Jean Michel Jarre: Je voudrais un MUSIC TAX sur VOTRE MOBE Smartphone owners should pay hundreds of dollars to the music industry, wrinkly French synth twiddler Jean Michel Jarre has said. Without the ability to play music, Jarre argued, the gadget wouldn't be worth as much as it currently is. “We should never forget that in the smartphone, the smart part is us creators,” Jarre told …
This is the blank tape argument again. As all blank tapes are ever used for is to copy music (basically piracy) then there should be a tax levied on all blank tapes (guilty without the ability to prove innocence).
Blank phones are just high tech blank tapes. The idea is as stupid now as it was then.
Maybe if a phone was sold that legally had access to ALL media.
It's already been tried in Spain, with a levy on blank digital media (anything you can store songs or films on). The result: Rights-holders bitching about not making enough money and still calling downloading piracy, despite the fact that we've paid already; instantly tanking the blank CD/DVD industry; calls from rights holders for penalties for "infringers" (again, ignoring the fact that we've paid for the privilege of downloading music and films) which the Spanish government have responded to in typically laconic style. There are penalties for enabling sharing, but currently none for downloading.
There has been talk since the law was passed of rescinding the downloading privilege (leaving the levy in place, of course) but it hasn't happened yet. Possibly won't now.
What this has made very clear is that a universal levy won't stop the rights-holders from bitching for more money. They want the money now and they want to call "take-backsies" on any concessions they made in order to get their hands on said money. In the case of Spain, they wanted the levy on blank media AND they wanted us to pay full-fat prices on anything we downloaded...any deviation from that and we're somehow pirates, despite the fact that boats are involved in very few cases.
Hi I use "CD-RW music", you effectively cannot get them here in France, go on the Internet and you have to get them from the UK. You need these if you use a copying machine, possibly a bit long in the tooth but still a lot faster and better for recording music than with a computer and definitely better for recording vinyl. I see that the same situation is realised in Spain. So because these silly politicians have had a little brain storms brought on by their total lack of realising that people are not buying or even wanting to buy French or Spanish music in hordes, those that want to record music from elsewhere are being, or rather an attempt is being done, to get their money to support these poorly subscribed sources of music, to media sources the clients for the media are forced to import. ( does that make sense, The French / Spanish have to buy the "CD-RW music" abroad). Viva la EU. Just think, if the UK were to leave the EU, how many such exports would go to say Rumania
While we're complaining about JMJ not being value for money - I'm still annoyed at going to see him a year or so ago at Wembley - he played for just over an hour - not good value.
Now I'm going to have no chance of justifying the expense of going to the next Houston-type concert.
you see I think all musicians should subsidise my phone and other media players. Without them these musicians would not have got the global reach they have got so not having access to a global market and therefore not being able to make the sales they make that has made them so rich.
Jean Michel Jarre's comments are totally predictable from big-goverment progressives. They see someone is successful, they want a piece without contributing.
Musician's compensation has been set with the price of a CD or song from the iTunes Music Store. They deserve nothing additional.
Music industry has been hurting the past 20 years or so. Its not the fault of technology, its the fault of musicians and music industry for not producing anything anyone wants to buy. I buy about 1 CD every 2 or 3 years because there just isn't anything new worth having. Not even anything worth stealing.
Am getting more than my money's worth out of the first 3 Boston albums, Kansas, Electric Light Orchestra, Jimi Hendrix, Modern Jazz Quartet, Phish, ...
Mmm spot on, My daughter listens to a few modern artistes, however, she bops to things like the Stones, the Who, and the like. She hums many of my genre pop songs and now I hear my grandchildren playing "our" pop songs. As I heard one youngster say why pay for cr4p when you can get decent stuff for free, copy his dads!
Not sure about that. According to the music industry, none of us have 'bought' our CDs, MP3s, vinyl albums or cassette tapes. All we've bought is an exclusive, non transferable licence to LISTEN to the music on whichever media it has been encoded onto.
Therefore, if changing technology decrees that he can no longer get hold of the technology he needs to exercise his limited rights under that licence, isn't it the responsibility of the music industry which granted that licence to provide him with a medium he *can* listen to?
of course, it would mean he has no right to sell the 'obsolete' media without ensuring that someone else doesn't inadvertently listen to music under his personal licence, but it also means that the music industry cannot continue to charge him again and again for the same piece of music just because it's been poured into a different container.
Hi for vinyl I have a Philips machine that copies and records no problem, there are many cheapo machines (that have too much needle downweight and destroy vinyl) that record to MP3 and of course you can do it on a computer with an RIAA amplifier. It is up to you I play my vinyl a very few times and have put them on tape, so without damaging the disc I can listen to Elvis LSP1254 either on MP3 crappy repro or tape or music CD.
You do not HAVE to digitalise them, my amp is about 40 years old, I have another that is almost as old, and a selection of turntables that take Sure M44E or there like.If you have CHOSEN to have a digital bit of kit then that was your choice but there are players out there.
