Posted on 09/22/2003 12:40:54 AM PDT by Prince Charles
MP3s Are Not the Devil
Since every penny I earn depends on copyright protection, I'm all in favor of reasonable laws to do the job.
But there's something kind of sad about the recording industry's indecent passion to punish the "criminals" who are violating their rights.
Copyright is a temporary monopoly granted by the government -- it creates the legal fiction that a piece of writing or composing (or, as technologies were created, a recorded performance) is property and can only be sold by those who have been licensed to do so by the copyright holder.
Without copyright, once a work was performed or printed, other people who saw or heard or read it could simply do their own performance or print their own editions, and keep all the money without paying a dime to the creator of the work.
At the same time, a book or song isn't land or even corporate stock. In exchange for the private monopoly of copyright, when it expires the work is then free for anyone to perform or print or record.
Until 1978, copyright only lasted 52 years in the U.S. -- and then only if you remembered to renew it. There were other technical lapses that could result in the inadvertent loss of copyright -- it wasn't really user-friendly.
And the most obnoxious feature of the law was that some authors outlived their copyright. Their most popular works would go into public domain while they were still alive and counting on the income. It's like revoking someone's Social Security at age 72, just because they had the temerity not to die when demographics predicted they would.
Since 1978, the law was changed so that copyright lasted until a certain number of years after the author's death. So not only did the author never outlive the copyright, but the author's dependents could continue to derive income from it for some time.
Also, copyright began, not when the work was listed with the Library of Congress, but rather from the moment of creation.
But there were loopholes. If you wrote something as an employee of a company that paid you a salary for creating it, then your writing was a "work made for hire" and the copyright belonged to the company. You had no rights.
Here's where the ugly stuff begins. A lot of publishers began routinely requiring writers to sign contracts that declared that what they wrote was a "work for hire," so that the authors wouldn't own any part of their own work. Of course the companies didn't actually hire the writers and give them benefits, like real employees. It was basically highway robbery -- the companies demanded that either the writers sign their names to a lie and give up all their rights, or the company wouldn't publish it.
Only a few of us were stubborn enough to refuse to sign work for hire contracts. It was an expensive moral quibble, but I have real objections to perjuring myself and pretending that I was hired by a company when in fact I never was. If I took all the risks and wrote something on spec, then the copyright should belong to me. I'd license them to do whatever was needed, but I wouldn't, in effect, declare them to be the author of my work.
Who Are the Thieves in This House?
So it's pretty hilarious to hear record company executives and movie studio executives get all righteous about copyright. They've been manipulating copyright laws for years, and all the manipulations were designed to steal everything they could from the actual creators of the work.
Do you think these companies care about the money that the actual creators of the work are being deprived of when people copy CDs and DVDs?
Here's a clue: Movie studios have, for decades, used "creative accounting" to make it so that even hit movies never manage to break even, thus depriving the creative people of their "percentage of profits." A few have dared to sue, but most figure that it isn't worth the ill will. (The sentence "You'll never work in this town again" runs through their minds. They remember what happened to Cliff Robertson after he blew the whistle on an executive who was flat-out embezzling!)
And record companies manage to skim enormous amounts of money from ever CD sold. As you can easily calculate by going to the computer store and figuring out the price of an individual recordable blank CD. Figure that the record companies have been paying a fraction of that price for years. Then subtract that from the price of a CD. Figure the songwriters and performers are getting some ludicrously small percentage -- less than twenty percent, I'd bet -- and all the rest flows to the record company.
In other words, the people complaining about all the internet "thieves" are, by any reasonable measure, rapacious profiteers who have been parasitically sucking the blood out of copyrights on other people's work.
And I say this with the best will in the world. In fact, these companies have expenses. There are salaries to pay. Some of the salaries are earned.
But remember that huge fortunes like, say, David Geffen's were made by getting ownership of record publishing companies. Count on it -- Geffen got a lot richer than any but a handful of the actual performers. And when their careers are over, the record company owner keeps right on earning.
Not only that, but the digital technologies that allow perfect-quality copying came as a huge windfall to the studios and record companies.
I basically replaced all my vinyl records and cassette tapes with CDs, and then replaced all our VHS tapes and laserdiscs with DVDs. The record companies and studios would have laughed if somebody said, "This is just an upgrade. I should be able to turn in my vinyl and cassettes for CDs and my videotapes for DVDs, for no more than the actual cost of production." Ha ha ha ha ha.
In all the ridiculously overblown "estimates" of how much the studios and record companies are "losing" from "piracy," nobody bothers to calculate just how much extra money they made from consumers paying full price for music and movies they had already paid full price for only a few years before.
That's all right, you see, because that helps the companies' bottom line, whereas piracy hurts it.
But how much?
