Elbows Music Blog Community

p.s.

boxstr is way better.  and the admin people are friendly.

yep. they are starting to crack down.



*goes to back up his posts*

uh,  yeah.  cause wordpress doesn't have the same problem?  this last month or so is the first time i've ever seen stuff like this happening with blogger, which is sorta scary.  but i've seen a lot more issues come up over wordpress over the years.

Fileden cut me off, too. I just said screw it to the bandwidth game. I'm going to worry abou tit when I start actually making something out of this blogging thing.

Is this paid-for fileden? I seriously suggest getting a host of your own, usually more reliable and probably cheaper.

That's really strange that they'd do that. I'm kind of scared the same thing may happen to me.

you could write back to them saying that the mp3 was originally authorized and the link was no longer active.  i wouldn't get freaked out.



i think the best thing to do is just back up everything you write and don't worry about it.  i mean, you can try and avoid posting unauthorized "illegal" mp3s and cite your sources, but that doesn't really seem to make that much difference where these fools are concerned.  it really doesn't provide much incentive to stick to authorized mp3s. . . . 

ever since blogger introduced the beautiful function of exporting/importing blogs, i made a second redundant account where i back up all my blogs monthly.

just incase.

Absolutely, Mr. Toad, that is what I am angry about this morning:  destruction of MY intellectual property by deleting a post that no longer contained a link to any MP3s, only my personally-authored text.  And the only method of protest I am given requires me to, among other things:



"...consent to the jurisdiction of the district court in whose district I reside."



If I were to go through the process described here:  www.google.com/dmca.html#counter 

and  here: www.chillingeffects.org/dmca/counter512.pdf



which are the links provided in the e-mail notice, I doubt that I would be heard fairly, and I would be incriminating myself (by admitting that I do actually post MP3s) and I would be leaving myself open to someone else to decide how much monetary penalty I should pay based on some number they would have to pull out of their ass.  Hell, I don't know how many people downloaded any MP3 I have ever had posted.  My statcounter doesn't tell me that.  Just because people visit a page does not mean they download a song.  If there is more than one MP3 in the post, there is no way to tell which one(s) they took. 



No new e-mails this morning, and so far I still have a blog.  I hope no news is good news.



Sundtrak--Good idea.  I'd like to know more about that, please.

That is a good idea, sundtrak.  I will talk to my partner, who generally does all the webmaster duties for us, and we will look into it.



I am also frustrated that I have no idea what about the two deleted posts triggered the deletion.  The first one, from June 2007, contained four bands.  I have considered writing to each of them to ask if they know of any agent acting on their behalf would have done such a thing.  It seems like a very cowardly act, to snipe at me, a pretty small blog,  from behind the huge, unresponsive bulk of Blogger.

I am currently venting my frustration by rewriting my disclaimer as "My Rights Under Fair Use."  I'm not ready to actually publish that yet, however.  I'm still thinking about all this.

It's getting pretty ridiculous lately. I'll probably just shut down my blog. What's the point?

If anyone wants to move to Wordpress (.org) to avoid the removal of posts, I would be happy to host them for free (the blog that is, rather than the mp3s) - just email tim [at] thebluewalrus [dot] com

I remember when you moved over to Wordpress, actually.  The problem is that the law is weighted in such a fashion that Wordpress or Blogger or whoever have to face all kinds of comeback from the labels if they even question a DMCA notice, and are specifically exempted, by law, from any comeback from us for damages resulting from wrongful takedowns.  Consequently, where do you think their motivations are going to lie?



It's not just bad, it's fucking crazy, but that does appear to be the law.

I use wordpress and I haven't had any problems yet (that I know of). So far I've only had a couple of Web Sheriff notices to take down certain mp3s, and they were a little while ago anyway. I thought that because my blog is pretty small that I would be safe, but hearing about your plight Linda makes me a little nervous too. I hope you keep blogging though - yours is one of the first blogs I came across and one that I read frequently. And that Glasvegas debacle - what a load of shite.

Oh, Agnes, I can't tell you how much that means to me, especially in the light of all this garbage going on.  Thank you!

I think once you get decent and obvious readership (when you see bloggers with the visits/subscribers blatantly plastered on the side of the blog, it usually isn't only for gloating purposes), labels/PR/artists are less likely to take stuff down because the benefits outweigh the costs.

I have a decent readership. I've been doing this over three years without a single complaint from any artist/label, etc. Ever. And now they're deleting my posts...so it seems there's no real 'safe' way to do this. At least not on blogger.

aw, agnes, you ARE too kind!

Posted by: everybodycareschadI think once you get decent and obvious readership (when you see bloggers with the visits/subscribers blatantly plastered on the side of the blog, it usually isn't only for gloating purposes), labels/PR/artists are less likely to take stuff down because the benefits outweigh the costs. I have a decent readership. I've been doing this over three years without a single complaint from any artist/label, etc. Ever. And now they're deleting my posts...so it seems there's no real 'safe' way to do this. At least not on blogger.

chad,  i remember when you said you were going completely legal. i can't believe they're coming after you, of all blogs.

there is definitely something fishy going on between blogger and google. i've had a couple of web sheriff removal requests, a couple from artists directly, but never had a post removed in its entirety. however, i am not on blogger. i'm not on wordpress, either.

