Your mother should know

Who Is Paul McCartney?!

Apparently Twitter had a surge of live-tweeters during the Grammy awards who had no idea who this "legend" was supposed to be. I guess they didn't stick around for the end of the show.

I'm trying to imagine how my generation would have reacted in 1972 (that's the year that Carole King, Tapestry and "You've Got a Friend" owned the show) if the Grammys had trotted out Frederick Loewe, Richard Rodgers or Meredith Willson for some kind of recognition, all of whom would have been approximately the same age McCartney is now. I can't honestly claim we would have acted any differently. Possibly we would have welcomed Willson, whose "Music Man" was still recent enough to be on people's minds.

P.S.: Okay, I'm sentimental. She made me cry.

Another Bohemian Rhapsody

via youtube.com

This song seems to bring out the best in people.

Posted via web from Dreaded Purple Master

Neal Hefti, R.I.P.

Old news by now. Hefti was one of those musicians who, through luck or sheer talent (most likely the latter), created the soundtrack of life itself. The obits all mention "The Odd Couple" and "Batman", but here's a clip of Lionel Hampton performing Hefti's "Cute". I've heard the song a hundred times but never knew the name, nor knew that it has lyrics at all.



Saw it at Mark Evanier's News From Me.

What is this "due process" thing all about

Originally uploaded by kdborden86

The Motion Picture Association of America said Friday intellectual-property holders should have the right to collect damages, perhaps as much as $150,000 per copyright violation, without having to prove infringement.

"It is often very difficult, and in some cases, impossible, to provide such direct proof when confronting modern forms of copyright infringement, whether over P2P networks or otherwise; understandably, copyright infringers typically do not keep records of infringement," MPAA attorney Marie L. van Uitert wrote Friday to the federal judge overseeing the Jammie Thomas trial. [Wired]

The theory almost makes sense.

The MPAA... told Judge Davis that peer-to-peer users automatically should be liable for infringement. "The only purpose for placing copyrighted works in the shared folder is, of course, to 'share,' by making those works available to countless other P2P networks," the MPAA wrote.

Saw it at the Consumerist.

Vinyl and dust

Vinyl and dust
Originally uploaded by T1ger

AJC | Forget MP3s, some teens turning to vinyl records
On a recent afternoon 15-year-old Graham Saylor popped into Decatur CD to check out new releases. But he sprinted right past the CDs, stopping, instead, at the six bins of vinyl records.

Saylor prefers to listen to his favorite new acts, such as TV on the Radio and the Black Keys, on the black 12-inch platters. Some classmates at Decatur High School have become vinyl fans as well.

So what attracts the teens to a musical format that was proclaimed landfill fodder years before they were born?

"I just dig vinyls more. The tone is warmer. I'm not much of a digital guy," explains Saylor.

See also Wired.com: Vinyl May Be Final Nail in CD's Coffin.

Monday Media: Don't Buy the Liverwurst

If you're having trouble thinking of anything else that "Hello Muddah, Hello Fadduh" guy did, here's a classic video in which Dean Martin and Vic Damone present a medley of lyrics made famous...well, let's be honest, made only slightly less obscure...by the inimitable Allan Sherman.

"Dad, what's a 'single'?"

Early Single
Originally uploaded by Tavallai.

Wired | Jan. 10, 1949: A Brand-New Format for the Shirelles, Drifters
1949: The 45-rpm record is introduced by RCA. Can rock 'n' roll be far behind?

Flat disc records began replacing the cylinder for reproducing recorded sound as early as 1887. The original standard, what we know as the 78, had a 10-inch diameter disc with a rotational speed of between 75 and 80 rpm.

The 78 remained the standard for portable recorded sound until the mid-20th century, despite some severe limitations. For one thing, the disc didn't hold much, meaning that longer works, typically classical music, had to be broken in mid-composition (which makes the 78 seem a little like the vinyl forerunner of the four-track tape).

Columbia introduced the 33-rpm disc in 1948, which mostly solved that problem, and its rival, RCA, was right behind with the 45. Despite a diameter of only 7 inches, the 45 could hold as much sound as the 78, and was far more portable and cheaper to produce.

