# A law requiring that music be modern???



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Last Thursday Trump signed the *Music Modernization Act*, requiring that all new compositions use the 12-tone method set forth by Arnold - heh heh, just kidding!

In fact, the Act guarantees that music creators receive copyright protection and that they are paid when their music is streamed (among other things). The goal: "To make it easier for music creators to make a living." Here's an article from the LA Times.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-music-modernization-act-20181011-story.html


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Last Thursday Trump signed the *Music Modernization Act*, requiring that all new compositions use the 12-tone method set forth by Arnold - heh heh, just kidding!
> 
> In fact, the Act guarantees that music creators receive copyright protection and that they are paid when their music is streamed (among other things). The goal: "To make it easier for music creators to make a living." Here's an article from the LA Times.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-music-modernization-act-20181011-story.html


When Trump heard about John Adam's compositions, he said, 'A Founding Father, our 2nd president and now I learn, a composer. Wow'.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

DaveM said:


> When Trump heard about John Adam's compositions, he said, 'A Founding Father, our 2nd president and now I learn, a composer. Wow'.


More likely, he said that he loved the tv show about him and the rest of his family (Addams Family.)


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Last Thursday Trump signed the *Music Modernization Act*, requiring that all new compositions use the 12-tone method set forth by Arnold - heh heh, just kidding!
> 
> In fact, the Act guarantees that music creators receive copyright protection and that they are paid when their music is streamed (among other things). The goal: "To make it easier for music creators to make a living." Here's an article from the LA Times.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-music-modernization-act-20181011-story.html


Hope he has to pay the Stones royalties for "You Can't Always Get What You Want." (Always thought it was a weird choice for a campaign theme.)


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2018)

It certainly sounds great that there is a focus on actually paying the creators of music for their music, rather than the corporations who distribute them as their sole owners.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Yes, but turns out the act isn't the greatest as it doesn't allow companies like Spotify to be sued for past infringement. They've made billions off composers and other musicians and now they can't be touched.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

regenmusic said:


> Yes, but turns out the act isn't the greatest as it doesn't allow companies like Spotify to be sued for past infringement. They've made billions off composers and other musicians and now they can't be touched.


No law can apply to prior events that were legal at the time. So-called _ex post facto_ laws are illegal (in the US) and have been for a very long time. Sorry, just the way it is.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

KenOC said:


> Last Thursday Trump signed the *Music Modernization Act*, requiring that all new compositions use the 12-tone method set forth by Arnold - heh heh, just kidding!
> 
> In fact, the Act guarantees that music creators receive copyright protection and that they are paid when their music is streamed (among other things). The goal: "To make it easier for music creators to make a living." Here's an article from the LA Times.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-music-modernization-act-20181011-story.html


Re the link you posted:

_Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism._


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

janxharris said:


> Re the link you posted:
> 
> _Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism._


If you search on "Music Modernization Act" there are doubtless other sources of information.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

KenOC said:


> No law can apply to prior events that were legal at the time. So-called _ex post facto_ laws are illegal (in the US) and have been for a very long time. Sorry, just the way it is.


The biggest corporations just ripped off musicians. That's just the way it is. There have to be more constitutional laws supporting this fact. I'm not into letting criminals off because they have good attorneys.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

regenmusic said:


> The biggest corporations just ripped off musicians. That's just the way it is. There have to be more constitutional laws supporting this fact. I'm not into letting criminals off because they have good attorneys.


Interesting. Can you give an example of a big corporation ripping off a musician? That would be helpful in defining the problem, and possibly finding a solution.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

regenmusic said:


> The biggest corporations just ripped off musicians. That's just the way it is. There have to be more constitutional laws supporting this fact. I'm not into letting criminals off because they have good attorneys.


If we are talking spotify - posting one's music there is voluntary.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

janxharris said:


> If we are talking spotify - posting one's music there is voluntary.


One might argue that Spotify is "ripping musicians off" due to excessive market power. But as of now, Spotify has yet to make a profit and has lost plenty of money instead.

What's hurting artists is simply that if a song is posted, immediately a million copies will spread around, each indistinguishable from the original. And if you try a protection scheme, it won't be downloaded (and paid for) at all.

Classical music probably suffers less because nobody cares enough to copy and pirate it. Composers get their reward from commissions, sheet music sales, and live performance royalties, just like in the 19th century and earlier.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

KenOC said:


> One might argue that Spotify is "ripping musicians off" due to excessive market power. But as of now, Spotify has yet to make a profit and has lost plenty of money instead.
> 
> What's hurting artists is simply that if a song is posted, immediately *a million copies will spread around, each indistinguishable from the original.* And if you try a protection scheme, it won't be downloaded (and paid for) at all.
> 
> Classical music probably suffers less because nobody cares enough to copy and pirate it. Composers get their reward from commissions, sheet music sales, and live performance royalties, just like in the 19th century and earlier.


