Hi Andreas – Scott Soriano here. I understand where you are coming from but there are two things that I very much disagree with.
The first thing I take issue with is your contention that “it was the dominant electronics industry that created this mess.” Perhaps, the electronic industry created the means to digitize and upload/download media, but they did not force people to ignore compensating musicians or songwriters. Technology exists but we are not slaves to it. Technology might allow us to do something easily but it does not guide us to do so. In other words, a gun might make killing simpler than strangulation, but the gun didn’t create an impulse to murder any more than one’s hands do.
If technology isn’t the cause, who is? The greedy record companies and the music industry? Again, through their greed & corruption (specifically the price fixing and artificial high prices of CDs) and their insane overreaction to the early days of file-sharing (when they should have been figuring out a way to market music cheaply instead of wishing for maximum coin and taking 18 year olds to court), the music industry might have created a climate where people could express their hatred for the industry by file-sharing, but, again, they did not coerce anyone to engage in freeloading and did not force people to ignore musicians or songwriters.
Those responsible for “this mess” are those engaging in the action of freeloading, whether it is you or me doing our blogs or our followers downloading material. Before I go on, I should explain what I mean by “this mess.” To me, “this mess” is an atmosphere where the people who create music – musicians and songwriters – are not compensated for their creativity or their labor. Additionally, I think it is wrong that people have so little respect for the artist that they make no attempt to seek him or her or them out and ask them if they mind that their music is used. (A couple things here: First, doing Crud Crud, I have been contacted by artists responsible for some of the songs I’ve posted. Every one of them have been gracious. I have no doubt that if I had attempted to contact them and asked for permission to post their work, they would have said “yes.” Second, in my experience with my record labels, tracking down artists is not very difficult, especially not with google and facebook. Of course, this does not apply to dead people!) The issue is two-fold but related: Compensation for an artist’s labor and respect for his/her work.
Respect is a simple issue of courtesy, as far as I am concerned. Compensation is one of labor. Making music takes time, it takes work, and it take resources. Recording music is laborious and good recordings cost money (whether you invest in the recording technology or you go to a studio). Making music might be something people love to do, but it is also work, and those who chose to do it for a living should be able to make a living at it if the demand for their music is there. The situation is akin to cooking for the enjoyment of it or in order to make a living. If you are lucky, you the eater has a friend who can cook well and you get to eat for free. Or perhaps you bring the food and he cooks it for you. Or maybe you go to a restaurant and have someone cook for you. Do you leave without paying or do you pay the cook for the food he made? “But food should be free,” you say. And I don’t agree, but the person who cooks it for you should do it of their free will or be paid to do it! Otherwise, you should cook it yourself or eat your meat raw.
Please note that I did not mention record labels or the music industry in my rant about labor or respect. Record labels – good or bad, honest or dishonest, indie or major – act as an agent for the artist. In some cases they treat the artist well, in other cases they screw the artist. But that is an arrangement between the artist and the label. The label might create a physical product (record or CD), finance the recording or an artist’s tour, etc. but it is the artist that creates the work, i.e. the music. Record labels could disappear tomorrow and the artist would still be feel the effect of “this mess.” Yes, “digital” might be worthless, but music is not. Digital is the technology, but music is the “product.”
Now, I appreciate that you take care in choosing the music you post. I did as well. And, while I do not agree that we are not “taking business away” from the artist (it is something that is impossible to gauge), I think that the interest our blogs generate is minimum, especially compared to torrent and filesharing sites. I do believe that we are more like curators than pirates. That said, we also create cover for pirates. We provide the philosophical excuse for others to steal en mass. It is not “digital” or “technology” that has created “this mess,” but you and me. We put the bullet in the chamber and encourage others to pull the trigger. We are responsible.
So, what to do about “this mess”? I’ve thought about it for months and I have come up with something that satisfies me. First is I will make every attempt to seek out and obtain permission from an artist. If I have established that they are dead or anonymous or impossible to track down (for instance, their material appeared on a state-run label of the USSR or pre-dictatorial Burma), I think it is fair to present their work. I also believe in “public domain.” Current laws regarding copyright are said to be weighted toward the artist, but they are not. They are weighted toward the rights holder, which in many cases is not the artist. That isn’t just song publishing but the recording of a song. Finding out who owns what takes some work but it can be done. However, for me what is important is finding out when the work was created. I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a work to go into public domain after a set amount of years after the creation of the work. In the US a work is under copyright until 95 years after the creators death! That was used to protect Mickey Mouse from going into the public domain. I think the US law is against the public’s interest. Italian copyright law protects a work for 50 years after it’s creation and then it goes into public domain. So anything made before September 13, 1962 is fair game. Since I am officially both an American and an Italian citizen, I’ll go with the Italians on this one…to a point. If the artist has died or remains unknown or impossible to contact (see USSR/Burma example), to me the work is public domain.
So between the 50 year rule, my death/anon. stipulation, and obtaining permission from an artist, I figure that I would have had no problem using that guideline since day one of Crud Crud and publishing at least 90% of what I have posted. This is what I will do going forward. The difference between how I will do it now and how I was doing it is that I now have a stated ethic. I am not pretending that there is no “mess” or that I am outside the mess because I have good intentions. No, I want my actions to be conscious. I want to give the artist the respect that they deserve. After all, if I am truly a fan of music, I must treat the musician with respect…and in the case that they ask to be paid for their music, if I want to use it, I will pay them or not use it. As a listener, I’ll either buy my music or go to blogs or sites (like WFMU’s Free Music Archive) who go by a similar ethic. I think this is a small step toward maybe some day doing away with “this mess.” I invite you to do the same.
Best regards
Scott Soriano
Crud Crud/S.S. Records/Sol Re Sol Records