posted 09-23-99 07:51 AM         

and of course this post wont get deleted - - - like poppycock it wont - - - save it while you can

tiffany barsotti

just got off the phone with general bobby farrell - FIREDRAGON MUSIC (ASCAP) and he confirms that you are a damned liar right out of the gate

quote:

---

I have just come to MP3.COM to be the liason between the performing rights organizations that we are doing deals with. Firstly it's ASCAP.

---

just to insure the connection

quote:

---

Let us dispell any misunderstandings that we can. You all have points!

---

just to set the stage

quote:

---

MP3.COM has purchased a broadcast licensing deal with ASCAP, we are working on doing the same with other performing rights organizations. This essentially means that we are treated somewhat like a radio station. What's better about this deal than the radio is that we are much better at reporting accurate numbers of plays, downloads and streams. We give our numbers directly to ASCAP and they pay a percentage to the rightful owners who are members. ...

---

and that is a damned lie

ascap pays their clique via their own monitoring cum surveys and nobody else - ill be happy to document

quote:

---

... The percentage is yet to be determined as, there is no baseline for this type of deal. So right now, everyone needs to be patient. We at MP3.COM are working to make this a fair deal for everyone. Our practices of free downloads will not change.

---

patience with knowing thieves - that is just so much mealyamouthing and you damned well know it - nobody is patient with a thief nor should they be

fair deal at ascap is as nonexistent as credibility at mp3.com - and your smoozing wont change it

quote:

---

Everyone in this business of merging music and the internet is dealing with how, what, who, where; and we @ MP3.COM know WHY; to give the power back to the artists/songwriters. Not everyone has that goal, but that is why it is important that you have your agenda straight and be proactive, being mad won't help.

---

anyone idiotic enough to buy that line of bull - power back to the artists/songwriters - is absolutely brain dead - you cannot now and will not ever show any change whatsoever in ascaps bmis or sesacs lying thieveries from their mass members in favor of their respective cliques and their own golden parachutes - the only thing artists/songwriters are going to get is shafted just like always

quote:

---

To: Another P.K. - are you an artist and/or songwriter? Are you registered with a performing rights organization? By-the-way, We do not delete posts here, we will delete hacks that give us pornographic images, but we believe in letting everyone go and run their fingers. Communication is key!

---

do not delete posts here - now THAT is a god damned lie of the first magnitude - my own prior to the 20th last for starters - I have copies of all and none contain either pornographic words or images - so youre a damned liar right out of the gate on that one too

the only time anyone can run their fingers is when they defame general farrell vmg or any of their supporters - try telling the truth about any of the liars at mp3.com and see how long your posts last

quote:

---

There are a lot of positives about this ASCAP deal, lets focus on these and give MP3.COM, Congress and the PRO's (Performing Rights Orgainizations) some time to figure out how it's all going to work. ....

---

they already know how its going to work - or didnt you know about ascaps marilyn bergman buying the senate judiciary committee via senator hatch - so that too is a knowing damned lie

quote:

---

....We need get everyone to start thinking differently. That is exactly what I said at a panel and CMJ last weekend: Clearly we ALL need to think differently and leave our egos behind and the crowd cheered. Having a victim attitiude will not serve you.

---

you need everyone thinking differently to suck them into being scammed without protest in their ignorance - egos be damned a liar is a liar and a thief is a thief and ascap and mp3.com qualify in both categories - and being a victim with an attitude will bring out the TRUTH neither ascap bmi sesac nor mp3.com can stand

quote:

---

GOING FORWARD: There is a Lilith Fair songwriting contest that ASCAP is sponsoring, you must submit your songs before November 15th to ASCAP. Being a member of ASCAP and MP3.COM is required.

---

just dont hold your breath unless youre in the ascap clique

quote:

---

We are working diligently to get the ASCAP page up on our site. But in the meanwhile you can go to ASCAP.COM and check other benefits.

---

the only other benefits at ascap are more lies to scam those ignorant enough to believe anything written there excluding addresses and telephone numbers

quote:

---

To PlatosForms: Tell me your story.

---

oh please do - so ascap can use every word of it against you should you ever decide to call them on their nonpayment of your royalties - ill be happy to document one more time

quote:

---

So let's talk about all of this, I'll be your guide in this area, it can be tricky, but I believe if technology broke something, technology can fix it! The music business thinks technology broke it, we'll see if that's true?

---

not until you get rid of the damned liars like yourself you wont

at multimedia we get hundreds of requests to verify public performances for songwriters from all three agencies - ascap - bmi - sesac - and all foreign agencies - but by those own agencys rules only their own surveys - which are all but nonexistent - are acceptable in determining their royalty disbursements

and all other versions are outright god damned lies

posted 09-23-99 09:33 AM            

The Life And Times Of Tiffany Barsotti (personal manager, agent, and
publisher at Rondor Music International, Director of high profile relationships Mp3.com)-

Tiffany has a degree in Recording Arts and Sciences from UCLA which included
courses in music publishing, marketing, production, sound engineering,
retail radio and publicity.

Tiffany worked as an assistant to Sandi Gallin at Gallin-Morey Associates,
the largest Management Company in Los Angeles at that time.

Tiffany also worked at Jensen Communications doing tour press for popular
groups like Jane's Addiction, Depeche Mode, the Doobie Brothers, Rod
Stewart, Billy Joel, and many others.

In 1989, after her departure from Jensen Communications, Tiffany received an
unexpected call from Dianne Reeves with an offer of road management and tour
publicity work. A successful meeting with Dianne's manager, Linda
Goldstein, whose other clients included Bobby McFerrin, and Laurie Anderson,
resulted in a further offer for Tiffany to move from her native Los Angeles
to New York to work out of Goldstein's office prior to heading out on the
road with Reeves. It was during this tour that Reeves' album, "Never Too
Far," hit the #3 spot on the Billboard R&B charts.

She eventually joined forces with Steven Rechtschaffner; and together they
created the company, Industrial Strength Productions (ISP). A series called
Inside Out, a sort of erotic Twilight Zone for which Tiffany and Steven were
producers, caught the attention of Propaganda Films, which in turn offered
the duo their first major contract: The opportunity to produce
state-of-the-art workout videos for Reebok. ISP took off with the Reebok
productions, and during its lifetime went on to do everything from Sports
marketing for brands such as Rollerblade, Airwalk, and Burton Snowboards, to
proposing shows to MTV, the blueprints of which eventually developed into
mainstays for the cable channel to this day.
Industrial Strength Productions had finished all of its work by 1993. Soon
thereafter Dianne Reeves called Tiffany once again, this time to ask her to
be her manager. As this was the moment Tiffany had been awaiting, she
promptly created her own new company, Sound Management, and contiguously
began working with Dianne to develop a new album, "Art and Survival."
Released in February 1994, the album received a host of critical and popular
acclaim, winning many awards in both the jazz and R&B genres. This album was
followed by "Quiet After the Storm," produced by Dianne's mentor and cousin,
George Duke. This well organized project garnered her a Grammy nomination,
high volume in sales, visibility, a strong foundation for International
publicity, and touring opportunities.
In 1997 a new direction was on the horizon for Sound Management and
Tiffany. With the signing of Maysa Leak(of the group Incognito), and the
signing of the up-and-coming blues-based rock group Swamp Boogie Queen,
Tiffany entered the arena of mainstream and popular music, in which she has
made great strides. Since November of 1998, she has worked for Rondor Music
International, as the Creative Director in the New York office under the
administration of Karen Durant, whom she met in 1993, when Karen was the A &
R representative for Reeves' "Art and Survival" release.

Paradise
Hip-hop/Rap

posted 09-23-99 02:09 PM            

RadioBuzzard is correct in stating that with things like radio, ASCAP relies on their own sampling surveys to determine royalty payments. I'm guessing that his big beef is over the fact that their surveys have never turned up any evidence of any VMG record ever being played anywhere, hence the General's hysterical accusations about them denying him all his royalties. 'Cause off in Crazy General Land his records are at the top of all the charts.

Anyway, that said, there's no way that ASCAP can apply those sampling methods to MP3.Com, since download statistics for all the artists are only known to MP3.Com. It's not like with radio, where someone can listen to how often a song is played. And just because this is a new medium and ASCAP has worked out a different way of determining airplay statistics does not make the whole thing "a damned lie." But it probably means that VMG will not be getting any royalty payments through MP3.Com either, because your non-existent roster of stars is no more popular here than it is anywhere else.

posted 09-23-99 04:18 PM            

I bet your bed is unmade, too.

posted 09-23-99 07:19 PM            

General Bobby Farrell - <guffaw> - stop it, you're killing me!

