A to Z of Making It, Copyright, Music, My Stories, Stupidity

Copyright Just Keeps On Giving

Copyright is the gift that just keeps on giving.

Remember how copyright is meant to protect the creator so they have a monopoly on their work, with the aim to be paid if the work is popular. A lot of artists create works which are not popular and as such, their monopoly on their copyrights have no value.

However, in this case, the creator gets a stroke and other people allegedly forge the creators signature to transfer the rights to corporations who seem to benefit.

The Seinfield creators couldn’t even come up with this kind of a story. You can add elder abuse to the list for Copyright court cases.

The other big one is Ed Sheeren and his song, “Thinking Out Loud”. You see even if Sheeren did copy a Marvin Gaye song, the song should have been in the public domain anyway because both Gaye and his co-writer are dead. Then again the labels wanted these kind of perpetual laws many years ago and now they are getting bitten in the ass.

And companies like Structured Asset Sales, founded by an investment banker called David Pullman exist by purchasing a lot of copyrights from the children of these creators many years ago and now we have this stupidity of suing people.

And as usual, Copyright is already benefiting the corporations who create nothing and now it is benefiting the heirs of artists who create nothing, to sue the creators who create something.

But if you really want to know how the recording industry via the RIAA caused this mess, then read this article over at Techdirt.

Nothing is original especially in music which has mass appeal. No artist writes music without being exposed to music. Everyone is working from the same instruments and the same chords.

And the courts now cannot make a distinction between influence and theft. It’s set the precedent that all influence is theft. And the labels went with that for decades only to be sued over the last 10 years from heirs of dead artists.

Standard
Music, My Stories, Stupidity

The Camera Eye = Social Control

How much control do we want to give away in order to live our lives the way we want?

Driving up to the traffic lights, I am confronted with a green light to proceed while the cars to my left and right are stopped, because of a red light on their side.

This form of control provides safety and order.

But also at the traffic lights is a red light speed camera, which takes a photo of you if you go through a red light at normal speed and under and it also takes a photo of you if you go through a green light or red light, over the speed limit. And that information is stored by various organizations and contracted out to law enforcement.

And with the rise of phones in cars, in Australia we had laws against texting while driving and when a police officer was hit and lost his legs from a driver who was texting, we now have laws that state we cannot handle or touch our phones while driving.

So to control these new laws, the traffic lights and light poles have extra cameras added to take pictures of drivers inside their cars.

And throwing cigarettes out your window always had a fine in Australia if witnessed by a Police officer, but now there are proposals to make the cameras do all the work.

And of course we have laws against driving intoxicated and affected by drugs.

And all of these traffic lights in our lives create rules and enforce punishment to maintain social control.

Social control in the name of safety.

But a truck driver crossed over to the other side of the road, killed a family in a head on, because he was trying to open a bottle of coke.

So what’s next, laws against coke bottles.

And then we have the social control within family and friends. Everyone wants to belong, no one wants to be alone. So we abide by these norms and rules so we remain part of the tribe as we gossip our way through life.

When you add the criminal justice system which imposes sanctions when the law is broken and the rules and expectations of each company we work for or deal with, it doesn’t feel like freedom and more like control.

Social control is neither bad or good, it just is, because through centuries of control we cannot believe it is possible to live without social control.

And here is the article that influenced this post and Neil Peart was already writing about it in “The Camera Eye” a song about how New York City installed cameras everywhere in a bid to stop crime and make the streets safe again, using a system set up in London, who had to install cameras on every street corner to stop IRA bombings.

Peart made it out that the cameras are chasing the oblivious humans, as the humans do their day to day duties.

Standard
A to Z of Making It, Copyright, Music, My Stories, Stupidity, Treating Fans Like Shit

Public Domain 2020

The post over at Duke University.

The purpose of copyright is to promote creativity. And it does so by providing creators a limited monopoly to distribute their works with the aim to make money.

The limited time for works was 28 years and if the creator renewed they would get another 28 years and if they didn’t renew, then the works would end up in the Public Domain. All up 56 years was the term.

But not all works made money so 98% of them would end up in the Public Domain after 26 years.

What’s the point in renewing if it’s worth nothing?

Having copyright terms that last 70 years after the death of the creator does not promote creativity.

It promotes money for lawyers because of the heirs who sue or it make money for the corporations who control the rights.

It also promotes laziness from the creator who has no incentive to create anymore works. Certain artists tell us that they have no incentive to create new works and are quite happy to live off their past works which had public acceptance.

Works from 1924 will enter the US public domain and most of these works are already in the public domain in other parts of the world, which means anyone can use these works as raw material for their own creations, without fear of a lawsuit.

Prior to the 1976 Copyright Act (which became effective in 1978), the maximum copyright term was 56 years—an initial term of 28 years, renewable for another 28 years. Under those laws, works published in 1963 would have entered the public domain if Copyright was never extended to last for the life of the creator plus 70 years.

Works from 1963 like the songs from The Beatles’ albums “Please, Please Me” and “With The Beatles” or songs from The Beach Boys’ album “Surfin’ U.S.A” album’s would be in the Public Domain.

Imagine that.

All those works available to build new works, in the same way way The Beatles and The Beach Boys built their works on the blues music already in the Public Domain at that point in time.

But when we create works, we do not do it because of Copyright law. We do it because we need to create and we love to create.

Imagine if those terms existed past 1978. Works from 1991 which failed to get renewed would be in the Public Domain.

Imagine that.