Some say valves make better amps, however they have a harmonics problem hence actually make music if you follow my drift. I did some scope investigation of that little misnomer many years ago.
Maybe the telcos should have a music database, or two?
-- One for licensed, label-distributed music
-- One for indie, non-represented music
Let the labels charge through the ass for their stuff.
Let the indies charge lower, as low as they can.
Let the phone companies help advertise the music, maybe somehow obtaining some portion for subsidizing new phones.
Let the labels watch the indies take in more per track, assuming the listeners want to explore indie music.
If the music plays on the device, the user's account gets billed accordingly. But, not on each device, just one or two. Of course, the users' buy-in would need to be obtained in any case.
Obviously, this probably imperils the labels, but they act as if their existence is a god-given right. Indies are for the most part screwed out of/locked out of playing at venues controlled or manipulated by labels. Indies have to play in small venues which may not be by fire code (occupancy limitations) able to take in the tickets necessary to please the music act as well as the venue owner/operator.
When musicians figure out how to break their contracts, when courts figure out how to say "a signed fuck-job contract is no legal contract at ALL!", when artists figure out how to better self-and-group promote, when venues figure out how to reward indie acts to give them a fair shake, when music consumers figure out how to directly sponsor/suppor indies they like, then musicians the world over may finally regain control of their income streams.
What's that sound..? Sounds like an aluminum and a wooden baseball bat each scraping a wall down the hall from my room... Looks like I'll be needing a wheelchair and two bionic hands pretty soon...
Of course, I would be remiss if I did not recognize that the super-polished acts are where they are (in terms of fame/craze, but not mega-money) because they themselves often do not own nor lease:
-- the hyper-expensive equipment
-- sound studios
-- choreographers
-- promoters/artwork teams/radio/TV promotional outlets
-- shakedown artists who finagle the venue rights
-- the vehicles, aircraft, roadies, and security need to deliver them to and protect them from their fans...
Can anyone tell me why musicians and composers are so special, JMJ doesn't pay his plumber every time he draws water, he doesn't pay his electrician every time he turns a switch on, he doesn't pay the artist every time he looks at his collection of art so why should he and other musicians be paid every time you listen to their music. They should be paid once for their work just like every other worker. The premise that musicians should be paid over and over is a modern premise promulgated by the recording industry and prior to this musicians of talent either earned their keep by performing regularly or by obtaining wealthy sponsors. Modern so called musicians have this belief that we owe them a living & that they shouldn't have to work for it o matter how little talent they have. Just remember that one of the biggest campaigners for the recent extension of copyright on music is that well know Christian Sir Cliff Richard. AFAIC if musicians want paying more than once for their work they need to be intersting enough for me to go and see them more than once, when they have to work for their pay and they have to stop being selfish luvvies and actually appear on time and give a reasonable performance in both time and quality.
I do quite a lot of work for a successful Electro house musician his royalties pay a fair proportion of my wages so I can't complain.
However, the whole thing about royalties going on for years and years or the life of the originator doesn't make complete sense. If a musician, author or actor can get royalties why can't an architect get something for every time someone looks at at one of his (possibly) beautiful buildings?
After all architecture is considered to be fine art so why shouldn't everyone pay to look at it?
I started life painting houses, something that arguably makes them look better so why shouldn't I get paid a royalty for everyone who looked at a house I painted or a carpenter getting paid every time someone goes up the stairs he built?
As for JMJ, the light shows at his concerts where better than the music!
I've always liked Jarre's music and I've bought quite a lot of it. But if he's going to be spouting this stupidity I may not be buying any more. I like to see the artists get paid to, but not by dipping into my pocket every time I buy a new device. And, last time I checked, music wasn't usually free if you obtained it legally (which I do).
When I bought a record player I paid Mr Jarre for his music by buying his music records. When I bought a tape player, I paid Mr Jarre for his music by buying his music tapes. When I bought a CD player I paid Mr Jarre for his music by buying his music CDs. You charge for the content via the charging for the content, not via the hardware.
Jean, if music was free then you might have a point...but it's not, so you don't.
I would quite happily pay a reasonable monthly fee for all you can eat media, maybe one day the industry will stop trying to gouge us both.
yet again, the problem there is whether the money I put in, will get anywhere near the artists I would like to support...you not being one of those artists for me.
I'll stick with bandcamp or the old ways for now thanks.
The thing is and I live in France, France is dans le merde, and further what percentage of the music is French and what percentage is new in French! IF and I say IF his silly idea was adopted, then I perceive that France would receive a greater percentage of monies for its lower percentage of listened to musicians compared to say the UK which has a higher percentage of listened to musicians.
I know that it is possibly historic however it is more salient, take Johnny Holliday and compare with say the Beatles, the Who, The Rolling Stones.
How many in the UK listened to JH and how many in France listened to the Stones.
Yeah, another idiotic French twit that thinks the ROW owes France a living!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
