Posts Tagged ‘artists’

Response to unculutred blog, use of song in chairty project.

October 3, 2008

visit the uncultured project at this link

Hey Shawn,

A pleasure to be a part of your project. This film use was great news for me as i’m self publishing my art. Part of the problem is that the large charity organizations all want to deal with the big stars like u2, yet there is heaps of art that sounds great that can be used in so many ways and create such a great result for the organization. I started a project a long time ago called hungry artists feed hungry people on myspace http://www.myspace.com/hafhp i started to gradually understand the reality of many of the charity organizations. They are interested in the rock gods. Yet the reality to my mind is that these media stars are a big part of the problem and part of the reason for poverty. When people are hearing the song “one love” “one world” written via the likes of U2, some might think that problems are being solved. Yet part of the reality is that a publisher is collecting something. Creative commons is part of the solution and its great that i inspired you to use the licenses. I bumped into the CC licenses through the hafhp project. I hope that more artists go with the hafhp idea. I just wanted to be true to my word,

its great work your doing shawn, keep going. thanks a lot.

One thing i should add, is that i only gave up the funds that fox gave me for the use of the song, i did not give up the Author rights that would be paid for the use of the song’s public performance, my view is that self publishing artists giving revenues to charities is a good way to promote the sound recording of the song. Many business models could evolve out of a similar situation, yet the charity organizations have to want to work with these types of business models.

Torbranda from Bergen

March 16, 2008

Torbranda from bergen talks about rights organizatio Tono and getting the pop art out and about where ‘es based.

http://www.rawmedia.tv 

Hein from Amsterdam

March 9, 2008
We met at Waterhole (venue in Amsterdam). Hein was watching some of his friends performing covers. It seems the only gig a self published artist can get in Amsterdam is playing content owned by a publisher or playing in a competition for free.
You can find out more info about Hein Japp and the band he performs with @

http://www.reboundoogiebent.nl

http://www.rawmedia.tv

creative commons and rights organizations

February 14, 2008

its interesting that last.fm are now collecting royalties for self published artists not with rights organizations. This really shows where things might be headed. With all the abuse that CC get from the rights organization, i wonder why CC should help them integrate the license. If the rights organizations are forced to adapt the license without CC, then they have to use the legal framework of the license as it is. In Australia APRA is already wanting government radio/schools to be excluded. Thats the kind of pressure that they are putting on CC au. My view is that unless the rights organization adapt the license under terms of a non-commercial use that the CC community agree is a non-commercial use, then CC should not help the rights organizations in any way.

its not oil free

January 28, 2008

On facebook they have a group saying that digital music is oil free. response:

facebook group link are they going to delete the post?

one thing that is not oil free is all the money spent on promotion of music via publishers and labels. the best thing you can do for the environment is not pay for content owned by any label or publisher and buy content put out by self publishers, that is not joined to rights organizations. so really its not true that digital music is oil free. if you don’t buy it its less oil free. yet even then maybe having that music helps that published artist sell product via use of that content. its all a scam and you label people know it in your heart. go plant a tree and be real.

Last FM Creative Commons

November 29, 2007

A couple of months back this thread started on a last FM’s forum. Today I noticed that last.fm in conjunction with Mozilla is sponsoring an event that celebrates five years of Creative Commons.

Now if an artist, label or publisher tags their song with the words Creative Commons, the song goes into the Creative Commons charts. Read this thread for more information. For now artists or net labels are not able to upload using any type of Creative Commons licenses; a Creative Commons chart within last.FM’s system is a good step forward.

How last FM works ?

Type in the name of your favorite artist… into the last FM search engine. You are then taken to a page that says “Now playing:… Similar Artists”. The first track you listen to is the artist you choose, then to similar artists, example. The user has the option of clicking on a heart button to say weather they like the track playing or not, by doing this you create your own play list. The next artists playing is a different artist and so on. Each band or artist playing has a buy link that the listener can visit. Last FM has no advertising brakes, this sets last.fm apart from all other forms of music radio media.

Last.fm’s revenue.

Last Fm’s revenue comes from banners and preferences given to content played.

Information from last.fm’s website.

* 100 impressions for $20.00
* 500 impressions for $100.00
* 1,000 impressions for $200.00
* 2,000 impressions for $400.00

Book a Powerplay campaign to target a set amount of radio plays for a track to a specific group of users. After you’ve run your Powerplay campaign, you will be able to access statistics of how your track has been received.

Pay and be heard.

Artist’s label’s and publisher’s are able to “pay and be heard” on last FM. In Australia it is illegal to “pay and be heard” on radio. Its the responsibility of a programmer to decide what is played and what is not. A publisher, artist or label is able to bring content to the station. Its upto the radio network to pay the programmer to do her or his job. Last FM may be just a little closer to the reality of the music business.

Rights for use of content?