I'll second that, I hadn't even noticed it wasn't already blogger only.

if every single music blogger currently with them migrated to wordpress, i doubt they would even notice.

All the more reason to leave then, I suppose. If they don't value you in any way, what's the point in giving them your business?

i'm there because it's free and convenient, and uprooting is work/money.

If posts are being arbitrarily deleted without notice, I don't see it as being very convenient.

Posted by: Thomas  maybe i'm just being cynical, but i can't help but wonder if trying to be friendly with the labels is what got them into trouble.



i know it's an unpopular opinion around here, but i really believe that blogs should NOT be courting labels, and that this "legal" mp3 blog model is a disaster, and bad for music in general.

i'm not even sure how to address this. it's wrong for a couple of reasons, the most obvious one being that the bloggers who stick to legal mp3s care mostly about the artists. they're trying NOT to screw them by posting things that most people should pay for.

i mean, i think it's pretty much understood that the reason most of us are music bloggers is because we love music and the bands and we want to support them and help them out. therefore if we play by the rules as much as possible, it helps them and protects us.

furthermore, i certainly don't consider myself as a person who "courts" anybody, yet i am thrown more legal mp3s in a day than i could ever post about. i'm not trying to be the label's friend, they're trying to be MY friend.

that kind of attitude is like blaming the victim: well, you shouldn't have been walking down that street at night. you were asking for it!

re: Blogger

in an ideal world they probably should notify the blogger to remove the links him/herself, and then have a bunch of people on staff to handle compliance.  i agree.  but i can't realistically see them having ongoing communication to sort things out with every blogger who claims his/her mp3s are legal.  i suppose i'm not claiming complete innocence on their part, just that the labels sending the complaints are at the heart of the problem.

Posted by: Sean RockSellout

I have respected a lot of what you've said up till now, but I just can't fathom your reasoning here. How is working with labels and artists bad for music? As long as those relationships aren't dictating content, I can't see how this could be viewed in a negative light. If you're posting mp3s without permission, you will eventually get shut down. It's inevitible. What's the point in that?

you sort of answered your question for me, i think.  working with labels, and only posting what they give you permission to post  IS dictating content of a blog.  i also think you're being a bit hyperbolic with the "mp3s without permission = inevitable shut down".  that's clearly not the case at all.  maybe you're seeing the future.  either way, there's no way to prove that hypothesis.  as was mentioned earlier in one of these threads, a lot of successful blogs don't ask permission, but they do comply when they are asked to take things down.

Posted by: mjrc

i'm not even sure how to address this. it's wrong for a couple of reasons, the most obvious one being that the bloggers who stick to legal mp3s care mostly about the artists. they're trying NOT to screw them by posting things that most people should pay for.

i mean, i think it's pretty much understood that the reason most of us are music bloggers is because we love music and the bands and we want to support them and help them out. therefore if we play by the rules as much as possible, it helps them and protects us.

furthermore, i certainly don't consider myself as a person who "courts" anybody, yet i am thrown more legal mp3s in a day than i could ever post about. i'm not trying to be the label's friend, they're trying to be MY friend.

that kind of attitude is like blaming the victim: well, you shouldn't have been walking down that street at night. you were asking for it!

mjrc,

i think you partially misinterpreted what i wrote, or it just wasn't clear.  i'm not sure that it's the case that bloggers who stick to legal mp3s always care mostly about the artists.  but either way that's not exactly what i meant by legal mp3 blogs being bad for music.  the way i see it, what is good for ARTISTS and LABELS is not necessarily good for music.  what is good for the artists is only good for music if the music happens to be good.  and it's not exactly a secret that a LOT of legal mp3 blogs are spreading the word about a lot of mediocre music.

as far as who's trying to be whose friend, it's sorta irrelevant.  either way you're forming a relationship with labels that you thought was amicable, and then one or more of them is screwing you.  obviously some of them can not be trusted.  as far as the blaming the victim thing goes, i'm not sure how relevant that is either.  i thought it was pretty clear that i think the blame falls on the labels who are making the complaints. 



it sort of seems like you're trying to back me into a corner.  i mean, you're taking one thing and not-so-subtly comparing it to a woman getting raped.  is that fair?  me thinking you might not want to be so cozy with record labels doesn't have anything to do with my thoughts about women walking down dark alleys.  limiting yourself to exclusively posting what the labels give you permission to post is essentially working for the labels.  great, in my opinion--if the music is actually worth the attention.  not so great when it's not.  sorry to say, but the latter case sums up about 80% of the legal blogs i've come across.  as i said, i know it's not a popular opinion around here.

 EDIT: i should mention that terrible taste in music plagues the non-legal mp3 blogs as well.