Could you clarify please?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

So, since Spotify aren't making a profit they aren't ripping anyone off.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

we are in the process of searching for new economic models that are neccessitated by the technological development (internet, streaming). CDs are dead imho. They are impractical (take a lot of space).

https://www.economist.com/business/...ed-music-spotify-may-upend-the-industry-again
https://www.musicbusinessworldwide....e-to-change-everything-in-the-music-business/


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

the most popular artist on spotify with 50 million people streaming it is some guy called J Baldvin and his biggest hit is I Like It [




it is beyond my understanding why this garbage of music is so popular 
on youtube, this clip has 619 764 644 views, ie 1/10 of the world population watched it


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Interesting. Can you give an example of a big corporation ripping off a musician? That would be helpful in defining the problem, and possibly finding a solution.


Spotify sued for $1.6 billion over Tom Petty, Doors songs
https://money.cnn.com/2018/01/03/technology/spotify-lawsuit-wixen-songs/index.html


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

regenmusic said:


> Spotify sued for $1.6 billion over Tom Petty, Doors songs
> https://money.cnn.com/2018/01/03/technology/spotify-lawsuit-wixen-songs/index.html


Is it an ongoing lawsuit?


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Jacck said:


> the most popular artist on spotify with 50 million people streaming it is some guy called J Baldvin and his biggest hit is I Like It . . . it is beyond my understanding why this garbage of music is so popular
> on youtube, this clip has 619 764 644 views, ie 1/10 of the world population watched it


As has been noted, there is no accounting for taste. There are even people who like Ferneyhough, although apparently not nearly so many as like this J. Baldvin person. It is one of the great mysteries of the universe, and most people probably don't even know why they like what they like.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

JAS said:


> As has been noted, there is no accounting for taste. There are even people who like Ferneyhough, although apparently not nearly so many as like this J. Baldvin person. It is one of the great mysteries of the universe, and most people probably don't even know why they like what they like.


I don't think it is such a mystery. Most people are sheep and will like what they are fed by advertisement. Play this junk music on the radio and people will start liking it. This kind of modern music is really attrocious. 








these modern pop stars with IQ of monkeys, dressed like gypsies and dancing like if they suffered from Huntington's chorea and the number of views reaches 2 billions 
I actually prefer Ferneyhough to this.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Jacck said:


> I don't think it is such a mystery. Most people are sheep and will like what they are fed by advertisement. Play this junk music on the radio and people will start liking it. This kind of modern music is really attrocious.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would _not_ prefer Ferneyhough to it, but that is a little like asking me if I prefer to have a red-hot needle stuck in my _left_ foot or my _right_ one. Neither, please. The phenomenon of taste is still a mystery, at least to me. (I won't speak for anyone else.) Hearing any of this on the radio would not make me like it, nor be kind in my actions to the radio.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

JAS said:


> I would _not_ prefer Ferneyhough to it, but that is a little like asking me if I prefer to have a red-hot needle stuck in my _left_ foot or my _right_ one. Neither, please. The phenomenon of taste is still a mystery, at least to me. (I won't speak for anyone else.) Hearing any of this on the radio would not make me like it, nor be kind in my actions to the radio.


my guess is that taste is a combination of internal factors (termperament, intelligence, personality etc) and external factors (culture, music you are exposed to). Teenagers generally listen to what they see their peers listening to. Classical music certainly requires active approach to music, because you won't get exposed to it by chance.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Jacck said:


> my guess is that taste is a combination of internal factors (termperament, intelligence, personality etc) and external factors (culture, music you are exposed to). Teenagers generally listen to what they see their peers listening to. Classical music certainly requires active approach to music, because you won't get exposed to it by chance.


The peer influence is certainly an aspect of the phenomenon, but also part of the mystery. This may be mostly peculiar to me, since I never really fell into that trap. I have always followed the adage that it is good to learn from your own mistakes, but even better to learn from the mistakes of others.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Jacck said:


> I don't think it is such a mystery. Most people are sheep and will like what they are fed by advertisement. Play this junk music on the radio and people will start liking it. This kind of modern music is really attrocious.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, you have no idea what their IQ is. For instance, in your first example, Bruno Mars is a major talent and, from all accounts, a very bright artist. In his earlier career, he was known for melodic ballads, but in an apparent attempt to stay relative with current trends, his music is now more rhythmic. And he is often mixing it up with very current artists such as rapper Cardi B (as in that video), a pretty smart career move, though it means that I don't listen to his latest stuff.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

DaveM said:


> Well, you have no idea what their IQ is. For instance, in your first example, Bruno Mars is a major talent and, from all accounts, a very bright artist. In his earlier career, he was known for melodic ballads, but in an apparent attempt to stay relative with current trends, his music is more rhythmic. And he is often mixing it up with very current artists such as rapper Cardi B (as in that video), a pretty smart career move, though it means that I don't listen to his latest stuff.


