- zorn-list - mailman.xmission.com

Re: why isn't it stealing?
by William Crump 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

Sounds good to me. And the targets have made themselves easier to identify by coalescing into five huge blobs. William Crump ---------- >From: "john schuller" <superbadassmofo(a)hotmail.com> > Because I wish to see the major labels destroyed. Simple as that. > >

1 0

CD/music copying/stealing/etc.
by Dan Given 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

What I am failing to understand in this entire argument is why people think that they have a "right" to hear all music that has been recorded. If your argument is that you wouldn't have bought it anyway, then why should you be able to hear it. The way most of society has (unfortunately) developed means that music, like most other things, is a commodity, and has a monetary value placed on it. People in the production chain generally expect something in return for their labor. If you aren't willing to pay that price, why should you hear it? Is it written in the constitution of some countries that we have the right to life, liberty and music? People have said (here, or in other places where this same discussion has taken place) that they would copy, but not buy, a disc because: - they don't know enough about the artist to know if they would like it. Then ask someone whose judgement you trust for a recommendation. - can't afford it (someone said that here). Well, there are lots of things I can't afford (a new car, my own house, a long vacation), etc. Does that mean we are entitled to them anyway? As for copying discs or making compilations for friends to try things out - why not just let them listen to it at your house? Or lend it to them? I lend discs to friends quite frequently that I think they would be interested in. They don't copy them; they keep them for a couple of days or weeks, or even longer depending on how much I trust them and whether I want it back quickly, listen to them, decide if they think it is worth owning or not. They lend me things that I buy or don't buy, or maybe buy something else by that artist. I really don't see the need for making compilations for friends.

3 4

it's stealing
by CuneiWay＠aol.com 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

>If one has no intention of buying a particular album how does making a >copy >of that record take any money out of your labels/artists pockeet? If they >were never going to buy it anyway, their money would have never existed >for >you. Fine. If they aren't going to buy it, then they shouldn't buy it. No one is suggesting that anyone buy something that they don't want to buy and 'consume'. But they shouldn't be able to USE it if they don't buy it. That's the way the admittedly imperfect system works. If they are downloading or copying it and USING it (notice I am saying USING it - obviously if someone copies one of my releases 1,000 times and does absolutely NOTHING with it other than break the CDR in half after burning, then it is NOT having any adverse affect on me), then it's stealing. Period. Don't like my thinking on this? Fine. Ignore this posting. But it's still stealing. Don't try and argue/rationalize your way out of it. And don't say "I am tired of reading this stuff, and don't want to see it any more on this list". What you are really saying is "you are challenging my rationalization, and I don't like that". Again - you think it's ok? I can't convince you otherwise. And as Craig pointed out, it is very easy to copy CDs and because it is so easy, people seem to think it's 'ok'. But bottom line is that (1) the law is on my side in this argument as I am making it here and (2) neither I, nor the artists I represent think it's ok. We think you are stealing from us and we think you are doing something that you know is wrong and either you don't care because you are basically a nasty shifty shithead or you are someone who is able to convince themselves that because it *is* easy that it is ok. And if I am making someone uncomfortable with these postings, then that is precisely my point. Steve Cuneiform Records

2 1

Re: why isn't it stealing?
by Craig Rath 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

>Agreed. It's obvious that this is an important issue for Steve. He >surely puts a lot of time in on his label and his music, so let's honor >his request and not copy his stuff. a simple request by an artist or >independent label should be persuasive enough. So if an "independent label" ask you to not copy, you won't, but if a major label asks, you will? Where do you draw the line? Don't you just love flexible ethics? Craig M. Rath H: fripp(a)attbi.com W: rathc(a)questarweb.com

2 1

Re: it's stealing
by Craig Rath 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