Yeah, he's a real authoritative source of information. Hint: (Not!)

I once went through the trouble of reading that long diatribe known as his web page. Let's just say that there was just enough accurate information in there to make it sound as though he has a clue. Which he doesn't.

posted 09-23-99 07:25 PM            

I was so happy to see your post about the ASCAP thing. We've been waiting for some good info. Thanks.

How bout this q: Will we get credit for all our downloads? Including past ones?

posted 09-23-99 08:45 PM            

Can you believe I came back to this. For those how few they may be, I will continue to post information and give love back to the community.

MadelynIris, I have a meeting with people regarding this subject tomorrow. I will post back when I have real information I can disclose. (I need to do some fact checking before I can go public.) -- oh won't AnotherP.K., RadioWizard and General Bobby Farrell (and/or whoever he/she may be tomorrow) have fun with this one.

Free speech baby - knock yourself out!

posted 09-23-99 10:21 PM         

quote:

---

Radio Wiz. Please clear this up for me. If Tiffany is a "damned" liar and Jodi is a "Super" liar. Does this mean that Jodi is still your # 1 fave? Am I still on the VMG charts, as hyprocite, ass-kisser, idiot element?

---

jodi is far more practiced than tiffany - her skill really shows through

are you still on the industrys ****list - i suppose so since nobody ever documented a leopard changing its spots

to the rest of you - when you get paid anything by ascrap - then call those of us who have been there and seen the thievery about it - until then practice your whining

cant imagine how general farrell manages to work 30 hours a day 11 days a week and keep all these aliases running without a hitch

could it be that he really knows this industry and made a lot of people a lot of money - or saved their behinds from being taken - that has his many fans and friends in his camp

but that would be too intelligent for the idiot element at mp3.com - as clearly shown in their posts

posted 09-25-99 12:41 AM         

I was wrong, and now I listen to them, but I only listen to ANYONE with a grain of salt. I never try to make a decision without finding out as much as possible about things.
when I am in doubt I tend to not do anything rather than do something stupid, ok?

alot of people have in fact been censored here in this BB, including Rad Wiz for absolutely no valid reason, and that tends to make me pay more attention. it makes you think! whole threads with 60 posts vanished to nowhere!

since michelle has got back from her trip less things have been deleted, so it was probably who ever was subbing for her while she was away. but i dont know.thats just my supposition.

recently while looking for an attorney for my copyright infringement case, I found one in pittsburgh on the net.

this firm has info about cases they've been involved with in it. -you know, to brag.

there was a case they had info about what they did, involving a case representing artists against ascap. and they won.
I was about to sign up for asap before that, but changed my mind then.

I just couldnt understand how so many artists were involved in something like that. big name artists even. it made no sense.

although, now I see that most musicians do not know about the music industry or check anything out thoroughly. they read a simple contract and think it sounds cool without seeing the whole picture about it.

they encouraged us to sign on to ascap in the "ask the lawyer" section, and left the url.
the site look impressive and all those big named artists!
everybody has seen ascap or bmi written on the backs of their CDs and albums right? Its on all the sheet music right? It was only ten bucks a year, so why not right? after reading about the court cases, I did not join ascap, and I feel satisfied with that decision personally.
you dont have to agree, but I thought I would mention this anyway.
Rad Wiz actually has some grounds for his statements, and he usually backs them up with info you can use to check it out.

-and i am not the wizard or the general either! (wish I were, Id probably have some money, heh!)

posted 09-25-99 02:02 AM            

All I know about is the origins of the two organizations. ASCAP was created because blacks were making too much popular music. Blacks were not permitted to join ASCAP so it was assumed they would stop making music under the oppressive circumstances. I guess it didn't work and blacks kept making music so they decided to go ahead and create BMI, as a means to at least control (and take) the money that blacks were making from music.

Neither of these organizations have a very nice history, they were both created for the purpose of institutional racism, and had nothing do to with providing industry accountability.

By the way how is the mp3.com/ASCAP deal going to work with certain techno artists, particularly drumNbass and jungle.. tracks that lack a melody and lyrics can't be liscenced, due to racist conspiracy, isnt that right?

posted 09-25-99 05:15 AM            

quote:

---

Neither of these organizations have a very nice history, they were both created for the purpose of institutional racism, and had nothing do to with providing industry accountability.

---

Now, I've heard some generalisations in my time...What do you ground these beliefs on? Conspiracy theories make people look stupid.

quote:

---

tracks that lack a melody and lyrics can't be liscenced, due to racist conspiracy, isnt that right?

---

Creating divisions when there were previously none is irresponsible.

Julian

www.mp3.com/JulianHeald

PS-Whats your url?

posted 09-25-99 05:36 AM            

its common knowledge to anyone who cares to find out, I guess.

Do you realise how stupid that sounds? Are you implying that only black people make music without melody or lyrics? Get a life.

no I am talking about what was happening 80-100 years ago. black music was rhythm based, and the entire culture was racist and you're trying to tell me I'm off base? screw you, loser. i suppose i'm making it up if I say they couldn't ride in the front of the bus until the 1950's too...only in this case its 1999 and the publishing companies and performing rights agencies are still ripping everyone off, regardless of race, creed or color! take your own advice, get a life!

posted 09-25-99 05:57 AM            

quote:

---

By the way how is the mp3.com/ASCAP deal going to work with certain techno artists, particularly drumNbass and jungle.. tracks that lack a melody and lyrics can't be liscenced, due to racist conspiracy, isnt that right?

---

quote:

---

I am talking about what was happening 80-100 years ago.

---

quote:

---

its common knowledge to anyone who cares to find out, I guess.

---

Julian

www.mp3.com/JulianHeald

[This message has been edited by JulianHeald (edited 09-25-99).]

posted 09-25-99 06:44 AM         

here is the history for you,
ascap was around first. they did not like alot of the (black) artists, the R&B, rocknroll and blues artists.

thus BMI came about.

Ive read this elsewhere and I was told this by someone who works with BMI once before, and alas, if you look on bands that did those styles of music in the 50, 60's etc, you see that they are almost always on BMI. not ascap.
alot of country artists and show biz tunes from those days are on ascap.

nowadays it doesnt matter what style you play or what color you are or anything else. if ya give em the money you're in.

posted 09-25-99 06:57 AM            

what is this selective editing??? Did this slip by you?:

only in this case its 1999 and the publishing companies and performing rights agencies are still ripping everyone off, regardless of race, creed or color!

Oh geez I forgot its the weekend... no wonder the moron quotient just went up around here.

and as for this:

Are you implying that only black people make music without melody or lyrics?

no, I never implied that. blacks were putting plenty of melody into their songs at the time these rules were drawn up but there was so much rhythm present that the whites were unwilling to accept the 'tribal african noise' under any circumstances. But it doesn't stop there. What I'm implying is that A LOT of us are getting the shaft now because A LOT of us are making music that is rhythm-based nowadays, primarily all the most lucrative forms of POP MUSIC.

posted 09-25-99 07:47 AM            

IT DOES matter what style you play because the old rules for determining what constitutes 'songwriting' were written up with a racist bias and those are the same rules they use today.

If you are in a 5 peice band and you're part of the rhythm section, good luck getting a songwriting credit! good luck sueing anyone that rips off your drum track or your bassline. Do you have any idea how much money Clyde Stubblefield could've collected if the James Brown funky drummer loop had been protected? everyone from anthrax to the stereo logic would have to pay up! and you'd see a lot less derrivative crap clogging up mp3.com if they enforced a usage policy that was not rooted in these racist scams!

by the way before anyone gets confused, i am talking about PUBLISHING, not COPYRIGHT or OWNERSHIP of RECORDINGS. melody and rhythm are both notated on the same staff, now if anyone can explain to me why one is worth nothing and the other is worth 50% songwriting credit, I'd like to hear it.

posted 09-25-99 10:16 AM         

quote:

---

Neither of these organizations have a very nice history, they were both created for the purpose of institutional racism, and had nothing do to with providing industry accountability.