True. You are right. I am no expert in this kind of music and have never listened to Bruno Mars. So I might be misjudging him based on the music clips. It might simply be my prejudice about this kind of music and the people who produce it and listen to it. From what I observed while growing up (adolencence) in Czech Republic, the most intelligent people listened to rock/metal/punk and frequented rock clubs, while the dumb ones listened to disco, pop etc. and frequented discotheques. But I am aware that I cannot generalize this localized experience to the whole world.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

DaveM said:


> When Trump heard about John Adam's compositions, he said, 'A Founding Father, our 2nd president and now I learn, a composer. Wow'.


Not sure he'd know about those first two.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Suddenly, the CD becomes relevant again?


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

millionrainbows said:


> Suddenly, the CD becomes relevant again?


Yes! Brilliant comment. As does the LP, signed letter, cassette, or whatever else you know gives to the artist and maybe has some kind of resale value for your kids who don't understand your taste when you're gone.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> Suddenly, the CD becomes relevant again?


Yes, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates again so CDs are now relevant again.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I’m a bit amused that when Trump signs a bill improving the lot of music creators, most people commenting here can only think to insult him. I live in the LA area and am acutely aware of how close the Democratic politicians here, from Feinstein on down, are to the big-money interests in the entertainment industry. This bill wouldn’t exist in a Democrat administration.

Think about it.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

KenOC said:


> I'm a bit amused that when Trump signs a bill improving the lot of music creators, most people commenting here can only think to insult him. I live in the LA area and am acutely aware of how close the Democratic politicians here, from Feinstein on down, are to the big-money interests in the entertainment industry.* This bill wouldn't exist in a Democrat administration.
> 
> Think about it.


*Two or three years ago Feinstein and the Democrats proposed a bill blocking American access to certain overseas Internet sites thought to be hosting copyrighted materials. This would have been the first time our nation had blocked any site, worldwide, from access by our citizens - a very slippery slope! Fortunately, there was quite a bit of blowback and the bill didn't move forward. I'm sure it will reappear with Democratic support when the time seems right.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

KenOC said:


> *Two or three years ago Feinstein and the Democrats proposed a bill blocking American access to certain overseas Internet sites thought to be hosting copyrighted materials. This would have been the first time our nation had blocked any site, worldwide, from access by our citizens - a very slippery slope! Fortunately, there was quite a bit of blowback and the bill didn't move forward. I'm sure it will reappear with Democratic support when the time seems right.


There are many blocked sites, some of them submerged in deep web and dark web. The restriction of freedom happens by other means. The USA does not have the most free internet, so I doubt that was the first case ever. The biggest restrictions of freedom happened under Bush under the "war against terror" which was used to justify the restriction of freedoms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_and_surveillance_by_country

China is the leader in this kind of thing, they are building the Big Brother, using artificial intelligence to gather data about its citizens, using digital surveillance and ranking the citizens by a crazy credit system. A real nightmare
https://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-punishments-and-rewards-explained-2018-4


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Does Trump's MMA impact on non-American musicians? Forgive my ignorance.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

KenOC said:


> *Two or three years ago Feinstein and the Democrats proposed a bill blocking American access to certain overseas Internet sites thought to be hosting copyrighted materials. This would have been the first time our nation had blocked any site, worldwide, from access by our citizens - a very slippery slope! Fortunately, there was quite a bit of blowback and the bill didn't move forward. I'm sure it will reappear with Democratic support when the time seems right.


Because Republicans (say Sonny Bono, for example) have never been advocates of regressive and overly restrictive copyrights. Revisionist history strikes again.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Concerns regarding the MMA from Europe and the UK:

https://artistrightswatch.com/2018/02/01/eu-composer-songwriters-alliance-questions-serious-problems-with-music-modernization-act/


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Cryptocurrency in the future may help artists in this regard. Face it, computers are here to stay and digital transfer of value is obviously here also. Think of "likes" on Facebook. Big companies currently own your likes but sites like Steemit are well established as are the cryptocurrency Steem used there. Many established cryptocurrency companies aim to let the user get monetary reimbursement for their activity, not big companies like Facebook or Twitter (or Spotify, etc.). The only thing bad about Crypto is the word itself, which is really meant to establish a safety mechanism.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

regenmusic said:


> Cryptocurrency in the future may help artists in this regard. Face it, computers are here to stay and digital transfer of value is obviously here also. Think of "likes" on Facebook. Big companies currently own your likes but sites like Steemit are well established as are the cryptocurrency Steem used there. The only thing bad about Crypto is the word itself, which is really meant to establish a safety mechanism.


