Top stories this week:
Vacation plans take me up to Bar Harbor this weekend, leaving in an a couple of hours. You won’t see much on the blog until perhaps Sunday night. Until then, stay classy everybody. I’ll leave you with an apropos track by the Mountain Goats.
The Mountain Goats – Going To Maine
I want to take a second to wish the best of travels to my good friend, online mentor, and all around champion of the people, Mr. Colin Ashe. Colin is taking the next long while to see the rest of the world (via Brazil, and then Thailand, and hopefully I can join him next spring in a motorcycle trip from Bangkok to Beijing). He is a tireless advocate of good things, and the States will certainly miss him while he’s out there over the next year or two. His influence in my own life has been most profound, helping me craft an interest in everything from online intellectual property, to Wilco, to Twitter.
Safe travels, Mr. Ashe. I’m sure you all can read about his happenings in true aggregate form via Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Meta.
As I mentioned last week, along with Public Knowledge, Digital Media Insider, and BoingBoing, the Associated Press created incredibly strange, highly unwanted, and potentially superseded by law “quotation licenses” for their content, as a way to make money off of what should simply be a case of fair use. Worse than that, they reserve the right to revoke the licenses if they don’t approve of the use, creating a horrible chilling effect on the free press that Nielsen Hayden illustrates quite well. This week we’ve also seen it come out that the group the AP claimed (and New York Times repeated) to have been negotiating with on behalf of the blogosphere, the Media Bloggers Association, has not met with the AP, nor do they claim to represent the entire blogging world.
My supreme disappointment with an organization I used to hold fairly dear has already manifested itself in a couple rants here. Last night I decided to do something a little more snarky about it:
Announcing The First Four Words, a website which will give you the first four words off of the top AP story once or twice a day. I would give you the full headline, naturally, but that would cost me $12.50, and I’d rather spend that money on some used records and a slice of pizza.
(This is a followup to my earlier post, Devo Sues McDonalds. Read there to get up to speed on the case.)
A couple people asked me what I thought of the second half of Devo’s argument, that the McDonalds toy plays a Devo-esque song. A few in more devout Devo circles (see what I did there?) claim the song the toy plays is a lot like the theme Devo did for the movie Dr. Detroit. Here are the clips. You be the judge.
Devo – Dr. Detroit:
The McDonald’s toy “New Wave Nigel” (thanks to Club Devo for the clip)
doneI’m not a court musicologist, but I’d say Devo better stick to their other arguments.
(image from Flickr user Marshall Astor)
Via Stuff New Zealand, (found off Brooklyn Vegan):
Post-punk pioneers Devo say they are suing McDonald’s in the US over a Happy Meal doll that sports the band’s signature red flower pot hat.
In April the fast food chain released a series of American Idol Happy Meal toys in the US based on a range of music genres, including Disco Dave, Country Clay, Rockin’ Riley and Soulful Selma.
Devo’s complaint relates to New Wave Nigel, a toy kitted out in an orange jumpsuit, pink shades, and Devo’s “energy dome” hat.
The band also allege that the toy plays a “Devo-esque song”.
(thanks to ILoveFastFoodToys for the pic)
My assessment below the cut.
Two of my favorite DJs happen to also be two of my favorite people in the Boston/Northeastern music scene: Ryan, aka DJ Ghostdad, and Aaron, aka Aardvark Chekhov, aka my roommate. Last week we saw the melding of their musical minds on Ghostdad’s MoFo Radio on WZBC. Ryan’s got the link on his blog. Give it a listen. It’s quite solid.
Aardvark Chekhov – Blue Pearl
(Image from Flickr user divertingbailey)
Kanye West’s performance at Boner-Zoo received a lot of flack for its late start time, which depending on who you ask was either due to technical miscommunication between Kanye’s crew and the production staff on the main stage, or simply Kanye being Kanye. Whatever the circumstance (and I for one am inclined to believe it was a little of both), Kanye’s already sleepy start time of 2:45 AM was pushed back to 4:45 AM, meaning the sun was up when the show was supposed to reach its dramatic “Glow in the Dark” peak. This angered many; there’s a pretty fantastic Stereogum thread about the graffiti reactions, including, “Kanye West doesn’t care about ‘Roo people.” Well, today we have Kanye’s reaction. Here it is in its Caps Locked glory.
BONNAROO SHOULD HAVE RELEASED A STATEMENT IN MY DEFENSE BUT SINCE THEY HAVEN’T LET’S BREAK DOWN THE WALLS ON THIS TRUMAN SHOW AND LET YOU KNOW WHAT REALLY OCCURRED!!! FOR OVER A MONTH WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON WETHER OR NOT WE COULD EVEN FIT MY STAGE AT THE FESTIVAL. ONE DAY THEY WOULD SAY YES… WE’D SEND THEM OUR SPECS THEN THEY THEY’D SAY OK… THEN THEY WOULD SEND SPECS BACK THAT DIDN’T FIT THE STAGE. WE WERE OBVIOUSLY DEALING WITH FUCKING IDIOTS WHO DIDN’T REALLY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO REALLY PUT ON THIS SHOW PROPERLY. THEY TRIED 2 GIVE ME A TIME SLOT WERE IT WAS STILL LIGHT OUTSIDE … I HAVE A FUCKING LIGHT SHOW DUMB ASS, IT’S NOT CALLED GLOW IN THE DARK FOR NO REASON SQUID BRAINS!