The Hit-Making Machine
The real pirates -- people who make knock-off copies of CDs and DVDs and sell them in direct competition (or in foreign markets) -- make a lot of money in some markets, but most of those are overseas. It's a problem, but some reasonable combination of private investigation and police work and international treaties should deal with that.
Internet "pirates," though, usually are more like a long-distance group that trades CDs around.
If you got together with a few of your neighbors and each of you bought different CDs and then lent them to each other, that wouldn't even violate copyright.
In fact, the entire music business absolutely depends on the social interaction of kids to make hits. You stop kids from sharing music, and you've shut down the hit-making machine.
Copyright violation comes from the fact that digital copies -- even the compressed MP3 format -- are nearly perfect. And when you "lend" your copy to someone over the internet, you still have your original. And he can lend to ten more or a hundred more or a thousand more, and the record company is only paid for that first copy.
Well, that's not a good thing -- if that became the primary way music was published.
The record companies swear that it's making a serious inroad on sales, and they can prove it. How? By showing that their sales are way down in the past few years.
It couldn't possibly be because (a) most of us have already replaced all our old vinyl and cassettes, so all that windfall money is no longer flowing in, or (b) because the record companies have made some really lousy decisions as they tried to guess what we consumers would want to buy.
It couldn't possibly be that they've targeted all their marketing at precisely the market segment -- high school and college students -- who are most likely to be sharing MP3s over the internet.
Maybe if they started marketing more music that people my age would enjoy, they'd find that, lo and behold, there are customers who prefer to buy music the legal way!
It's All Happened Before
The irony is that we've played out this whole scenario before, more than once. When radio first started broadcasting records instead of live performances, the music publishing industry became livid. This was going to hurt sales! A compromise was reached whereby radio stations paid small fees to the publishers for each playing of a record.
But the truth is that it's a lot of bother for nothing. Radio didn't hurt record sales. Radio made record sales, because people wanted to own the records they heard on the radio. Radio let people hear musicians they might never have found otherwise.
Same thing with TV and movies. Yes, TV wiped out the B-movie market segment and it killed newsreels -- but it opened up a lucrative aftermarket that kept movies alive long after they would have stopped earning money. That's how Wizard of Oz and It's a Wonderful Life and many other movies became American icons.
And again, with the VCR, studios were terrified that people would tape things off the air and stop paying money for movies. (And the TV networks were terrified that people would tape shows and skip over the ads; they didn't realize that most of us are too lazy to skip over commercials.)
And rental videotapes! That was the end of the world!
When the studios finally stopped charging ninety bucks for a videotape, they discovered that the videotape (and now DVD) aftermarket was often bigger than the original theatrical release.
The internet is similar, but not identical, to these situations.
First, most of the people who are getting those free MP3s would not be buying the CDs anyway. They're doing this in order to get far more music than they can actually afford. That means that if they weren't sharing MP3s online, they would simply have less music -- or share CDs hand to hand. It does not mean that they would have bought CDs to get the tunes they're downloading from Napster-like sharing schemes.
That's why I laugh at their estimates of "lost sales."
Next week: Part 2
Copyright © 2003 by Orson Scott Card.
Please ping me when Part 2 comes out.
And a good one, I'll add, since that's unfortunately not necessarily synonymous with "respected and successful"...
Speaking of which, a movie based on "Ender's Game", with Card writing the screenplay, is currently in the works.
I basically replaced all my vinyl records and cassette tapes with CDs, and then replaced all our VHS tapes and laserdiscs with DVDs. The record companies and studios would have laughed if somebody said, "This is just an upgrade. I should be able to turn in my vinyl and cassettes for CDs and my videotapes for DVDs, for no more than the actual cost of production." Ha ha ha ha ha.In all the ridiculously overblown "estimates" of how much the studios and record companies are "losing" from "piracy," nobody bothers to calculate just how much extra money they made from consumers paying full price for music and movies they had already paid full price for only a few years before.
Ignoring unconstitutional laws like the Digital Copyright Millenium Act, there is no "requirement" to buy the same title again in a new format. Your fair use provisions of the first ammendment make no distinction of what manner you choose to use to view/hear a recorded work. You can home tape that title for playback in any format (again, ignoring the unconstitutional DCMA).
The companies can encourage "repurchase" of old albums and films (that long ago paid for their production expenses yet cost dollar for dollar the same as new product on the shelves, sometimes even more) by enhancing the release. They can remaster the sound using the leading edge technology, they can release it from a restore print or negative, they can add commentary from the commentators (and some of the actors in those commentary tracks have complained that they were not paid for that work, so much for the industry taking care of its own).
If a work becomes "public domain", there is nothing to stop the owner of the original negative from offering a superior product that could still come out on top in the marketplace.