Last.fm have to pay the rights organizations for use of content, last.fm does not ask the artist when they become a member of their service, if they are a member of a rights organization or not. This means last.fm most likely pay a blanket license fee for the use of content. When an artist not with a rights organization is being played on last.fm, last.fm still pay for use of that content. Its possible that a fair chunk of last.fm’s revenue goes towards paying rights organizations. How are the rights organizations going to react when Creative Commons content is played via last.fm in non-profit spaces. If these organization only play content from the CC last.FM charts they be in a situation where they would not have to pay for use of this content.

A self publishing artist using last FM, why?

The last.fm system looks to support the established publishing/label industry. The system gives the opportunity for un-known artists to tap into the fan bass of a well-known established artists with a similar style and possibly sell music through i-tunes, paypal, cdbaby, amazon…. For an artist to be heard beyond the community of people that she or he comes in direct contact with, seems to be an expensive process. Creative Commons charts could change this.

Free culture & rights organizations?

People like music without hearing advertisements. With wifi moving everywhere is last.fm going to last? As the last.fm system gets more and more popular, the cost for the use of content might go up. Listening to radio without having commercial brakes gives last.fm a competitive edge in the market place, this might be seen as un-fair. Are publishers, artists & labels (companies that use banners) going to bring in enough revenue to pay for the use of this content? Could last.fm be shut down by the right organizations?

Music business.

The music business looks to have turned from the exploitation of the public for revenue to that of the “self publishing” artist. The explosion in artistic content created, fueled by the net and an explosion in technology, makes the exploitation of unrealistic dreams a good business. Its good business for the music business to maintain low standards of content within the market. “Pay and be heard”, pay this and our festival might consider you for a performance. Pay 20 dollars for your song to be reviewed. Put three songs on an album written by famous artists so public might find your content on i-tunes. Where does free-culture fit into all this?

iarts launched

October 26, 2007

Solutions to problems around us can be found by sharing and communicating ideas.

Reform APRA. Getting music artists in Australia to put pressure on APRA (collection society) to create a one member one vote system. Currently voting rights are structured so that for every 500 dollars that an artist or publisher collects, the artist or publisher gets one extra vote. With new technologies it makes sense to have equal voting rights for all members. Consider that the conditions that the board of APRA create, effect the way that members and non members deal with commercial and non-commercial spaces . APRA members are not able to use a creative commons license and remain within the terms of the agreement that the board of APRA maintain. Websitemyspace

Hungry Artists Feed Hungry People. Artists giving up commercial rights for the use of their content to a charity of choice. HAFHPmyspace icommonsOpenbusiness

Artist Press Kit. Creating a press kit (media station) for artists, where the media comes to the artist rather than the artist going to the media. openbusinessicommons

Create Incentives For Artists to be Artists. Create an organization that would collect
and distribute works that would be used in commercial streams.
Encourage artists to license works allowing commercial use. Create
incentives for artists. icommons

Titanic Radio. Why
not bring Wiki, Creative Commons, Public Domain content together and
make it available for broadcast through a wireless network to a device
with unlimited channels ?

Decentralized “broadcasting” network.
website icommons

Explain creative commons licenses to Artists. The objective of this project is to give
balanced advice to artists on the advantages, disadvantages, risks and
rewards that their use of Creative Commons licenses may involve. Icommons
wikifacebook

any feedback is much appreciated. jam@iarts.CC

WWW.IARTS.CC

article in progress “Some reasons why artists don’t use CC license”.

October 3, 2007

Most artists when they get started on their path mostly seem interested in distribution of ideas, rather than revenue. I spoke to a blues guitar player recently, when talking about money and music. “The music is free, what your paying for is the strings, the amp, the petrol and all the rest of it; but the music its free”. Its not easy for some artists to license their art with a CC license, Creative Commons is difficult to explain to an artists having a hard time. The void within the publishing system creates a magnet to almost every idea, creative commons is the only . I’m convinced that CC creates a better flow of culture within culture, yet getting that message through is not easy.

License:
The most effective distribution tool (i reckon) is an open license, yet for a commercial organization to use an open license can create problems. Recently virgin mobile in Australia used images, licensed with an open license without a model release. This resulted in legal action against virgin mobile and creative commons by the person that licensed their image using a creative commons open license. If the person using a license can sue the organization that creates the license, what is the future of that license ?

Publishing:
The publishers have created difficult circumstances for “self publishing” artist with new ideas. As publishing industries grow smaller, exploitation of the “self published artist” grows. Organization have sprung up all over the net that offer artists the opportunity to get through the wall at a cost. Its easy for an artist with little understanding of the publishing industry to be sucked into this system. Even when artists create ideas compatible with contemporary ideas, unless publishing industries have nurtured these ideas the ability to distribute the idea is not easy. One of my favourite artists “beck”, was related to the business when he started out. Publishing good ideas has less to do with the idea and more to do with who you know, even with


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 85 other followers