DOCSLIB.ORG

US Copyright Law After GATT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
US Copyright Law After GATT Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 16 Number 1 Article 1 6-1-1995 U.S. Copyright Law After GATT: Why a New Chapter Eleven Means Bankruptcy fo Bootleggers Jerry D. Brown Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jerry D. Brown, U.S. Copyright Law After GATT: Why a New Chapter Eleven Means Bankruptcy fo Bootleggers, 16 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 1 (1995). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol16/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW AFTER GATT: WHY A NEW CHAPTER ELEVEN MEANS BANKRUPTCY FOR BOOTLEGGERS Jerry D. Brown* "I am a bootlegger; bootleggin' ain't no good no more." -Blind Teddy Darby' I. INTRODUCTION On December 8, 1994, President Clinton signed into law House Bill 5110, the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) Implementation Act of 1994 . By passing the GATT Implementation Act before the end of 1994, the United States joined 123 countries in forming the World Trade Organization ("WTO"). The WTO is a multilateral trade organization established by GATT 1994, wherein member countries consent to minimum standards of rights, protection and trade regulation. Complying with these standards required the United States to amend existing law in several areas concerning trade and commerce, including areas that regulate intellectual property rights.' * B.A., University of Oklahoma, 1992; J.D., Oklahoma City University School of Law, 1995. The author wishes to thank his wife, Angela Marie Poe-Brown, for three years of enduring patience, love, and stability, for he could not have finished his education without her. Thanks go also to John C. Kluge, for offering advice and suggestions on previous drafts from a disinterested point of view. Finally, the author would especially thank Associate Dean Jay Conison, Oklahoma City University School of Law, for his thoughts, advice, and insight in drafting this paper. 1.As British police hauled away a young bootlegger's entire inventory of Compact Discs ("CDs") in Colchester, the young bootlegger played this old blues song on his sound system. Record Haul by Music "Police," THE OBSERVER (London), Dec. 12, 1993, at 13. 2. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-465, 108 Stat. 4809 (1994). 3. Though the textual result of the Uruguay negotiations is entitled The FinalAct Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, the treaty itself has come to be known simply as "GATT 1994." Similarly, the intellectual property sections of GATT 1994, the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property,Including Trade in Counterfeit Goods, 2 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 16 This Article addresses the subsequent addition of Chapter 11 to Title 17 of the United States Code.4 This chapter, and its criminal counterpart in Title 18, establish liability for the unauthorized recording of live performances, a popular and increasing form of "bootlegging." In short, Chapter 11 requires that one making a recording of a live performance obtain the consent of the performer.' One who makes a recording of a live performance without the performer's consent is liable to the performer, and is also subject to the remedies or penalties set forth in existing copyright law.6 Current federal copyright law already prohibits some types of bootlegging, such as counterfeiting and pirating.7 In many respects, these laws control domestic bootlegging successfully. Before the new amendments, however, and for reasons addressed in this Article, Congress left to the states the task of regulating the unauthorized recording of live performances, what this Article refers to these recordings as "classic" bootlegging. Congress' failure to regulate classic bootlegging left enough room in federal law for people around the world to profit from this special form of infringement. In addition, many foreign countries considered state regulation of classic bootlegging an inadequate form of protection for their artists in the United States. Consequently, these countries did not provide American artists the same protection they provided their own citizens. Because the required provisions were buried deep within the language of GATT, and because federal copyright law already prohibits most forms of bootlegging, the recent amendments received little fanfare from the press or legal commentators. However, there are a few in the music industry who foresee the new amendments as having a great impact on domestic and international copyright protection. For these people, the new amendments is commonly abbreviated as "TRIPs." The TRIPs provisions of GATT 1994, delineated by articles and subsections, are located in Annex I-C of the Agreement Establishingthe World Trade Organization. Unless indicated otherwise, citations to the TRIPs portion of GATT 1994 will be given as GATT 1994, citing to the pertinent article. 4. See generally 17 U.S.C. §§ 101-114 (1994). 5. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-465, 108 Stat. 4809 (1994). 6. Id. The remedies for copyright infringement are set forth in 17 U.S.C. §§ 501-510 (1994). 7. See infra part IV.A. 1995] COPYRIGHT LAW AFTER GA TT "close a gaping loophole"8 of protection in existing law, one that allowed classic bootleggers to profit without violating federal law. The addition of these amendments presents many interesting issues. Of these issues, this Article will address three: (1) Where, and to what extent, was federal law inadequate in controlling bootlegging? (2) Second, what will the new amendments bring to existing law? (3) Finally, how effective will the new amendments be, in conjunction with GATT 1994 standards, in controlling bootlegging in the United States and abroad? Part II, the section that follows, will familiarize the reader with bootlegging terms and the recording industry in general. Part III of this Article will analyze the toll that bootleggers have taken on the recording industry to date. Parts IV and V will summarize the current federal and state methods of controlling bootlegging. Part VI will outline the new GATT and federal provisions, and will trace their legislative history. Finally, Part VII will examine those areas in existing law where the new amendments will have the most effect. II. BOOTLEGGING AND THE RECORDING INDUSTRY: THE PLAYERS A. Classes of Bootlegging Bootlegging is the unlawful sale or manufacturing of some product,9 including phonorecords.'0 The word "bootlegging" originates from acts of piracy and theft: an "allusion to concealing objects in the leg of a high 8. GA 77 and Intellectual Property: Hearings on H.R. 4894 and S. 2368 Before the Senate Judiciary Comm. on Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks and the House Subcomm. of the Judiciary on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. (1994) (statement of Jason Berman, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Recording Industry Ass'n of America). As will be discussed in parts IV, V, and VI, existing federal copyright law does not prohibit some types of bootlegging, so long as the bootleggers conform to the compulsory licensing provisions of 17 U.S.C. § 115 (1994). 9. Judges and authors have defined "bootlegging" in a number of ways. Even the Supreme Court has defined bootlegging: "A bootleg phonorecord is one which contains an unauthorized copy of a commercially unreleased performance." Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207, 209 n.2 (1985). 10. "Phonorecords" is a term of art in copyright law, which not only includes records, but also any "material objects in which sounds . are fixed by any method now known or later developed ...." 17 U.S.C. § 101 (1994). 4 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES ENTERTAINMENT LA W JOURNAL [Vol. 16 boot."" As with many unauthorized acts, there exist different classes of bootlegging, each with its own distinct legal consequences. The dis- tinctions among these classes lie either in the source material being bootlegged or the packaging of the product.'2 This Article will identify three classes of bootlegging: counterfeiting, pirating, and classic bootleg- 13 ging. Counterfeitingis the unauthorized duplication or sale of a pre-existing copyrighted work, where the duplicate has been manufactured to look and sound like the authorized copy. One may compare counterfeit phonorecords with counterfeit money; both purport to be authentic when in truth they are not. 14 Similar to counterfeiting, piratingis the unauthorized duplication or sale of a copyrighted work that was not released to the public. Included in the category of pirated recordings are outtakes,15 studio rehearsal tapes, "B-sides," and demonstration or audition tapes. 6 Classic bootlegging is the third type of bootlegging. Bootlegging in the classic sense is the unauthorized copy of a live performance of a copyrighted work. Usually, one becomes a classic bootlegger by recording a live performance in person or through a public broadcast. 7 This Article identifies classic bootlegging as such because the unauthorized recording of a live performance is the original and most notorious type of bootleg- ging. !1.WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY 168 (College ed. 1968). 12. Were one referring only to the source material being copied, one could divide bootlegging into two categories, instead of three: unauthorized recordings of pre-released works, and unauthorized recordings of unreleased works. 13. At least two sources have used the three-category method. See Douglas Wong, Cantopop Piracy Poses Threat to Music Industry, STRAITS TIMES, Dec. 11, 1993, at 44. See also Daniel Roth, The Battle Never Ends for the Tape-PiratePolice: Music Knock-Offs are Big Business, CORP.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UMG V Veoh 9Th Opening Brief.Pdf
