Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Music Media

Carp-Free Independent Music Labels 142

robkill writes "The actions and intentions of the RIAA have been under close scrutiny in the folk music community as well as Slashdot. In addition to Janis Ian's article previously featured here on Slashdot, guitarist Harvey Reid has an article on the importance of internet radio for the independent music community. Besides posting a number of good links, he has started a signup webpage for independent artists and music labels who are interested in circumventing the CARP fee. Right now, it's only a mailing list for Artists and Record Labels who want to see internet radio succeed. So if you own the copyrights on some independent music, why not join the list? For the rest of us, it's a good list of musicians to support."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Carp-Free Independent Music Labels

Comments Filter:
  • by billatq ( 544019 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @01:52PM (#3878216)
    Quite Frankly, the RIAA's business practices make me sick. It seems that they try to make money off of everything that we listen to, while squelching the alternatives that we might listen to through another medium. They seem to want to copy-protect everything, throw fair use out the window, and then charge everyone royalties for what amounts to them as free promotion. I hope more artists sign up for this.
    • It's called, "Being a business in a capitalist world." If you want businesses to look out for Jon Q. Consumer's interests, to take care of his well-being, and to make sure he gets enough food each week, form a Socialist community. Until then, don't be surprised when you find out that every GM of the world is only concerned with how much money they can get from you.

      • Thing is, it's not simply 'business'. It's abuse of the powers of an oligopoly. In an operational market both the artists and the fans would have other venues to sell/consume their wares. But seeing as the RIAA has a lock (and is payig for legislating to lock it tighter) on the distrobution and they all set their contracts (indentured servitude) together there are no viable options through which to market music. The internet looked like it might break that, which is why the RIAA is gunning so hard for it. When the DRM act gets passed nothing will play anywhere w/o their permission and their oligopoly will be cemented in law.

      • pheared wrote:

        > It's called, "Being a business in a capitalist
        > world." If you want businesses to look out for Jon
        > Q. Consumer's interests, to take care of his
        > well-being, and to make sure he gets enough food
        > each week, form a Socialist community. Until then,
        > don't be surprised when you find out that every GM
        > of the world is only concerned with how much money
        > they can get from you.

        At best, it is the worst kind of business in a capitalist world. Businesses do not have to care for social welfare (unless it is for the good PR), but they better care about treating their customers well. Or those very angry customers can take their business somewhere else, to the detriment, or even destruction, of the mistreating business involved. That is why there are all those sayings about "the customer is always right", or "the customer is number one". It is far more expensive to get another customer than it is to keep an existing customer happy. Happy customers keep buying from the business that makes them happy, making the business prosper.

        This applies to a true capitalist world, which unfortunately we don't have in the entertainment and software industries. Instead we have power mad monopolies and cartels who think they can treat their customers like criminals and use Congress to force them to buy. These are not upstanding businesses operating in a capitalist environment. These are greedy sharks that tear their customers (and their artists, and anyone who gets in their way) into bloody ribbons.

        One of the first steps in taking the RIAA sharks out is for independant artists to take over the internet airwaves. This is a necessary step that will not only give the independant artists a way to compete with the RIAA member labels, but will also save internet radio.

        Bells are ringing: Mothra, Mothra! Every heart is calling: Mothra, Mothra!
        Come on, Tok Wira, these sharks have gotta pay! New Kirk calling Mothra, we need you today!
    • Well--I'm not advocating socialism, but I don't think any single entity (and a non-governmental one, at that) should have this degree of control of the the type of music that we listen to and what we are and aren't able to do with the content in which we have legally purchased licenses. Not to mention, what happens when you aren't part of RIAA's big scheme of things? You can't exactly depend on a file sharing service to help promote your music, as they keep shutting the damn things down.
      • well then stop supporting them. Every time you buy a record from a big company you put oney in the RIAA's pocket. Write letters to small labels , indie music magz and the like saying we will buy no corperate media. Hell right letters to sony and BMG too, maybe they will get the hint. If people can be shamed into veganism and not wearing fur, maybe they can be shamed into NOT buying shitty music.
        • This is, alas, only a semi-option. While it's true we can all live without RIAA/MPAA product if you do you are essentially removing yourself from the culture. The member companies are so large that you support them when you buy much of anything media related, including watching TV and listening to the radio (or buying stuff from their sponsors). If you can't talk to your friends/neighbors/loved ones about music, movies, television, magazines, and books then how are you participating in the same culture that they are?

