February 23, 2004

• This album is incredible. I finally took the time to check it out. I'm interested to see tomorrow's turnout and reaction, if substantial.
• Funny, I was about to post a post about it. I also downloaded it today; it's really quite good, although I'm no fan of Jay-Z.
• I have mad respect for anyone that can seam two genres from different ends of the musical spectrum together with such brilliance. It's a shame there's always someone trying to protect their works in the name of copyright infringement when all it's really about is money. If I was such a talented musician, I would be honored by this.
• genial: it's not jigga who's tryin' to shut this down, it's EMI. As downhillbattle points out, JayZ released an acapella version with the intention of seeing the album remixed. The tempest in a teakettle on this is really that there's no way this album COULD be released. It's a product that has consumer demand, artistic merit and critical acclaim, but without the proper authorization it can't be sold. Herein lies the problem with current American copyright law. Art is obliged to take back seat to commerce.
• Very true forksclovetofu, I guess in a free world musicians would have control over the rights to their music, but again, I'm dreaming. The real shame is that good musicians feel the need to turn over those rights in order to gain national fame.
  
  On another note, I'm glad to hear that the FCC will consider lifting restrictions on low-power community radio stations so more independent/local music can be heard.
• Best tracks: Encore 99 Problems December 4 Allure Not a Jay-Z fan either but really liked it. You can sample *cough*download*cough here and great cover art here.
• Ok I'm a dork and missed the last link on the post. Sorry for 2x posting it.
• So, er, what's McCartney got to say about all this? Because if it's anything like "hands off my work, go lift someone else's shit and profit off their notoriety", I think he's got every right. Do you guys think music just comes out of the air?
• genial: That is good news. Clear Channel makes me cry. forks: "Art is obliged to take back seat to commerce." Art has always been a wacky mix of catering to the populace and self expression. Look at the Baroque period: they censored minor chords for god's sake. (no pun intended) The fact is that if nobody pays for art, the artist isn't going to be able to put bread on the table. Sure our system isn't ideally set up to encourage the freest self expression possible, but it's really not that bad. Millions of people are, after all, getting to hear DJ DangerMouse's album through this great thing called the Internet.
• Wolof: The whole point is that nobody is profiting monetarily from this anyway. Is it really so wrong for someone to attempt (and succeed in a big way) at blending music without someone coming in and claiming infringement? I don't think so really, when they aren't selling it, just distributing it for what it is.
• I don't agree that the money being made by copyright claims is going towards any amount of bread on any artist's table, let alone the cool new spinners on Jay-Z's benz. Sorry for not feeling bad for them, but I find it HIGHLY ironic that the artists that need the money for bread on the table DON'T complain when other's download their music, rather they distribute it freely for all and accept donations from those that appreciate the quality of the work.
• I find it highly ironic that a covey of people who contribute freelance journalism and creative writing on a daily basis FOR FREE to both their own blogs and this filter would presume that an artist wouldn't produce if not for the sake of economic gain. Look in the mirror kids: what we do online here and at our own little spots is artistry. Yet most of us aren't making a dollar; in fact, we're SPENDING money (thanks trac) simply because of the enjoyment of doing it and the love for community and for our own art. Turning a buck is almost always secondary on these matters. Certainly, I don't want anyone else to get rich off of my work, but the Grey Album is neither fish nor fowl. The beats are sampled equally from both white and black albums and mashed up. He uses his sampling material like a cook uses fine ingredients. It's good work. The system HAS changed and many of us haven't noticed yet. Free music, plastic art, fiction, poetry, journalism ABOUNDS on the net. Artists have always struggled to turn a buck and always will. This issue in particular has NOTHING to do with artist rights and EVERYTHING to do with an archaic draconian system that is sagging under it's own weight. I think a fair comparison can be drawn between the current RIAA copyright law debacle and same sex marriage: enough people have challenged the old way that the general populace is ready for a change. Extending copyright on Mickey Mouse or Superman ala Bono doesn't enrich the creators or the public, it enriches the companies. Censoring artistic work solely for the sake of upholding a legal principle when no one is getting hurt? Please. /scattershot reply, excuse the rant.
• Ooh, creative commons!
• and? it's only half a vanity tag: copyright doesn't require statement, the cc is useful only insofar as it alerts people that you don't mind them using your stuff. It's trendy, but trendy's not necessarily bad. /ipod user
• and wol: if you'd like to remix any of my posts feel free.