    Case: 09-56777 04/20/2010 Page: 1 of 100 ID: 7308924 DktEntry: 11-1 No. 09-56777 ____________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ___________________ UMG RECORDINGS, INC.; UNIVERSAL MUSIC CORP.; SONGS OF UNIVERSAL, INC.; UNIVERSAL-POLYGRAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING, INC.; RONDOR MUSIC INTERNATIONAL, INC.; UNIVERSAL MUSIC—MGB NA LLC; UNIVERSAL MUSIC—Z TUNES LLC; UNIVERSAL MUSIC—MBG MUSIC PUBLISHING LTD., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. VEOH NETWORKS, INC., Defendant-Appellee. _______________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division—Los Angeles Honorable A. Howard Matz, District Judge __________________________________ APPELLANTS’ BRIEF _____________________________________ Steven Marenberg, Esq. State Bar No. 101033 Brian Ledahl, Esq. State Bar No. 186579 Carter Batsell State Bar No. 254396 IRELL & MANELLA, LLP 1800 Avenue of the Stars Suite 900 Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: (310) 277-1010 Facsimile: (310) 203-7199 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS 2221905 Case: 09-56777 04/20/2010 Page: 2 of 100 ID: 7308924 DktEntry: 11-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT................................................ 2 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT ................................................................. 3 ISSUES PRESENTED ..................................................................................... 4 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ........................................................................ 6 FACTS ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Isabella Clarke Selected to Represent Australia at the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2017 on Monday 27 November
    RELEASED: SUNDAY 10 SEPTEMBER 2017 Isabella Clarke selected to represent Australia at the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2017 on Monday 27 November ABC is excited to announce that talented young singer Isabella Clarke will represent Australia at the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2017 (JESC) held on Sunday 26 November at the Tbilisi Sports Palace, Georgia. From Victoria, Isabella is a 13-year-old singing sensation who made her debut on the Melbourne singing scene four years ago. Since then she’s received many accolades performing at various singing competitions and, at present, holds a coveted principal vocalist role in the Victorian State Schools Spectacular. Isabella is self-confessed foodie who enjoys spending time with her family and friends and credits megastars Beyoncé and Mary J. Blige as her inspiration for singing. She loves Australian comedy television shows, knows how to laugh at herself, and is focused and determined both at school and in performing. Tipped for a bright future, Isabella hopes to join her idols and become an international recording artist. ABC and production partner Blink TV selected Isabella in consultation with leading Australian record companies. Isabella Clarke said: “I’m so honoured to be given the opportunity to represent Australia at such an amazing event. I can’t wait to start rehearsals and film the music video! I’m also looking forward to visiting Georgia for the first time and meeting all the other performers. It’s a dream come true and I hope I do my family and Australia proud.” “Isabella displayed all the qualities we were looking for in this year’s Australian representative,” says Michael Carrington, Head of ABC Children’s Television.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Digital Music Distribution" (2012)
    Southern Illinois University Carbondale OpenSIUC Research Papers Graduate School Spring 4-5-2012 The ffecE ts of Digital Music Distribution Rama A. Dechsakda [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/gs_rp The er search paper was a study of how digital music distribution has affected the music industry by researching different views and aspects. I believe this topic was vital to research because it give us insight on were the music industry is headed in the future. Two main research questions proposed were; “How is digital music distribution affecting the music industry?” and “In what way does the piracy industry affect the digital music industry?” The methodology used for this research was performing case studies, researching prospective and retrospective data, and analyzing sales figures and graphs. Case studies were performed on one independent artist and two major artists whom changed the digital music industry in different ways. Another pair of case studies were performed on an independent label and a major label on how changes of the digital music industry effected their business model and how piracy effected those new business models as well. I analyzed sales figures and graphs of digital music sales and physical sales to show the differences in the formats. I researched prospective data on how consumers adjusted to the digital music advancements and how piracy industry has affected them. Last I concluded all the data found during this research to show that digital music distribution is growing and could possibly be the dominant format for obtaining music, and the battle with piracy will be an ongoing process that will be hard to end anytime soon.