---

and it was as much cultural as it was racist - and neither ascap bmi nor sesac paid country music the same rates as they did their clique music until the early to mid sixties

bmi was founded in 1940 in retaliation against ascap abuses toward broadcasters - but it has since degenerated into the same moral slime of both racist and cultural discriminations

dont think so - the try and get a who got paid and how much report as required by their charters - which they will not deliver in spite of the court orders - and then count the names and tag them to the bodies

youll see racism all other the place and a pay clique based on race and field of music - culture - that would give justification for hitler to become an antisemetic saint

btw - if youll take the time to read the much hated general farrells site - youll find all this duly documented with no holds barred

and the ascap cum mp3.com scaminprogress isnt going to be any exception

posted 09-25-99 11:34 AM         

hehe. Who's posting more "hype" here, Tiffany or the VMG "crowd?"

"like most of you I originally thought rad wiz and the gen were wacko,(and the same person) but since then I've seen rad wiz point out some things that were in fact true in the BB."

Does that mean he isn't wacko?

"I was about to sign up for asap before that, but changed my mind then."

If you decide not to do business with a company because they were involved in a lawsuit, you won't be doing much business.

"Do you have any idea how much money Clyde Stubblefield could've collected if the James Brown funky drummer loop had been protected?"

Clyde actually put out a few CDs of loopable stuff out there. Not sure whether they made a lot of money. But your argument is a little off-base...the loop is/was protected. It's just that it was owned by JB/the record company/somebody who was not Clyde. He (hopefully) got paid to record it, but royalties were probably not part of the deal. You can say that everyone who used it should have paid a license, and that if the world was fair CS should have been let in for a cut of whatever the tune made, rather than just being paid off. Maybe there's a raw deal there, and racism is certainly behind some ripoffs. Maybe performers, in fairness, ought to have more control over their recorded performances. But you're stretching too far to say that everyone in a rhythm section should get a songwriting credit just for playing on a track.

"youll see racism all other the place and a pay clique based on race and field of music - culture - that would give justification for hitler to become an antisemetic saint"

posted 09-26-99 12:15 AM         

Chevdo said:
IT DOES matter what style you play because the old rules for determining what constitutes 'songwriting' were written up with a racist bias and those are the same rules they use today. (etc)

oh I see what ya mean Chev. I was referring to the fact that if you do R&b you can be on ascap for ex. they dont care about that part, just so they get their money from you. I didnt see anything on their webpages to indicate I could or coulnd't join as long as I paid them. The songwriting thing is true.
its also weird that I've heard the copyrights dont include the solos,(is that right?) although I could make an instrumental using that solo and it would be copyrighted.(?) isnt that weird?

RadioWizard said:
STAND BY FOR THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST! - CHEVDO IS RIGHT!

hehe! (who said he has no sense of humor? he made ME laugh!)

btw, I wasnt basing my decision about ascap on just one court case.
it showed their complete trial info including the transcripts and evidence.
It had shown that there were a LOT of artists who won seperate cases for the same thing, and this case was a class action suit, not just one artist too.

If they screw up with one artist or two then I could say oh they goofed, but if someone screws alot over a long period of time I don't want to deal with them, thats all.
you dont have to agree.

radio wiz is not wacko, he just writes in a sensationalized manner, thats all. you know, the CAPS and the BOLD (I never learned how to do that yet) and the phrases like "superliar." He uses the bold print to
emphasise thats all.

posted 09-26-99 12:53 AM            

you are talking about the marketing of a recording. all recordings are protected under copyright. I was talking about publishing, and I specified PLEASE DO NOT GET CONFUSED. If you don't know what I'm talking about, learn the difference!

But your argument is a little off-base...the loop is/was protected. It's just that it was owned by JB/the record company/somebody who was not Clyde.

NO. the RECORDING of him playing the drums is protected by copyright. The rhythm itself is unprotected. Anyone can play funky drummer on any set of drums and they do not have to pay for usage.

He (hopefully) got paid to record it, but royalties were probably not part of the deal.

again, learn the difference between mechanical royalties and performance royalties, and the difference between a recording artist and a composer and the fact that one person can wear both hats, and be entitled to mechanical and performance royalties as both recording artist and composer.

You can say that everyone who used it should have paid a license, and that if the world was fair CS should have been let in for a cut of whatever the tune made, rather than just being paid off.

He was never 'paid off', nobody had to buy out his side of the song because it didn't legally exist! he got paid for performing on a RECORDING of the song.

posted 09-26-99 01:07 AM            

http://lodge.com/music/library/business/copyright.html

posted 09-26-99 01:19 AM            

if they are generating their own rhythms, they should get the credit. if they are playing someone elses rhythms, that person should get the credit. the line between what constitutes songwriting and what doesn't is either entirely racist or entirely arbitrary. either way, there is no valid excuse for it other than the fact that a lot of money would have to keep being transfered around to different people if every rhythm were protected. oh no, a big stimulation of the economy! what a horrible thing that would be to anyone who isn't sitting on billions of dollars and wants to keep it that way!

yeah, lots of rhythms are generic, probably because nobody is getting paid enough to bother making unique ones! but you can't change the fact that funky drummer is the most recognizable loop on the planet, and its only generic because it has been STOLEN so many times.

posted 09-26-99 01:35 AM         

yeh I notice how many times they steal something unique and clever from someone else, and thats pretty shitty.

santana comes to mind.. some songs are nothing without their rhythm part.

like that part with the sounds of clocks on the beginning of pink floyd's Time,

and also the beginning of their song Money. that thing with the cash register sounds etc, really is cool and original, but the way things are now, anyone could steal it.

posted 09-26-99 01:37 AM            

yep thats right, thats why eddie van halen used to have to turn his back to the audience so that they wouldn't find out how he was doing his solos. they say he was protecting his 'technique' but actually his technique and the solo itself are intertwined, the only reason he had to protect his 'technique' is because his MUSIC was NOT protected.

and personally, i think it ended up making him look like a dickhead when really he was just a victim. the history books have him down as being a dickhead, and who knows the whole thing might have ended up affecting his personality and turned him into a dickhead!

posted 09-26-99 01:44 AM            

wrong attitude! if the kids down the street want to rap over my loops and throw a few tapes around I'd be flattered! i dont care what they do with my material, but as soon as their record sells a zillion copies, I'll be there waiting for my cut of the action!

anyway there is a problem with the idea of a 'cash register sound' being protected. Its one thing to have an actual recorded sample of a cash register copyrighted, but to have ownership over 'the sound of a cash register' would be like saying anyone who wants to play drums has to pay one guy for the privledge. Imagine if someone had trademarked the letter 'e' and everyone had to pay them each time they use the letter 'e' when speaking or writing??

speaking of which, the trademark 'mp3.com' is probably illegal.

posted 09-26-99 02:31 AM         

but the thing i was thinking isnt just the cash register SOUND, but the fact that it has other shit in the beginning which is actually a persussive groove beat, it could be played on drums or guitar or whatever and still be the same. of course it wouldnt sound exactly the same.

it almost is saying that drums arent a valid musical instrument. my old drummer used to tune his drums to the key of G. the bass was a G and the snare was a higher G. you could play a drum part on the gtr, it just wouldnt sound the same.

the other thing is yeh, if they took it and used it ok, but they have to pay for the privelidge, (like you said)
or get their own damn cash register or whatever, and come up with something original.

zztop has a song that uses a car door being shut on it, and people think its a drum.
anything that has a sound with a pitch could be used in music somewhere. but the drums are a major musical instrument ans they arent as valid somehow. I just dont get it.

i was just thinkin.. mp3con is a cult.
their slaves are told they must work hard, and to try to gain favour.
they offer great sacrifices to the mp3god.
in the hopes they will gain favour.
the god chooses his favorites.
they are told they are one community.
they must abide by the god's will or be unclean and outcast.
they must not question the god or be struck mute.
sometimes he gives them small gifts.
They must all sing happy songs as they drink their coolaid.
-oh no, i think i need help! hehe

posted 09-26-99 11:03 AM         

"the line between what constitutes songwriting and what doesn't is either entirely racist or entirely arbitrary."

Can't see the racist angle unless you are equating "rhythm" with "black," which sounds racist already. Arbitrary, sure, although there's some question whether it's the law itself or the way people use it.

That was the point I was trying to make: where are you going to draw the line? Everybody who plays a drum track should get co-writer credit? Everyone who comes up with an unusual chord voicing should "own" it? Sounds like corporate lawyers who run around companies looking for any idea they can get a bogus patent on, because they know someone will step on it, then they can use that as leverage when their company steps on somebody else's bogus patent. Pretty soon you can't make music without a team of lawyers.