          So, alienate yourself from everyone around you or feed the machine? What wonderful options.
      • I am going to get modded down for this, but the problem is not with RIAA/MPAA/BSA/Microsoft/GM/AOL/Enron or whatever monopoly is terrorizing you at the moment, but with the semi-Socialistic government of the US(and pretty much the rest of the world too) that fucks up everything and allows laws to get passed letting these companies screw you.

        In my humble opinion a country should not need laws, but rather a principle (i.e. "Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness") for the US.

        RIAA would be harmless if they tried to compete in real world capitalism as opposed to trying to legislate out of their ass.
        • In my humble opinion a country should not need laws, but rather a principle (i.e. "Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness") for the US.
          Principles are all nice and sweet in the land of faeries and elves, but here in the real fucking world, when a criminal pulls a knife to demand your money or points a gun at your family...

          Yeah, you're right. No laws, just let em go... life will be so much better.
    • I have to say that as a listener of not-quite-so-mainstream music, I support the idea of a coalition for independent musicians. The majority of the music I listen to on a regular is either independent musicians (stuff from, or music by artists who have long since died (i.e. classical). On this same note, I've got several songs in my collection from artists I've never heard of prior to file sharing.

      The file I'm listening to right now as I write this is none other than the tune from the infamous Bubble Bobble, as performed by a high-school band/orchestra.

      Life was simpler before RIAA and DMCA and CARP (CRAP? Yes I read it that way the first time as well) and all these other four-letter acronyms. I don't even KNOW what CARP means, I haven't kept track of all these laws and changes lately, except it's yet another way to keep me from hearing music via whatever method works best for me at any given time.
    • by donnacha ( 161610 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @03:30PM (#3878632) Homepage

      I hope more artists sign up for this.

      Hell, I don't want my favorite artists distracting themselves with this business bullshit, unless being a fighter is part of what they already are, like Ani diFranco [] or Courtney Love []. Life is too short, time too scarce for the few genuinely talented artists we have to go running off on tangents.

      This is a battle that we, the consumers, should be fighting. If we decide, en masse, not to play the RIAA's game, what the Hell can they do.

      Can I suggest that PeerCast [] (as discussed on /. [] earlier) is a very good place to start.

      And, remember, if we really want to stop these bastards shagging us, we must always remember that our participation in P2P has to be about growing a new, fairer system, not just getting our hands on free stuff.

    • can you imagine if all the idie artists sign for this? It will basicly increase the gap between indie and corperate. most net radio will be indie and it will abound. Indie music will become popular and then the corperate world will have to change to their model to compete!
  • Anybody else read the headline this way?

    Wishful thinking, I guess!
  • by idfrsr ( 560314 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @01:59PM (#3878244)
    won't fall by the wayside. It will take artists and musicians to make internet radio, and downloadable music something that we can all enjoy for a long time to come. We can huff and puff all we want, but they are ones who have to lead the charge for anything to change for the better.
    • Yes, but they need our money, and lots of it, otherwise they'll end up starving and turn to the record companies.
      • I don't think it'll take lots of money to out-do what the RIAA gives musicians. What it WILL take is a new way of looking at how-to-get-paid (and how-to-pay) that can eliminate the bottleneck between artist and consumer. (Yes, as always, I have a financial interest in a certain way to do this.) It shouldn't take a giant corporation's help to let a musician ask for money (either tips, or pay-per-download) because our side doesn't have layers of management who require (as Courtney Love puts it) all those trips to "Scores."

        For an example of what I'm talking about, see [] (and hopefully others soon). I again offer anyone here a small click of e-gold (not much, but enough to test) so you can try it for free. I want programmers to use e-gold, so please take advantage. Thanks.

        (I speak only for Jim Ray [], nobody else wants to admit this stuff anyway.)

      • Yeah, they do need our money, but not nearly as much as they need when working through the RIAA.

        What they really need is a little mainstream attention once this gets rolling. If the quality is good, the money will take care of itself.

        (I am not saying that we don't need to support them, what I am saying is that we can support them easier this way. Which is a good thing. (tm --by some smart ass.)
      • Visit Music Link [] and send money directly to the artist.
  • I don't understand do they still pay royalities if the station doesn't play their music?