At 04:01 PM 12/1/2002 -0800, you wrote: >The one question I have to raise is with >the "use" area. How does this play into the area of "borrowing" cd's. Right >now I am borrowing about 20 cd's from a friend of mine. I will enjoy these >cd's for about a month and then return them. Chances are I will not buy any >of the titles after listening to them for that amount of time. >Now even though I never bought these cd's I am using them. This is an issue which is common in the software world as well, and the basic idea behind it is that of "simultaneous use". Since there is still only one copy in use at any one time, there is no harm done. Many software companies allow you to buy one copy of a program and install it on more than one computer, as long as you only use one copy of the program at any one time. Therefore it is ok for you to have it installed at work and at home, since you can only be in one place at any given time. The same I would assume applies to CDs. Since your friend loaned you the CDs, he is unable to use them while you have them. Craig M. Rath H: fripp(a)attbi.com W: rathc(a)questarweb.com

1 0

Re: it's stealing
by john schuller 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

I think Steve is making some very good points. It is good to get these views from an independent label owner. The one question I have to raise is with the "use" area. How does this play into the area of "borrowing" cd's. Right now I am borrowing about 20 cd's from a friend of mine. I will enjoy these cd's for about a month and then return them. Chances are I will not buy any of the titles after listening to them for that amount of time. (I rarely listen to an album more than 5-10 times, I have to move on to the next thing). Now even though I never bought these cd's I am using them. The same for music from the library. Again, those pieces of music are being used without proper "usage" payment to the artist or label. Now again, I am not "for" burning independent releases by labels or artists that do not wish for it. I am just curious as to how this area fits in. Anyone can answer. Thanks, John Schuller >From: CuneiWay(a)aol.com >To: zorn-list(a)mailman.xmission.com >Subject: it's stealing >Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:39:51 EST > > >If one has no intention of buying a particular album how does making a > >copy > >of that record take any money out of your labels/artists pockeet? If they > >were never going to buy it anyway, their money would have never existed > >for > >you. > >Fine. If they aren't going to buy it, then they shouldn't buy it. No one is >suggesting that anyone buy something that they don't want to buy and >'consume'. > >But they shouldn't be able to USE it if they don't buy it. That's the way >the >admittedly imperfect system works. If they are downloading or copying it >and >USING it (notice I am saying USING it - obviously if someone copies one of >my >releases 1,000 times and does absolutely NOTHING with it other than break >the >CDR in half after burning, then it is NOT having any adverse affect on me), >then it's stealing. Period. > >Don't like my thinking on this? Fine. Ignore this posting. But it's still >stealing. Don't try and argue/rationalize your way out of it. > >And don't say "I am tired of reading this stuff, and don't want to see it >any >more on this list". What you are really saying is "you are challenging my >rationalization, and I don't like that". > >Again - you think it's ok? I can't convince you otherwise. And as Craig >pointed out, it is very easy to copy CDs and because it is so easy, people >seem to think it's 'ok'. But bottom line is that > >(1) the law is on my side in this argument as I am making it here > >and > >(2) neither I, nor the artists I represent think it's ok. We think you are >stealing from us and we think you are doing something that you know is >wrong >and either you don't care because you are basically a nasty shifty shithead >or you are someone who is able to convince themselves that because it *is* >easy that it is ok. > >And if I am making someone uncomfortable with these postings, then that is >precisely my point. > >Steve >Cuneiform Records > >_______________________________________________ >zorn-list mailing list >zorn-list(a)mailman.xmission.com >To UNSUBSCRIBE or Change Your Subscription Options, go to the webpage below >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/zorn-list John Schuller www.johnschuller.com www.worldmisery.com do you know the deutsch that I'm sprechen? _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

Re: why isn't it stealing?
by john schuller 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

