Research: About / Intro
My name is Adam Porter. I am a recent graduate from the Masters program in Professional Media & Media Management at SIU-C. My media interests include audio production, recording engineering, MIDI programming, collage, sound art, multimedia editing, web design, and new media studies.
This is my final research thesis on music copyright, new technologies, and how creative commons and netlabels are facilitating a free music culture.
Download the full PDF of the paper here: LINK
(The pdf link above is now up! Feel free to download, read, critique, share, enjoy)
Or read on, as the web version of the paper is divided into sections …
……………………..
Introduction & Method
With the emergence of the Web as a viable communications platform, and the introduction of sophisticated computer technologies available to the general public, producers and users gained significant new tools for accessing and sharing music in new ways. Paul Miller (2008) says that we can look at the Web as “an immense repository of information accessible to a wide range of new applications – its an archive of almost anything that has been recorded” (p. 15). With this immense archive comes new possibilities, such as the ability to find obscure recordings that aren’t available as physical copies in record stores anymore, or to upload your own music and have it available freely for a global audience to share and enjoy. However, the Internet also provides the ability for copyrighted music that is controlled by the four major record labels to be uploaded, downloaded, and shared through peer-to-peer (p2p) file-sharing networks. Through litigation against Internet users, along with heavy lobbying in Washington, the major labels and their representative trade group and legal arm known as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) have used copyright law to justify the criminalization of music sharing (Stallman, 2004).
A history of technological innovations in music production, distribution, and consumption coincides directly with a history of extended copyright restrictions. The question that remains is whether these copyright laws are in the best interest of authors and most importantly the public, or rather in the best interest of large media corporations. I will be exploring those histories, laying out a framework for understanding music sharing in the age of networked computing and digital music technologies. It is important to remember that the recorded music industry has only existed for approximately 110 years (Morton, 2006), and as new ways of accessing music become available to users, traditional distribution models have the potential of becoming obsolete and incompatible with music user preferences. While this research is more about looking at music sharing on the Web as a new alternative form of promotion and distribution for independent artists, there is a need to outline the history of copyright law and recorded music to create a framework for understanding these new models that embrace free culture principles.
The access portals for recorded music content have increased a thousand fold, and music consumers are now overwhelmed with options of how, where, and what they listen to. Jim Griffin claims that “sound recording’s economy is now a tip jar. It’s a choice listeners make. Not morally, not legally, but effectively it’s become voluntary to pay for music” (Bernstein, 2008, Para. 3). This has empowered the music listening public, allowing for the opportunity of meaningful interactions on a more personal level, while in some situations even completely eliminating the middlemen that previously existed between artists and fans in music commerce. Those middlemen are the record companies who, as Fleischer (2008) states, “keep dreaming about building a digital simulation of a 20th-century copyright economy, based on scarcity and with distinct limits between broadcasting and unit sales.” He goes on to say that “this vision of copyright utopia is triggering an escalation of technology regulations running out of control and ruining civil liberties” (para. 34). This copyright economy based on scarcity is in direct conflict with the digital economy of music on the Internet.
Before computers, the methods of music distribution kept the control of distribution in the hands of the record companies. The equipment used to make copies of recorded music and sell them in mass amounts around the world was not available to the common public. Thus, the means of copying music was controlled by companies, namely the record labels, that invested large amounts of money in the recording and reproduction technologies needed to facilitate copying. In this situation, the copyright laws applying to music and music copying made sense, as the laws did not restrict the abilities of the user, or reader.
Stallman (2009) states,
Copyright on these musical recordings was mostly uncontroversial as it only restricted record companies and not music listeners. Today’s digital technology enables everyone to make and share copies. Record companies now seek to use copyright law to deny us the use of this technical advance. The law which was acceptable when it restricted only publishers is now an injustice because it forbids cooperation among citizens. (Para. 4)
Stallman’s quote points directly to the purpose of my research, to analyze how the Web, digital music distribution, affordable music production software, and new music consumer preferences are in direct conflict with US copyright laws that restrict music users and criminalize sharing, thus leading to a need for alternative models that facilitate sharing. That analysis will lay the framework for a more narrowed research focus on free music culture, a movement consisting of independent artists and musicians, netlabels, music sharing communities, remix portals, and music fans of all types. By embracing digital technologies, and using the Web as a platform to distribute music that can be shared freely throughout the world, these musicians and fans provide a great example of how the Internet can be used to enrich our music culture and promote new talent.
