Kim Cascone wrote:
I said only a few would sue. But that's just it, each person can decide. If you think your work would benefit from letting people hear it more, then let DJs use it. (and not get sued by the RIAA against the label's wishes) If you don't then you can excercise control over what you own and put a stop to it. Although I'd love every DJ in the world to be able to make mixes with every piece of music ever created, as long as people need to survive and pay for their labels (which unless you're big, you're only barely making enough to keep releasing) you can't force people's music into the commons. I want people to make mixes, and I suspect that labels that freely give permission to do so will fare much better in the long run from the free promotion than labels who don't, that is a choice that needs to be made by each person desperately trying to survive while (or by) making music. Obviously I feel a little less guilty about using music that almost none of the money ever reaches the artists. Like modern corporate hip-hop (don't believe the hype, most of the bling is rented). Really, me making a bastard pop mix of some tune isn't doing much damage to the artist that the label isn't doing to them ten-fold.Independant Dance Producers want (and beg) DJs to play their records far
and wide.
Only a few bastards would ever think of suing over it in a vain attempt
to get paid.
when I ran Silent Records we produced a couple of ambient mix CD's by local DJ's and one of them prompted a long distance phone call by the agent of a very famous producer (I won't mention any names but think: 'blotter paper') who basically threatened legal action if I didn't pull the CD with his track on it...we were stunned and saddened by this power play to say the least...
Rob
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx website: http://www.microsound.org