From: owner-alloy-digest@smoe.org (alloy-digest) To: alloy-digest@smoe.org Subject: alloy-digest V4 #295 Reply-To: alloy@smoe.org Sender: owner-alloy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-alloy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "alloy-digest-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. alloy-digest Tuesday, November 2 1999 Volume 04 : Number 295 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Alloy: Prequel to Open Art ["electrix" ] Alloy: Help! (plus news of Barbara Cohen!) ["Stephen M. Tilson" ] Re: Alloy: Prequel to Open Art [Chris Cracknell ] Re: Alloy: Freeing The World One Song At A Time [Chris Cracknell Subject: Alloy: Prequel to Open Art Hi Crackers and all: I gave some thought to the "Open Art" concept. I would like to voice my OPINION (distinct from absolute FACTS) as open-ended statements since there is no established base for it. I will establish my position a small posting at a time since this is a complex topic. Also, because reading long dissertation can be taxing to the mind. It might occasionally seems that I waver, but some elements that are indirectly related needs to be exposed for clarification. The Art process implies several interrelated conditions. I tend to separate the interrelationship in to three aspects that it affects: The artist, the business and the consumer. It is also necessary to establish the exact problem so that a clear-cut solution can be developed. I gather the problems you proposed are as follows, please correct me if I am wrong. 1. The Copyright Laws are basically obsolete due to the era in which musicians live in whereby the old laws are not applicable today. 2. The Copyright Laws is restrictive to the proliferation of an artist work. 3. The Copyright Laws is being manipulated by Corporations to protect their self-interest in the ownership of their artist catalogue. 4. There is a distinction between "art" and "product." THE MUSICIAN Let me start with the last as aspect of an artist. I have pondered item 4 for quite awhile. I have had to come to grips with what I create as an artist. Since there is no defined authority on what makes "art" Art (that is, "good" or "bad" Art) except for status quo agreement of what constitute art; however, this is in reality very arbitrary by majority. The TASTE of people determine what they call art. I personally have come to embrace true art as one that transcend time and can be APPRECIATED across generations. I also consider it to be one that has the most to offer in the society as far as vision, accurate societal introspection that triggers positive change and lays the foundation to fruitful culture. THE BUSINESS MAN As a businessperson, I want to see my artistic work get to the hands of the market that favors it. Whether I consider my work true art is irrelevant, since it is the listener who puts value on my work. My concern, with this hat, is to market the music honestly and without undue "programming" of the public taste. In this aspect, my art becomes a product that is voted by dollars. My business effort constitute my work, my job... which I feel the consumer is obligated to pay for. If not for the art itself, then for the capital and resources I expended in bringing the product to the public. Profit is essential for my continued growth and more refined products. THE CONSUMER As a consumer, I obtain the music that appeals to me. Regardless if they are true art or not. As long as it satisfies my mental, spiritual and emotional needs, I buy and listen to it. It is not important to me that it be labeled true art or not. In fact, I sometimes may wish to defend all that I listen to as true art. But this is far from the truth per my resolved definition of art. It is my observation that these three aspects are taking place interchangeably. However, each has its own final agenda. I create the art; a business markets it for me to the right audience and with the proper effort; and the consumer places aggregate value upon it. It is then considered true art if the public react in the manner I defined as true art. To summarize, I am the artist. I allow a business to invest in my talent. Finally, the consumer remunerates us both from the process. It used to be that the artist didn't have the expensive technology available to get his art (and from the business standpoint --- product) to the consumer's hand. It was economically unfeasible for an artist. Today, with the recording technology and Internet access to consumers, it is revolutionizing the way an artist can get his art to the consumer. At a small scale, the artist can be the sole business. However, at a large scale (especially in manufacturing by large quantities), the agent business still has a grip on the industry. I expect this grip to loosen as they compete to get the independent artist/businessman on board to be serviced, not unless it becomes a full oligarchy, which seems to be the trend if not already (Companies such as Time/Warner buying out records companies as quick as they blossom. This ensures its longevity, plus, having only the few Sony's, Univer To be continued... electrix ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 03:49:09 -0500 From: "Stephen M. Tilson" Subject: Alloy: Help! (plus news of Barbara Cohen!) Dear Alloy, Jonathan Chiddick inquires: > does anybody know where I might be able to get a copy of Golden > Age of Video from (PAL for UK use). All the online stores are > saying no-way! Too old! I've been trying to track this down for > ages but I am getting no where fast. Remembering that a PAL-format Golden Age of Video was