"the only reason he had to protect his 'technique' is because his MUSIC was NOT protected."

Actually, solos are protected if they are "fixed in tangible form." If you can document that someone lifted your solo, you can go after them. The technique isn't protected by copyright law, but I suppose he could've tried patent or trademark law to protect it.

"they must abide by the god's will or be unclean and outcast.
they must not question the god or be struck mute."

posted 09-26-99 11:16 AM            

quote:

---

"the line between what constitutes songwriting and what doesn't is either entirely racist or entirely arbitrary."

Can't see the racist angle unless you are equating "rhythm" with "black," which sounds racist already.

---

posted 09-26-99 11:27 AM            

But no response. I am socked, someone SO CONCERNED with the INDIE music world, would lack time to responde to suck a metter....................................

http://www.theglobe.com/tcmonroe

posted 09-26-99 11:46 AM            

or better yet, get out there, sell yourselves, sell your music, and make some money.

sitting behind your computer screen, in your room, all by yourself is going to get you no where.

since i already read all this garbage thread, i better put someting on.

radio wizzard is not wacko - he has some valid points and insight the business. but he also lacks tact, writing skills, and intelligence. which is scary, cause knowledge in the wrong head leads to disaster. he also has a hidden agenda, he has alterior motives for posting the stuff he does. he aint doing it to enlighten anyone on this bb. he is doing it to damage mp3.com in some way. so he should not be trusted at all.

lastly, even if the MP3.com and ASCAP dealings are just hype and a bit of sunshine being blown up your ass. so what! it's a hell of a lot better than them just sitting around and doing nothing. which is exactly what some other compeitition sites are doing.

posted 09-26-99 12:04 PM            

quote:

---

sitting behind your computer screen, in your room, all by yourself is going to get you no where.

---

That's excellent advice.Take it

Julian

posted 09-26-99 12:08 PM            

have fun playing the "my ego is bigger than yours" game.

see ya next weekend.

p.s. your web link doesn't work tough guy.

posted 09-26-99 01:34 PM         

The truth is that Rad Wiz (whatever) is absolutely right in many of his points, these people are the vilest, most disgusting kind of scum. They will ride your back into Beverly Hills and then kick you back onto the street and tell you that they EARNED IT! And when you listen to them react to a story of someone who wants to get their money, they freak out and start screaming about how "That little so and so thinks he can f**k with me? I'll break him!" as though they own you.

There is a very well established culture in this biz, and that is that if you're are anointed as one of the "Chosen", then you better be damn happy about it and take the scraps they give - smiling. If you don't then you're an ungrateful little piece of crap that needs to be put back into your place. "How dare you speak up?" is the way it's looked at.

So what? Well, here's what I said I found interesting about this.....

These are the people MP3.com is getting in bed with. Now, that doesn't on the face of it make it a bad thing, as it's possible that *SOME* people will actually make some extra money off this. But....

We've already heard rumbles about people not getting what they deserve from CD sales and whatnot, as well as figures being manipulated, and we all see what happens when someone speaks out, even if they use logic and clarity to support what they say, (as I admit many do not, thereby diluting the point they want to make). This kind of stance is familiar to me, and it looks a whole lot like the same old thing being done different, instead of a whole new thing being done right.

So when I hear that they are going to be keeping download stats that will have anything to do with ASCAP payments and the like, I get real f**ing nervous. This is getting into the REAL stuff now gang, and if you don't think that this will be a 2-way street, then you just plain don't see how things are. "QUID PRO QUO" has always been the name of the game in business, what makes you think this is gonna be any different?

Mp3.com likes to trumpet about how they are helping a new revolution in music. C'mon people! This is just another group of people trying to make a living riding the back of your music. And there's nothing wrong with that, if they're gonna carry you now and then too. (Have YOU been carried lately?) They're just making money folks! Plain and simple. And the best way to do that is gonna be the way that they will go. Period.

ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, HARRY FOX, and the others are all very well known for their lack of forthrightness, mysterious and arcane bookkeeping, and their lack of regard for the rights of the artist. Doesn't that sound even a little like the kind of stuff we're hearing all over these boards about mp3.com?

And as far as mp3's attitude towards us....
I was part of a well known fight in these boards recently. Since then I have tried to get an instrumental rock song of mine featured, as an experiment. I'm not trying to get downloads here but, if you go and listen to #11 on my page, then listen some of the other stuff that's featured and is high on the charts there, you'll be a little surprised. I think it would be very hard to support an argument that the stuff that's been up there for over a week is so deserving that my song shouldn't be up for at least one day!

The point of this is that I believe that I may have been blacklisted here, which is an old tried and true tactic that the biz has used very successfully against artists since time began. Speak out, and you disappear. Other artists see what happens, and they learn to keep their mouths shut. And the machine grinds along, business as usual............

That position of strength that these people have, has been turned into a well-guarded gate, with only the people with the right passes, credentials, and attitudes allowed to go through. And the people guarding the portal are the only people allowed to choose who gets those credentials.

Seems a little odd, considering that they would have nothing without those very same people that they rule over. And make no mistake, rule is the correct term. Come out to L.A. and watch the wheels turn if you don't believe me.

Just drawing what seem to me to be obvious conclusions, given the course of these events, as well as what I've seen from the people running the show here.

I still believe it can be useful to you to have your stuff here, but make sure it's USEFUL TO YOU!! Find a way to make it work for you independently of what mp3.com can/will do for you, or you're wasting your time. Mark my words, the time is coming where all of the people here will be going through all the same old moves trying to become the next Fisher from this site, and what the hell is different about that?

There are a lot of people putting together little projects here and there based on the people that they have met here, and the new ideas that they have shared. This is one of the true values here. Use it! It's one of the only things here that is for sure.

Now I fully expect a chorus of screeching little minions to tell me to *shut up* and not be so ungrateful, and that will just prove my point as far as I'm concerned, so go ahead. There's very little I've ever seen here to change my mind, and I doubt that some brown-faced lackey who's been busy lapping at the crack of these folks is gonna say something that will make me see things their way all the sudden.

www.stillmusic.com
www.mp3.com/still

posted 09-26-99 03:07 PM            

no, thats a racial statement, not a racist statement. It is a fact that the rhythmic popular music of today has its origins in the rhythm of black music. What would be racist is if you attempted to deny this.

Pretty soon you can't make music without a team of lawyers.

lawyers are mostly needed to hammer out rules when the rules are fuzzy. you don't really need a lawyer to draw up any standard contract, you can have it signed by a notary public. Please don't try to scare me into giving up my rights. A situation where 'you can't make music without a team of lawyers' is ludicrous.

posted 09-26-99 05:10 PM         

Not trying to scare anybody, I'm just saying that it makes sense that the presumption should be that "sidemen" on a recording session are working for hire, and don't get songwriting credit (and thus publishing royalties) unless determined otherwise beforehand.

"no, thats a racial statement, not a racist statement. It is a fact that the rhythmic popular music of today has its origins in the rhythm of black music. What would be racist is if you attempted to deny this."

I'll agree that it all goes back to the blues directly or indirectly, but even in the blues (or whatever black music you want to point to) the rhythm section still doesn't routinely get co-writer credit. This is true even in jazz, where the sidemen are generally contributing a lot more individual creative content to the recording. I still don't see how it adds up to a bias against black people. (Not that there's any shortage of convincing examples of blacks getting screwed by the industry.)

STILL, nice post...it'll be interesting to hear if you find out convincingly that you've been "blacklisted" somehow. Most of the "speaking out" here has been lacking in logic and at least a little rude. But there have been cases where mp3c bent over backwards to feature people who complained the loudest, perhaps to try to avoid the perception that people speak out are punished.

"and it looks a whole lot like the same old thing being done different, instead of a whole new thing being done right."

I'd like to hear your ideas about what the new thing would be and how to do it right. Seems like they have less control over the artists than the traditional industry, since the contract lets anyone come and go as they please. But the Real deal shows they are doing a good job of building a steerable audience.

"Doesn't that sound even a little like the kind of stuff we're hearing all over these boards about mp3.com?"

posted 09-26-99 06:11 PM         

quote:

---

"Doesn't that sound even a little like the kind of stuff we're hearing all over these boards about mp3.com?"

---

Note the phrase "even a little bit".

I'm not sure that I have been "blacklisted", I'm simply pointing out some facts. The song is real good, and they have had the same thing up there for well over a week. I'm not saying BTW that there is anything wrong with the song that is there, but is it THAT deserving? It's so good that my song should not be featured, or anyone else's for that matter?