    The worst part, I think is the retroactive part. Isn't that an ex post facto law?

    Well, if internet radio takes off then the RIAA will have to pay them to play their music anyway.

  • How com VA seems to be the only advertiser on Slashdot? Doesn't seem to say a lot about how well the ads on slashdot are going. OK, I'm exagerating, I see a think geek ad every once in awhile too.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    CD's from this band of independents ?

    I basically stopped buying music in the late 70's
    after Dire Strait's "Sultans of Swing" because
    it became so boring.

    Hmmm, real musicians performing real music -
    reminds me of the school reunions we organized
    in the late 70's, early eighties, with bands
    trying to imitate "Stairway to heaven" with two
    real wooden flutes !

    Go, music, go !

    Toon Moene.
  • by Transcendent ( 204992 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @02:05PM (#3878283) is a website for independent music artists... there is a very long and detailed page about the rate ruling, and links for you to send a fax to congress about making legislation to save the smaller stations as well...

    I tried putting this in an article, but got rejected, so I hope a lot of people read this and send in a fax... I don't want to loose my favorite internet radio station... []
  • What the subject says. I mostly like rock and metal. I presently find new bands by watching a public access show that plays metal videos. Interestingly enough, the host is even bigger and sexier than me.
    • I am currently using: live365 [].

      There tons of differents genres to listen too.
      • I broadcast on live365 [] (a damn good service I must say) but even those poor buggers have gotten the shaft by CARP. Their solution has been to levy a $5 monthly fee across the entire live365 lineup. I must say I can't blame them, they're trying to spread the hurt around as evenly as possible, but it does mean that you can't run a CARP free feed thru them without handing money over to the RIAA.

        I fear that this is what the RIAA wanted. Personally, I think CARP blows, but if the RIAA want to shoot themselves in the foot by all means they should be able to. But it looks like they'll be able to essentially shoot down any big time non-CARP radio feeds by simply being the 800lb gorilla in the music biz.

        Who (in terms of a large, easy to use broadcaster like live365) are going to run the risk of not paying CARP fees for everything and run the risk of the RIAA coming down on them like a tonne of brinks is a CARP free stream broadcasts a CARP covered song by accident?
        • You can listen to a non-US radio station. European broadcasters have no CARP (yet).

          There are public radiostations in Germany and Austria which are funded by mandatory fees from the citizens of these countries which also broadcast over the net.

        • well on live 365 only the cheaper acounts pay the 5 bucks. The others for larger broadcasters actuallyhave to pay the real CARP fee. Of course the 75 $ a month broadcasters can also sell thier own ad space and not play live 365 ads. only pays CARP royalties on songs by artists signed up with carp. If you have a NON CARP radio station, then that station does not create any CARP royalties. They will still have to pay the 5 bucks though. The 5 bucks does not cover the CARP royalties on many stations, just offset the cost. PLEASE if you have a nn CARP station, advertise it as such...hell SPAM it..this is one type of spam i would be GLAD to get in my MB.
      • takes for the info. It's pretty good.

  • I think that Crap-Free Independent Music Labels would be a good idea.

  • by Ender77 ( 551980 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @02:17PM (#3878345)
    From webside:

    Got a Question for Hilary?

    A representative of the RIAA has agreed to take some time out of their hectic court schedule and answer a few of our questions. Don't miss out on a chance to voice your opinion!

  • RIAA Membership List (Score:5, Informative)

    by abischof ( 255 ) <alex@spamcop.nLAPLACEet minus math_god> on Saturday July 13, 2002 @02:23PM (#3878372) Homepage
    There's also the RIAA Membership List [], which can serve as a good starting-point for labels to avoid.
    • you notice 4ad, epitath and project are a few of the "indie" lables that are on that list. Too bad I like bands on those labels. I also noted that alternative tentacles(jello biafra's label) was absent. WAY TO GO JELLO!
    • by thales ( 32660 )
      Boycotting the RIAA means more than just not buying CDs. If you download music that is availble on RIAA labels all you are going to do is make yourselves look like a bunch of deadbeats that are too cheap to pay for entertainment. A Boycott involves having NOTHING to do with the RIAA. Don't buy it. Don't download it. Don't make it availble for downloading. Don't attend the concerts.

      Write to the bands and tell them you are Boycotting RIAA labels and the reasons WHY, and urge them to sign with a non RIAA label. Leave Boycott messages on bands fan site message boards.

      Extend the Boycott. If a company has non-music bussiness Boycott that too. Don't buy that Sony monitor, or TV or PS2. Don't go see that AOL/Time Warner movie. Drop AOL in the unlikely event a slashdotter is using the service. Don't watch AOL/TW stations on TV. If a company hires an artist that is signed to an RIAA label as a ad spokesman, write them and let them know you won't be purchasing their products.

      Include the MPAA in the Boycott too.

      You have a big advantage. The RIAA and the MPAA deal in a non vital product, entertainment. You won't die of music hunger or movie thirst if you boycott their products. Use it.

      Don't worry about the artists being hurt in a boycott either. Are they worried that the RIAA's ploys are going to hurt you? Are they speaking out against copyright extensions and attempts to narrow the scope of fair use? If they aren't, why should you give a shit about them?

      • I boycott the RIAA, but I don't think boycotting is enough. I've added the statement "I boycott the RIAA" to all my .sigs in the various forums I post in. I use the no RIAA icon wherever I have the option for an avatar. I've put a banner at the top of my website which states "I boycott the RIAA" and links to a personal statement about the RIAA.

        I'd like to see this practice spread to the extent that no RIAA or big 5 employee could go to any forum or non-corporate website on the net and not see an anti-RIAA statement. I'm sure that's wishful thinking on my part, but if anyone wants to help make this happen you can get the banner I made from my site ( []) or go to [] where they have several other (less aggressive) banners available.

      • Agreed. I've seen far too many people justify copyright infringement by saying they hate the RIAA, or the RIAA charges too much. Those are pretty poor arguments. The best way to stand up to them is to find alternatives; taking the easy way out and downloading RIAA tracks doesn't help develop viable alternatives.

        I haven't purchased, downloaded, or otherwise attempted to acquire RIAA music in some time now. And it doesn't hurt a bit.
      • Don't worry about the artists being hurt in a boycott either. Are they worried that the RIAA's ploys are going to hurt you? Are they speaking out against copyright extensions and attempts to narrow the scope of fair use? If they aren't, why should you give a shit about them?

        Actually, many if not most of them probably don't know anything about the above at all. They are professional artists. For the most part they spend their time creating and performing their artform (as well they should if they ever hope to get out of debt w/ their labels). They don't deal with business well or with law well. That is why the labels are there to begin with. Many artists are surprised after the fact when they start running into the walls their contracts have put up around them. Joan Osborn is a good example. Her label killed her career. She spent years working produced a full album worth of material. Label rejected it. She made _another_ album worth. They rejected that too. Then she found out that not only did none of that music count towards finishing her contract requierments she could release it anywhere else either.

        The RIAA is raping it's artists as badly as they are the fans. They are stuck too. If they want to have a hope of exposure to more than a few thousand people the RIAA is the only game in town.
        • Didn't I mention writing to the Artists and informing them of the Boycott? Once they start getting letters from their fans they might realize what the RIAA is doing, instead of hearing BS about how the RIAA is protecting them from the "evil music pirates"

          In my life I've seen artists involved in every cause from Viet Nam to Pop Ecology to Aids concerts. Don't tell me they have no time for causes. Inform them about the Boycott. Destroying the RIAA is certainly in their intrest. After they are informed of what the RIAA is doing to the fans, along their knowledge of what the RIAA is doing to them, if they still want to kiss RIAA butt, well I have no reason to worry about their fate.

  • The list in question was pretty much a Folk monoculture until the link was posted on /. Lots of different styles there at the bottom of the list.
  • by antirename ( 556799 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @03:02PM (#3878532)
    Hang out at live shows if you want to support your local unsigned bands. A lot of them are really quite good. Then, when you're buying their CD if you liked the music (this is about supporting the musician, remember) suggest CARP-free web radio. Leave them a card with a link to information, maybe your e-mail address (a lot of them will have mailing lists, questions, etc). I've mentioned mp3 archive sites and streaming audio to several guys here; none of them have done it yet but all of them were at least thinking about it. The local small time musicians know the problems in the industry a lot better than the geeks do, but geeks can at least make suggestions :)
  • support? (Score:2, Interesting)

    I think I'll support musicians who make music that I like, even if their politics aren't always in lockstep with Slashdot. Is that okay?
    • No, that's not OK. Turn in your /. ID at the door.
    • Doubt you're alone (Score:4, Interesting)

      by martissimo ( 515886 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @03:56PM (#3878721)
      I mean, you can read endless boycott the MPAA rants here on a regular basis, yet when Star Wars, Spidey, LOTR, etc come out you can also read these same people's takes on the plot twists, and how good they are.

      I'm sure there are a few hardcore people who stand behind the principle of thoose boycotts they propose... but even here where most people are far more involved with their views about the **AA than is mainstream, i doubt a huge difference is actually made.

      Personally i just do as you do, i saw SW-EP2 in the theatre, i have a pre-ordered copy of LOTR DVD at Amazon which will ship in August, same with the new Dave Matthews CD pre-order.

      I despise the crazy bills that the **AA trys to get passed to inhibit our abilities to use a computer as we see fit, yet I still purchase the rare bits of appealing (too me, at least if you just wanna reply to criticize my tastes thats fine, but frankly i may think the same about your taste if so) stuff they put out.

      And I know i'm not alone, when there is something out there I want... I get it. I'm no Gandhi, I will not starve myself (so to speak) to make a point, guess i'm just weak, but so be it.
      • Me too.

        This got really long. If you are interested in hearing an alternative view regarding how to deal with the whole media struggle, read on, else skip....

        For most of us, they are going to get something out of us. Nobody wants to forgo interesting media in the hopes that the diminished revenue will make things change. It is not going to happen.

        I think the secret really is to exercise choice when you have it, and make them provide value to you when you buy. I believe there are a lot of people out there just sucking down whatever comes through their pipe without really thinking about it. These people are easy targets --true consumers. Life is short, we should make the
        best of it.

        Here are some of the choices I have made.

        Killed the Sat Tv system. (Will really miss HBO and their Sopranos series though.) Why won't these turkeys just sell me HBO without the 150 crap channels? I could wait a year, and get it on DVD, but I am not sure that is worth it yet.

        Put up a nice Antenna. Too bad the additional FM I get with it is not worth a damn.

        Purchased a DVD player. And use the money normally spent on the SAT to purchase programming I can watch at my leisure. This is a good value really if you can ignore some of the DVD annoyances.

        Ditched commercial radio totally. If I want something live, I check out the college stations, AM, or OPB. Programming is spotty, but there are good things to be had.

        Quit buying POP CD's unless they are very good ones. Never purchase any music without either a recommendation from a trusted friend, or a sample.

        Speaking of samples, I get them from listening booths, if they have good choices in there, kazaa of course, lending and trading other peoples media, and mp3 swapping. It is damn nice to just mail over a track to someone and be able to have a constructive conversation about it on our time, not theirs.

        For times when I am outside, or with friends, I bought one of those little FM transmitter things from Ramsey electronics. They will easily go 1000 feet or more. Any music source I own can be easily used around my home with current equipment.

        Spent more time outside. This is a biggie. You have no idea what you are missing until you start doing it. Coaching kid sports has been great as well.

        Know the feeling you get at the end of a particularly good movie? It's nothing compared to the end of a winning season, or close game. And there is no license required!

        I get news via internet, in favor of magazine and newspaper subscriptions. I still look them over on the news stand, and will buy one if it is worthy. (Not many are right now.)

        Started shopping for clothes with *no* logo on them.

        Take advantage of used media when it makes sense. Why buy twice? If someone makes a bad call, that can be my gain, not the **AAs gain.

        Let the kids sample music via peer to peer.

        Spent a lot of time surfing with the kids. Tossed out forever the idea of censorware. Who else is going to help them understand the net and what it can do for them?

        Told all my friends and neighbors what I am doing and why it matters.

        Here are some of the results so far:

        Kids are way more active. They actually consider going to bed on time, and are doing better in school thanks to their increased ability to use the net and their increased overall energy level they have from using their bodies instead of wasting them.

        Buying the DVDs has been interesting. The collection is pretty large now. You never know how much you really spend monthly on subscription programming services until you use it for something like this.

        So, taking that collection and sharing it among friends has been well worth it. Many of them are beginning to do the same thing. Because our tastes are different, I get to sample for free, things that I would have missed, or would have paid for via some subscription. Bet the **AA really hates that.

        Made some new friends via the kid sports thing. So far I have had two really good summers. That is worth something now. Will likely be worth more as my kids grow up and share memories and hopefully get their kids to do the same things.

        Feel better now on a daily basis. Getting out and making the best of your life relieves a lot of stress.

        Since I spend a lot less time soaking up mind-candy, I have had to find other things to do with my time. Writing (I did not say writing well though --ha!), getting back into programming, coaching, working on the house, are all things that took too much time before I started this whole thing.

        So, does this make a difference? I think it does. Maybe not in the shorter term, but in the longer term making active choices matters, and they will make a difference.

        I believe one of the right ways to deal with the **AA is to make them compete with life --specifically yours. They have a *lot* of power right now because they consume a large portion of many of our lives. Why exactly do we do this?

        They make it easy not to choose.

        They make things avaliable in ways that consume your time. This is not a bad thing, but the current structure often dictates you dedicate parts of your time that you really should be spending on other things.

        They make you wonder about how good things could be if only... Bullshit.

        You know life is really better than you think, and they spend a lot of time selling you pictures of an alternate one that looks better, but lacks the depth your own life has right now.

        If more of us put them in their proper place and started acting like customers instead of consumers, they would likely have a much different attitude in a few years.

        Just my .02

      • There are, indeed, many hipocrites. That doesn't mean that you should join them. I prefer not to patronize the RIAA membership, but for some reason, they don't publicize who they are. A purported list of them can be found at a site called "boycott riaa", but I don't know how trustworthy that site is. (It looks reasonable, but ...)

        And I don't even have a purported list of the MPAA membership. That should be a lot easier, as there are many fewer movie studios. But I don't know of one.

        So how am I supposed to know which studios are members? For some reason they don't proclaim their membership.
    • Hey, in my case at least, there are several artists on that list whom I like, so it's easy. The point is simply to encourage artists to stand for something that is in their best interest. It's about preserving a chance to be heard, so it's easier for people to discover artists they've never heard of, but might like.
  • For those who haven't heard it, check out my recording "An Association Named Sue []," based on this post [] by Yo Grark. It's all free, so it's not like I'm being a marketing jackass here.

    I've also added a gif of an old pirate flag modified to reflect today's concerns. I think it'd make a great t-shirt, but I'm too busy with other stuff. Feel free to do whatever you want with it.
  • Sounds good, but ... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I got turned off radio and most commercial music as much as 15 ago. I am a big fan of independent music as an alternative to the god-awful crap that the "music" industry has been force-feeding the general public for so many years. In the last few years the Internet has become a vehicle for me to find good independent artists (mostly via promotional sites like IUMA [], etc., and the artists' own web sites) that I would never have found by conventional means. This has allowed me to rediscover some of the pleasure of good music. So, I would love to see Internet broadcasters pay far more attention to independent artists and build an alternative system (some of you may remember alternative radio before it was commoditized), where quality of content, not corporate dollars and monopolization, dictate what is played.

    Having said that, I am very troubled by the following possible scenario:

    What's to stop the RIAA Cartel, Clear-Channel and its ilk from sitting by quietly and letting others experiment, invent and grow a system and then, if it starts to take off, using their billions to buy/muscle their way in and take over? That is, use a very effective part of the Microsoft R&D model - let some one else spend the money to invent and innovate and then buy them/take them over or stomp them out of existence. Then we end up with the same mess or a worse mess than radio is in today on another medium. And, since (I believe that) Internet broadcasting is essentially an unregulated medium, it is probably ripe for widespread payola and other abuses.

  • by Jonathan ( 5011 ) on Saturday July 13, 2002 @03:25PM (#3878616) Homepage
    Many of you may have heard about the problems that the (Asian) northern snakehead fish are causing in Maryland. What you may not know is that carp are also non-native to North America, but were introduced from the Old World in the 19th century. Therefore, I am glad that there is going to be carp free music labels. There are many native fish species that deserve to be supported instead.
    • I think Bass is native american fish. (Correct me if I am wrong and replace Bass with more american fish if you like :)
      What about "Bass" label on music CDs as a symbol of its free distribution?
      • I think Bass is native american fish. (Correct me if I am wrong and replace Bass with more american fish if you like :)

        There are indeed native bass in North America.

