From Jon Drukman Sent Wed, May 20th 1998, 18:14
From Jon Drukman Sent Wed, May 20th 1998, 18:14
> > this guy was ripping off records owned by us and putting them up for > > distribution - the fact he wasn't charging is irrelevant the fact that > > these tracks were 'rare' is irrelevant. the fact that neither warp nor autechre owns the rights to many of them may, however, have been relevant. > > 'people' seem to think that everyone has a god given right to listen > > to every piece of music ever written. 'people' are right. intellectual property copyrights suck. haven't we learned anything from negativland/plunderphonics? > > when a band writes a track for a charity compilation and gives the > > track free of charge so the charity can raise funds with it you can > > see how they might be annoyed when someone starts freely distributing > > that track. anyone who could willingly withhold money from a charity is a shit and will no doubt suffer their sins at some later point in life. if the charity comp is out of print tho, download the track and send some $ to the charity. > > bands can release tracks however they see fit. it is _their_ art. can't disagree with that. > > autechre, boards of canada and aphex etc write more tracks than you or > > i will _ever_ hear, don't lose sleep over it. i'm not. it's the meat beat manifesto tracks that i lose sleep over. > > bands make no commercial gain by limiting releases, quite the > > opposite, they do it so some fans somewhere can have a special release > > that gives them a warm glow. this fan may not have mask1 but they have > > basscadet box set. swings and roundabouts dudz. the brave new > > copyright free world be be a very uniformly grey place if everyone had > > everything. [tangent alert] i believe it would be exactly the opposite. people would stop obssessing about this or that rare release which is probably no more appealing that the widely available ones. people wouldn't have to spend $30 to get one record. they could buy six records for $5 and get exposed to a wider variety of music. sounds like a good deal to me. > > whilst this site may not have had whole commercial albums, others do. so go after them. > > *there cannot be one rule for one and one rule for others*. why not? the police turn a blind eye to small amount of marijuana possession all the time. > > if you are > > distributing copyright material you are infringing copyright. this > > means the artist is not being paid. if the artist is not paid the > > artist cannot survive making music. artist doesn't make music. it has yet to be proven to my satisfaction that rarity mp3s are going to put anyone out of work. > > please forward this to idm someone. this is my last word on the > > matter, time constraints etc. thank god we won't have to listen to more specious reasonings from you then. as an artist i will put my money where my mouth is: i will make mp3s of my jungle CD available once the CD has been out for a month. there are already mid-quality previews of some tracks at http://sticky.bud.com/ if i had been thinking about this shit when i was doing the liner notes i would have put something like "please don't make mp3s, official ones are available from http://blahblahblah..." Jon Drukman xxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Plan: Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway.