For three or four years all I listened to were folk standards. I went to sleep singing folk songs. I sang them everywhere, clubs, parties, bars, coffeehouses, fields, festivals. And I met other singers along the way who did the same thing and we just learned songs from each other. I could learn one song and sing it next in an hour if I'd heard it just once.
If you sang "John Henry" as many times as me -- "John Henry was a steel-driving man / Died with a hammer in his hand / John Henry said a man ain't nothin' but a man / Before I let that steam drill drive me down / I'll die with that hammer in my hand."Dylan is so clear about this that you wouldn't think he could be misunderstood. But then you'd be forgetting libertarians! Take it away, Ed Krayewski at Reason:
If you had sung that song as many times as I did, you'd have written "How many roads must a man walk down?" too.
Bob Dylan's Makes the Case Against Today's Copyright ClimateAin't even kidding.
In a 20 minute speech, Bob Dylan explains how copyright is detrimental to cultural heritage without mentioning the word
...Were these different folk standards composed in a legal climate such as today's, they would never be "standards." They'd be copyrighted and would lose their status as musical currency that can be passed around, performed, revised, and rewritten and so forth.And some old black men might have gotten paid. I wonder if Krayewski reached out to Dylan and told him he was on the right track, and should now read some Hayek and oh, yeah, put his catalogue into public domain to stimulate freedom. He might also try that on Kid Rock, Nick Gillespie's latest libertarian rock star -- see how he goes for the idea that copyright is "detrimental to cultural heritage."
These guys have got me believing in life on other planets because they can't possibly be from this one.
It's the old "finding an excuse for selfishness". They can't just admit that they're cheap bastards who would rather just torrent stuff, even though most could easily afford it. Instead the cheapness has to be an act of nobility, heroism even, that everyone should thank them for.
ReplyDeleteWould it be churlish to point out that Krayewski's piece, like everything else on Reason, is itself under copyright? It's almost like they want to control their own work and maybe turn a profit off it (yeah, I know, but it's not impossible).
ReplyDeleteThing is, I actually believe in copyright reform and the copyleft movement. The existing system is ridiculously byzantine and does put a damper on creativity. But I've always suspected that a lot of the techbro types in the movement don't really believe in it. I've seen too many people who cry "fair use" as they steal other people's work and put it under their own copyright, then turn around and crack down when their fans try to do the same thing. And that's not counting all of the "artists should be proud that I'm willing to steal their work" dickheads.
Copyright is a complex subject, a fine balancing act between artist's rights and user's rights, and people have been hashing it out with mixed results for many years. Hard to be shocked that a pack of Reasonoids would dumb it down like this.
"Were these different folk standards composed in a legal climate such as
ReplyDeletetoday's, they would never be "standards." They'd be copyrighted and
would lose their status as musical currency that can be passed around,
performed, revised, and rewritten and so forth."
Which is, of course, the basic principle of copyright: you get it for a limited time (not as limited as it should be, true) and then it goes public. So even in an older regime of copyright, they still couldn't become standards overnight.
What will these libertarians think of Flo&Eddies lawsuit against Sirius,youtube, etc?
ReplyDeleteAnd inside the selfish scared men are scared little boys who demand to be worshipped. They denigrate today's "rewards for participation" culture while demanding rewards for participating.
ReplyDeleteWow, until now I never noticed that "John Henry" and "Blowin' in the Wind" are practically the same song!
ReplyDeleteBut wait...without copyrights, won't all musicians have to "go Galt" and withdraw their productivity? I thought Libertarians were all about keeping the moochers from mooching off the producers?
ReplyDeleteLinkage?
ReplyDeleteI think Krayewski makes a lot of sense! In fact, this whole issue of Reason is full of great work. If you'd like a printed copy, send me only $3.00 through PayPal and I'll mail you a copy (I save money by printing it on my boss's printer, and I pass on the savings to you).
ReplyDeletegoogle is your friend
ReplyDeleteBut they want their music for free, so the producers should just do it for sake of pleasing people in this particular case.
ReplyDeletekon-sis-ten-see? What's that?
Bob Dylan
ReplyDeleteHootie & the Blowfish
"Only Wanna Be with You"
out-of-court settlement
Yes, because if there's one thing that our age currently lacks, it's an accessible place in which budding musicians of wildly varying quality cover well-known music in a broad range of styles.
ReplyDeleteI love the text of that speech by Dylan. It's rare that he speaks that long, and I think being sincere and clear for that amount of time might have been difficult for him, but it was worthwhile. What he said about Joan Baez was very classy.
ReplyDeleteAs for Krayewski, what is there to be said? When a Reason columnist starts shedding tears for young songwriters whose creativity is being restricted by copyright laws, I get suspicious. My guess would be he thinks that all intellectual property belongs by divine right to Google, or whoever the next high bidder happens to be.
After reading uncountable right-leaning articles and blog posts in which art is only acknowledged as spoils of political victory, I wouldn't at all be surprised if you were right.
ReplyDeleteHere's one link.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why I felt the need to read anything about kid rock, ever, but I clicked that link.
ReplyDeleteNot quite as funny as the people upset about all the satan at the Grammys.
shorter krayewski: I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT BOB DYLAN'S SAYING
ReplyDeleteNow I want Krayewski to explain how he wrote Idiot Wind.
ReplyDeleteHe had to live it first.
ReplyDeleteThese guys have got me believing in life on other planets because they can't possibly be from this one.
ReplyDeleteOr, as a friend of mine puts it, "They must have a sixth sense because they show no sign of the other five being functional."
Why is it always rightwingers who run into this problem? Reagan got a cease-and-desist from Springsteen, McCain got one from some other artist, I think Bush got one, and I seem to recall the Romney campaign getting one.
ReplyDeleteFor the party that rammed through the Disney extension of copyright, the GOP sure seems to have a hard time understanding the concept.
He read Jonah's column?
ReplyDeleteI find it weird how many discussions about copyright seem to take place under the assumption that artists will inevitably own the copyright to the work they make.
ReplyDeleteI mean, some do, but...
Do they only accept dollars? How is that ok? Why can't I pay with seashells?
ReplyDeleteThe article also ignores that nobody could stop Dylan from performing "John Henry" even if it's under copyright. He'd have to pay a fee, but as I understand the rules, they can't refuse him.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it wonderful no matter how many times a libertarian mutt is handed a round peg, he always tries to jam it into the square hole of his hopelessly reactionary philosophy?
ReplyDeleteIt probably boils down to: big company, copyright good, individual, copyright bad . . ."
ReplyDeleteNo probably about it, and it always boils down to "big company good, individual rights bad." Which is the most bizarre thing about libertarianism: For a supposed philosophy dedicated to maximizing individual freedom, its adherents make every effort to ensure that corporations can run roughshod over the individual while stripping the individual of any recourse short of suicide-by-Pinkerton or smoking vast quantities of pot.
Well sure, as long as it isn't the government because they can't be trusted.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I'm really enjoying the ad for "Men's Spandex Fun Wear" in the sidebar.
ReplyDeletemusical currency that can be passed around, performed, revised, and rewritten and so forth.
ReplyDeleteIn a more perfect world, everything is Bitcoin.
...An intentionally deflationary currency of most use to tax evaders and money launderers, whose adoption serves mostly to enrich selfish libertarian assholes?
ReplyDelete...and for which the numerous scams like Mt. Gox only prove to its boosters that its triumph is inevitable?
ReplyDeleteI've always said that libertarianism is, at its heart, the demand that there be only as much, and precisely the type of, government that that particular libertarian can use personally. The comments thread at Reason is full of arguments that Disney-driven copyright extensions are somehow unnatural, while other property rights are apparently natural outgrowths of the bedrock of existence itself. It's kind of hilarious.
ReplyDeleteDisney stole several chunks of Stravinsky's music, and offered him screen credit and a small fee. The other option, they told him was to get nothing at all and they'd change it slightly and use it anyway. That's probably the state of copyright law libertarians would like to see again.
ReplyDeleteYou can. I took a class from some Montana Freemen in 1994 about how to make your own money. Please send me US$1000 and I will send you all the information about how to create your own money based on seashells.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about the music, man.
ReplyDelete~
In a more perfect world, everything is Bitcoin
ReplyDeleteMusical currency should be metal.
Imagine me and you, I
ReplyDeletedo
I think about your copyright. It isn’t right.
To think about the money now
Cause you’re the cow
And I am the farmer.
If I should take your
stuff, without a dime
And say that it belongs to me, within my mind
Imagine how the milk would taste, like chocolate wine
With a hint of money
I can't see me milking
nobody
But you. I like your stuff.
When I milk you baby
Your stuff will be mine, for all my life.
How right Ed is! This explains why all artists have only been influenced by copyright-free folk songs (and p.d. stuff like Gilbert and Sullivan), and therefore why all music is folk music and light opera. Finally, a wingnut culture analysis that makes sense!
ReplyDeleteYou have to admit that the "triumph" of Bitcoin is that it was able to convince thousands or tens of thousands of people to exchange actual real-life money for something not even as substantial as magic beans. I think this speaks volumes to the intellectual capacity of the average libertarian.
ReplyDeleteIt's a belief system that begins and ends with "Wouldn't it be neat, if..." because it's only held by emotionally curbed children.
ReplyDeleteI wish to take this comment out back and terminate it with extreme prejudice for compelling my brain to suffer that tune, again. The revised lyric, however, is brilliant.
ReplyDeleteI did not know that. The Mouse has consistently been behind extending copyright, which is totally typical.
ReplyDeleteMy personal fave bit of the speech:
ReplyDeleteCritics have made a career out of accusing me of having a career of confounding expectations. Really? Because that's all I do. That's how I think about it. Confounding expectations.
"What do you do for a living, man?"
"Oh, I confound expectations."
You're going to get a job, the man says, "What do you do?" "Oh, confound expectations. And the man says, "Well, we already have that spot filled. Call us back. Or don't call us, we'll call you." Confounding expectations. What does that mean? 'Why me, Lord? I'd confound them, but I don't know how to do it.'
With tulip mania, at least you could grow a flower.
ReplyDeleteThere are many things in this world that I'd rather not see, and that applies to most men wearing Spandex.
ReplyDeleteChastity wear?
ReplyDeleteI'd like to introduce this Krayewski guy to some coffeehouse owners who got whacked with huge fines by ASCAP or one of the other licensing organizations because they let some guy sing a copyrighted song. "Musical currency" my ass.
ReplyDeleteTom Petty told Bachmann to stop using "American Girl" at he rallies.
ReplyDeleteSmart Libertarians will logically want to begin their crusade against intellectual property rights in the one place it's most likely to succeed -- the one hotbed of both intellectual property rights and Libertarians, the tech industry. If they win there, fuck, I'd vote for them.
ReplyDeleteMy online scanned copy is available for only $2.75. Triumph of the free market!
ReplyDeleteTo a steel drivin' man, everything looks like a spike.
ReplyDeleteIt probably boils down to: big company, copyright good, individual, copyright bad, restrictive of the dissemination of the arts.
ReplyDeleteI dunno- in this case, I think it's more likely that it boils down to "copyright on things I want to sell good, copyright on things I want to torrent for free bad."
- HC
"These guys have got me believing in life on other planets because they can't possibly be from this one."
ReplyDeleteI was thinking robots, but aliens works, too. I think the same thing every time someone writes a " 50 conservative rock songs" article. What asshat reads something like that and thinks "oh this fits into my political worldview"?
My god how can you read Reason more than once a year?
ReplyDeleteDylan actually references the Turtles in his speech. He says that the covers by the Byrds and Turtles were great commercials for his songs. Total diss.
ReplyDeleteToxic wind, that is. Toxic.
ReplyDeleteI heard the copyright extension bill that was passed some years ago called "the Mickey Mouse preservation act" because among other things it allowed Disney to keep the Mouse under copyright.
ReplyDeleteI have a second party check from Raoul Duke, former second baseman for the St. Louis Browns - will that work?
ReplyDeleteAlso the Wilson sisters made Queen Sarah stop using Heart's "Barracuda" at her rallies. You can guess how that went down with the Brethren.
ReplyDeleteWelll, Romney could hardly go with Come, Come Ye Saints, could he? Think of what vile radical left imaginations could do with that.
ReplyDeleteWork-for-hire is evil anyway.
ReplyDeleteThat photograph makes me seriously question my heterosexuality. Also my sanity, and whether or not it really is dinnertime. Asshole.
ReplyDeleteLibertarianism:
ReplyDelete"I don' wanna, you can't make me, go-way, leemeelone WAAAAAHHHHHH!!!"
And to his Shaker, everything looks like a fast-approaching sledge hammer...
ReplyDeleteA Plutonian year...
ReplyDeleteJesus, Howie & Mark are still "happy together" on tour in 2015.
ReplyDeleteAlso too, at one time the Mothers consisted of Kaylan, Volman, Jim Pons, Don Preston, Aynsley Dunbar, Ian Underwood, and Frank Zappa, which, if you removed Underwood and Zappa, was basically the Turtles...