• Ooh, I have a right to use the Beatles' music any way I want! Or anybody's! Because ooh! I got Garageband! I am a creator! Look, good DJing is good. Acting like you own the product and wrote it with your wacky technology is poo. And you (Forky) were the guy talking about Clyde Stubblefield just the other day. PS, just saying.
• In Europe at least, and as far as I know, the Beatles music will start being public domain in about ten years,anyway, unless the lobby groups succeed in extending copyright.
• Wolof, you expressed your enjoyment of Joel Veitch's cartoons in a post further up the page. What is this but taking work from a number of individuals, cutting them up and putting them back together in a way that gave him and others enjoyment? You know, kinda like the Grey Album. I wonder what you'd say if the owner of one of the original photos that Veitch used tried to sue him for breach of copyright.
• Considering that Dangermouse isn't taking any steps to shut down the dozens of sites that are giving away what must be hundreds of hours of work for him; I have to wonder what you mean by "acting like you own the product". As for what ownership of an idea means in relation to art, these are hardly new arguments: did Warhol have a right to incorporate Church and Dwight's products into his art? And yeah, I hate to say it but the guy who remixes AC/DC and Everything but the Girl IS an artist and IS making art. Dismissing people's creative output because it's accessible or derivative is lazy and elitist. Sure the vast majority of stuff that comes out of the new cyber-garage scene is crap, but I refer you to Heinlein's Law. Where is the danger in sampling as far as the artist's reputation is concerned? Probably the first Clyde I heard was via Public Enemy, which led me to JB. And, though I think I've already said this, I like a lot of Dangermouse's takes on JayZ's work better than the production work that was on the officially sanctioned album. And if you want me to believe that corporate is doing this in the name of the artists and their work, I've got a bridge you can buy. Nobody's been screwed out of more rightfully earned money and song rights than Little Richard and Chuck Berry; those sonsabitches STILL have to tour to make cash and I don't think it was remixing and downloading that did a number on their bank accounts. /just discussing.
• If a sculptor decides to Make Art in my front yard without my say-so, I'm tearing it down. Doesn't mean that it isn't art, only that my territorial rights take precedence over the sculptor's need to Make Art, no matter how perfect my front yard is to complete the sculptor's Vision. Like it or not, EMI owns those rights until the copyright expires. Now, the abomination that is Bono... that is indefensible.
• the king of the mashup weighs in. goetter: your analogy falls apart in that the sculptor on your front lawn is (presumably) stopping you from using said lawn, obstructing your view, cheapening your property, etc. so forth. There is no demonstrable damage being done by Dangermouse here. This is simply an issue of financial/legal (not even ethical) principle and one that can and should be challenged occasionally to test the public's response to changing these laws. Bono DOES suck, by the by.
• Re Veitch etc., if either the owner of the photography or the music want to say "Can't touch this!", I completely support their position. Re my "lazy elitist" attitude: I can't really defend the "elitist" part of same, but getting other people to do all the musical heavy lifting for you seems pretty "lazy" to me. Isn't Bono some kind of dog food?
• Can't touch this! Heh.
• I don't know if you've heard the thing, but every single musical note on the album comes from the White Album. This means that Dangermouse, to construct the beats alone, had to scan the album carefully, by ear, to find the perfect drumbeats for what he wanted, separate them from the rest of the tune, and put them together with beats from entirely different songs in order to make a beat. Already this sounds much harder than just picking the drumbeats out of a library.
• what bbf said. Bono: Irish Setters ask for it by name /it's hammagohammamchammayohamma
• Please don't hurt 'em, Hanna! Hanna Schuygulla time! OK, more music stuff
• Mmmmm... that's great bass! [RealMedia, sorry]
• From Greytuesday.org: After a quick preliminary survey of sites that hosted files during Grey Tuesday, we are certain that the Grey Album was the number one album in the country yesterday (by a lot). Danger Mouse moved more "units" than Norah Jones and Kanye West, and the Grey Album easily went gold in a day, with over 100,000 copies downloaded. That's more than 1 million digital tracks. "Are you not entertained?"
• I think a lot of people are quicker to click a download and listen than actually go to a music store and make a purchase, so I don't think it's fair to judge the popularity of an album by number of copies downloaded, in as much as it's not accurate to judge a site's popularity by number of hits.
• This ain't even close to over
• I wish that download was a little faster
• This Cheap Cologne's trying to ride a wave. I could've made those loops on my own, there's barely any creativity in the damn thing. At least what I can tell from the poorly made "sample medley," at least. Save your PayPal, link, bro.