purchased by our (hopefully) temporarily un-subbed member, Barbara Cohen (she who designed our beautiful shirts, need I remind you ), I wrote her to ask the status of that tape. By way of keeping in touch with the group, here is her reply to my message of inquiry regarding not only the tape, but also about progress on her doctorate in exogeology (or whatever it's called - she will be a doctor of non-terrestrial geology, as I recall - cool!). > Hi Stephen! Wow, I'm rather surprised you remember back that > far...or is there an Alloy archive? :) Yes, I have a PAL Golden > Age video. However, my future is shaping up to possibly include 3 > years in England, starting early next year (if all goes well and > I keep my fingers crossed REALLY tightly). So I think for now I'm > rather unwilling to part with it. The story is that I'm trying to > graduate in December or so, and my S.O. is currently a postdoc in > Leeds, so I'm trying like hell to get a job there too, with > multiple applications out. Of course, the minus side to finally > being able to watch the Golden Age is that my Gate video will be > unwatchable there.... Glad to hear all is well for you. Please > give my kindest regards to the Alloy group. If and when I get my > head above water I'll pop in for a Boddy's :) > > Cheers, > *B* > > Barbara Cohen > Cosmochemical Cocktail Mixer, PhD to be > ****************************************** > Love may make the world go 'round, but inertia keeps it from > stopping. She always did have those great sigfiles, eh? Of course, I wished her luck - as I'm sure we all do! Looks like we're to have another doctor in our midst. How many does that make out of the eighty of us? Five or something, I think. Anyway, sorry Jonathan, that's all I could think of. Maybe one will pop up on eBay. I'll let you know if I see one... Failed me in biology, /\/\iles CC: Barbara ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 04:24:38 -0500 From: "Stephen M. Tilson" Subject: Alloy: Freeing The World One Song At A Time Dear Crackers, Electrix, and Alloy at large: I was thinking it might help us to focus more clearly on this subject if we first explored what exactly it is that Crackers wants to accomplish with Open Art: To establish, if you like, the core issue. I'll step up here with my analysis. Crackers? Correct me as necessary, please. The core concern I hear in Cracker's plaint is: "I want to be heard!" Understandable, I think. Me too. Electrix too. Ian too. All of us who are musicians with professional aspirations have this need - this desire. Even if it is on a small scale - we do it to hear and be heard; hopefully bringing introspection, succor, and even joy to our audience. If that analysis is correct, then let me take it one step further: OK. We have the technology to produce professional recordings. But distribution is controlled by monolithic corporations. If you're not in Sony's stable, for instance, then the distribution network they control won't give you the time of day. We have to, somehow, break the distribution stranglehold entities such as Sony have. Is this not the real issue? Distribution, so we may be heard by a large audience? So our work is available in Peoria? In Paris? In Portland? Iow, I don't feel that copyright, in itself, is the blockade. In fact, I feel copyright is necessary. I'll use it to keep Sony off my back. And bootleggers. I am extremely reluctant to embrace giving my art away for free - just to be heard. There must be a way to accomplish that and yet retain the rights of ownership. Eh? Working on it, /\/\iles ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 08:30:21 EST From: RThurF@aol.com Subject: Alloy: Thomas Dolby's Beatnik Inc in the news Here is a forward of the latest news from Beatnik... Robin T Beatnik and Mixman Technologies Announce Merger Leader in Interactive Audio Extends Reach to the Consumer Market to Further Proliferate the Use of Music and Sound on the Internet SAN MATEO, Calif., Nov. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Beatnik, Inc., the leader in interactive audio technologies and content for the Web, today announced the signing of a definitive agreement to merge with Mixman Technologies, Inc., a leading provider of PC- and Mac-based consumer music creation products. Beatnik and Mixman share a vision that the promise of the Web will be realized when high-quality, interactive music and sound are part of the everyday Web surfer's experience. The Web will become "sonified" as music and sound is experienced in real time, "on the Web page," and not simply downloaded or streamed from it. Beatnik and Mixman's shared customer base and technologies will enable millions of professional Web designers, musicians and consumers to create and experience interactive audio on the Web. Together, Beatnik and Mixman will possess one of the most expansive music and sound libraries available on the Web, including both Top 40 artists and professional music catalogs. Mixman's suite of award-winning consumer software is the market leader for creating, recording, and remixing multi-track music, while Beatnik's authoring tools allow designers to incorporate music and sound into their Web pages. The Beatnik audio engine is the industry standard for digital audio playback and is licensed for use in TV set-top boxes, Internet appliances, Web browsers and Java Sound. At a time when many Internet companies are struggling to turn the momentum of MP3 music into revenue streams, Beatnik and Mixman both bring proven track records for generating robust revenue from Web music technologies and content to the merger. "The