File-sharing vs. Playing a CD

I don’t really have an strong opinion on file-sharing, I think both sides are partly wrong, but I was wondering about this in a related note:

If I buy a CD and listen to it is legal, correct? And if I have friends over, and they listen, it is still legal right? And if I have a cookout in my back yard and play the CD it is ok too right? Is there a limit on how many people can listen to my sound system before it is illegal? Technical problems aside, can I have thousands or millions of speakers attached to it located all over the state? Country? World? What about wireless speakers, are they ok and is it limited by the power of the broadcast?

Just wondering.

You’re getting into “fair use,” another concept that really only makes sense with outdated technology. I’m not sure what the standards are exactly for music files, but at least with video you get the FBI warning that lets you know that unlicensed public broadcasts are verboten.

Also note that with file-sharing, the “audience” gets a digitally-perfect copy of the original song, and they can listen to it even when you’ve turned off your gear and gone to bed – something they can’t do at your backyard barbecue.

I’m also pretty sure you can’t just hook your sound system to the World’s Biggest Amplifier and play music for everyone in your neighborhood; not only would that be annoying as hell (especially if you’re playing music by Prince), but you’d be crossing the line between “fair use” and “holding a concert.”

If and when the file-sharing demon is vanquished (ha!), expect the RIAA to go after wireless speakers and backyard boom boxes.

“These thieves are using wireless technology to broadcast copyrighted material around the neighborhood. Anyone with a simple scanner from Radio Shack can listen in! This technology has absolutely no legitimate use, it’s purely intended to broadcast copyrighted material to one or more receivers.”

“We have recently learned of backyard ‘barbecue’ parties where the participants exchange more than just steak and beer - they swap music. In some cases, the ‘host’ streams copyrighted music through the air to as many as 30 or 40 recipients who have not paid for it. It’s just like walking onto a car lot and driving off with 30 new BMWs!”

You know, if you take an historical perspective on the music business, well, the concepts of copyright and commercial rights of use go all the way back to piano scroll music in the early 1900’s. In those days, gramophones hadn’t really taken off yet and the most valueable money earner was the publishing rights to music - that is, the printed music score and or piano scrolls.

Then, around the 1920’s or so, the gramophone side of things took off. And in the late 1930’s, the German’s perfected high fidelity reel to reel tape. And in the 1940’s 33.3rpm LP’s started to arrive.

Over a 40 year period, the 33.3rpm LP was king. Most importantly, during this period, the major labels in the music business were ALSO able to establish the concept that they were entitled, by default, for ever and ever, to make obscene shitloads of money while squeezing the bejesus out of their artists. And not much changed. And why?

You see, the problem with a 33.3rpm LP was that even if you or I shopped around for super duper extra thick German or Japanese pressings of one of our fave albums, the reality is that they were never less than at least 7 or 8 generations away from the original master tapes. So there was inbuilt sound degradation you see. Further, as our LP’s were used more and more, the got worn out as well. And if we made copies onto teeny weeny little cassette tapes (which record at only 1.5 inches per second which is pretty shitty really) well you’d get even more sound degradation. My point here is that in the vinyl/cassette era, the major labels weren’t too concerned about pirated music because they knew there were demonstrable quality issues which were working in their favour.

However! The arrival of the Compact Disc in the early 80’s was, with hindsight, a carefully aimed shot in their collective feet by a bazooka for the major labels. The nature of digitally recorded media is that you have very little, if any, data degradation from generation to generation. Accordingly, the nature of piracy was let loose because the inbuilt sound degradation which USED TO EXIST, no longer did. And yet, the major labels would continue to have us believe that they are entitled to continue their rights to have a team of gold shitting monkeys on every desk in one of their corporate headquarters.

The bottom line, for me, is this… the nature of digital media has changed the playing field.

Traditionally, the music business worked over 4 areas…

(1) Creativity and Artistry

(2) Recording and Engineering

(3) Manufacturing and Distribution

(4) Marketing and Awareness
Nowadays, Points (1) and (2) can easily be paid for and/or achieved by the artist. And Point (3) can be achieved by the increasing number of high volume CD reproduction and printing houses on the scene. Accordingly, the sole remaining area which the major labels feel they have any sway is Point (4) - Marketing and Awareness. And when I refer to Point (4) folks, I’m talking about the $3 BILLION dollars a year paid in under the table payola via Independant Music Distributors to Radio Channels like Clear Channel Communications (the cunts).

In short, we’re seeing a true quantum shift in how the music business works. Indeed, we might actually be seeing the end of the music business as we know it. At least in terms of the major labels holding the artist to black mail. THe unknown right now is Point (4) - what’s going to happen in the Radio industry. As it stands, it’s a pretty fucked state of affairs in terms of fairness.

Actually, I believe that letting people listen to it in a backyard party is one of those “technically illegal but its not like were ever going to prosecute you for it” type things. Basically, its easier to make draconian laws and selectively prosecute based on common sense than to make fairer laws but have people slip through loopholes.

I actually have a cite relating to this (my first cite).

http://www.winamp.com/news.jhtml?articleid=10000

I am sure it will be appealed.