by George Ziemann

I'm looking for independent musicians who are willing to lend me their names to aid me in my attack against the RIAA.

Since we are all independent, we each stand alone.

I'm going to get an audience with the U.S. Copyright Office at the DMCA hearings on May 14. And then I'm going to Washington, D.C. One way or another, I will be heard.

I'm fully prepared to go before these people and say that I speak only for myself. I represent no organized group, no man's views but my own.

But if you're an independent musician and you agree with what I say, or at least believe I have brought before you valid issues that must be publicly scrutized in search of the truth, the time to do something is now.

I'm trying to fight for us all. I don't want your money, I don't want your copyrights, I won't steal your music.

All I need from you is a couple of letters. A few e-mails. But don't send them to me. Don't write to me. I'm better off if I don't even know for sure that you're there.

Write to your Senators and Congressmen. Write to the U.S. Copyright Office. Tell them I'm coming and they need to listen.

Do It Today.

As far as I can tell, I'm the best chance we've got. Make them pay attention.

I wish I could help, but right now my band has only a vocalist and bassist. Not good enough, and my bassist doesn't know much about this Internet related conflict although he is totally against major labels for the other reasons... i.e. stealing, cheating, being bitches...

Have you written a song? Have you copyrighted anything? You don't need a band.

George,

I am not a band, or artist, but a consumer advocate. I would be happy to sumbit something to you to send in, from a consumer's side.

Stephen

Hey, are these DMCA hearings open to anyone who wants to go? I go to school in the D.C. area and would love to be able to go and listen to what is said. If they are open to the general public, could someone maybe give me a little bit more information? Thanks.

The hearing that I will attend will be at UCLA Law School (Los Angeles, sorry, Scott), Moot Court, 9 a.m. May 14.

I think this is a public hearing.

more info at www.copyright.gov/1201

The outline of what I want to say is at
http://www.azoz.com/news/DMCA2.html

Due to the limited scope of the hearings, it was necessary for me to speak either in favor or against an existing or proposed exemption to the DMCA.

I am supporting the exemption which permits libraries and educational institutions to bypass copy protection in order to make backups for archival and educational purposes. This was granted in the original October, 2000 ruling. If it is not renewed, this exemption will expire in October.

My wife has a doctorate in education, as do her mother and father, who was once a vice president of Northern Arizona University.

The educational community NEEDS this exemption to continue.

And so do we. You don't have to be a musician to support me. You don't have to agree with me 100 percent.

I'm going to argue that... well, look at my submission (the DMCA article). I've used you guys for debate. But hell, most of you agree with me.

Come on you guys. Read the original document. I know, it's tough. A bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo. Frankly, I'm shocked that they even put me on the list, okay? After they refused my first submission (I wasn't even close), I had about 24 hours to understand that document enough to write an intelligent submission.

Then read my submission again.

Come on, pick it apart. Line by line, word by word. Play devil's advocate. Put youself in Hilary's chair for a minute.

Argue with me. Please. If I'm wrong, show me. Make me prove it if you don't believe it.

If you believe it, then write to your Senator and tell him to pay attention to me. All you have to be is an American.

Typo on the link. Remove the "" from the end to make it work.

Crap. Forgot this goes on the web. Remove the angle brackets and what is between them to make it work.

I've received at least one direct question. In case you don't "get it", what I am going to state is that the DMCA has nothing to do with music and literary works.

They are NOT digital by nature. The DMCA does nothing to benefit the creator of a copyrighted work beyond the copyright laws which existed prior to the DMCA.

They have merely provided a way for the ultimate copyright owners (the labels, in most cases) to overstep the bounds of logic and common sense in an effort to further an assertion which is totally unsupported by the facts.

Example: Two years ago, I went to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. At the time, there was a John Lennon exhibit there, which contained (among other things), the original handwritten version of "Day Tripper", among others.

The more copies of the song "Day Tripper" that are distributed, the more people that know and love the song, the more valuable that original coffee-stained piece of paper is worth.

Along with the original master recording, IT is the copyrighted work, not the CD I bought, not any mp3s I find on the web.

Had it been released in a copy-protected format in the first place, if consumers had been sued for listening to it, those original lyrics become just another piece of coffee-stained paper.

It would be worthless.

Here is something from the Copyright Office.

"'Copyright' literally means the right to copy. The term has come to mean that body of exclusive rights granted by statute to authors for protection of their work."

It doesn't say "RIAA" or "record company". It says "authors."

The DMCA does nothing for the authors. Absolutely nothing.

In fact, we would be better off NOT to register our work. This would mean no punitive damages (that $150,000 a song fee) are available.

I want the Copyright Office to explain to me why I should ever register another song. Because I have a copyright form that they sent back. I made a mistake.

Thank God.

Look At my page oon dmusic. Nuff said

Well, hell, let's just put that right up front here.

They've already got a database going. They mention using us as evidence -- against the RIAA.

http://noriaa.the-erm.com/

This might not apply to all of you, but you might enjoy it anyway.

First of all, I now have to flip from my stance at the top of the page.

Today, I need to know who you are. Things have changed. This could all be solved next week. Literally.

I'm meeting with Sharman Networks/Kazaa on Friday. They contacted me.

The question is this...
How much free, totally authorized music can we offer them at once?
You've all got until Thursday night to let me know.

I've asked several large filesharing sites this same question this evening.

How many of you want to be on 6 million desktops that the major labels don't want to be on?

If just three of the places I've contacted buy into this plan, we've got about 80,000 to 100,000 legal downloads available to the public on Kazaa.

We can totally eclipse the majors the first day they plug us in.

Like I've been saying. Let's do what the RIAA asks. Clean all the major label music off the peer-to-peer net.

Take ours instead.

Who's in? You've got 48 hours.

mailto:wizard@azoz.com