The beauty of this technology is this: You could watch it play and see how it worked. Every bit of the science that made sound happen was visible.

With an iPod, on the other hand, there are no moving parts larger than electrons. The basic parts are still there (data storage, scanning, conversion from physical to electronic form, transportation to vibrating surface, conversion from electronic form to vibrating air) but there's nothing you can see going on. And a common phenomenon of everyday life gets a little more obscure.

It might as well be magic.

When I get older, losing my rights, not-so-many years from now

Originally uploaded by bgimbel.

I know, it's only a week since Public Domain Day 2008, so you may still be recovering from the parties. This reminder shows, though, that all of our public domain problems are not yet solved.

You know how hard Disney has been fighting to keep Mickey Mouse protected under their corporate copyright? You ain't seen nothin'.

Reuters | UK rejects music copyright extension
The British government rejected a plea to extend copyright laws for sound recordings to beyond 50 years on Tuesday, prompting the music industry to accuse it of not supporting musicians and artists.

The music industry had won support from opposition politicians and a parliamentary committee in its bid for a copyright extension that would allow veterans such as Cliff Richard and Paul McCartney to carry on receiving royalties in later life.

Ars Technica | Beatles music to start entering UK public domain in 2012?
The Gowers Review has been a big deal in Britain, where former Financial Times editor Andrew Gowers is chairing a commission that will suggest ways to reform the UK's intellectual property laws. One key piece of the Review will focus on the copyright term for sound recordings. Artists and publishers want the term extended from its current 50 years to 95 years, but an inside source has now confirmed that the Review will not recommend the 45-year extension, according to the BBC.

Given the high-profile names that argued for the extension—musicians like Sir Cliff Richard and Bono—the news is a surprising victory for those in favor of more limited copyright terms. The official report from the Gowers Review is expected in the first week of December, and if the government acts on its conclusions [see above: they did], then songs from hit acts like The Beatles will come out of copyright in the next few years.

"My Bonnie" may already be unprotected, but there'll be no question when "Love Me Do" falls in 2012. Boy, if all those "it was twenty years ago today" headlines in 1988 made you feel old, just wait until 2018, when "Sgt Pepper" goes public domain. Coincidentally enough, when I'm sixty-four.

Monday Media: I do not hate Celine Dion

I have tried, oh, how I have tried. I liked Titanic but I got so sick of that darned song. But still I couldn't shake the feeling that Dion herself was a talented musician with more range than she was typically called upon to show.

But I also enjoy Barry Manilow and Nine Inch Nails (two names that may never have been said in the same sentence before), so you can take that for what it's worth.

The thesis of the following video is: Celine Dion is Amazing. I'm not sure I'm convinced of that, but the video certainly is.

Happy Public Domain Day!

music piracy
Originally uploaded by Slider22.

Boing Boing and Copyright Watch are celebrating Public Domain Day, or January 1 as the rest of us call it. As of today in the United States, the unpublished works of authors who died 70 years ago will enter the public domain.

Just imagine what nuggets of literature must reside in that collection.

As for me, I'm thinking, as I so often do during the holidays, of that besieged agency that fights for the rights and money of musicians everywhere, the Recording Industry Association of America. Seeing that millions of American music consumers no longer know what they can legally do with the CDs they've bought or received for Christmas, the RIAA, with its lawsuit against Jammie Thomas, has clarified its position beyond any possibility of misunderstanding.

What can I legally do with this CD I just bought?

Why, you can listen to it on a CD player.

Can I copy it to...

Nope.

But wait. I didn't tell you how I was going to copy it, or where.

Doesn't matter. You can't copy it. At all. Period.

But I got this new iPod for Christmas...

My, yes, that is a handsome model. I'll bet it sounds terrific.

I wouldn't know, there's no music on it.

That's a shame.

I'd like to listen to these songs.

You can.

But you just said...

All you have to do is buy them from iTunes.

But I bought the CD!

*blank expression* Yeah?

So I thought I'd copy the songs to...

Ah ah ah. That would be stealing.

But I bought the CD!

But you didn't buy a license to make a digital copy of the music.

But I bought the CD!

You keep using that word, "bought".
I don't think it means what you think it means.

Welcome to music in the 21st century.