Patents are granted a limited existance and some activist actors even complain that patents on AIDS medications should be released so that more companies could offer the medications cheaper. A bio-chemical formula may be more "important" than any escapist fare (be it a book, album, or movie) but those who research, toil, and invest are due rewards for their efforts.
Again, chalk it up to hypocrisy.
Copyright for the life of the author plus a certain amount of years is fair.
I get a kick out of how many people believe that they are entitled to "free" use of anothers property.
The mp3s that I have heard are substandard and I would not bother even trying to seek out such recordings unless the source materials were exceedingly rare.
There are plenty of "grey market" records that compile up old 45s and other cuts. Some of the recordings may be public domain, some are not. Few are probably owned by major corporations but that makes no difference. The original artists and copyright holders see none of the money from those releases (some companies will set aside a small percentage of the profits for any artist who steps forward seeking payment).
Is it any less ethical to download such recordings ("don't bootleg my bootlegs")?
Stay Safe !
As with any "lossy" compressed data format, there's a trade-off between size and quality.
When someone "rips" a CD and makes MP3 files from the music tracks, they choose what sampling rate to do it at -- the higher the sampling rate, the better the fidelity, but the larger the MP3 file. There's also an issue of using the proper amplitude range -- choose a bad one and the quality will suffer.
A good MP3 of a CD track is very, very good -- indistinguishable from the original unless you're gifted with extremely sensitive hearing. It's also quite large. Unfortunately, a lot of the MP3 files floating around the internet have been poorly made, or intentionally sacrifice quality for size.
The record companies swear that it's making a serious inroad on sales, and they can prove it. How? By showing that their sales are way down in the past few years.It couldn't possibly be because (a) most of us have already replaced all our old vinyl and cassettes, so all that windfall money is no longer flowing in, or (b) because the record companies have made some really lousy decisions as they tried to guess what we consumers would want to buy.
Here's a list of the top 10 selling albums of all time worldwide (cumulative as of fall 2000). The baby boomers just don't buy albums like they used to. The executives and the hired muscle at the RIAA both try to find new sources to keep pulling in more revenue every year.
1 Thriller Michael Jackson 1982
2 Dark Side Of The Moon Pink Floyd 1973
3 Their Greatest Hits 1971-1975 The Eagles 1976
4 The Bodyguard Original Soundtrack 1992
5 Rumours Fleetwood Mac 1977
6 Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band The Beatles 1967
7 Four Symbols (Led Zeppelin Vol.4) Led Zeppelin 1971
8 Elton John's Greatest Hits Elton John 1974
9 Jagged Little Pill Alanis Morissette 1995
10 Bat Out Of Hell Meatloaf 1978
Very few recordings past 1980 on that list. Very few prior to 1970 on that list. There were albums that are arguably better that were released before that date. The baby boomers just didn't buy them (and rebuy them) to the same degree.
I found this list which claims to be the top 100 selling albums of all time based on September 2003 RIAA information. I couldn't get the RIAA's website to load so I could not confirm if this matched any data they offered. Again, few modern albums in the top 50 and nothing very old in the top 100 (a Patsy Cline greatest hits, excepted).
No. Artist Album Title Times-Platinum
1. The Eagles Eagles/Greatest Hits 1971 - 1975 28
2. Michael Jackson Thriller 26
3. Pink Floyd The Wall 23
4. Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin IV 22
5. Billy Joel Greatest Hits, Volume I & II 21
6. Fleetwood Mac Rumours 19
7. AC/DC Back In Black 19
8. The Beatles The Beatles 19
9 Shania Twain Come On Over 19
10. Whitney Houston The Bodyguard (Soundtrack) 17
11. Hootie & The Blowfish Cracked Rear View 16
12. Elton John Greatest Hits 16
13. The Eagles Hotel California 16
14. The Beatles The Beatles 1967-1970 16
15. Boston Boston 16
16. Garth Brooks No Fences 16
17. Alanis Morissette Jagged Little Pill 16
18. Bruce Springsteen Born In The USA 15
19. Led Zeppelin Physical Graffiti 15
20. Pink Floyd Dark Side Of The Moon 15
21. Bee Gees Saturday Night Fever 15
22. The Beatles The Beatles 1962-1966 15
23. Guns 'N Roses Appetite For Destruction 15
24. Garth Brooks Double Live 15
25. Santana Supernatural 14
26. Backstreet Boys Backstreet Boys 14
27. Garth Brooks Ropin' The Wind 14