addition of Mixman's exceptional products, engineering talent, and extensive customer base will have an enormously positive impact on Beatnik's position as the premier provider of interactive music and sound for the Internet," said Lorraine Hariton, president and CEO of Beatnik. "Combining Beatnik Web authoring solutions with Mixman's successful consumer products creates the kind of momentum that fuels content development and licensing agreements with top musical talent. Beatnik-sonified Web sites also will proliferate as our combined user base becomes more proficient with both Beatnik and Mixman tools." "We are thrilled to be joining Beatnik and helping to spearhead the revolution of bringing audio to the Internet," said Eric Almgren, CEO and co-founder of Mixman Technologies. "Having already begun to pool our talent and resources, Beatnik and Mixman is becoming a powerhouse for the leading music software, Web-based communities, Web audio technologies and content needed to sonify the Web." According to a recent report by Jupiter Communications, 80 percent of business executives interviewed cited that audio will become a standard feature on the Internet within the next two years. The report recommends Web sites immediately adapt audio to deliver a passive experience for utility, guidance, cueing and branding, as well as develop interactive audio content to serve as an active pull for consumers to experience music, information and narrative audio. "Interactive music and sound will soon be ubiquitous on the Web, making sonification a leading method for capturing and engaging a Web site audience. Beatnik and Mixman technologies increase the stickiness of a site, which is extremely significant, as twenty minutes spent on a Web page equals about two and a half hours, or eight times the value of the minute, of passive television viewing," said Michael Moon, analyst at Gistics Research. "It is clear that interactive audio retains audiences longer, provides more meaningful impressions for advertisers and presents online companies the opportunity to sell more products and build larger Web communities." In the new Beatnik organization, Mixman co-founders Eric Almgren and Josh Gabriel will become Beatnik's senior vice president of sales and label relations, and chief product officer, both reporting to Beatnik CEO Lorraine Hariton. Beatnik and Mixman will retain all employees of both companies. About Mixman Technologies, Inc. Mixman Technologies Inc. is a privately held company based in San Francisco designing remix and performance technologies, musical products and a Web-based music community that enable people of all ages and skill levels to interact with, customize, control and perform music with professional quality tools. The company's product line includes a range of Web and packaged software products, including Mixman Studio Live, Mixman Studio Pro Deluxe, Mixman Studio Pro and Mixman Studio, and over a dozen Soundiscs(TM), professional multi-format audio sample CD-ROMs. Mixman software is translated into nine languages available worldwide on Win95/98 and soon, the Apple Macintosh and NT platforms. The company partners with major PC hardware and software manufacturers and leading record labels including Capitol, Tommy Boy, and Warner Brothers Records to deliver content from artists in Mixman's interactive format. About Beatnik, Inc. Beatnik, Inc. is the premier technology platform to create, deliver, and experience interactive audio on the Web. The Beatnik Audio Engine for the digital playback of audio has been licensed to an expanding family of strategic partners, including Microsoft's WebTV Networks, Sun Microsystems, Netscape, Intel and Liberate (formerly NCI). Beatnik's Web authoring tools are used by Web designers in the creation of Web sites such as MTV Online, Yahoo, Altoids and David Bowie.com and also ship with products from Macromedia and NetObjects. The Beatnik Player currently allows more than 7 million Web surfers to experience the power of interactive music and audio. Its Rich Music Format (RMF) is the Web standard for high quality, multi-track music with file sizes that are small enough not to require streaming and are secure per Web site usage. By coupling expert engineering skills with an expanded catalogue of musical content, Beatnik is dedicated to realizing new possibilities for interactive music and audio on the Internet. Beatnik (formerly Headspace, Inc.) was incorporated in 1996 with a team of software innovators and world-renowned visionary, musician and composer Thomas Dolby Robertson. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 08:03:58 -0700 From: "Keith Stansell" Subject: Re: Alloy: Thomas Dolby's Beatnik Inc in the news Finally, perhaps we will be able to create RMF files on the PC platform! - -Keith - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 1999 6:30 AM Subject: Alloy: Thomas Dolby's Beatnik Inc in the news > > Here is a forward of the latest news from Beatnik... > > Robin T > > > Beatnik and Mixman Technologies Announce Merger > > Leader in Interactive Audio Extends Reach to the Consumer Market to Further > > Proliferate the Use of Music and Sound on the Internet > > SAN MATEO, Calif., Nov. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Beatnik, Inc., the leader in > interactive audio technologies and content for the Web, today announced the > signing of a definitive agreement to merge with Mixman Technologies, Inc., a > leading provider of PC- and Mac-based consumer music creation products. > > Beatnik and Mixman share a vision that the promise of the Web will be > realized when high-quality, interactive music and sound are part of the > everyday Web surfer's experience. The Web will become "sonified" as music and > sound is experienced in real time, "on the Web page," and not simply > downloaded or streamed from it. > > Beatnik and Mixman's shared customer base and technologies will enable > millions of professional Web designers, musicians and consumers to create and > experience interactive audio on the Web. Together, Beatnik and Mixman will > possess one of the most expansive music and sound libraries available on the > Web, including both Top 40 artists and professional music catalogs. > > Mixman's suite of award-winning consumer software is the market leader for > creating, recording, and remixing multi-track music, while Beatnik's > authoring tools allow designers to incorporate music and sound into their Web > pages. The Beatnik audio engine is the industry standard for digital audio > playback and is licensed for use in TV set-top boxes, Internet appliances, > Web browsers and Java Sound. > > At a time when many Internet companies are struggling to turn the momentum > of MP3 music into revenue streams, Beatnik and Mixman both bring proven track > records for generating robust revenue from Web music technologies and content > to the merger. > > "The addition of Mixman's exceptional products, engineering talent, and > extensive customer base will have an enormously positive impact on Beatnik's > position as the premier provider of interactive music and sound for the > Internet," said Lorraine Hariton, president and CEO of Beatnik. "Combining > Beatnik Web authoring solutions with Mixman's successful consumer products > creates the kind of momentum that fuels content development and licensing > agreements with top musical talent. Beatnik-sonified Web sites also will > proliferate as our combined user base becomes more proficient with both > Beatnik and Mixman tools." > > "We are thrilled to be joining Beatnik and helping to spearhead the > revolution of bringing audio to the Internet," said Eric Almgren, CEO and > co-founder of Mixman Technologies. "Having already begun to pool our talent > and resources, Beatnik and Mixman is becoming a powerhouse for the leading > music software, Web-based communities, Web audio technologies and content > needed to sonify the Web." > > According to a recent report by Jupiter Communications, 80 percent of > business executives interviewed cited that audio will become a standard > feature on the Internet within the next two years. The report recommends Web > sites immediately adapt audio to deliver a passive experience for utility, > guidance, cueing and branding, as well as develop interactive audio content > to serve as an active pull for consumers to experience music, information and > narrative audio. > > "Interactive music and sound will soon be ubiquitous on the Web, making > sonification a leading method for capturing and engaging a Web site audience. > Beatnik and Mixman technologies increase the stickiness of a site, which is > extremely significant, as twenty minutes spent on a Web page equals about two > and a half hours, or eight times the value of the minute, of passive > television viewing," said Michael Moon, analyst at Gistics Research. "It is > clear that interactive audio retains audiences longer, provides more > meaningful impressions for advertisers and presents online companies the > opportunity to sell more products and build larger Web communities." > > In the new Beatnik organization, Mixman co-founders Eric Almgren and Josh > Gabriel will become Beatnik's senior vice president of sales and label > relations, and chief product officer, both reporting to Beatnik CEO Lorraine > Hariton. Beatnik and Mixman will retain all employees of both companies. > > About Mixman Technologies, Inc. > > Mixman Technologies Inc. is a privately held company based in San Francisco > designing remix and performance technologies, musical products and a > Web-based music community that enable people of all ages and skill levels to > interact with, customize, control and perform music with professional quality > tools. The company's product line includes a range of Web and packaged > software products, including Mixman Studio Live, Mixman Studio Pro Deluxe, > Mixman Studio Pro and Mixman Studio, and over a dozen Soundiscs(TM), > professional multi-format audio sample CD-ROMs. Mixman software is translated > into nine languages available worldwide on Win95/98 and soon, the Apple > Macintosh and NT platforms. The company partners with major PC hardware and > software manufacturers and leading record labels including Capitol, Tommy > Boy, and Warner Brothers Records to deliver content from artists in Mixman's > interactive format. > > About Beatnik, Inc. > > Beatnik, Inc. is the premier technology platform to create, deliver, and > experience interactive audio on the Web. The Beatnik Audio Engine for the > digital playback of audio has been licensed to an expanding family of > strategic partners, including Microsoft's WebTV Networks, Sun Microsystems, > Netscape, Intel and Liberate (formerly NCI). Beatnik's Web authoring tools > are used by Web designers in the creation of Web sites such as MTV Online, > Yahoo, Altoids and David Bowie.com and also ship with products from > Macromedia and NetObjects. The Beatnik Player currently allows more than 7 > million Web surfers to experience the power of interactive music and audio. > Its Rich Music Format (RMF) is the Web standard for high quality, multi-track > music with file sizes that are small enough not to require streaming and are > secure per Web site usage. By coupling expert engineering skills with an > expanded catalogue of musical content, Beatnik is dedicated to realizing new > possibilities for interactive music and audio on the Internet. Beatnik > (formerly Headspace, Inc.) was incorporated in 1996 with a team of software > innovators and world-renowned visionary, musician and composer Thomas Dolby > Robertson. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 99 15:18:03 +0000 From: "Lem Bingley" Subject: Alloy: Re: GAOV Jon wrote: > Hi all, > does anybody know where I might be able to get a copy of > Golden Age of Video from (PAL for UK use). Last time I looked - a couple of months ago - there was a copy lurking in the shelves of the Virgin Megastore on Oxford Street in London. Would you like me to try and buy it on your behalf if it's still there? I should be able to pop in on Friday. Lem Get your free E-mail at http://www.zdnet.co.uk/mail/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 12:18:39 -0500 (EST) From: Chris Cracknell Subject: Re: Alloy: Prequel to Open Art In article <199911012351888.SM00252@mail.electricson.com>, you wrote: >It is also necessary to establish the exact problem so that a clear-cut > solution can be developed. I gather the problems you proposed are as >follows, please correct me if I am wrong. >1. The Copyright Laws are basically obsolete due to the era in which >musicians live in whereby the old laws are not applicable today. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Well, I don't know about obsolete, however, copyright laws today no longer live up to the spirit in which they were created. The pupose of copyright law was to expand the volume of created works available to the public. The means by which this end was accomplished was by granting the creator (or whoever bought the creator's rights) a LIMITED monopoly over the created works. Now adays that "limited" monopoly has become less and less "limited". Also if the end goal is still to expand the volume of created works available to the public then copyright law is no longer needed because the same obstacles that stood in the way of publishing a work at the turn of the century have been blown away by today's technology. But now adays that is no longer the end goal of copyright law as the means has become the end itself. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >2. The Copyright Laws is restrictive to the proliferation of an artist work. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Not always, but it can be, especially if control of the artist's work is in the hands of someone other than the artist. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >3. The Copyright Laws is being manipulated by Corporations to protect their > self-interest in the ownership of their artist catalogue. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Well the laws are what the laws are so I don't know if manipulation is the right word. However what is true is that the legislative bodies of our countries are being manipulated by corporations to protect their self-interest in the ownership of their artists's catalogues. Did you know that software industry lobbiests tried to lobby the US government to have the "Fair Use" clause removed from copyright law. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >4. There is a distinction between "art" and "product." ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Definetly and I think that distinction starts at the moment of conception. The distinction comes when you enter the act of creation thinking "I'm going to create a work that will sell a million units" or "I'm going to create a work of art". This distinction then follows through to the ways the work is presented to the public. CRACKERS ((c)1999 from hell!!!!) - -- Atari 2600 Collector - Accordionist - Nrrrd and Proud - Borderline Otaku http://www.hwcn.org/~ad329/crab.html CRACKERS' ARTS BASE http://www.netcom.ca/~geekboy Official "I Love My Shih'Tzu" Webpage Nihongo ga dekimasu - Canadian, eh - Atari 2600 Programmer - Father of 2 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 11:51:41 -0500 (EST) From: Chris Cracknell Subject: Re: Alloy: Freeing The World One Song At A Time In article <199911020425_MC2-8B44-2A8B@compuserve.com>, you wrote: >Dear Crackers, Electrix, and Alloy at large: > >I was thinking it might help us to focus more clearly on this subject >if we first explored what exactly it is that Crackers wants to >accomplish with Open Art: To establish, if you like, the core >issue. I'll step up here with my analysis. Crackers? Correct me as >necessary, please. > >The core concern I hear in Cracker's plaint is: "I want to be >heard!" ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ It goes beyond that too. I not only want to be heard, but I want my work to be a living, breathing entity with a life of it's own capable of reproduction without my involvement. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >We have the technology to produce professional recordings. But >distribution is controlled by monolithic corporations. If you're not >in Sony's stable, for instance, then the distribution network they >control won't give you the time of day. We have to, somehow, break >the distribution stranglehold entities such as Sony have. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ That is definetly true. As cool as the internet is, it's not going to be able to do it. Not when only a tiny percentage of the population can afford the ever changing technology needed to stay online not to mention the fees involved in accessing the internet itself. We have to find realworld ways to send our voices around the globe. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >Iow, I don't feel that copyright, in itself, is the blockade. In >fact, I feel copyright is necessary. I'll use it to keep Sony off my >back. And bootleggers. I am extremely reluctant to embrace giving >my art away for free - just to be heard. There must be a way to >accomplish that and yet retain the rights of ownership. Eh? ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ But now we're talking about "product" again. Distribution and marketing isn't the end goal of what I envision as "Open Art". If ownership and profit and marketing and distribution is the issue then there is no need for a movement. Copyright your work, sell your albums, and hold onto the pitifully small royalty cheques that SOCAN (or whatever royalty authority your country may have) sends your way. If that's what matters then there's no need for change. People have been selling independent albums worldwide for over a decade now. What I'm talking about is a whole new way of thinking about our art. The fact that it may result in more sales and larger distribution for a number of artists is a fringe benefit. "Open Art" will end negative reciprocity in the art field. There are still restrictions on the employment of a work of "Open Art" created by another artist but not as many restrictions as currently exist with copyright. If I use another artist's work of "Open Art" in a project, then my project becomes "Open Art" and other artists are free to feed upon it for their own creations. For what I take I also have to give, infact, it is possible that what I give will be greater than what I take because if I were to use another artist's "Open Art" on my next album then everysong of mine on that album is now "Open Art". I'm breaking the 3rd Law of Creative Thermal Dynamics and lovin' it! There's more coming out then there is going in. "Open Art" is just another way of fulfilling the spirit of what copyright laws were put into place for in the first place. 1) To expand the volume of works that are available to the public. 2) To encourage artists to overcome the obsticals that stand in the way of creating a work. Where copyright used a limited monopoly to encourage artists to create "Open Art" uses the act of creation itself and the spirit of sharing that creation with the world to encourage the artist. As for keeping Sony off my back, Sony decided long ago that this goof with an accordion is unmarketable so why should they suddenly jump on my back now that I'm releasing my work as "Open Art"? To the big companies that control the entertainment industry "Open Art" is a threat just as "Open Source" is a threat to Microsoft. They won't want the artists they control to have anything to do with "Open Art" so it's not like Shania Twain is going to suddenly start screwing me out of SOCAN cheques by doing covers of "The Guy's Always Wrong". As for Bootleggers. Who cares. The only means I have of distribution at my disposal are flogging my stuff on the internet, taking albums with me to gigs to sell to the audience, and selling albums on consignment at record stores. If somebody in Cambodia wants to start selling CD-Rs of my work to the local peasents then go for it. If some guy in Hong Kong wants to supply the whole asian pacific ring with bootlegs of my work then go for it. I don't have the means to effectively reach those markets anyways so it isn't really costing me any money. Besides, with "Open Art" there is no bootlegging. If he wants to sell copies of my "Open Art" works he's perfectly free to do so. He can create compilation disks of "Open Art" works and sell them, and I'm equally as free to copy those compilations and sell them myself. I guess what I am saying is that I am embracing the freedom that comes from relinquishing your fears. I'm relinquishing the fear that someone is going to "rip me off". Well they can't "rip me off" under "Open Art". I've made a discision to give my art freely. They can use my art in their creations and I'm equally as free to use their creations in my art. I'm always credited as being the originator of the work of "Open Art" so they can't claim to be the works creator, only the creator of the modified version. I'm relinquishing the fear that someone is going to "mess with my baby". In 200 years (maybe more if entertainment industry lobbiests are successful in having copyrights extended even further) my works will be in the public domain anyways. Everyone will be perfectly free to put their own spin on them. Personally I'd rather be alive to see the new life my works will take on when they leave my hands than know after I'm long dead and gone artists will be taking my works to new places. "Open Art" will let me do this. What will be the financual drawbacks for me if I were to release all my works to date as "Open Art"? This is how I, as a working musician, make my living in no particular order. 1) Doing session work for other people's projects. 2) Doing jobber work for other people's gigs. 3) Playing gigs of my own. 4) Doing commissioned soundtrack work. 5) Doing production on other people's projects. 6) Selling my own independently produced projects. 