Superfly Productions (the crew in charge of the Zoo) would have been smart to issue some form of statement explaining what happened, as left to speculation and Kanye’s opinion they too start to look pretty bad. I have no doubt that it was a combination of Kanye’s insistence ideal conditions and prima-donnaism, combined with Superfly’s tight booking and general ambivalence toward Kanye (one of the very brightest stars on the bill) that caused this to occur. On a personal note, I have worked with many of the stage staff at Bonnaroo before, both at the 2006 festival and at other large-scale festivals, and would not characterize them as “fucking idiots.” They are many things, but not unprofessional.
The backlash is felt towards Kanye, but also towards Superfly – many threads are running on message boards asking what Superfly has to do to redeem themselves. The dedicated Bonnaroo fans often call for a return to its original jam- and roots- driven bills. Most people would agree that Metallica was a pretty awkward choice, and that immediately case uncertainty on Superfly’s ability to put up quality bills anymore.
I for one think the festival’s gone far too big for it’s britches, and you can do much better elsewhere these days. There was no organic upbringing for Bonnaroo, like you saw at a Coachella, which grew slowly over many years. Bonnaroo has always struck me as a bloated festival that can’t figure out whether it’s a Gathering of the Vibes or a Millwaukee Summerfest, and constantly tries to tow the line with mixed results. People attend simply because it’s the largest, and quite frankly, we can do better. We all can see there’s no real shortage of festivals these days. I would urge many to look around this summer and next summer and realize that you don’t have to wait in traffic in Manchester to have a good time.
I was planning on writing something about the now-famous MPAA amicus brief filed in Capitol v. Thomas, but I was waiting for a certain much more respected thinker to go first, William Patry. He has made his statement, so here’s my repost and followup.
For those unfamiliar, let me bring you up to speed: The case of Capitol v. Thomas is probably the largest of the volley of lawsuits filed by the RIAA; it is the only one to be brought to a jury trial. The judge presiding on the case asked for briefs from interested parties after he mistakenly advised the jury that the defendant merely had to have the files on her computer for infringement to occur (this, known as Jury Instruction No. 15, is the famous “making available” question that I wrote about here, here, and here back in April). The MPAA, on the very last day briefs were accepted, filed a brief which stated the following:
The fundamental issue raised by Jury Instruction No. 15 is whether the Copyright Act renders such conduct (the unauthorized making available of copyrighted works over a P2P network) unlawful, as that instruction states, or whether such conduct is unlawful only if “actual distribution has been shown” — which, as MPAA understands it, means the copyright owner must provide direct proof that specific individuals downloaded specific works the defendant made available. 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; understandibly, copyright infringers typically do not keep records of infringement. Mandating that proof could have the pernicious effect of depriving copyright owners of a practical remedy against massive copyright infringement in many instances.
It’s a sad and compelling story, no doubt, but consider the last line of the statement. They try and slip something by that must be (and has been) met with a good deal of resistance. In this sentence, “[m]andating that proof” is a subtle way of saying “insisting on innocence until guilt is proven.” The MPAA is trying to argue that they do not need to actually catch someone in order to collect on a lawsuit. We as a country have more than a little pride in that peculiar tenant of our legal system, and the MPAA cannot take that away even if the cost is infringement.
More to the point, US law explicitly states what rights a copyright holder has (reproduction, distribution, derivative works, and so on) and “making available” isn’t one of them. The brief goes on from here to talk of world treaties and obligations, all surrounding the notion that making available is (or should be) sufficient to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars from single mothers in Brainerd, Minnesota (cue Fargo reference about “settling it here… in Brainerd.”).
Too bad for the MPAA that this is not how our law works, and it’s here that copyright sage William Patry begins his systematic disintegration of the MPAA’s arguments. You can read his post here.
According to Patry, much can be read into the fact that the MPAA leads their brief with an international argument. This shows that they think their domestic argument for “making available” is weak. To address this, Patry notes that the 1996 WIPO treaty (like most international treaties) draws copyright protection in broad strokes, and leaves it to the nations to determine the what’s and how’s of copyright. The MPAA presents no evidence that (1) “making available” is a guaranteed right to all treaty members or (2) WIPO does not require actual infringement to go after infringers. They are tying to draw a specificity into WIPO where no such specificity exists. While some partner countries may protect a creator’s right to make their works available, the US does not, and all countries rely on actual and not potential infringement. Central to their second (domestic) argument is the 1804 Supreme Court case of Murray v. The Charming Betsy, which only applies if the statue is ambiguous. The law is specific, but limited. The MPAA seems to miss that point, or gets it and is leading the court astray. Regardless, I hope the court realizes this deliberate attempt to drastically redraw the bounds of the law, and doesn’t play ball.
I have a hunch I’m in a race with OhRyan to repost this. A bunch of my friends and former co-workers did up a series of sketches for a work project that was canned before it was ever released. I for one was afraid these comedy bits would never see the light of day. Now they’re back and better than ever as an independent release. From Evan, Taylor, Jake, Paul and Dan, here’s WowManWow:
Found via Evan on his blog, Let’s Get Tight.
Woops. Forgot to do the weekly ritual of posting the top stories of the week over the weekend. Here they are:
I want to end the night with an exclusive recording done by three of my best friends. Two of my bandmates, friends, and nearly newlyweds – Jackie and Stacey – have rocked my radio shows for years with their ambient noise experiments and general comedy fun. Last week they wrote a straight-up pop song (kinda), recorded by dear friend and Sitcom Mom Bethany. Here’s the result:
The name of the track is “Green Vinyl Shoes (Walking Down Beacon Street On A Cold Autumn Day With My Love On My Mind)” it hits a really lovely Moldy Peaches sort of aesthetic, which is wonderful for these too (and Bethany’s fandom of the band comes through quite well in her production). Hope you enjoy.
