No, this is not a physcis thing.
However, you may think you used to live in a tiny universe after you have spent an hour or two in the grip of these musicians. Small venues and up close are best.
I really enjoyed their performance at Bumbershoot last year and wish this relatively short set was amongst the over over 100 shows available for download or streaming at the Internet Archive.
If you like the music burn some copies for yourself and your friends, attend a show next time they are in your area and, yes, buy a CD or two.
And, while you are at it, thumb your nose at the RIAA and its albatross clients.
No, this is not a physcis thing.
…in a makeshift screening room in a Brooklyn warehouse, more than 75 filmgoers paid $7 each to watch the first film in the series, “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone.” Sort of.
On the screen “The Sorcerer’s Stone” played as it was released by Warner Brothers. But the original soundtrack, dialogue and all, was turned down and replaced by an alternate version created by a 27-year-old comic book artist from Austin, Tex., named Brad Neely.
There is some chance that this type of creative endeavor will run smack up against some kind of copyright defense mounted by the MPAA folks. Blocking creativity based on existing works is clearly the goal of the folks who want forever copyrights. And as Paul Goyette says:
It would indeed be a shame. Creating and making as much as watching and listening? This could be the perfect remedy for our passive, bloated, consumption-driven culture.
I think this possibility frightens the content folks. Why if folks sitting at home are watching content created by other folks hanging out at home and serving it from home or their friendly hosting company what happens to the revenue streams of the cable companies, the moviemakers, the recording industry, etc. Massive disintermediation becomes a real possibility.
Which, I think, would be a great thing for everyone except the legacy industries. Creative destruction at its best!
Read the New York Times article.
Oh yea, on my cable connection the download of Wizard People, Dear Reader is currently taking less then 30 minutes!
According to dr. wex at The Blogbook it goes like this:
Until this catfight settles down, it’s unlikely the FCC will issue any rules anytime soon. When the masters squabble, the servants stay silent.
Oh, the catfight: Whether or not you will be able to make a digital recording of pay TV content.
Via Steven Taylor we learn that Rush’s weblog is consistent with the rest of his act.
Apparently his researchers and web builders steal material from others and use it without attribution. The most recent example and an earlier one is noted at Jessica’s Well. Taylor also is a victem.
Kevin Alyward has some action items to which I’d like to add: 1) write a letter to your local paper and 2) call/email other talk shows to discuss Rush’s dishonesty.
I suspect some of his listeners might finally realize that he’s not such a good roll model and quit listening.
Update: See Steven Taylor’s comment below. He point’s out that nothing was taken from his site so my classification of him as a victem is not correct.
Can anyone explain by what legal authority a U.S. Marshall can order a journalist to erase a tape recording of statements made in a public place? If only someone with legal expertise had been on the scene.
Eugene Volokh considered the same event and says:
If this report is accurate, then I don’t see any legal justification for the marshal’s demand, or the marshal’s seizing the tape recorder (which therefore sounds like a Fourth Amendment violation to me). To my knowledge, there’s no law — it would presumably have to be a Mississippi law — prohibiting tape recording of public events, even ones on private property.
This practice seems to be common in other contexts. For instance, theater and concerts come immediately to mind. How is Scalia’s practice different from, for example, Bob Dylan’s?
Note, I in no way support Scalia’s practice. He is a civil servant and as such should be 100% transparent in all work and public activities.
On the other hand, I think musicians are being foolish when they prohibit recording. Of course, in many cases (not Dylan) it would take only a few concert recordings to circulate to expose the complete lack of creativity they bring to the stage.