Ahh, the whole music-downloading issue. I don't do it anymore, not because I'm scared of being sued or even because I feel guilty. It's because, well, a lot of music that's out there ain't even worth downloading, much less purchasing. But I will offer this. The main reason I downloaded songs in the first place was because a lot of the songs I wanted weren't commercially available. Like, where would I have found Mary J.'s "Be Happy" remix feat. Keith Murray if I hadn't downloaded it? (Think years after it was released) Or Supercat's "Dolly My Baby (Remix)"? Then there's these soundtracks that come out with one good song and no single. I refused to buy the "Kate & Leopold" soundtrack to get ahold of Sting's "Until", so I downloaded the song. Yeah, I know--bad me. As far as I was concerned, it was the best way to find songs that were pretty much obscure to the general public. I mean, DJs can't have all the fun.

As far as the black blogger question, it never occurred to me that I might actually be a part of a movement. I think blogging offers an outlet for regular folks who might not be journalists or professional writers to get some things off their chests. I went out and got mine to improve my writing, and possibly log all of my experiences as they would come in handy if I ever decided to use my life as a model for my fiction. I think anyone that's black and writes, in any medium, is just adding more flavor to the mix. My approach to the whole thing isn't as profound, but if in the process I end up helping or educating someone. all the better.

I'm formulating a long-ass response of my own to your long-ass response, especially since you mentioned the book _Black Popular Culture_. I nearly swooned after seeing that reference. I'm going through the S. Hall piece again after your quote, and as soon as I can spare a free moment or two, I'll respond.

File-sharing? File-stealing? Maybe the proof's in the terminology. I thought they taught us in school that it's good to share. So much for the good ol' days.

But do I download music and movies? Yep, sure do. And if I like it enough, I actually go out and buy it. What I think the music industry doesn't realize is that we'll buy it if it's good. I mean, iTunes has sold over ten million songs. Paying for P2P works - if you do it right.

yeah, the file sharing issue. it's hard to ignore that file sharing means less money for music artists. but if 99% of the files are wack stuff you hear on the radio all day anyway... i don't know. i agree that a lot of the really good obscure stuff is not up there. like larry marshall for example. or mega banton's 100,000 megawatts. or a lot of Sun Ra. its very hit or miss, and the sound quality fluctuates wildly.

but what about the fact that you can go to a library and check out any book that you want, for free. no one ever questions the benefit of providing books to the public for at the public's own expense. libraries are paid through taxes. i have not once heard the publishing industry complain that it hurts sales.

on Black Blogging:
All the people i have met through the web (and stayed in touch with) have been some of the coolest, most interesting people. how else can one escape one's geo-cultural limitations in such a convenient format? one of the nice things is that you can assume that people on the web are mostly proactive people. if you see someone on a blog about hip hop... that means they are down to talk about hip hop for awhile. but in the regular world, you gotta size people up, and maybe they don't really wanna talk about anything at all. a lot of people avoid the sorts of conversations we have up in these web environments. even if someone is just hanging back and reading blog entries and comments -- w/o response -- they are still actively seeking out certain types of information. you can't just go to any blog and be entertained.

You go to any major city's main library and you can borrow videos, DVDs, CDs and sometimes films. Here in NYC, you can even borrow film. Actual film. So I think that is moot. While some justify P2P "sharing" with promises of later purchases of music, many of the bigger downloaders simply steal the shit. They ain't never gonna pay for anything and they make it extremely easy for others to steal.

If you're really for artists, you'll stop free, illegal downloads on your computer and use pay services. Apple is just one of several that allow listeners to preview songs before purchasing. 99c for a song is dirt cheap. Yeah, the artists should get more, but stealing the shit and smirking about it ain't gonna pay they bills.

Less money on music equals more money for books and magazines. Either lets make CDs cost $50, or make them free.

Music is just a small part of a much bigger picture. I am actually against ALL copyrights. I'm talking books, movies, medicine, names, etc. I would rather live in a world where everyone is poor, than a world where 1% is rich and 99% poor.

most people don't understand the ramifications and the implications of their actions. but i think it is OK to steal mp3s if you have thought it out and you understand that you are essentially voting to dismantle the system of copyrighted media.

I love music and I have a lot of respect for musicians, but do I feel guilty for downloading music? Hell no.

Because I know that I do more than enough to support that industry by having purchased cassettes, 45s, LPs and now CDs (and DVDs). But we were talking about the artist, right? So, my purchases help to support the artist, but my file-sharing rips off the artists, right?