What I am saying is that I do not mind at all if someone makes copies of my records. What other artists or labels want is totally up to them. I have no problem at all if an artist or label does not wish to have their cd's duplicated. (unless of course it is on a major label. I want to see the major's collapse) I personally do not make cd-r's of any records. So somewhere along the line we miscommunicated something. No problem. >From: CuneiWay(a)aol.com >To: superbadassmofo(a)hotmail.com, zorn-list(a)mailman.xmission.com >Subject: Re: why isn't it stealing? >Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:21:56 EST > >John, > >SINCE you were responding to my posting about copying of my labels >releases, >I assumed what you were saying was meant to have some bearing on my >posting. > >If you didn't mean that, then that's fine; but why are you quoting me when >talking about how you like people to take your music whether they pay for >it >or not? I assumed that this was a rebuttal against my postings. I'm sure >you >can understand why I was confused. I apologize for having dragged you into >this if I was wrong. > >Steve > > >Where did I ever presume to speak for you? You said - "you should not and > >can not presume to speak for me". > >I was speaking for *me*. John Schuller www.johnschuller.com www.worldmisery.com do you know the deutsch that I'm sprechen? _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

Re: why isn't it stealing?
by CuneiWay＠aol.com 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

This is all fine & well for *you* John, but just because you feel this way, you should not and can not presume to speak for me, and your feeling this way does not change that fact that people who do this to records on my label are stealing from me and my artists. Steve Cuneiform Records John wrote: >I feel good when someone copies my records. They probably would never have >gone and bought my record in the first place because they did not want >to >drop the $10-13 dollars for it, or maybe did not have the money. Maybe >they >wanted to buy someone else's record instead. I still want them to enjoy >my >record regardless. I don't think it should be up to my listening audience >to >support me financially at all. I will still make records even if I don't >sell another copy of any other release. I make them because I feel the >need >to make records that I want to hear, that do not exist right now. If someone >wants to give me money, fine. If they don't, fine. I don't ever want to >feel >like an employee.

3 2

Re: why isn't it stealing?
by CuneiWay＠aol.com 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

John, SINCE you were responding to my posting about copying of my labels releases, I assumed what you were saying was meant to have some bearing on my posting. If you didn't mean that, then that's fine; but why are you quoting me when talking about how you like people to take your music whether they pay for it or not? I assumed that this was a rebuttal against my postings. I'm sure you can understand why I was confused. I apologize for having dragged you into this if I was wrong. Steve >Where did I ever presume to speak for you? You said - "you should not and >can not presume to speak for me". >I was speaking for *me*.

1 0

Re: Comments on CD Burning/Unauthorized Duplication etc.
by Vincent Kargatis 01 Dec '02

01 Dec '02

> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 21:26:18 -0500 > From: Ellery Eskelin <eskelin(a)earthlink.net> > > Point is well taken and I may yet post some selections. I haven't done it yet > since it's tough for me to decide what's most representative of our sound. > There's no one or two or even three tunes that sum up what we do. True, but keep in mind a summary is not necessary, or even what surfers expect, really (those trying this music out, at least). The goal is only to induce purchases, so lack of summary-representation is a non-issue, as long as you yourself can live with the fact. > Having the entire CD is a much better way to experience it and I think there's > a much better chance that folks will like it if they hear the whole > presentation. Well, audio offerings on a web site will never substitute for the full and real package, so it's sorta another non-issue. Can you improve your sales and fan base by offering stuff on your site, and if so, how? Those are the most relevant questions I can imagine for this particular topic. Although, personally, I think you're better off just offering a smattering of full downloadable tunes on your site, you can also consider doing full-album streams. Streams are inherently low quality (cuz, well, they need to deliver real-time audio), and are one-time listens (i.e. not downloadable). So they deliver the album unit, and aren't likely (as I see it) to act as a purchase substitute. However, I see these as a bit less useful, because the listener needs to allocate an album-length's time to listening to that stream (something I think many potential customers won't try hard to do), and it's also hard to 'fall in love' with a stream, cuz it's harder to return to without deliberate effort (and it doesn't sound so hot). (I'm comparing to a downloaded tune, which can work its way into mp3 playlists and more-easily-repeated plays.) Both can be effective, I think, and both are imo likely more productive than nothing, regarding website-offered audio. If you do decide to offer any audio, keep a minimum excerpt length of 3 minutes or more. Less, I think (and find), is just about useless for any purchase decision. Just my 2 cents as a user of website-offered audio. -- Vincent Kargatis np: Debris - "Oh Be My Bent Recruit" (Live at Rice University (1993))

1 0