And by the way, if you investigate those posts that I was involved in before, you will see that the people from mp3.com were basically saying that they were human, and that they can be swayed towards someone's music by all kinds of factors outside of what the music sounds like.

Extending that rational, isn't likely that the reverse could be true, and that if you become a bit of a thorn, you will find yourself shoved into a closet in the basement somewhere? No matter how good your stuff is?

"Steerable audience", if I get you right, you see that as good?
Why?

Not saying any of these are true facts, but there are many signs that point to some interesting conclusions. Where there is smoke, there is very often a fire, or at least someone blowing smoke.......

I note that you neglected to speak about any of the things having to do with the new associations with ASCAP.

posted 09-26-99 06:25 PM            

ya thats my point, exactly!

I still don't see how it adds up to a bias against black people.

And I still haven't heard a more convincing explaination.

posted 09-26-99 07:34 PM         

Not necessarily good or bad, but evidence of the kind of control they are building. My point was that compared to the traditional industry, which controls both artists and distribution channels, mp3.com doesn't have much artist control but they are building a lot of influence over the channels, and doing it better than all the other music sites. amp3.com has been the only music site to try to get artist control back, either by weird insistence on loyalty or promises of money.

"I'm not sure if you're saying you're happy with these things or not, but I think you would agree that there are things here that bear careful watching."

Yes I would agree, and the more control they have the more important it is to watch. But I was trying to emphasize that most of the whining on the boards is just that, there's only a few complaints that have any merit to them. There are also some people who obviously have it in for mp3.com and will find something to criticize no matter what they do. (chevdo is a unique case in that he has the irrational mp3.com hatred, but he's too smart to jump on board the obviously bogus stuff, and he manages to be entertaining most of the time on top of it. )

posted 09-26-99 08:18 PM            

At this point you have to accept a tiny bit of conspiracy theory, in order to jump from one set of historical facts to the next. When the people who created ASCAP realized their ranks were being infiltrated at an alarming rate by the vary people they were trying to keep out, they created BMI and said 'hey blacks, come here! we like you!'.

At the same time they were petitioning the courts to draw up some sound rules for determining which portions of 'songwriting' were considsred to be intellectually protected, and which were not. Given the fact that ASCAP was an inherently racist organization to begin with (FACT), and given the fact that both organizations petitioned the courts to define songwriting on a slant that is obviously culturally biased, it requires a very TINY leap of the imagination to conclude that this cultural bias was rooted in the racist bias that was already public policy with that organization but was totally unenforceable by the time BMI and the legalities of songwriting were established.

chevdo, it may be bias that sidemen don't normally get writing credit, no matter how creative their work. But this is true no matter what color skin the sidemen and the songwriter have.

The rules stick with us today, and they affect plenty of white people too. Is that why you're having trouble beleiving this? That your 'own people' would sell you down the river too?? Look the racism was just a tool used to keep control of the MONEY. Money management is a simple concept. The idea is to maximize the amount of money coming in, and minimize the amount of money going out.

posted 09-26-99 08:39 PM         

"The rules stick with us today, and they affect plenty of white people too. Is that why you're having trouble beleiving this?"

posted 09-26-99 08:49 PM            

sorry, no references.

No, I'm having trouble finding the racism connection since they would have affected white people since their inception.

thats ok, beleive whatever you want to beleive. but racism only existed in the first place to make money off free labor, so as I said before, it comes down to money.

posted 09-26-99 09:43 PM            

heres your chevdo thread:

http://bboard.mp3.com/mp3/ubb/Forum6/HTML/003939.html

Also I notice you're from San Diego, so I'm just curious.. which mp3.com staff member are you dating?

posted 09-26-99 10:18 PM            

quote:

---

mp3con is a cult.
their slaves are told they must work hard, and to try to gain favour.
they offer great sacrifices to the mp3god.
in the hopes they will gain favour.
the god chooses his favorites.
they are told they are one community.
they must abide by the god's will or be unclean and outcast.
they must not question the god or be struck mute.
sometimes he gives them small gifts.
They must all sing happy songs as they drink their coolaid.

---

You don't need help, man, they do.

Rockne You mention you've only been here a few days, and then you give your newbie opinon about a person (not the topic). YOUR the asshole here.

Anyway, two points- Mp3.com grabbed ascap but did you know that at the same time, their nemisis, EMUSIC.com, jumped in bed with BMI. (Yes, I think MP3.com is looking at emusic as its largest competitior.)

Oh, and you dick heads like Julian who keep saying "So put up your URL", you seem to forget this is a PUBLIC forum and URL's are NOT required. Duh, the listeners here don't have URL's, that don't mean they can't post. So shove your URL and your newbie johnny-come-lately opinions. Maybe you should try to be around here for a while before you stick you feets in your mouths.

posted 09-26-99 10:29 PM         

quote:

---

Rockne You mention you've only been here a few days, and then you give your newbie
opinon about a person (not the topic). YOUR the asshole here.

---

posted 09-26-99 10:54 PM            

I forgot to answer this. The culturally biased slant is against rhythmic music. At the time, classical music and pop melodies were the accepted mainstream. 'Ragtime' music, arguably the most popular form of rhythmic music to hit stateside since eefin-nanny 50 years prior, was created as a satire whereby blacks would 'rag on the classics', which ment to turn classic tunes into rhythmic entities. The origins of the popular 'cakewalk' dance is in blacks making fun of the 'stiff' way whites dance.

Well, as you can imagine the whites did not take kindly to all this 'satire', especially since it became so damn popular because it was so damn good!

As radio wizard pointed out, the cultural bias extends into all forms of roots rock, blues and country. If you were a white musician making 'black man's music' you were blacklisted. Look these people didn't even consider this kind of 'noise' to be music at all so its no wonder they would not be inclined to want to protect it.

Incidentally, a compelling psychological reason rhytmic music was supressed is because it was traditionally associated with war and revolution (marches). And with the south drumming up a racket on their twangers, and the civil war still fresh in most peoples minds, there was no room for compromise. Basically, they were freaked out so they came down hard.

posted 09-27-99 12:52 AM            

>here is the history for you, ascap was >around first. they did not like alot of the >(black) artists, the R&B, rocknrol and blues >artists.

>thus BMI came about.

No, that's not why BMI came about, although BMI might want to you believe otherwise. ASCAP was formed so that songwriters and music publishers could collect royalties for public performances of their music.

ASCAP, for those of you who don't know, stands for American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers. Its board of directors consists of an equal number of songwriters and publishers. The board is elected by the members, all of whom are songwriters, composers, and publishers.

ASCAP is run by the creators and owners of music, and thus, it tries to negotiate the best price it can for the use of music. Radio broadcasters are users of music, and thus, they want to pay as little as possible for the use of music.

Back in the 1940, ASCAP tried to increase the license fee it was charging to broadcasters, so that songwriters and publishers could earn more money for the use of their songs. Radio broadcasters refused to pay the higher rate, and they banded together to boycott ASCAP.

The only problem with this strategy was that all the writers and publishers of popular music were ASCAP members. The broadcasters needed some kind of music to play on the radio during their boycotts, so they formed BMI and recruited blacks and hillbillies", and they started playing their music on the radio. The reason those musicians weren't members of ASCAP is because their music was not being played on the radio until this time.

BMI, by the way, stands for Broadcast Music, Inc., and is owned and operated by radio broadcasters. Its true reason for existence is to give the broadcasters leverage in royalty negotiations with ASCAP.

>Ive read this elsewhere and I was told this >by someone who works with BMI once before, >and alas, if you look on bands that did >those styles of music in the 50, 60's etc, >you see that they are almost always on BMI. >not ascap.

It's not surprising that someone working for BMI told you this. You wouldn't expect them to tell you that they exist so that broadcasters can pay you less, would you?

>nowadays it doesnt matter what style you >play or what color you are or anything else.
>if ya give em the money you're in.