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Record Producers' Rights and the Problem of Sound Recording Piracy Stanislava N
    Digital Commons @ Georgia Law LLM Theses and Essays Student Works and Organizations 8-1-2004 Sound Record Producers' Rights and the Problem of Sound Recording Piracy Stanislava N. Staykova University of Georgia School of Law Repository Citation Staykova, Stanislava N., "Sound Record Producers' Rights and the Problem of Sound Recording Piracy" (2004). LLM Theses and Essays. 50. https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/stu_llm/50 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works and Organizations at Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in LLM Theses and Essays by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. Please share how you have benefited from this access For more information, please contact [email protected]. SOUND RECORD PRODUCERS’ RIGHTS AND THE PROBLEM OF SOUND RECORDING PIRACY by STANISLAVA NIKOLAEVA STAYKOVA (Under the Direction of David Shipley) ABSTRACT This paper will describe some current issues and developments that are of relevance to sound recordings protection, as they are experienced and debated in industry and among customers, as well as policy making bodies. The paper’s focus is on the historical development of sound recordings protection under United States Copyright law. In Part II, this paper will explore early federal and state law protections for sound recordings, including the Copyright Act of 1909, common law protections, and state statutes. This section also will trace the development of proposals for a federal statute granting express copyright protection for sound recordings. In Part III, this paper will examine the 1971 Sound Recording Amendment, particularly the scope of protection afforded for sound recordings.
    [Show full text]
  • Mtv and Transatlantic Cold War Music Videos
    102 MTV AND TRANSATLANTIC COLD WAR MUSIC VIDEOS WILLIAM M. KNOBLAUCH INTRODUCTION In 1986 Music Television (MTV) premiered “Peace Sells”, the latest video from American metal band Megadeth. In many ways, “Peace Sells” was a standard pro- motional video, full of lip-synching and head-banging. Yet the “Peace Sells” video had political overtones. It featured footage of protestors and police in riot gear; at one point, the camera draws back to reveal a teenager watching “Peace Sells” on MTV. His father enters the room, grabs the remote and exclaims “What is this garbage you’re watching? I want to watch the news.” He changes the channel to footage of U.S. President Ronald Reagan at the 1986 nuclear arms control summit in Reykjavik, Iceland. The son, perturbed, turns to his father, replies “this is the news,” and lips the channel back. Megadeth’s song accelerates, and the video re- turns to riot footage. The song ends by repeatedly asking, “Peace sells, but who’s buying?” It was a prescient question during a 1980s in which Cold War militarism and the nuclear arms race escalated to dangerous new highs.1 In the 1980s, MTV elevated music videos to a new cultural prominence. Of course, most music videos were not political.2 Yet, as “Peace Sells” suggests, dur- ing the 1980s—the decade of Reagan’s “Star Wars” program, the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and a robust nuclear arms race—music videos had the potential to relect political concerns. MTV’s founders, however, were so culturally conserva- tive that many were initially wary of playing African American artists; addition- ally, record labels were hesitant to put their top artists onto this new, risky chan- 1 American President Ronald Reagan had increased peace-time deicit defense spending substantially.
    [Show full text]
  • Lexis Practice Advisor Intellectual Property & Technology Determining
    Lexis Practice Advisor® is a comprehensive practical guidance resource for attorneys who handle transactional matters, including “how to” information, model forms and on point cases, codes and legal analysis. The Intellectual Property & Technology offering contains access to a unique collection of expertly authored content, continuously updated to help you stay up to speed on leading practice trends. The following is a practical guidance excerpt from the topic Copyright Ownership & Registration. Lexis Practice Advisor Intellectual Property & Technology Determining Copyright Ownership by Jeremy S. Goldman, Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC Jeremy S. Goldman is counsel in the Litigation Group of Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC, where he focuses on intellectual property, entertainment and privacy law for clients in the media, entertainment, advertising and technology spaces. Overview Copyright protection is given to authors of original and expressive works , including literary, musical, dramatic, sculptural, and certain other categories of works, which are fixed in a tangible medium. Although the author of a copyrighted work is generally also the creator of the work, there are exceptions to this, such as works made for hire and works jointly authored by more than one person. A copyright in a derivative work protects only the new and original elements added to preexisting work; the author of the derivative work has no ownership interest in the preexisting work. The ownership of a copyright may be transferred or assigned, in whole or in part. That is, each of the exclusive rights afforded a copyright owner under the Copyright Act may be owned and transferred separately. To the extent there are conflicting transfers, the prior transferee will have priority over any subsequent transferee so long as the transfer is recorded within one month of execution (for transfers made in the United States), or at any time prior to recordation of the transfer to a subsequent transferee.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Legal Protection for Fictional Characters: Balancing Public and Private Interests Amanda Schreyer