Standard
Classic Songs to Be Discovered, Influenced, Music, Stupidity

Just A Number

Our digital world is at a dangerous level, as people use our data to make billions in ad revenue and other people are trying to gain access to our lives so they could do up fake accounts and use our information/details for fraud.

And governments put the onus on us to protect ourselves, so we get virus and protection software in the same way we get locks on our windows and an alarm system in the house.

And if you think by using a hacked version of virus software keeps you safe, then you are delusional. The police are not even equipped to deal with cyber fraud and the banks don’t even care.

But how can we protect ourselves, when every organisation we deal with, wants our personal information, otherwise we cannot participate with them. And then how do these organisations store our personal information.

Is it under lock and key, on encrypted drives?

Who has access to it and if they destroy it, how do they destroy it?

Because if we need to go to all these lengths to protect our personal information, why shouldn’t the organizations we deal with do the same.

If you’ve been to a Dr’s surgery, you will notice that there is so much personal information in a box near the receptionists desk waiting to be shredded.

Now I am sure that this information gets destroyed/shredded, but it was there, and all it needs is someone to take that box and suddenly, they have names, addresses and dates of birth of real people. In the hands of criminals, this information is gold.

The governments now also want this data as part of policy research, so what we have happening in Australia, are Doctor surgeries passing on private health information to the government for a fee.

Talk about going back to the well over and over again. Doctors bulk bill the government for each patient via Medicare plus we need to pay a gap payment to the Doctors because they over estimate their worth and now the Doctor surgeries make extra money from the government by sharing our personal health issues with the government.

Dollars for data. To doctors we are just walking fees, as treatment takes a backseat to making money.

I guess the people whose data is exposed don’t benefit in any way. Just the organizations who hold the data.

I guess we are all just a number, like the Bob Seger song.

To ma bell I’m just another phone
I’m just another statistic on a sheet
To teachers I’m just another child
To IRS I’m just another file

To change the above;

To Facebook, I’m just another user, a data mine for profits on a sheet, to doctors I’m just another fee, as treatment takes a backseat to making money.

Standard
Derivative Works, Influenced, Music, My Stories, Stupidity

Rise Of Skywalker

It’s a Star Wars movie and I’ll always devote time to the franchise, plus my money.

But in the end, it’s more of a stand alone fantasy flick which will be forgotten because Disney kept changing the vision and the end game of the story. And they didn’t have the guts to take risks.

I still came away with the same viewpoint after watching it. There is a crop of writers and directors being used in big movies who just don’t know how to write and rewrite scripts.

George Lucas rewrote the Star Wars script so many times over so many years that there is even a special edition book available of the original script/story, because it is so different.

Christopher Nolan should have been tasked with these films. Just think of his Batman trilogy and how he showcased the battle between good and evil.

And Disney destroyed the expanded universe from Star Wars canon but then delivered movies based on fan fiction.

However, all the scrips needed was some serious editing on some scenes and a little bit of extra context and explanations added to important scenes. But this means that the writers had to think and people don’t like to think these days, it’s too hard for them, so we get awe inspiring visuals without any meaning.

Then again, JJ Abrams and even George Lucas have both said that people want to see a new Star Wars movie and then yell at you when it’s not to their liking.

Watch it and make your own mind up.

Standard
Music, Stupidity

The Irishman

This is why organisations fade away.

At first, organisations ignore the new threat, then they try to kill the new threat and eventually they accept the new threat or join it or get overtaken by it.

Martin Scorsese’s new flick, “The Irishman” is a passion project. Rejected by all the big movie studios, Netflix came to the rescue with funding and allowed Scorsese to do the movie however he wanted. And Scorsese wanted a film 3.5 hours long. This is how a filmmaker wants to operate.

But in order to show the movie in the large cinema chains, which could lead to Academy Awards and what not, the corporate bodies who represent the major cinema chains want a 90 day window, while Netflix really didn’t want any window but would have agreed with 45 days.

All of this is old world stuff.

The new world is different.

I would happily avoid a cinema experience, to watch a movie in the comforts of my own home. But the Cinema chains and the movie studios have a cabal set up, which exploits a family for multiple tickets instead of the one month streaming premium.  

And if anyone is facing a challenge to their business model it is the cinema chains.

Once upon a time, when the control of the distribution was in the hands of the movie studios, a film’s commercial potential was judged by its cinema box office receipts. It’s a viewpoint which is still carried to this day and it only pleases the people in the media and the websites that re-report box office takings.

There’s no reason why the cinema experience cannot be an event, but it’s got a long way to go to become a concert like experience.

And “The Irishman” is trending on Twitter highlighting the stupid move from the cinema chains to not screen it. Here are some screenshots from Twitter highlighting the idiocy of the cinema chains and how independent cinemas are winning.

Standard
A to Z of Making It, Music, My Stories, Stupidity

Personality Era

Its the era of the personality, those who’ve been in the game for decades seem to have the perfect forum to broadcast.

To spread their viewpoints or criticisms.

So many play it safe and try hard to be liked by all. Others have handlers or social media teams to run their accounts.

But the ones who have control of their accounts, the ones who are true to themselves and their beliefs, and stand by what they say, will be the ones we talk about.

Because these personalities can enact change. Only if they are willing to be uncomfortable and put themselves out there.

“We are all just actors trying to control and manage our public image, we act based on how others might see us.”

Erving Goffman, a Canadian sociologist came up with the above quote from one of his studies, and he’s been dead since 1982. So the social conditioning of being liked in the pre-Internet era existed and got amplified with social media.

It’s not about likes, it’s about having a voice.

Standard