That is some bullshit. It's the recording industry that continues to rip off its artists by saddling those artists with antiquated contractual obligations with technology simultaneously helps the industry to squeeze even more blood out of the turnip. I think 99 cents for a compressed audio file (that may or may not be compatible with every way that you listen to mp3s) is ridiculous when I can buy the CD and have a physical copy of the music, the cover art and the liner notes. I can still listen to my CD on ANY CD player, and if I want, I can rip it to my computer as mp3s that I can play anyway I see fit - on my computer(s), in my iPod, on a CD (Audio or mp3) that I burn, etc. How much does it cost to make a CD? How much does it cost to make an mp3? 99 cents a song is a ripoff.

Back to the artist, for a moment: how much do they get per CD? How much do they get per mp3? How much will they get after RIAA's litigation? These questions point to the fraudulence behind "ripping off the artist" because if you saw the answers in black and white, you would see that the recording industry is doing a fine job ripping off its artists itself.

I don't think I'll be buying any CDs for a while. And maybe I'll hold off from purchasing anything else from those entertainment conglomerates. We should be up in arms, now that our children are under attack.

Donald...

That artists get ripped off is not the fault of the industry, it is the fault of artists who can barely handle their algebra homework. Chasing dollars without reading the fine print wil ALWAYS get you in trouble. The contracts signed by impetuous artists is none of my business.

You are right, though, to point out that this is not about artists... it is about the companies. Ultimately, I think, the question is whether we want a very very small portion of music artists to make a living off music, or whether we want people to have free access to music.

This isn't about what is fair. This is about what sort of economic structure we want. We aren't talking about business ethics, we are talking about copyright law. Copyrights are the basis of our economy. Copyrights provide incentive to develop new technologies and products, with the understanding that no one will be able to jack it.

In a system without copyrights, record labels will have a much harder time "ripping off the artists", but only because there won't be any major labels left. It will just be a bunch of independent labels. And personally, I think that sounds exciting.

oh, and then maybe artists will learn how to perform live for a change. there will always be profits in live shows.

oh... and fuck copyrights.

Support live music!!!

Blogging for me means that I have a creative outlet to write about my passion for jazz and other good music. I have been doing this almost a year and the response has been trememdous. Another nice thing about blogging is that I am free to voice my opinion however I choose. Writing for others does not always allow you that freedom. No one will live your dreams like you!

i just can't wait til my AOL says...not only that YOU'VE GOT MAIL, but YOU'VE GOT MOVIES, MAGAZINES, MUSIC and whatever else they can think of.

On the real to real, I should be paid for listening the bullshit on the radio, furthermore, I have no qualms about it. Those muthafuckas wasn't thinking about me when I was assed out sleeping on park benches.

I'm still amazed that our species has invented a way to tranform any and all information into hardwareless data. Music, Books, Ideas, Corporate plans, War Plans, Bomb making instructions, The cure for smallpox, Pictures from Mars, Pictures from areas of space so far away it's beyond our comprehension. Bone Marrow operation instructions. Any possible idea can be turned into data, stored, filed, and transfered anywhere in the world in seconds. Music, which is shared by all cultures, races and countries, has become the catalyst which is causing reactions which are challenging our views on ownership, morals, property and the economics that tie it all together. Now a song is available for free. Pretty much any and every song, and its available anytime, and anywhere. We could seperate music from commerce entirely. Its not too difficult to picture a future where music makers don't get paid, or sued. Musicians make music for the art. No one does it for the money, and there are a lot less boy bands in the world. It's a streatch of the imaginination, but the concept is plausable. --- one step further- What I said earlier about all ideas can become data. What if all ideas were as available to everyone as music is. Spy satilites, Bombs, armies, disease information, cures, books, university courses, chicken recipies, building codes, -everything. What if all of mankinds collected info was available instantly for everyone. Thirdworld countries couldnt be kept poor by the rich nations. There would be no secrects between countries. If france built a new bomb, that bomb info would be known by every other country. This is a streach I know... but if we all had access to everything at any time, would it not force us to be equals? Would money and economy fade as information (and therefore goods) became equaly available for all? By making all info equaly available, we might eliminate our entire concept of 'money, economy, value and worth.' Everynow and then we invent something that changes our way of life in every way. Farming. Industry. Flight. Computers. Now information and its availability may change everything again. ---Just an idea thats been bouncing around in my head lately. I do fear that the human race has bought into some bad ideas that dont work. (like money and commerce) And I wonder if we can even imagine a world without it. ...oh, and I download tonnes of tunes. For Free. and I make copies for my friends. And they do the same with movies. I copy gifs of webpages and stick them in my emails. I believe in sharing. If it can be put in a form where everyone can have it, then eveyone who wants it should be able to experience it. The creater can still be appreciated. Enjoy your tunes all. Right now, I'm hooked on "the staunton lick" by 'Lemon Jelly. Available for free to promote their cd at this site. http://www.epitonic.com/
Keep dancing.