28. Meatloaf Bat Out Of Hell 14
29. Prince & The Revolution Purple Rain (Soundtrack) 13
30. Metallica Metallica 13
31. Steve Miller Band Greatest Hits 1974-1978 13
32. Simon & Garfunkel Simon & Garfunkel's Greatest Hits 13
33. Bruce Springsteen Bruce Springsteen & The E Street Band Live 1975-1985 13
34. Whitney Houston Whitney Houston 13
35. Backstreet Boys Millenium 13
36. Britney Spears Baby One More Time 13
37. Dixie Chicks Wide Open Spaces 12
38. Matchbox Twenty Yourself Or Someone Like You 12
39. Phil Collins No Jacket Required 12
40. Def Leppard Hysteria 12
41. Bon Jovi Slippery When Wet 12
42. Boyz II Men II 12
43. The Beatles Abbey Road 12
44. Various (Soundtrack) Forest Gump 12
45. Kenny Rogers Kenny Rogers' Greatest Hits 12
46. The Rolling Stones Hot Rocks 12
47. Shania Twain The Woman In Me 12
48. Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin II 12
49. Kenny G Breathless 12
50. Led Zeppelin Houses Of The Holy 11
51. Pearl Jam Ten 11
52. James Taylor James Taylor's Greates Hits 11
53. TLC CrazySexyCool 11
54. Celine Dion Falling Into You 11
55. Various (Soundtrack) Dirty Dancing 11
56. The Beatles Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band 11
57. The Eagles Eagles Greatest Hits Volume II 11
58. Jewel Pieces Of You 11
59 Various (Soundtrack) Titanic 11
60. Elton John Candle In The Wind 1997 11
61. Kid Rock Devil Without A Cause 11
62. 'N Sync No Strings Attached 11
63. Dixie Chicks Fly 10
64. Creed Human Clay 10
65. 'N Sync 'N Sync 10
66. Celine Dion Let's Talk About Love 10
67. No Doubt Traffic Kingdom 10
68. Notorious B.I.G. Life After Death 10
69. Doobie Brothers Best Of The Doobies 10
70. Green Day Dookie 10
71. Aerosmith Aerosmith's Greatest Hits 10
72. Garth Brooks The Hits 10
73. Mariah Carey Music Box 10
74. Eric Clapton Unplugged 10
75. Lionel Richie Can't Slow Down 10
76. Hammer Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em 10
77. Mariah Carey Daydream 10
78. ZZ Top Eliminator 10
79. Various (Soundtrack) Lion King 10
80. U2 The Joshua Tree 10
81. Van Halen 1984 10
82. Van Halen Van Halen 10
83. George Michael Faith 10
84. Nirvana Nevermind 10
85. Carole King Tapestry 10
86. Journey Greatest Hits 10
87. Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin 10
88. Madonna The Immaculate Collection 10
89. Madonna Like A Virgin 10
90. Bob Marley & The Wailers Legend 10
91. Tom Petty Greatest Hits 9
92. Various (Soundtrack) Top Gun 9
93. Various (Soundtrack) Footloose 9
94. 2 Pac All Eyez On Me 9
95. Smashing Pumpkins Mellon Collie And The Infinite Sadness 9
96. REO Speedwagon Hi Infidelity 9
97. Patsy Cline Greatest Hits 9
98. Mariah Carey Mariah Carey 9
99. Boyz II Men CooleyHighHarmony 9
100 Garth Brooks Garth Brooks 9
mp3s may give me higher density storage but I can't play them back as universally (I have to use the mp3 player in my computer or DVD player) and the menuing in my DVD player makes it difficult to branch through hundreds of recordings; your milage may vary.
I know that mp3s can sound good or bad. I also know that DVDs can look better than a laser disc but the source materials or poor or the compression is too weak, the image will be substandard. The potential for the technologies is not always reached.
I plan to work on getting a good sound sample from my vinyl because I will hear it in the repeated playback of those recordings. An extra hour in preparation will pay off in the continued playback over years.
With 45s, there are times they are great to have. There are also times where it is a pain to sit near the stereo so a new side can be placed every 2:30/4:00 minutes.
I remember when going to high school with a Billy Joel or an Elton John album would get your ass kicked. Don't even talk about Mariah or Whitney, you would of been stabbed by the Goths.
I've got the Beatles albums, Hot Rocks (but I also have a number of the original Rolling Stones albums), the Steve Miller hits album, the ZZTop thing, and maybe a handful of the rest. And I don't have any intent to pick up ANY of the other albums. Even the AC/DC one (I listed to some of their other albums growing up but am not so inclined to put them on these days having been overexposed to those albums).
I have Dark Side Of The Moon and The Wall but I am more likely to listen to Animals, Wish You Were Here, or even some of the older albums.
Most of the albums I routinely listen to will NEVER make this list (they are at the opposite end of the spectrum, one was virtually unreleased in the 1960s, Billy Nichols' album only had a few dozen promo copies pressed and those traded in the thousands of dollars, recently a legit CD was released of those Stones/Small Faces related cuts).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.