by George Ziemann

With lawsuits being the "last arrow in the quiver", what happens as the labels' coffers dry up?

As tantalizing as this sounds to those of us who would see the "Big Five" fall, the simple truth is that this just isn't going to happen. It has nothing to do with music, furthering any art form, or anything else, except simple supply and demand.

Sony (beginning as Columbia), RCA (now a part of Bertlesmann) and EMI have been around for 100 years. Look at what they do.

Philips Electronics established PolyGram, now part of the Universal Music Group. Sony makes electronics. AOL (now the "secret" devision of Time Warner) sells Internet access and broadband.

They do more business making the CD burners, CD players, DVD burners, mp3 players and everything else in and around the industry than the entire music business makes selling music.

They're not going to run out of money. They can also not afford to let music go away. They know there's money in it, they just can't figure out how to get it now.

There is a logical argument that mp3s are merely advertisements for CDs which are, in turn, ads for a musicians's live performances. Kazaa, much to the dismay of the record companies, has discovered that they can make money by merely adding another layer of depth to this chain and selling the ads around the mp3s.

Of course, Kazaa now has the distinction of being the primary hunting grounds for RIAA lawsuits, with about 1400 of its 60 million users nabbed. If this is truly the last arrow in the quiver, then the industry has spent it foolishly.

As a recent New York Times article asked, what are the labels going to do when major label acts become persona non gratis on college campuses? Another in Counterpunch's "RIAA Watch" discusses the difference between how the RIAA and other corporations are acting and our traditional (and much more moral) capitalism.

So it's not just the people who would frequent this site that are annoyed at the RIAA and its minion. The sentiment is becoming widespread.

Yet all along, the labels have insisted on holding back their true asset. They have a treasure trove of old masters that the public is actively looking for.

For instance, let's say I'm a diehard music fan, interested in completing my collection. Today, I'm looking for The Critters' self-titled debut album The Critters, released by Project 3 in 1966.

The Critters were a New Jersey band that the Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock and Roll (1983) described as having "a mellow pop style similar to the Association..." One of the members later joined the Four Seasons. Their follow-up LP, Younger Girl, on Kapp Records in 1966, contained their biggest hit, a song called "Mr. Dieingly Sad." Their third album, Touch 'n' Go with the Critters, also came out in 1966, back with Project 3 as publisher.

Without actually making any effort to prove otherwise, I'd be willing to guess that this album didn't make it to the digital age. I don't even know for a fact that it is actually out of print. Just a guess.

It was Don Ciccone, not frankie in case any one was wondering that went over to the 4 seasons, and you got it,george z, i be one of those out there looking for that good old rock and roll... thanks for the article and all you guys hard work here bcot riia etc.com 10/4 flbgbt

Dropped a couple of lines from the end.

So now I stumble on to this information and now I want to heard the music. It's just not out there.

I couldn't buy it if I wanted to.

YEAH and I'm still looking for a copy of the RUTLES!!!!!!!!!

Untold amounts of wonderful music locked away. THAT should be a crime.

Zuckuss, it is, it is !!! 10/4 flbgbt

An interesting point, the custodians of music don't make it available longer than is profitable.

In the 1920s, over 20,000 books were published or which only about 25 are still in print today (source: a half remembered thing I read on EFF.org, the numbers could be different but the point remains the same). All of that human endevour, craft and art is now lost. The same could happen with music.

While a lot of modern music is instantly forgettable, some of it is of great cultural significance and should be preserved. And how can that happen if the people who want to preserve it by copying and distribute it are branded criminals? Why should it be impossible to listen to The Critters or (my favourite 60s band) Spooky Tooth with modern playback equipment?

Fundamentally this comes down to the conflict between the people wanting to make moeny out of something and the people wanting to enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - be "it" books, music or whatever...

Yet more proof the industry doesn't care one bit about music. All that music locked away is another HUGE indicator of why current copyright is useless and totally against its original intent.

From a post on another topic :

It doesn’t matter how much money their parent companies have at their disposal. Nothing will save them, and no one wants to throw money away, trying to revive a dead concept. They will quietly and slowly disappear, as has already begun in the case of aol, and no one but the overpriced executives at their helms will care.

-----------------------------------------------

As for the unavailable songs (from another post) :

1. The riaa and its labels, along with the outdated distribution system and abusive contractual methods they represent, are dead and irrelevant. They need to go away now, and not prolong the suffering. Once that is done :
2. The copyrights on any songs that are over 28 years old should be immediately released into the public domain. The labels have already recovered their initial investments, made some profit, and then some. Happy Birthday to you….
3. The copyrights on any songs that are less than 28 years old should be reassigned to the original artists, or their heirs, along with exact duplicates of the masters. The original artists, or their heirs, should also get exact duplicates of the masters for out-of-copyright songs (to facilitate 4., below). The labels have already made enough money to cover the original recording and promotion of these newer songs.
3a. After these newer songs are 28 years old, they should also enter the public domain.
4. If the artists, or their heirs, want to use their duplicate masters to have their own retail-quality CD's produced (which costs about 99 cents each), and sell them at concerts and off of web sites, or by any other means (maybe even record stores !), so much the better. They will finally get a fair share of the profits.

-----------------------------------------------

Sorry to repeat myself.

The Kid

And, from another post, to help the artists pay for the releasing of those newly freed songs :

I have been thinking of the artists who made my life bearable (even livable) when I was growing up, a lot lately.
A couple of days ago, I thought of an idea that would help them and hurt the riaa, at the same time.
Not only that, it would turn the riaa's propaganda gun right back around to face them.

I want to appeal to the lawyers who frequent this site, to see if this idea has any merit.

My proposal is for a huge class action suit to be undertaken by all of the artists who have ever signed a contract with a record label.
They would seek fair compensation for the total number of records sold, and any other compensation that is rightly due them (promotional work for the label and other groups, etc.).

This would hoist the riaa up on their own "we are only doing this for the artists" sword.

At the very least, it would drag the seamy practices, that the riaa labels use to rape the artists, into the public view.

They may never get a dime, but the public will see how the cookie is really divided.

I remember that an artist from the 50's or 60's (I forgot to note his name, as I only heard or read about it quickly), who had a million seller only got THIRTY DOLLARS, TOTAL, for making the record.

Even songwriters only get 2 or 3 cents per song, and they are the ones who start the process. Without them and the performers, there wouldn't be much music made.

--------------------------------------------

The Kid

It's been a year since I bought an RIAA sponsored cd!!!!!! oh yeaah!

kudos to The Kid!

I'd like to thank the RIAA for turning me on to ragtime music - my shared folder now contains a healthy dose of Scott Joplin, Arthur Pryor, Blind Boone, and old Gershwin pieces - all published before 1923 and in the public domain. Thank you, RIAA, for reminding me what utter crap you're peddling when compared to the truly innovative music that ushered in the last century.

George, you know it well, that it really doesn't matter whether the mother companies of music labels go bankrupt or not; if there will be NO demand for the music products (CDs, MCs, etc), there will be NO supply, and they be forced to withdraw from this market, period. Besides, I hold NO pretense against Sony electronics or Philips electronics (as for the latter, I hold in one of the best hi-fi equipment producers on the world; and that's NO ad, but just the consumer's opinion; for instance, I have their "discman" (portable disc player, or something like that; discman is sony's trademark afaik) for more than 3 years, use it constantly, all day long, carry it along with me everywhere (including outdoors in harsh conditions), and it still works _very well_. Some other equips have got already broken.
Besides, wasn't it you, who said that RIAA are 'dead people' (in the sense of the futility of their war on users, in the sense of the 'chances' for their business' survival)? Wasn't it you, who called their actions futile? Do you doubt it now? I hope that it's not the case ... CHEER UP, MY FRIEND, I AM WITH YOU ...

Cheerz,
Critto

"Some other equips have got already broken. " that means: produced by some other companies.

this issue is control,

what you can hear, what you can believe, what you can read.

There are honest members of the congress of the UNTIED states, and no surprise, they are not supported.

LOOK AT THE LEGISLATION.

http://thomas.loc.gov/

DO SOMETHING!

hr1066 only 5 cosponsors, that is a DAMNED shame.