mash-ups and authorship

this article by Jesse Walker discusses the mash up phenonomen in a bit more depth. she attributes the large number of mash ups to the accessability of the technology over the internet. she also mentions political mash ups - the "pauline pantsdown" one that was even played on the radio a few years ago springs to mind.
i like this quote, and think it sums up the situation of bootlegs/mashups on the internet.
"Technically, they are illegal. Practically, they are unstoppable. "
Although this used to be the mentality applied to filesharing (pre napster bust). i guess because mash-ups are created by individuals and not by an identifiable group/website (like filesharing) it is hard to prevent them being made. i would predict that the real deterrent will come from court cases and angry record companies. then again, we have artists like david bowie and INXS encouraging people to create mash ups.. there is obviously no common stance within the industry as to whether they should be outlawed or allowed.

mash ups

ive been doing a bit of 'googling' on mash ups.. heres a preliminary 'introduction' i found on seehearwrite.com Music Mash-ups:

Bootleg Culture Superstar

All your cool friends had this months ago and now even the lesser cool have heard tell of it: “The Grey Album” by underground DJ Danger Mouse. It is a track-by-track remixing of the latest Jay-Z release “The Black Album” with loops, sounds and beats from the Beatles “White Album.” Conceived as an “art project/experiment,” the album now has global buzz, The Boston Globe hailed it as “the most intriguing hip-hop album in recent memory” and the DJ is on the way to bling-bling land.

I'd have to admit i havent actually listened to the grey album, but my favourite radio station at home radio metro (aka hott fm in the old days) was debating its worth over the christmas holidays. personally i think it sounds interesting, and as a fan of mash ups myself, im a bit surprised i havent heard it yet.. (maybe it has to do with exorbitant prices of internet download quota at the twisted community i call home)

Why can’t that be you? Nowadays any geek with a computer and editing software can turn out their own remixes or “mash-ups.”

true. and they do. thats why i have absurdly bad mixes of eminem and britney that i collected from the net at some stage..

A “mash-up” is a blending together of two disparate music tracks. Best if it’s an odd or ironic pairing: Britney meets The Strokes, Destiny’s Child versus Nirvana. After being spread en masse via the Net, these homemade bootlegs hit the dance floors. The DJs can become famous, superstars maybe.

my favourite mash ups would be from 'too many dj's' who have some amazing mixes, my favourite being destinys child's 'independant woman' vs 'dreadlock holiday' which is pretty cool.. ( guess my dad has left a strange affection for reggae imprinted on my musical tastes..)

What makes a mash-up any different from a "remix?" Truth is not much, in principle at least. While remixes may tweak a song with new beats and samples, mash-ups normally fuse two or more songs together all the way from start to finish. Remix is a term that we've known for the last 15 years. It was exclusive to bigtime DJs and producers with access to studios, expensive equipment and the artists themselves. Today with computers and the Net, it is easier for everyday people to become remixers. Downloading gives them the sounds, and the programs the means.

Record labels long looked the other way towards club remixes. But now that mash-ups are making big noise and DJs are getting paid, some are getting snippy. EMI Records, who control the Beatles’ catalog, recently threw a cease-and-desist order at “The Grey Album.”

scary thought.. dj's getting hounded by record companies for club remixes.. i think thats going way too far.. but fair enough that EMI arent happy about the grey album.. it is the beatles after all.. funny that no-one is too upset about Jay-z's copyright breaches.. i think modern artists might be a bit more open minded about these issues.. i even heard an interview on Radio Metro (damn i miss it) with 'solitare' the alias behind the song that channel 10 were blatantly expoliting over summer to promote their 'summer of love' programming or something.. the artist didnt really know his song was being used, and he didnt really care, making a comment like 'if they want to use it, i dont mind' or something to that effect.. i dont think channel 10 could get away with using a beatles song to the same effect..