Distribution costs near zero, so costs for the consumer can near zero as well. This is okay, as long as models are allowed to thrive that enable artists to use their recorded works as incentive for other purchases, like special limited edition physical releases, merchandise, and most importantly concert tickets. Rio Caraeff, the head of digital strategy at eLabs (a subsidiary of Universal Music Group) stated at the Digital Music Summit in Nashville that “the future is not the sale of recorded music.” He goes on to say that now “context is king…everything around the music has value. Access to music will be more powerful and valued than possession…and music will become more valuable to consumers than it is today” (Caraeff, 2009, presentation). This might seem like a surprising statement from a a major label employee, but it serves as proof that the record companies are well aware of the shift in music consumption habits. To keep the major record companies scarcity-based business model working will require “bureaucratic hierarchies with gatekeepers at every level. Therefore, new artists’ access to channels for financing, music production, distribution, and marketing is highly restricted” (Burkart, 2010, p. 22). As digital technologies allow anyone access to all of these channels, new business models form in opposition to the major labels, eliminating the gatekeepers that exist between musicians and fans. There becomes less of an absolute need to sign with a record label once the means of production, promotion, and distribution are available to the musicians themselves. I am interested in those embracing this new empowerment.
To understand these issues in the proper context, I will begin by looking at the history of copyright law, and how that relates to the history of recorded music before the widespread adoption of the World Wide Web. I will then focus on new technologies like mp3s and p2p file sharing, and how they have changed the context of music, which will lead to a post-Web analysis of the recorded music industry. I will then look at the major label and RIAA responses to the digital shift, including the passing of the DMCA and the increased litigation against Internet users in the 21st century. I am primarily using scholarly journals, books, and online sources as my reference points. The major labels provide a context and comparison for what will be presented and analyzed in the second half of this research, a new cultural economy of music that exists in contrast to the major label models of commercial distribution.
My research will shift into a macro case study of netlabels and free music culture, which will serve as an example of Web communities that are embracing a shared music philosophy. Free music refers to non-restrictive licensing, meaning the music can be shared and re-distributed for non-commercial purposes legally. Netlabels are a driving force behind free music culture, filtering and aggregating free music which is then distributed on the Internet, bypassing traditional physical distribution practices and releasing music in a digital format, usually for free and under a CC license. However, this definition is by no means set in stone, as most netlabels have many similar characteristics but have different goals and operate in different ways. A lot of netlabel music is distributed free of cost, yet some use a hybrid model of some free and some paid downloads. However, I will argue that the freedom to share is the most important aspect of this new network of cultural content, while a free price is not necessarily a defining element, just a common one. I will explain the concepts behind free culture, free software, and free music. This will include examples of new licensing models that are built around traditional copyright law, such as free software licenses and Creative Commons. These licenses are allowing programmers, authors, musicians, and media makers to choose exactly what rights they want associated with their work, while ensuring that the work can at least be shared freely for non-commercial purposes.
I will be utilizing an analysis of literature discussing netlabels and related topics, as well as personal interviews that I have conducted with netlabel owners across the globe. Due to the lack of academic research on netlabels, the primary data gathered from interviews is helpful in portraying netlabels as seen through the eyes of those who run them. I will conclude with a discussion of other CC-licensed music and remix communities on the Web, and what social and cultural implications these communities have for the future of music production, distribution, and consumption. This analysis is important because netlabels and Creative Commons music communities are highly under-researched in academia, and thus a detailed explanation of this history and culture is lacking and needed in critical media studies. At the end of the paper I will make some declarations for the future of digital music on the Web, specifically focusing on new licensing and distribution models, netlabels, and free music culture.
Continue to next section (Copyright) >>