    Cybaris® Volume 6 | Issue 1 Article 3 2015 An Overview of Legal Protection for Fictional Characters: Balancing Public and Private Interests Amanda Schreyer Follow this and additional works at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/cybaris Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Schreyer, Amanda (2015) "An Overview of Legal Protection for Fictional Characters: Balancing Public and Private Interests," Cybaris®: Vol. 6: Iss. 1, Article 3. Available at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/cybaris/vol6/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at Mitchell Hamline Open Access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cybaris® by an authorized administrator of Mitchell Hamline Open Access. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © Mitchell Hamline School of Law Schreyer: An Overview of Legal Protection for Fictional Characters: Balanci Published by Mitchell Hamline Open Access, 2015 1 Cybaris®, Vol. 6, Iss. 1 [2015], Art. 3 AN OVERVIEW OF LEGAL PROTECTION FOR FICTIONAL CHARACTERS: BALANCING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INTERESTS † AMANDA SCHREYER I. Fictional Characters and the Law .............................................. 52! II. Legal Basis for Protecting Characters ...................................... 53! III. Copyright Protection of Characters ........................................ 57! A. Literary Characters Versus Visual Characters ............... 60! B. Component Parts of Characters Can Be Separately Copyrightable ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MUSIC RIGHTS PRIMER Introduction
    THE COMMITTEE ON ENTERTAINMENT LAW OF THE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK January, 2003 The Committee gratefully acknowledges the contributions of prior chairpersons, Noel L. Silverman and Victoria G. Traube, and of H. Joseph Mello, the initial editor. MUSIC RIGHTS PRIMER Introduction This Primer is intended to assist lawyers who are not actively engaged in the music sub- specialty of entertainment law, but who, from time to time, may be involved with matters pertaining to that area. It is also intended for law students and non-lawyers who have an interest or involvement in the entertainment industry. We envision this Primer to be used primarily to explain the different rights that fall under the generic term “music rights”, and to delineate generally which rights are necessary for projects or product in this medium. It is not intended as a replacement for an exhaustive treatise and should not be considered a substitute for specialized legal representation required to resolve the complex issues that often arise in transactions involving music rights. Rather, it is designed to highlight issues and to provide the basic understanding of the foundations of a music project. Specialists in the field should be consulted when additional legal assistance is needed. They can easily be found in New York, Los Angeles and Nashville, and to a lesser extent, in other parts of the country. This Primer deals with music rights in the United States only. While many of the principles discussed below apply in other countries as well, there may be significant differences, and resolution of foreign issues is outside the scope of this Primer.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Software Derivative Works: the Calm Before the Storm
    COMPUTER SOFTWARE DERIVATIVE WORKS: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM Natalie Heineman* Cite as 8 J. HIGH TECH. L. 235 (2008) I. Introduction Every generation believes they live in the most exciting times of continued social and technological advancement. Since the advent of computers and the internet, however, the present is a time in which progress seems unrivaled. While the law races to catch up with technology, the area of law requiring the fastest runners may be that of computer software derivative works under current copyright law. An author’s exclusive right to prepare derivative works is particularly challenged in the software environment where innovation often involves references to and incorporation of other preexisting works. Without definitive cases on point or specifically tailored legislation to guide the analysis, however, the scope of this note is simply to help define the issues presented, thereby drawing attention to what looks to be the calm before the impending storm. This note considers the challenge posed by computer software derivative works. The note first discusses the definition of derivative works under the current Copyright Act, and analyzes how the courts have interpreted derivative works in analogous contexts. Because defining a derivative work necessarily considers whether it has infringed the underlying work, the note then discusses how the courts make infringement analyses. The infringement analysis focuses primarily on the abstraction-filtration method as it has developed in computer software cases. Finally, the note considers trends in cases and legislation that suggest an increasingly broad interpretation of derivative rights. This section emphasizes the Open Source movement which will no doubt have a significant impact on the future of computer software derivative works.