DJ Danger Mouse is most concerned though about pissing off Paul and Ringo. He recently told The New Yorker, “if they say that they hate it, and that I messed up their music, I think I'll put my tail between my legs and go.” Wonder what Yoko thinks.

interesting.. but i think its more likely to be the beatles fans who get upset about the use of their nostalgia laden sounds in a 'nasty-digital-internet-hiphop-dj' kind of way..

Remix competitions

A few lectures ago there was some discussion of artists running competitions for the best remix of their songs (ie Davie Bowie). I found a post on the music production and technology forum of ITM advertising a BigPond music comp for INXS remixes.. the comp closed on May 8, but about half way down the forum there is a post asking about copyright issues.. which is mostly having a whinge about SKY news for using a sample from the comp in there advertising.. but also brings up the fact that the copyright to the entries is owned by INXS. The same as with the david bowie comp: (from the rules section)
By entering your Mash-Up in the Contest, you acknowledge and agree that: (a) db.com will maintain ownership of the elements (including, without limitation, the Masters), and will own all Mash-Ups entered by you in the Contest or otherwise uploaded to the Website (the Mash-Up and all parts of the contest entry being collectively referred to herein as the "Materials"), and (b) as between you and db.com, db.com will own all publishing rights in and to the Materials. Each entrant into the Contest hereby irrevocably grants, transfers, sells, assigns and conveys to the Sponsors, their successors and assigns, all present and future right, title and interest of every kind and nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, all copyrights, all music and music publishing rights, and all rights incidental, subsidiary, ancillary or allied thereto (including, without limitation, all derivative rights) in and to the Mash-Up(s) for exploitation throughout the universe, in perpetuity, by means of any and all media and devices whether now known or hereafter devised (the "Rights"). Sponsors shall have the right, in their sole discretion, to edit, composite, morph, scan, duplicate, or alter, the Mash-Up(s) for any purpose which Sponsors deems necessary or desirable, and each entrant irrevocably waives any and all so-called moral rights they may have in the Mash-Up(s) submitted by him or her. Each entrant hereby acknowledges that such entrant does not reserve any rights in and to the Mash-Ups. Notwithstanding the forgoing, an entrant will retain whatever rights such entrant had in and to any Additional Elements that may be incorporated into a particular Mash-Up, subject to an irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide, non-exclusive license to use such Additional Elements throughout the universe in perpetuity in any and all media now known or hereafter devised.

so not only to they take the ownership rights to your precious winning entry, they also deny you any royalties, and reserve the right to change it however they want and use it for whatever they want. im pretty sure that kind of contract is worth more than an audi..

update (lame title but hey)

ok so ive had a long weekend and dont want to pull anybody else out of a pool and pretend to rescue them while wearing a zillion heavy bits of scuba gear EVER AGAIN (well until next weekend at least)

BACK TO THE TOPIC>>

it seems a few people have posted comments on my blog. Great! now i need to read all the cool stuff they have suggested.. Raz led me to this awesome article about commercialisation etc of dance culture by Nicky Barth which starts all kinds of interesting things about dance culture and how its changed, and how we use it now, and who uses it, and where we go instead (of the family)and why we dont go there anymore etc. which is really interesting, but i think im; a) too tired right now to write non biased, vaguely academic posts and b)its not really to do with my topic so ill try to avoid spending the rest of my blog on it (which i would happily do, trust me. how can you hate and love the same club at the same time? and why do you still go there despite how much you know you dont like it?)ok im leaving this alone right now..!

secondly Jean pointed me in the direction of Som's blog who has some great research on amateur music creation and issues like creativity and exclusiveness, which definately has repercussions in terms of dance music being created at home. i think a related issue is that of originality, especially in terms of the sample, when used by amateur musicians. can anyone on their home PC sample a bunch of tracks, chuck them into some program they downloaded free off the net, push some buttons (much like making a banana smoothie) and create an original piece of music? (or an original smoothie for that matter?)

more on these when ive had some sleep.. mmm banana smoothie