BMI charges nothing for writer members. ASCAP charges annual dues of $10 for writer members, and that money doesn't even cover the cost of administration and mailings.

posted 09-27-99 01:09 AM            

Been reading the thread. Very interesting and at times insightful...

posted 09-27-99 01:11 AM            

didn't realize i'd write a manifesto

posted 09-27-99 01:20 AM            

>So this is interesting. RIAA, ASCAP, SESAC, >and BMI, as well as the Harry Fox Agency and >the major six labels, as well as a whole >flotilla of lawyers, publicists, >accountants, promotion geeks, programming >consultants, and an assorted cast of >equipment suppliers, venues, and support >people - ALL MAKE THEIR LIVING VAMPIRING OFF >THE BODY OF THE COLLECTIVE ARTISTS! ALL of >these agencies have sprung up as ways to >make money off the fact that people like >some people's music, and will pay to hear >it. They have managed to shoulder their way >into a position of strength in between the >artists, and the people that want to hear >them.

ASCAP, SESAC, and Harry Fox Agency all exist so that songwriters can get paid. That doesn't translate into "vampiring" in my book. If you think you can collect your performance and mechanical royalties on your own without their help, then there's no rule that says you have to join.

Same with equipment suppliers, venues, etc. All of them provide a service. Naturally, people charge money for services provided so that they, too, can make a living. I don't know how charging money to provide a service constitutes "vampiring".

The truth is that Rad Wiz (whatever) is absolutely right in many of his points, these
people are the vilest, most disgusting kind of scum. They will ride your back into
Beverly Hills and then kick you back onto the street and tell you that they EARNED IT!

Just like any other business, some people are scum and some aren't. Most of the people I know in the music business are human beings just like everybody else.

>So when I hear that they are going to be >keeping download stats that will have
>anything to do with ASCAP payments and the >like, I get real f**ing nervous. This is
>getting into the REAL stuff now gang, and if >you don't think that this will be a 2-way
>street, then you just plain don't see how >things are. "QUID PRO QUO" has always been
>the name of the game in business, what makes >you think this is gonna be any different?

How do you imagine that this could possibly hurt artists. It simply means that now, there's a chance you can earn royalties on songs played on MP3.COM, whereas before, you couldn't.

>Mp3.com likes to trumpet about how they are >helping a new revolution in music. C'mon
>people! This is just another group of people >trying to make a living riding the back of
>your music. And there's nothing wrong with >that, if they're gonna carry you now and
>then too. (Have YOU been carried lately?)

MP3.com has done everything they said they would do. I have not earned a dime from MP3.com yet, but that's hardly their fault.

>They're just making money folks! Plain and
>simple. And the best way to do that is gonna >be the way that they will go. Period.

You say this as if making money for providing a service is a bad thing. If you don't like the service provided by MP3.com, then don't use it.

>ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, HARRY FOX, and the others >are all very well known for their lack
>of forthrightness, mysterious and arcane >bookkeeping, and their lack of regard for >the rights of the artist.

ASCAP, etc. are certainly not perfect. There are entrenched power structures there, which is not unusual for any large organization. There are attempts being made by some composer groups to effect change at ASCAP and the other PROs, and these attempts are beginning to show results.

>That position of strength that these people >have, has been turned into a well-guarded
>gate, with only the people with the right >passes, credentials, and attitudes allowed >to go through. And the people guarding the >portal are the only people allowed to choose
>who gets those credentials.

The PRO's and Harry Fox don't guard any portals. They can, however, help open some doors for you that you might not otherwise have access to. They tend to do this for people who they feel have marketable talent.

>Seems a little odd, considering that they >would have nothing without those very same
>people that they rule over. And make no >mistake, rule is the correct term. Come out >to L.A. and watch the wheels turn if you >don't believe me.

"Rule" is the paranoid term. I live in LA, and I also spend a great deal of time in Nashville. I see the wheels turn. I find ASCAP and BMI to be helpful at best, neutral at worst. And Harry Fox has paid me all royaties that were due to me, although it's taken a few phone calls before the checks were sent.

www.mp3.com/loudspeaker

posted 09-27-99 01:36 AM         

I didnt say I know everything about ascap, I said I personally at this time wasnt joining them because I wasnt so sure about them because of the records I've seen and things I've heard. doesnt hurt me any to not do it now, its not like I have to make up my mind today either, does it?

I dunno if theyd treat me fairly or not and the thing that is the most scary is that i would really have no way to find out for sure,

just like when we have to trust that Mp3con is taking care of our sales properly. and we see problems, BUT they don't respond to it or whatever. THAT makes me nervous too, because there is no way for me to know.

for all I know I have sold a thousand copies of my DAMn CD and dont even know it, maybe its lost in a puter program glitch or someone's pocket;
I made that argurment before about things but hey, thats the same as anything else. If I had a major label deal then I would just have to trust that someone was keeping track of it for me.

the thing that gets me is how often we get no replies to it. even a "we will look into this and get back to you" is better than ignoring it.

the main thing, when dealing in matters where its just a matter of trusting a company to do what they are supposed to,
is when I see they don't accept responsibility for boo-boos,(any and every company makes errors somewhere)
or they give me double talk
or lies
or they are tolerant or blind to it
when it's pointed out
that an employee is doing that.
it makes me nervous.

posted 09-27-99 02:01 AM            

Are you doing the right thing for yourself?

Are you happy?

Can you answer these questions without being overwhelmed by a kneejerk response you can't control.

What do you expect?

Where's the line for the bathroom?

Is there a giant wombat hovering over your house, too? Is it rabid? Will there be vienna sausages in the country slaw? Who pushed the dolemite videos at the styx concert?

posted 09-27-99 02:02 AM         

Mp3com has NOT done what they said they would do; in many ways, with many artists. I wont go into all the details here again.

How do you know it's not their fault that you havent made money anyway?
have you ever stopped to consider the fact that the artsist have given them their advise and opinions on how to sell the CDs and how to promote the artists better but they have not done, to date, anything that was ever suggested, nor have they shown any sales skill at all for the artists or the music.
they've made alot of money though.

I dont know how long youve been with them, but I've been here a year. I wanted to leave in February but didn't. Decided to wait it out and see what happens. I had been led to believe that I was doing much better than I have been. and I wont go into the details of that right now.

It took 5 months for me to get my first DAM CD. I've seen sales stats disappear and heard others say the same at the same time in the BB. this is cause for concern,
OF COURSE we should talk about it.
OF COURSE we should bring it to their attention.
OF COURSE we the Artists, in doing business with them, DO have the right to know what's going on,
and also, where they are planning on taking this ship, with no feedback.
and deleted posts when we talk about our concerns.

posted 09-27-99 02:36 AM         

You made me pretty upset with you mischaracterization of my comments, but that's how I usually feel when confronted by this sort of attitude.

I stand by EVERYTHING that I said in my previous posts, and have only to add that if you do the things you say you do, and you have the opinions that you say you do, then talk to me after you've had a couple a hits and tell me what you think about those agencies then. And if you have had some good luck in that way, then all I can say is you've been lucky, most who deal with them are not so fortunate.

There are many many cases of artists suing all of these agencies for their money owed. The accounting systems are so byzantine and bizarre that I doubt even those companies understand them.

And if you would use some other word than *rule* for the way the music biz in L.A, (and even more so in Nashville) is run, then I have to wonder if you think I'm talking about some small town in Kansas with a coincidental same name, cause you're definitely not in the same town I am.

BTW, I'm not trying to secure any deal with these labels/agencies. Been there, done that, that's why I'm not chasing them. So please don't get haughty and tell me some goofy-ass platitude like - "With an attitude like that, no wonder you can't get a deal".

posted 09-27-99 02:39 AM            

we can pressure mp3.com to work better within the overall system, and that's a positive step. But in order to pressure them to change, disrupt, or leave the system, we have to end our patronage...

a large scale refusal to use their products and services ends mp3.com as it is now.

that's the only way to fully disrupt commerce. Stop supplying the raw materials needed to engage in business (in this case, tunes and purchases)

if you want to wrest control of mp3, remake it into a better, more useful tool for songwriters, artists, and musicians... organize and overthrow. Legally, that's a losing game (in this country. power is churned with the establishment's arms).. and really, it's more egotistical than egalitarian, anyway.

I suggest: reign in the wild dreams cause their running out into traffic... find a less damaging way to nourish the ego, and love music for the sake of music.

posted 09-27-99 03:13 AM         

yep,you cant make em change unless ya force them to, unless they suddenly decide to listen which isnt very likely without seroius leverage anyway.