@ Thomas, Linda

I understand where you're coming from, but we will never have 100% absolute freedom to do or post whatever we want. Why? Because ultimately, we don't own the rights to the music. That's really the brick wall we're always going to hit. There's always going to be a degree of compromise involved. Until there's a major overhaul/shakedown at the majors and an 'industry' that actually works for the benefit of artists and consumers, it's what we're stuck with.

I don't feel it's hyperbole to suggest that it's inevitible that 'illegal' blogs will be shut down. They're shut down all the time. True, they typically go for the content-less p2p types of sites, for now. But the increasingly aggressive tactics employed by the RIAA, considered alongside this rash of Blogger deletions as well as the increasing numbers of C&Ds and visits by Web Sherrif would seem to point to that conclusion. I wish that weren't the case, but I don't think you need a crystal ball to see that coming.

Presumably, you're only writing about music you like in the first place. If you aren't, you've started on the wrong foot. Once you get that straightened out, what's being dictated is the specific track you use. And there are cases where the track offered isn't the one I'm in love with, admittedly. But I have always felt that if a band/label/pr is being reasonable enough to offer an mp3 to begin with, it's a bit of a dick move on my part to ignore that and post what I want. We can't expect artists & labels to just give us every single thing we ask for. That's just not reasonable.

yes, there is probably always a degree of compromise involved. complying when i get a takedown request is in some sense a compromise. but as it is i am much more free to do or post what i want than someone relying exclusively on label-sanctioned mp3s.

Well, I don't see that as a compromise. To me, constantly being in a reactionary position is inconvenient. I just don't need the stress. And again, I have to ask how long you're going to be 'free' to post what you want.

the "mp3s without permission = inevitable shutdown" is just not happening. if you had said that blogs posting authorized mp3s are LESS LIKELY to be shutdown i would be more inclined to agree with you. but even then, it seems that the labels/RIAA are not intelligent enough to sort the "legal" mp3s from the "illegal" ones. there is no brick wall. there is no inevitability. music bloggers are not nearly as "stuck" as you are suggesting.

I'm not sure how a reasonable person couldn't see that as a likely eventuality. It's the label's lack of intelligence and savvy about the difference between legal and illegal blogs that makes it more likely they'll begin to crack down. How can you not see them shutting down blogs when the blogs are posting their copyrighted and licensed product without permission in what they perceive is an enterprise that damages their bottom line? I clearly disagree with that conclusion, but it's also clear that that's how a majority of the big boys see it.

see, i care MOST about the track you're in love with, Sean. if you consistently pass on what you love for what they will give you, does that not sometimes conflict with the "only writing about music you like"? are you saying that if you like the artist it's okay to post an mp3 of theirs that you think is kinda boring, if that's the pr-sanctioned mp3, just as long as you're promoting the artist?

I just view this in a completely different way. If I'm loving an artist, presumably I don't find their work boring in the first place. But for the sake of argument, let's say they're more of a singles band. If I don't like the song being offered or find it boring, I'm not going to bother posting it, freely provided by a label or not. Plain and simple. However, if the song I like is scheduled to be the next single and the band/label would rather I not share it because they're afraid it could hurt the single sales, I don't have a huge problem selecting another track that they're okay with and that I also like. Is that a perfect process of expression? No. But again, I'm going to have to argue for pragmatism. I admit there's a fine line to walk, but I'm far more comfortable erring on the side of caution and respect.

why not? if everything you ask for is reasonable. as i said, i don't make it a point to contact artists/labels/pr very often. if i ask for something, it's in line with what i expect they will give me, usually because they've already offered it.

From what I understand, you've advocated being free to post content with no restrictions. I see that as unreasonable because we are talking about a business, in the end. Artists need to make money to continue making music, labels need to make money to distribute. I see a more realistic solution being a system of give and take. We make a request, they comply, make a counteroffer, etc. Would I love all labels to be like, say Nettwerk? Yes. They offer a variety of choices for customers buying music, including the option of downloads in lossless audio, etc. They're also incredibly flexible about mp3s and incredibly open to bloggers, while still taking good care of their artists.

I would love to see a system where any song from an album is available in something like a 128 bitrate for sampling. People that don't care about the sound quality likely aren't paying for music anyway, so if they fill an iPod with crappy mp3s, who cares. They'll be just as likely to load it with 64 bit files, after all, they've been doing that with Myspace for years. But customers that care about sound, and want to experience the music in the way the artist intended it to be heard, will presumably hear the songs and want the real deal. In fact, actually I'd be happy if they'd just offer say, 4 songs. That way bloggers wouldn't be pigeonholed into sharing the same track, and the labels wouldn't be giving away the whole album. Then, after the albums has been in circulation for a few months, any track would be fair game in that 128 format. But ya know, I have a million different ideas about this.

Since we don't have such a system in place currently, it seems to me we'll only get there if we're all working together. The whole 'labels bad, blog good' attitude doesn't seem likely to get us anywhere. So in that spirit, if a label is at least trying to work with me by offering something by a band I enjoy, I don't think it's unreasonable that I could make myself a bit flexible. Hopefully that system will develop into something better. That's what I'm looking for, at any rate.