Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal blinder's Journal: Why Do Record Labels Suck? 18

Journal by blinder

i get an email from a friend this morning, an old friend. we used to play in this band back in the early/mid 90's. we got signed to a small-nothing label based in detroit. they put out our record, it sold as well as to be expected, never saw a dime from it, the label kinda fizzled away into more obscurity.

fast forward to about a year ago... the label starts making a comeback.

well, this email i get from my friend p had a link to emusic, asking if i'd seen this yet. of course i hadn't, i don't use emusic (didn't know what it was until this morning) and well there it is, our record.

it gets better, another friend of ours, who happens to be married to the vocalist of this band found that our record is on bloody itunes!

grrrr!!!

look, i don't care about the money, in fact, i'm quite positive there isn't anything being sold, not even a little... its the idea, we own the copyright of the material, it was part of our deal... about a year ago i noticed this record popping up on the radar on mp3 sites... but now, this is getting annoying.

luckily my friend, p, happens to work with a copyright attorney... so i think a cease and desist letter will be forthcoming.

oh but wait, we aren't supposed to care about copyrights, right? piracy is good and just and those that don't believe that are just steeling from everyone. ugh. yeah, i grow quite tired of that line of thinking, especially when its espoused by someone who has NEVER CREATED ANYTHING!

yeah, i'm mildly annoyed by this.

This discussion was created by blinder (153117) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why Do Record Labels Suck? More

Why Do Record Labels Suck?

Comments Filter:
  • I totally downloaded it from alt.binaries.music.mp3.b1inderrock
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • heh yes, get the ADAT if you can.
      a few years ago i tried to get the 2" tape of the session, but the studio no longer exists (burned to the ground in a fire of some sort). heh and for all i know the tape probably got long erased anyway.

      i would have loved to have the 2" reel, because i think the over-all music is decent, but the mix and the resulting "master" is terrible (very low end). i would have paid a local studio to dump the original 24 tracks down into a protools session and re-did a few things. oh wel
  • In order of what I think you should do:

    1. iTunes is full of DRM crap- they need to be bitchslapped for including a copyrighted record without permission. It's their rules, not yours, that you are following, the rules of the MPAA and RIAA and all the other *AAs who are for copyrights. The moral compulsion is on them to follow their own rules, and it's up to you to slap them down for not doing so.

    2. For sites where ALL the music is free to begin with, consider re-releasing a low-bandwidth version of the
  • piracy is good and just and those that don't believe that are just steeling from everyone.

    No, you missed the point! The labels aren't paying the artists enough so pirates are sticking up for the artist by paying nothing! (Honestly, in this case that reasoning doesn't seem all that stupid. At least you'd be making 0% of a larger pie!)

    • my attempt at snarkyness was directed at those who do not believe in copyrights. this is the problem with this case, the copyrights aren't being respected.

      • As much as I'm one inclined to side with the 'information wants to be free' crowd on most IP issues I still am a believer in copyrights. However I'm very against the interpretations of current copyright law and fair use coming from the RIAA and the MPAA not to mention the changes they insist need to be made to the law or "artists will no longer have the incentive to create new work".
        • well, thankfully, in this instance, there is nothing left up to interpretation. hell, right there in the liner notes of the cd you'll see this line:

          (c) & (p) 1994, autumn leaf dance, all rights reserved.

          that's us. that means *we* own the material, the music and lyrics.

          ownership is important in creative endeavors.

  • I am always reminded of this Penny Arcade strip [penny-arcade.com]

    For my part, I'd rather see my work get passed around via filesharing than ITMS "appropriate" it and then charge whatever they charge.

    Out of curiousity, what was your band's name? If I find the tunes, I'll send you a check for a buck a song. :-)

  • So... (Score:2)

    by ryanr ( 30917 ) *
    Where do I steal your music, and where do I send your check?

    Regarding the copyright ownership thing... there are certain portions of the blogospehere thingy that would be very interested in this as an anti-label copyright story. The BoingBoing crowd, for example.
    • heh, well we've just sent an email to the person who runs the label asking, in a very calm and professional manner, "wtf??? and are you going to pay us?"

      so we'll see if we can get a response. till then, i'd just assume not make any more noise than in my own personal rant-box (aka my journal)

      • Just so I'm completely clear: The label doesn't own any of the rights, you're sure? There's no question about it? They don't have a contract to distribute, even with paying you royalties? I mean.. if they were your label, then they did at one point, right? What caused the rights to revert to you (or the band as a group) and to remove the label's right to distribute? Just a time-limit thing, or some other contract clause? Also, is the work registered with the copyright office, and in whose name?

        Reason

        • Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)

          by blinder ( 153117 ) *
          here's how it breaks down.

          we had a "verbal" contract which was this: we record the songs, we keep the copyright and you (the label) can put out and sell the cd on *your* label.

          so, in essence, the label operates as a manufacturer. the label *never* owned the rights. in fact, the paperwork on file with the copyright office clearly states that there are 4 owners, and they happen to be us :)

          • Cool, thanks for the explanation. So possibly, they still have the right to sell it, and are still obliged to pay you. The fact that they had no idea HOW to pay you doesn't look so great...

            Also, smart man for keeping the copyrights, and filing them.
  • Why not just seek the royalties?

Slashdot Top Deals

The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford

Close