Legally, that's a losing game (in this country. power is churned with the establishment's arms)..
the 'establishment' that is bigger and stronger and more stable than mp3com does not even want mp3sites, unless you've fallen for the hype too. mp3com is nothing in the music real world but a johnnycomelately

it's more egotistical than egalitarian, anyway.
i dont know what country you are from, but in the USA we were raised to belive we in a democracy, so we tend to dislike it when our voices arent being heard, it is not egotistical to think we are worthy of not being slaves to an ungrateful master, or being treated fairly by a business or employer.

posted 09-27-99 03:33 AM            

We're all sort of talking about the same thing here, and I have suggested legit ways of affecting what is happening. If you come to mp3.com, you've come for a reason. What I wonder is: how many of us are being honest with ourselves about what that reason is, and are not afraid to accept and admit it. And how many of us are willing to put our selves in a position of responsibility (for ourselves) if we find the overall structure of e-commerce and the way mp3.com does it's business (and as a corporation it has in many ways more CIVIL rights than you or I do as individuals) too deplorable?

To whom are you accountable?

an honest (rhetorical?) question

posted 09-27-99 08:25 AM         

[quote]At the same time they were petitioning the courts to draw up some sound rules for determining which portions of 'songwriting' were considsred to be intellectually protected, and which were not. Given the fact that ASCAP was an inherently racist organization to begin with (FACT), and given the fact that both organizations petitioned the courts to define songwriting on a slant that is obviously culturally biased, it requires a very TINY leap of the imagination to conclude that this cultural bias was rooted in the racist bias that was already public policy with that organization but was totally unenforceable by the time BMI and the legalities of songwriting were established.[/b]

emphasis mine

chevdo is absolutely right again - note the bold emphasis above - but what he neglected to tell you was it was HE who began the slandering tirades of racism against general bobby farrell and vmg because said general bobby farrell and said vmg caught and called the JEWS who founded and still run ascrap on their own racial biases

ascrap was founded by JEWS as a racist organization - it remains a racist organization run by JEWS to this very day

and nobody screams louder than a jew caught practicing racism

i know - im a jew - and ascrap bmi and sesac are nothing more than filthy nests of jews practicing racism against anybody who calls their socialist demagogueries into the cold hard light of day even if be other Jews

and for the record - the jews at ascrap bmi and sesac are a disgrace to all other Jews and indeed to all other human beings and to all other living creatures

posted 09-27-99 11:13 AM            

quote:

---

At this point you have to accept a tiny bit of conspiracy theory, in order to jump from one set of historical facts to the next.

---

Moldy Man

quote:

---

Oh, and you dick heads like Julian who keep saying "So put up your URL", you seem to forget this is a PUBLIC forum and URL's are NOT required. Duh, the listeners here don't have URL's, that don't mean they can't post. So shove your URL and your newbie johnny-come-lately opinions. Maybe you should try to be around here for a while before you stick you feets in your mouths.

---

RadioWizard

quote:

---

and for the record - the jews at ascrap bmi and sesac are a disgrace to all other Jews and indeed to all other human beings and to all other living creatures

---

Yours sincerely
Julian

Click on this Moldy Man www.mp3.com/JulianHeald

posted 09-27-99 02:51 PM            

>Mp3com has NOT done what they said they >would do; in many ways, with many artists. I >wont go into all the details here again.

I've seen some of the threads about missing CD orders, so I understand. I should have said that, for me, they've done everything they said, *so far*.

>How do you know it's not their fault that >you havent made money anyway?

You're right. Maybe I've sold a truckload of DAMs so far, but the orders didn't show up on my site. I have no way of knowing. Nor do I have a solution to the problem of not knowing.

>have you ever stopped to consider the fact >that the artsist have given them their
>advise and opinions on how to sell the CDs >and how to promote the artists better but
>they have not done, to date, anything that >was ever suggested, nor have they shown
>any sales skill at all for the artists or >the music. they've made alot of money >though.

Yes, I have. In fact, there's one glaring flaw in the DAM program that I recently pointed out on this board, and as far as I know, nobody from MP3 has even read my suggestion. That's certainly a frustration.

>I dont know how long youve been with them, >but I've been here a year. I wanted to
>leave in February but didn't. Decided to >wait it out and see what happens. I had been
>led to believe that I was doing much better >than I have been. and I wont go into the
>details of that right now.

I've been here only about a month. I don't see any reason to leave, since my being here doesn't hurt me, even if get zero results. I'm not here exclusively, and I continue to look for other opportunities both online and in the "real world".

>OF COURSE we the Artists, in doing business >with them, DO have the right to know what's >going on, and also, where they are planning >on taking this ship, with no feedback. and >deleted posts when we talk about our >concerns.

I haven't witnessed any deleting of posts, but I've heard it mentioned several times. If this is happening on anything resembling a regular basis, then it's cause for serious concern.

posted 09-27-99 03:04 PM            

The only thing "selective" about the quotes is that your post was too long to quote the entire thing. The purpose of the quotes was to provide context for my reply. I don't believe that I misrepresented your position in any way. I if I have inadvertently done so, then please correct whatever errors I might have made.

>I stand by EVERYTHING that I said in my >previous posts, and have only to add that if
>you do the things you say you do, and you >have the opinions that you say you do,
>then talk to me after you've had a couple a >hits and tell me what you think about
>those agencies then. And if you have had >some good luck in that way, then all I can
>say is you've been lucky, most who deal with >them are not so fortunate.

Trust me, I'm well aware of the problems. In fact, I'm actively involved in trying to get them corrected. However, my experience with the PRO's is that they've been helpful to me at this point in my career, and they've also been helpful to many other aspiring songwriters I know. My disagreement is not with you, but with the rantings of Bobby Farrell that are based largely in fantasy and delusion.

>And if you would use some other word than >*rule* for the way the music biz in L.A,
>(and even more so in Nashville) is run, then >I have to wonder if you think I'm talking
>about some small town in Kansas with a >coincidental same name, cause you're
>definitely not in the same town I am.

If the zip code 90028 means anything to you, then I can assure you we're in the same town. They don't rule me because it's up to me whether or not I want to play the game.

While I've run into my share of assholes in the business, they've been the exception rather than the rule. Most people are decent folks like anyone else , trying to do the best job they can. The problem is that nobody truly knows in advance what's going to earn them money, and the level of competition is so intense that there's no way they can service everyone.

Of course, this gives them a certain amount of power. It's easy for us to resent them for that. If I choose to play the game, understanding is going to help me a lot more than resentment.

posted 09-27-99 03:06 PM            

I contend its a judeo-christian conspiracy and has more to do with money than 'hatred'. jews are a tribe, anglos were a tribe, saxons were a tribe.. they were all enjoying rhythmic music in their cultures until the crackdown over the past 2000 or so years.

posted 09-27-99 03:08 PM            

the jump is required to get over the lack of facts because the decisions were made behind closed doors. You are afraid to make that jump because its like jumping a chasm, and you are afraid of falling in. It's a form of high-reasoning and it is not for the faint of heart, thats for sure.

posted 09-27-99 03:18 PM         

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. My experiences have been different from your's. BTW - I don't resent them, I just don't like them. They are not decent people in my opinion. You have your opinion, it's different. I hope you are lucky enough to never have a reason to change. If you ask around, you'll find plenty of backup for my position, and maybe not so much for your's. Most people regard these entities as dangerous beasts that are best left alone or at least to be real quiet around them, and you KNOW that's true.
There's a reason for that.

www.stillmusic.com
www.mp3.com/still

posted 09-27-99 03:22 PM            

I think you have to ask yourself what you would rather have:

a. a world where there is no such thing as a performing rights society; where collecting performance royalties is the job of your personal management or legal team, where you pay for the time and energy of countless people to try to figure out the skewed stats by people who don't want to pay for your services, where there is no collective power bargaining (which, btw, is a good thing...think unions, strikes, etc) and you're basically on your own.

b. An imperfect system where PRAs exist and as flawed as they are, there is a chance you will see the money owed you and there is an organization to do the work that as an artist you don't want to do myself and are not equipped to do without incurring massive expenses.

Choose your poison.

posted 09-27-99 03:22 PM            

I dunno, that could damage you in the real world. I have noticed since people have been asking me whats new in my life and I tell them about how I joined up for mp3.com then ended up in a battle royal with them, they take different standpoints.

For example, when I told my parents they shook their heads and thought 'oh he's burning his bridges with a bad attitude again'. Same goes for a few of my 'yuppy' friends I still talk to on occassion. But everyone else I tell thinks its really cool that I stuck up for myself and didn't let them continue exploiting me.

And the thing is, my parents and my couple of yuppy friends have never been interested in my music. one yuppy always used to buy my tapes that i put out years ago in case they became 'collectors items' some day but the fact is most people who enjoy my music (granted, there are not many who do) like it because it is very deep in counter-culture.