    [Show full text]
  • Others Comment on Rosie's Coming out Interview Buried by Madison
    March 28th, 2002 - April 10th, 2002 ,News The Wisconsin Light Others comment on Rosie's coming out GLAAD praises Rosie's interview Rev. Lew Broyles of the Milwaukee paragraph 2 of the US Declaration of Gay and Lesbian Metropolitan Community Church was Independence." Alliance Against Sawyer was exactly what you'd expect Defamation executive director Joan M. from enthusiastic about Rosie's interview When asked about the Loftin case in Rosie — she was genuine, heartfelt Garry released these comments March Dianne Sawyer on ABC, and issued this Florida the spokesperson added, "This and passionate. Her coming out has fos- is 15... praise: homophobic discrimination & emotional tered greater understanding of who "Last night's show broadened "She is the latest page in the chapter of abuse supported yet again with help from we are as moms and dads, as sons America's understanding of the proof that Lesbian & Gay families do have those who would go out of their way to and -daughters, and as families. reality of Gay and Lesbian fami- contemporary moral values to offer chil- point out to Lesbian & Gay parents every- That's the gift Rosie's given to lies. dren in the United States," the Senior where that their message is one that cen- her kids and to Gay and Diane Sawyer's approach to this Lesbian Pastor said. ters on the ethics of a 'compassionate con- families across the issue was both simple and bold- An MCC Senior Pastoral spokesperson servative' agenda. nation — and she's just getting ly original: instead of present- started. added, "More importantly
    [Show full text]
  • Danger Mouse's Grey Album, Mash-Ups, and the Age of Composition
    Danger Mouse's Grey Album, Mash-Ups, and the Age of Composition Philip A. Gunderson © 2004 Post-Modern Culture 15.1 Review of: Danger Mouse (Brian Burton), The Grey Album, Bootleg Recording 1. Depending on one's perspective, Danger Mouse's (Brian Burton's) Grey Album represents a highpoint or a nadir in the state of the recording arts in 2004. From the perspective of music fans and critics, Burton's creation--a daring "mash-up" of Jay-Z's The Black Album and the Beatles' eponymous 1969 work (popularly known as The White Album)--shows that, despite the continued corporatization of music, the DIY ethos of 1970s punk remains alive and well, manifesting in sampling and low-budget, "bedroom studio" production values. From the perspective of the recording industry, Danger Mouse's album represents the illegal plundering of some of the most valuable property in the history of pop music (the Beatles' sound recordings), the sacrilegious re-mixing of said recordings with a capella tracks of an African American rapper, and the electronic distribution of the entire album to hundreds of thousands of listeners who appear vexingly oblivious to current copyright law. That there would be a schism between the interests of consumers and the recording industry is hardly surprising; tension and antagonism characterize virtually all forms of exchange in capitalist economies. What is perhaps of note is that these tensions have escalated to the point of the abandonment of the exchange relationship itself. Music fans, fed up with the high prices (and outright price-fixing) of commercially available music, have opted to share music files via peer-to-peer file sharing networks, and record labels are attempting in response to coerce music fans back into the exchange relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Acoustic Sounds Catalog Update
    WINTER 2013 You spoke … We listened For the last year, many of you have asked us numerous times for high-resolution audio downloads using Direct Stream Digital (DSD). Well, after countless hours of research and development, we’re thrilled to announce our new high-resolution service www.superhirez.com. Acoustic Sounds’ new music download service debuts with a selection of mainstream audiophile music using the most advanced audio technology available…DSD. It’s the same digital technology used to produce SACDs and to our ears, it most closely replicates the analog experience. They’re audio files for audiophiles. Of course, we’ll also offer audio downloads in other high-resolution PCM formats. We all like to listen to music. But when Acoustic Sounds’ customers speak, we really listen. Call The Professionals contact our experts for equipment and software guidance RECOMMENDED EQUIPMENT RECOMMENDED SOFTWARE Windows & Mac Mac Only Chord Electronics Limited Mytek Chordette QuteHD Stereo 192-DSD-DAC Preamp Version Ultra-High Res DAC Mac Only Windows Only Teac Playback Designs UD-501 PCM & DSD USB DAC Music Playback System MPS-5 superhirez.com | acousticsounds.com | 800.716.3553 ACOUSTIC SOUNDS FEATURED STORIES 02 Super HiRez: The Story More big news! 04 Supre HiRez: Featured Digital Audio Thanks to such support from so many great customers, we’ve been able to use this space in our cata- 08 RCA Living Stereo from logs to regularly announce exciting developments. We’re growing – in size and scope – all possible Analogue Productions because of your business. I told you not too long ago about our move from 6,000 square feet to 18,000 10 A Tribute To Clark Williams square feet.
    [Show full text]