Extreme Makeover Home Edition

Extreme Makeover Home Edition is currently underway in Gainesville. The family to be featured runs a local non-profit music school called Studio Percussion. Read about them here: http://arkextremebuild.com/about-the-family.php

Create your own Rock Band Track

Rock Band just announced that they have created a set of tools for creating your own Rock Band tracks. You can download the tools, create your own songs, and upload them as an "audition" to be part of the game.

The Grateful Dead Model

In this age of digital media and music revolution, it may seem arbitrary to discuss the model of a band from 30 years ago. When the Grateful Dead were in their heyday, they revolutionized the music distribution model, from touring endlessly to encouraging bootlegging to owning their own music. While it did not catch on in a wide spread way, it seems that recent trends in music distribution are directly imitating their initial ideas.

With the impending death of the Record Label, artists are looking backwards for ideas to get their name out there. Instead of focusing on selling records, artists such as U2 are putting their focus on touring, much like the Grateful Dead did for most of their careers. For U2, they are making zero profit from their current tour, all in the name of putting on a good show. It seems like music is shifting away from making money and towards spreading the music. But this idea does have monetary risidual effects. While U2 may not be making money from ticket sales, T-shirt sales and music sales may be increasing, as well as general band awareness.

Other artists freely distribute their music to anyone who wants it. The band, Defiance, Ohio, just puts their music up for free for download on their site. The option exists to go to Itunes and pay money for their songs, and lots of people in fact choose this option, but they aren't looking to make money this way. "Back in the day", the Grateful Dead encouraged their fans to record and distribute their shows, going as far as letting some people plug directly into their sound board. For them, it was about getting the music out there. This isn't limited to just punk rock bands from the middle of nowhere; Radiohead, the Flaming Lips, and the Smashing Pumpkins also put their music online, for free.

In the digital marketplace, Record Labels are becoming obsolete. From Itunes, toMySpace, to Napster, to Demonoid, no one is buying CDs anymore. Whether streamed on the internet, or downloaded (legally or illegally), that hard copy format is just not bringing in the money it used to. With music being so easy to share digitally, many artists are forgoing the typical Record Label route entirely. The Grateful Dead owned the rights to all their own music. This did not quell their popularity nor their pocket book. Labels such as No Idea Records are finally beginning to embrace this model, serving mostly as a distribution outlet and less like the traditional, "sell your soul", record label model. In this model, the label prints and distributes records and the artist retains all the rights to the music.

But what are the legal repercussions of such a a DIY, artist/music focused shift? I guess this remains to be seen, but it is important to note the rise in freeware style licensing through things such as a Creative Commons licensing and Copy Left...but that is a whole nother blog post in and of itself.

Michael Jackson, The Beatles, and You.

Certainly, the copyrights owned by Michael Jackson were extraordinarily valuable. This article from the New York Times discusses the possibility of MJ's estate selling off the rights to some amazing music.

The NYT has this cool feature on it, where you can buy the rights to an article, and this got me thinking: "Is what I'm doing, right now, a violation of the copyright?" As much as I think about this stuff, I had never even given linking a second thought. In my search for the answer, I found these two articles:

10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained
Copyright Issues Present Ongoing Dilemma: To Link or Not To Link?

I haven't done any legal research on it yet, but I feel it's important to note that the second article is from 2003, and the law may have changed significantly. I'll check back with updates as I find them.

"Why Do Good People Steal Intellectual Property?"

Here's an article about the reasons people steal intellectual property. It examines the subject from a cognitive perspective, and it asserts that the biology of it has legal implications (beyond the obvious ones).

Interesting, indeed.

Two Different Takes on Capitol Records, Inc. v. Thomas

Capitol Records, Inc. v. Thomas-Rasset (2009 WL 1664468 (D.Minn.)) is a hugely contested case about a mother who downloaded 24 songs on Kazaa. Jury awarded the plaintiffs over $80,000 per song downloaded. Below are two different takes on it. What's yours?

Rule of Law Prevails in Capitol Records, Inc. v. Thomas

Jammie Thomas-Rasset gets hammered

French Judiciary-- "Free Access" to Internet a Human Right

"The French judiciary has ridden to the rescue of the country's web users, striking down a controversial new law which would have allowed the state to cut off the internet connections of illegal filesharers for up to a year."

Read on; it's an interesting take on the music piracy situation. The court ruled that "free access" to the internet is a human right.