7) Cashing in the royalty cheques. Of all those only number 7 will be directly affected by my decision to make my work available as "Open Art" and when I weigh the benefits of releasing it as "Open Art" against my last SOCAN cheque there's no contest. The SOCAN cheque doesn't stand a chance. I'm not a superstar who's able to cash in a SOCAN cheque for a new yaught. I never will be a superstar who will be able to cash in a SOCAN cheque for a new yaught. Since I'll still continue to make a living as always from my music by following steps 1 through 6 it doesn't bother me to lose step 7 when the potential for gain is so much greater than the loss of a SOCAN cheque. Besides, "Open Art" will always be a choice. I can choose which of my works I want copyrighted and I can choose which of my works I want to be "Open Art". No doubt there will be artists who will see "Open Art" as a promotional aid. "I give these three songs away for free in order to plug this CD of royalty music." And no doubt if "Open Art" becomes as big a force in the art world as "Open Source" is becoming in the software world then we will see big mainstreme artists backed by the big mainstreme record companies releasing a work or two as "Open Art" just to cash in on the image behind the movement. "Here you go little people, have fun with this audio file, it's gift from me, the star, to you, the consumer, because I care. Now go out there any buy my merchandise." This is perfectly fine. There's no reason why "Open Art" and "Royalty Art" can't co-exist. They just can't co-exist on the same album is all. What I need now is a way to express this concept in as clear, compact, and absolute a way as possible. I'm open for suggestions. CRACKERS (Come along and open my art like a spam tin from hell!!) -- Atari 2600 Collector - Accordionist - Nrrrd and Proud - Borderline Otaku http://www.hwcn.org/~ad329/crab.html CRACKERS' ARTS BASE http://www.netcom.ca/~geekboy Official "I Love My Shih'Tzu" Webpage Nihongo ga dekimasu - Canadian, eh - Atari 2600 Programmer - Father of 2 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 12:33:14 -0500 (EST) From: Chris Cracknell Subject: Alloy: [REPOST] Re: Freeing The World One Song At A Time Oops, sorry electric, found one more post of mine on the subject. In article <0.2daa6699.253ccb16@aol.com>, you wrote: >In a message dated 10/17/99 10:26:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >crackers@hwcn.org writes: > >:: People of Alloy, please share with me any ideas, insights, and suggestions > you might have that will help to make an "open art" movement a reality. > If you know of any arts organizations that have similar goals in mind > please share them with me too. :: > >crackers, your idea is intriguing! ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ This new learning intrigues me Sir Bedivire, explain to me again how sheeps bladders can be used to prevent earthquakes. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >I can say that in the graphic arts world there are already many collections >of copyright-free designs - 'clip art' - which anyone is free to use for >anything they like, without even having to refer to the source (many times >the source is forgotten by now anyway!) ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ The concept behind "open art" would be a little different from "public domain" in that the originator would always be credited and "open art" is a bit like a virus. Anything touched by "open art" would become itself "open art". This would make it different from "public domain" because you can incorporate PD material in a project, but that doesn't make your project PD. "Open art" would be a give and take kind of thing. If you take something that is "open art" and use it to create your own work then the work you created from it becomes "open art", so there's never a negative reciprocity. I guess the philosophy of "open art" would be: "By artists according to their means, for artists according to their needs." ^_^ I was out last night talking with some local artists and won two new converts over to the "open art" idea. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >Anyway, back to your idea of Free Art as pertains to Music. Are you >considering that artists might self-publish collections of a musical >equivalent of 'clip art' - that is, under the artists name (and possibly with >the name or code embedded within it so that the artist will always get proper >recognition) but with no copyright restrictions? ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Musical "clip art" would certainly be a likelyhood. There already exists something similar called "buy-out" music. CDs of original music (or original recordings of PD music) that one can purchase and as part of the purchase agreement they can use the contents of the CD in any way for any purpose they want. But like I was saying, I see "open art" becoming more than mearly art without copyright restrictions. I see it as a way of encouraging the sharing of talents and ideas in the art world. Film makers, videogame designers, writers, painters, musicians, all sharing their creations with one another with the only restrictions being that the work's originator is always credited as such, and that works created with "open art" become "open art". ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >Putting out music that >anyone can access for free *does* make sense in this light, because as we all >know, the only music that gets airplay is that which the companies push with >all their might/financing, if they think it will make them richer. Never mind >what the people want to hear... it's what the record companies are telling >them they want to hear. Propaganda such as this has always proven extremely ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ I think this is one of the reasons why "open art" will work well for the independent artist. Much in the way Linux would have languished in obscurity if it were released in the typical fashion of commercial software, many artists will languish in obscurity simply because the factors arn't in their favour for commercial success. To me it's far worse a thing to go through my life and not have had my voice as an artist heard than it would be for me to simply go through my life and not make a cent from my art. I'm certain that there must be a significant number of artists out there who feel likewise who would be willing to gamble their royalty cheques against the prospect of being heard rather than gamble their art against the prospect of becoming a superstar. And of course, just because you choose to release some works as "open art" it doesn't mean you have to release everything as "open art", so you're perfectly free to play both sides of the field as you see fit. Just remember that when you use "open art" that everything it touches becomes "open art". So if you're not willing to have every song on your CD become "open art" then don't use an "open art" song on it. As for record companies controlling the music market, I think the only way we'll ever break that is if we're able to convince artists to stop chasing the dream of becoming a superstar and to empower themselves to publish their works. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >underpaid, neglected, etc) What sort of media would you be proposing? >Internet is of course considered the most widely accessable... though not >everyone is connected to the 'net (after all, it seems 17% of Americans are >living below poverty level, not to mention the rest of the earth's population >who are under similar circumstances or worse... I just read the stats this >morning & I'm ticked off, sorry for the mini-rant :) ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ The internet would certainly play an important role in the publishing of "open art". If an "open art" organization could be created it would be able to point people online towards the various sources of "open art" (both on and off line). Of course, as you said, the one prohibiting factor behind internet publishing is the fact that only a small minority of people are online. Computer costs are still prohibitively expensive for most people as is the costs involved in internet access. One solution to this is the creation of more "freenets" and "community nets" such as the one I use to access the net. These are shell accounts on a text base system that allows access to the web, email, and usenet. Even though the system is text only, graphics and sound files can be downloaded and viewed/listened to offline. Freenets, like the name implies are "free" (although they may offer pay accounts with more features). Community nets are like freenets except they charge a small yearly fee for the account (I pay $30 a year for 50 hours a month and 2 meg of system space). The advantage of the Lynx shell account is that I can access the net on anything from an old Commodore 64 to a top of the line pentium. As long as it has a modem (and at least VT-52 emulation) it can get you online. But the internet wouldn't be the only source of "open art" just as it isn't the only source of "open source" software. Retail sales will still be a possibility. Artists will be able to publish and distribute their works in stores the way they traditionally have. Musicians can make CDs, artists can publish books, film makers can sell video tapes, the same way Red Hat sells copies of Linux. ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ >Self-publishing is definitely an answer. I can see that your proposal >involves more than just self-publication though. In what ways would it >differ, if you don't mind explaining once more (to the ditzy impractical >visual artist and craftsperson that I'm made out to be by corporate >propaganda spinners who want to rob me and my colleagues blind ;) ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Like I was saying, it's more than just self publishing. It's sharing your artwork with other artists and the world. It's also relinquishing the idea that I need to make 4.6 cents off every copy of my work in order for it to make the act of creation worth my while. I was playing at a folk club last night (most of my jobber and session work comes in the form of playing celtic folk music) and it occured to me that 99% of the music I was hearing played last night was written a few hundred years before copyrights exists by artists who were motivated by nothing more than the need to express themselves. It seems that since 1928 the need to express oneself has taken a backseat for many artists to the desire to cash in on their talents. It's easy enough to blame the big record companies but I feel that a bit of the blame must also fall on the artists who devote their creative energies to chasing down the big record contract as if that will suddenly validate them as an artist. Even worse is the artist who creates for no other reason than to make a buck and puts no more soul and feeling and expression into their work than is needed to make the sale. That's how mindless pap ends up getting packaged for the masses as art. CRACKERS (How do I get this "pinko" label off my ass from hell!!) -- Atari 2600 Collector - Accordionist - Nrrrd and Proud - Borderline Otaku http://www.hwcn.org/~ad329/crab.html CRACKERS' ARTS BASE http://www.netcom.ca/~geekboy Official "I Love My Shih'Tzu" Webpage Nihongo ga dekimasu - Canadian, eh - Atari 2600 Programmer - Father of 2 ------------------------------ End of alloy-digest V4 #295 ***************************