RE: [JBC] CD duplication is not ok
Date: Mon 23 Aug 1999 - 15:10:00 PDT
> NO ONE is making ANY money off old JBC stuff, except as artifacts on eBay,
> yet people still get off on copyright law. Sounds kinda naive to me.
> eBay trading -- remember they are "real" products of a defunct label, not
> bootlegs-- does clearly establish once and for all that there is a solid
> market for this great material well beyond the purview of this list. Arlo
> Guthrie comes to mind as an artist who re-acquired his own rights under
> own label and puts out a disc & does a gig now and then. Now, maybe if
> Pat, genius though he be, would get off the fucking barstool.......
This is precisely the kind of patronizing garbage I was talking about -- as if Pat can merely pound the pavement and make it happen. Arlo could buy back his rights because he has a steady income from touring, and from his dad's legacy. Pat has no such luck. Pat's argument absolutely holds sway here: Regardless of whether he sees a penny from second-market transfers of copyright licenses (i.e. eBay and whatnot), if he encourages us to willy-nilly duplicate his material, we're shooting any chance he'd ever get to have the material reissued.
And as for Dave "Blatzman" -- what, exactly is the wave of the future, Mr. Out-Of-Context-Quotation, ripping off artists? Ensuring that only those with the largesse of major labels behind them will be heard? Nothing will stop it? To the contrary: Either the majors will drag us all kicking and screaming into a pay-per-use world (and artists who've been betrayed by their fans, like Pat, will grudgingly go along) or we'll only hear music from the kinds of bands that can support themselves solely on the basis of touring, using recorded music as mere promotional material.
I don't think there are a lot of Phish and Dead fans on this list.
R Received on Mon Aug 23 15:20 PDT 1999