Of course, people actually having to pay for something, no matter the mechanism, is a sure way to kill or at least reduce interest.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

JAS said:


> Of course, people actually having to pay for something, no matter the mechanism, is a sure way to kill or at least reduce interest.


That's why I updated the post I created that you quoted.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

KenOC said:


> *Two or three years ago Feinstein and the Democrats proposed a bill blocking American access to certain overseas Internet sites thought to be hosting copyrighted materials. This would have been the first time our nation had blocked any site, worldwide, from access by our citizens - a very slippery slope! Fortunately, there was quite a bit of blowback and the bill didn't move forward. I'm sure it will reappear with Democratic support when the time seems right.


Wasn't this supported by the big money entertainment industry as well?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

regenmusic said:


> The only thing bad about Crypto is the word itself...


And the fact that it is based on something financially intangible, one's holdings can be lost by hacking, there is often corruption in the management of the system, wild fluctuations can occur for often obscure reasons, it's use has frequently been associated with illegal practices such as money laundering, it's use is beyond the understanding of the average person.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

KenOC said:


> I'm a bit amused that when Trump signs a bill improving the lot of music creators, most people commenting here can only think to insult him. I live in the LA area and am acutely aware of how close the Democratic politicians here, from Feinstein on down, are to the big-money interests in the entertainment industry. This bill wouldn't exist in a Democrat administration.
> 
> Think about it.


Whereas their opposing numbers are all against the "big-money interests in the entertainment industry".

How incredibly naive.


----------



## haydnguy (Oct 13, 2008)

I honestly don't know how the record companies operate today. How the artists get paid an honest wage. With streaming, .99 cent downloads, and Youtube, I think it's a mess.

To me, in some ways it was actually better when we paid "full price" for CD's. The record companies had more money and could give newer artists a bigger chance to succeed. For instance, if their first CD didn't sell well, they were given another chance by allowing the artist to put out a second CD. Today, it's pretty much "one and done" unless the first CD sells well.

I don't know but I imagine that they could either spend more on each CD and/or put out more CD's.

The other thing is, on Youtube although you can usually find a lot that you want, you have to put up with ALOT of "noise" that you don't like and that's very irritating.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

haydnguy said:


> I honestly don't know how the record companies operate today. How the artists get paid an honest wage. With streaming, .99 cent downloads, and Youtube, I think it's a mess.


My thoughts exactly. I think they've acted heroically. The big names don't care because they make enough from touring and whatever else comes their way.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

isorhythm said:


> Wasn't this supported by the big money entertainment industry as well?


That was my understanding at the time.* They would have been the primary beneficiaries of the bill, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Per Wiki, "Provisions included the requesting of court orders to bar advertising networks and payment facilities from conducting business with infringing websites, and web search engines from linking to the websites, and court orders requiring Internet service providers to block access to the websites."

Wiki also notes: "...opponents claimed that requiring search engines to delete domain names violated the First Amendment and could begin a worldwide arms race of unprecedented Internet censorship. On January 18, 2012, the English Wikipedia, Google, and an estimated 7,000 other smaller websites coordinated a service blackout in protest against the bill."

*"...The legislation has broad support from organizations that rely on copyright, including the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, Entertainment Software Association, Macmillan US, Viacom, and various other companies and unions in the cable, movie, and music industries."


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

KenOC said:


> That was my understanding at the time.* They would have been the primary beneficiaries of the bill, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Per Wiki, "Provisions included the requesting of court orders to bar advertising networks and payment facilities from conducting business with infringing websites, and web search engines from linking to the websites, and court orders requiring Internet service providers to block access to the websites."
> 
> Wiki also notes: "...opponents claimed that requiring search engines to delete domain names violated the First Amendment and could begin a worldwide arms race of unprecedented Internet censorship. On January 18, 2012, the English Wikipedia, Google, and an estimated 7,000 other smaller websites coordinated a service blackout in protest against the bill."
> 
> *"...The legislation has broad support from organizations that rely on copyright, including the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, Entertainment Software Association, Macmillan US, Viacom, and various other companies and unions in the cable, movie, and music industries."


Ah sorry, I messed up my post. What I meant was, didn't these same interests support the Music Modernization Act as well? The article you linked suggests they did.

This does not appear to be a partisan issue, was my point.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

As long as we're talking about the business end of things, here's a nice quote:

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." --Hunter S. Thompson


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

KenOC said:


> As long as we're talking about the business end of things, here's a nice quote:
> 
> ""The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." --Hunter S. Thompson


Could also be said of Wall Street or the Banking Industry (and probably others).


----------

