Posted by Mister X aka Kim on June 30, 1999 at 15:53:47:
In Reply to: Be wary... posted by Michael Toomim on June 30, 1999 at 14:56:38:
: The ICOMM seems like a good idea at first, but we
: should really think about what this would mean. I
: would like to first point out that the initial idea was
: regarding commercial ripping, not just stupid-fuck ego-
: boosting "i made this" bullshit. But then- really is
: there that much of a problem right now with people
: using scene music for commercial ventures? If, say, a
: production video game DOES use scene music, and it is
: an obvious rip, it really is not hard for the composer
: to prove it in court.
But he who represents himself in court has a fool for a client - you still need to pay the lawyer, regardless of how open and shut the case may be, this idea was to provide that counsel in the case of someone using a musician's work without their permission. The deeper purpose is to act as a deterrent to anyone (commercial or no) who would think about exchanging someone else's work for their own.
: Is there even ANY commercial ripping taking place,
: anyway? The only thing I could even come CLOSE to
: seeing happen is for a commercial song-writer to sell
: a song which contains a ripped sample. However, this
: is such a grey area that not only would it be hard for
: an ICOMM to do anything, it is totally ambiguous as to
: if it even SHOULD.
Hmmm, you are saying that it may be a conflict of interests of sorts?
: I must say that I think the idea is VERY cool and quite
: intriguing, but it is counter to everything that is
: scene. The scene is based upon principles of the
: internet- an entity that is without central direction,
: an entity that can survive with only one of it's
: disparit parts. To form an all-encompassing
: organization would prove to be incredibly ackward,
: unnatural and difficult. The "mission" of the ICOMM
: seemed to be to back up internet musicians whose music
: gets exploited commercially. There simply isn't a need
: for that. Sceners can take care of themselves.
Many would disagree with that, but we are not going to censor any opinions in this forum. You bring up valid points, which I tried to address in the article itself - that the MOD musician has a right to release his music for free on the Internet, and does not relinquish his rights to the copyright of the song. What happened to Melcom is akin to making a tape of, say, Frank Sinatra and releasing it under a different name, to share with your friends. Because the record label does not have the time to waste on preventing small occurences like that does not mean that they approve of it, or would not pursue it if it were cost-effective for them to do so.
The idea of ICOMM is not to disparage the spirit of the scene, but in fact to strengthen it, by encouraging creativity and art. There is nothing creative about copying...
Thanks for your opinions, I hope that they will evoke more responses and discussion. If something like ICOMM is not needed, then so be it - but we do not want to miss out on seeing the beginning of a problem in time to fix it.
Mister X aka Kim