        What about "Bass" label on music CDs as a symbol of its free distribution?

        An interesting idea. One thing that is either positive or negative according your point of view is that bass are carnivores while carp are vegetarians.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Why does Slashdot have a radio section []? The most recent story in it was June 29th... 2001! Over a year with no activity. Time to close up shop perhaps?
  • There is a good point in the article... THE ORIGINAL IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN THE COPY.. the problem is when there is people who doesn't really care about cool artwork, cool boxes or anything... they just want to hear the song, this people will always be copying without buying anything.. So IMHO the real problem is that there is a market segment (people that want music with crappy presentation at a low price) that is copying because the industry doesn't satisfy their quality-price needs... Well my final comment is that there always be a cheap bastard that will copy everything just because he can... but they will burn in hell anyway...
  • There has been much discussion on the various webcaster lists about going "DMCA-free" - technically, to forgo the DMCA statuatory license. It's coming, thanks to the idiocy of the situation.

    The SaveInternetRadio [] group and the International Webcasters Association [] have a lot more information about the situation. Good stations such as SOMA-FM [] have been forced from the air, and more are likely to fold.

    However, there is a lot of good music out there that can be freely streamed. Some Internet stations, such as channel 2 [], have always played freely availabled music, as has []. It is important to remember that these stations are free of the CARP and DMCA restrictions and payments, much like open-source software is free of licensing restrictions.

    I look for a new ecosystem to arise, akin to the open source movement, with music licensed freely to all, with returns coming from the sale of artifacts (DVD's, t-shirts, etc.), and concert tickets.
  • Hopefully the labels used by SomaFM and others can sign up to this, and then we can get our Groove Salad back!

    (p.s. CARP is still crap. I sent this fax [] just now, you can too.)

  • Roger McGuinn [], founder of the Byrds, has been giving away music on the net at the rate of one song per month since November 1995 at his Folk Den []. There you'll find a variety of styles and genres (folk, cowboy, celtic, blues, etc) as well as historic recordings like Roger playing John Henry" [] in a 1959 recording.

    Roger also testified before Congress in 2000 [] about the devious ways of the music industry and in support of MP3s and

    This has been rewarded too. Roger's CD, Treasures from the Folk Den [], was a Grammy Nominee for "Best Traditional Folk Album" this year.

  • The article is dated April 2002 and the deadline for responses is 20 May.
  • In fact it's probably the only business move most of these artists have available to them. The major labels are not going to foot the payola bill to get them on broadcast radio so the best chance they have of selling any music anywhere but off the card table at their shows is on the Internet.

    I buy music I hear learn about on Net radio. Even if 99% of the listeners don't, it's still an increase in sales.
  • I just signed up my old band, Latex Generation! At the height of Napster's popularity we got more emails than ever. We used to also play all of our stuff on a Live365 station. We never had intended to make money with our music, and it took me all over the USA, Europe, and Australia. The least I can do is offer it to the masses free of charge!
  • Quoting from the article:
    > ... the major record labels [working through the courts] ... have
    > now made a serious move that, if successful, will ... apply...
    > hefty fees to broadcasters, ... retroactive to 1998.

    Retroactive to 1998? Yeeeesh. If that's true, it would
    represent a serious abuse of power, or I'm missing something.
    Lawmakers can't even _think_ about levying fees retroactive
    to 1998 (Article I Section 9). But now the courts _can_?
    The courts are supposed to interpret the law, not go off
    on their own doing things that *can't* be made into law
    because the constitution won't allow it. Or is there some
    twisted interpretation by which some extant law can be
    construed to indicate that these fees should have been paid
    all along? Can someone explain this, before I lose my last
    shreds of faith in our legal system?
  • I will be doing whatever I can to help in this battle, even if it means just sharing my music and encouraging others to do the same.


    The kids are bored,
    at home for the summer
    on a computer they can't afford,

    A first post will not be had
    in these coming weeks.
    and it's sad.

    More catchy tunes [] (CARP-free music!!!)

  • Please, I urge you all to send a fax to Congress regarding this matter. It's simple and straightforward, and it's free.

    SomaFM has a very convenient portal here [].