tape back in those days, and the technological overhead is so much lower nowadaysâ¦.. ”
Hence the recent attempt to cripple the stereo inputs on some high end Dell Laptops.
You don’t REALLY think they were afraid of someone making copies, do you ?
They are trying to prevent low cost home recording studios.
My neighbor is setting his up for under $300.00
ANYONE can have a recording studio for about $300.00.
Obviously there will be a lot of crap produced, but the exact same thing is true about major label output.
Someone IS going to break out, completely independent of any label ties. All of the tools are there now,
and cheap or free, in spite of all the effort by the industry to destroy or criminalize those tools …
… the REAL reason they fear the internet.