But if you're making mainstream music, throwing your name just about anywhere is probably a good idea. overexposure isn't a problem, its the name of the game. Of course, the competition sucks, and that whole side of the industry sucks, so why you would want to to do that is beyond me ability to comprehend.

I mean if you're fisher or Emily Richards, go ahead and do the pop star thing. But what gets me stuff like when the clique set up their Frank Zappa tribute. All these bands dying for their mainstream exposure doing a tribute to a guy who was virtually ignored by the mainstream by his own volition just doesn't make sense.

When was the last time most people around here stirred their grey matter beyond the need to figure out how to scratch their balls when they wake up in the morning?

I say when was the last time because obviously these people weren't always morons, they obviously identified with Zappa at some point in their life but what happened???

are longtime Zappa fans as braindead now as longtime Grateful Dead fans?? am I going to end up this way someday too???? aaaaghh!!!!

posted 09-27-99 03:40 PM            

I admire your persistence

Now read on......

quote:

---

You are afraid to make that jump because its like jumping a chasm, and you are afraid of falling in. It's a form of high-reasoning and it is not for the faint of heart, thats for sure.

---

Afraid of falling in? You are spot on. I am afraid of falling in to a chasm of erroneous judgement. Do you really believe that you have the qualifications to fill in the gaps in history? Our history?
Here's an idea. We don't have all the information required to build a conclusive picture, so lets make it up! That's crazy talk. Like I said, I don't buy conspiracy theories. They're generally for wackos.

People go about their day to day lives, paying attention to their survival & to their futures. They do not however, have the time to conspire against black musicians! It's the same old story. If you are failing, then find someone to blame - someone other than yourself.
I'm getting the distinct impression there is inverted racism on this thread.

Julian
www.mp3.com/JulianHeald

PS-
Loudspeaker & Lutsik
Can you space your replies out a bit? You're giving me eyestrain (not to mention a headache).

posted 09-27-99 03:56 PM            

well whats interesting is how popular conspiracy theories are, and how popular anti-conspiracy diatribe is. Obviously a conspiracy would want to promote the idea that considering the possibility of a conspiracy is 'crazy' and 'paranoid' so that people would not consider the possibility of a conspiracy! A conspiracy WORKS because it exists in a CLANDESTINE environment. At the same time conspiracy theory is everywhere because more and more people are starting to notice that the facts don't add up, and they're questioning why that is. Thats your 'conspiracy theory' in a nutshell, and it doesn't sound all that crazy when you put it that way, does it...

Do you really believe that you have the qualifications to fill in the gaps in history? Our history?

besides being rooted in tavistock institute/carnagie educational conspiracy, think for a second about what you just said. Forget about my 'qualifications' for a moment and realize that you just so much as admitted that there are gaping holes in our history where we do not have any idea what really went on. Yet we had 'qualified' historians that were supposed to be keeping accurate accounts of what went on. So how does a gap occur in the first place? There is only one explaination, the facts were hidden therefore the history could not be recorded.

I'm getting the distinct impression there is inverted racism on this thread.

as am I, julian... the basis of today's rampant 'institutional' racism is that it doesn't exist. I am going to have to assume you are a typical unknowing pawn of the institution, and you are giving me the standard line of policy. it'd be nicer than calling you an asshole.

posted 09-27-99 04:56 PM            

why arent they as 'crazy' and 'paranoid' as someone who speculates on society the same way? is it just because im not in it for the money?? if thats the crazy part, I'm willing to accept that eccentricity anyway.

posted 09-28-99 02:19 PM            

quote:

---

by the way julian, your heros on wall street are called 'speculators' because they speculate on the direction the stock market is going to take in the future, based on the present and past, rumor and innuendo.
why arent they as 'crazy' and 'paranoid' as someone who speculates on society the same way? is it just because im not in it for the money?? if thats the crazy part, I'm willing to accept that eccentricity anyway.

---

You've got an interesting way of following strange tangents, or are you just obtuse?
I don't recall mentioning "heros of Wall Street".
The difference between speculators & you, is that your views are just too extreme to be taken seriously. Speculators weigh up the facts and make a reasoned judgement centred upon probability. Do you realise how improbable your views are?

quote:

---

conspiracy theory is everywhere because more and more people are starting to notice that the facts don't add up

---

quote:

---

realize that you just so much as admitted that there are gaping holes in our history

---

quote:

---

So how does a gap occur in the first place? There is only one explaination, the facts were hidden therefore the history could not be recorded.

---

quote:

---

the basis of today's rampant 'institutional' racism is that it doesn't exist.

---

Julian

PS

quote:

---

it'd be nicer than calling you an asshole.

---

posted 09-28-99 03:00 PM            

>> Maybe I've sold a truckload of DAMs so far, but the orders didn't show up on my site. I have no way of knowing. Nor do I have a solution to the problem of not knowing.

Why not persuade a friend or contact or whoever, from across the world to buy one of your DAM CDs. Ask them to e-mail you when the sale goes through, and then you can check your site: I bet it registers a hit.

Chevdo, the copyright on the 'rhythm' thing is interesting. I would imagine that the original thinking was based on the fact that any melody can ultimately played through any style of rhythm you choose to tie it up with. Ditto the tempo of a song - it can make a real difference to how a song comes over but is 'there' anything there really?

Copyrighting and patenting tend to work against any general or broad brush type of protection. Take the standard jazz swing riff/feel - can you imagine how many swing songs are set-off by that! Yet some person must have done it first - and I bet they never got their dues.

Paul McCartney is on record (the book "Many Years from Now") as saying that he is not sure whether even a bass line can be 'protected.' And he said this entirely out of the context of any 'racism' debate - its what he feels as a musician....so maybe it is just the way it is.

Ditto the fact that a chord sequence cannot be copyrighted - just the way it is to?

Cultural theft has been going on for a long time ....RnB boy bands pretending to be 'street' (read 'black') being the most shameful example.

Keep moving forward...

Regards

posted 09-28-99 03:16 PM            

>> Maybe I've sold a truckload of DAMs so >>far, but the orders didn't show up on my
>>site. I have no way of knowing. Nor do I >>have a solution to the problem of not >>knowing.

>Why not persuade a friend or contact or >whoever, from across the world to buy one
>of your DAM CDs. Ask them to e-mail you when >the sale goes through, and then you can >check your site: I bet it registers a hit.

Talk about quoting out of context. If you read my post in its entirety, it should be clear that I do not believe the above to be the case.

posted 09-28-99 03:32 PM            

quote:

---

Cultural theft has been going on for a long time ....RnB boy bands pretending to be 'street' (read 'black') being the most shameful example

---

Oh no, here we go again. A rational person would call this theft influence. Remember that concept? How a musician can be influenced by another. That's not theft, that's testament to the power of the original music.

A shameful example? Why? Because it's so blatant?
Do you have a chip on your shoulder?
Lets look at it all in a positive light shall we? "Boy bands have been heavily influenced by 'black music', and it shows".

There, that wasn't too difficult was it?

quote:

---

Absolutely crazy debate

---

There's nothing crazy about it. Maybe you just don't understand? Never mind, if at first you don't succeed.......

posted 09-30-99 02:02 PM         

The thread must live!

posted 09-30-99 02:25 PM            

Hey cool down will you! My reference to the craziness was not actually based on any particular posting but the 'general' (geddit?) way it had mazed crazily from one topic to another on a wild chase of subjects! Even the title alone is crazy enough for me...okay?

Loudspeaker: I was trying to offer help and advice...apologies if you read my 'crazy' remark as referring to your posting; I did not mean it to. Clearly I did indeed miss some of the context of your posting; so my remarks came over wrong. Finis.

Julian: The chip on my shoulder is big enough to enable me to open up a timber yard!! Anyway, I do think the vast majority of boy bands have been put together by the record companies, the only 'influence' going on here is the desire to part people with their cash as quickly as possible - using whatever 'image' that is 'hot.' I caution too, the use of the word 'influence' so generously. From any artistic perspective, if someone made a lot of cash after being 'influenced' by something you'd created after a great deal of insight or graft...you'd not be too happy. Its a difficult area, one person's influence is some one else's 'patronisation.' Miles Davis and Cecil Taylor are just two musicians I can think of, who had this kind of perspective on the musical world. Anyway, I hope this '2nd try' comes over better.

Regards