How are mashups posing a potential threat to copyright laws online?

In the New Yorker article entitled, “1+1+1=1: The New Math of Mashups”, Sasha Frere-Jones stated that “Mashups find new uses for current digital technology, a new iteration of the cause-and-effect relationship behind almost every change in pop-music aesthetics: the gear changes, and then the music does. If there is an electric guitar of the mashup, it is a software package called Acid Pro, which enables one to put loops of different songs both in time and in tune with each other.”. clients made music to pick up prominence from their fans and their tunes could top the graphs in the music business, at that point what happens when two accounts were joined to make a ground-breaking tune that could spread a message about the world around people, that is known as a mashup. There are two meanings of a mashup: in music, a mashup is a chronicle made by carefully consolidating and synchronizing instrumental tracks with vocal tracks from at least two unique tunes, while in processing, it’s a website page or application made by joining information or usefulness from various places.

 

Piracy and Privacy

Piracy is something we’ve been seeing since the history of the mankind, this is an old Viking term that means to board someone else’s ship and rob them of all of their treasures to claim as your own. This is an issue for anyone who owns something but someone with a volatile approach takes what they wanted from you, but piracy has taken on a new identity in this day and age. It’s all about media piracy, people will bootleg films and music to sell it at a cheaper rate because it either isn’t readily available or the person looking for the product isn’t in a position to pay full price to experience it. This is something more common than usual because we live in an era where if you don’t experience something from an authorized outlet then you can go to easy lengths to get around that issue to still experience it without having the sign up for any streaming sites, paying for a movie ticket or purchasing an album.

In the article “You Will Never Kill Piracy, and Piracy Will Never Kill You ” states: “As technology continues to evolve, the battle between pirates and copyright holders is going to escalate, and pirates are always, always going to be one step ahead. What’s clear is that legislation is not the answer. Piracy is already illegal in the US, and most places around the world, yet it persists underground, but more often in plain sight. Short of passing a law that allows the actual blacklisting of websites like China and Iran, there is no legislative solution.  That’s what SOPA and PIPA were attempting to do, but it so obviously trampled on the First Amendment, it was laughed out of existence as the entire internet protested it. The only other thing you could get the internet to agree on was if they tried to institute a ban on cat pictures.” This is something that will go on no matter what happens because there’s so much too people who disagree with their attempts to regulate this issue. This is something that that world will eventually have to come to terms with because this all a rebellious act to help those who don’t have the means to experience the way these production companies package it.

Pirate Bay was a pioneer in this field to spread information on a pirated website, but they never actually broke the law or anything along the lines. This company made sure to just spread the information of where you can find the torrents in order to download the files/software you’re seeking. In the article “The Pirate Bay shutdown: the whole story” states: “the day before the shutdown, nearly 102 million IP addresses were downloading torrented movies and TV shows. That dropped to 95 million the day after the December 9th shutdown, but by last Friday, pirate traffic was back up to just over 100 million IP addresses performing peer-to-peer downloads. A decrease? Sure, but nothing all that dramatic; this is a direct result of the hydra-like nature of piracy outfits in general. More or less, a series of shutdowns led to The Pirate Bay’s rise to prominence anyway. Napster got shut down and LimeWire quickly took its place. LimeWire was replaced by uTorrent, and uTorrent is the current go-to for torrenting”, so this will be the way of life for illegal downloads it seems because as soon as you shut down one outlet, another rises to take the last persons spot. These companies have to battle this from losing their money because as they’re investing in the products to be sold, people are copying them and selling them at a fraction or if you want to run the risk you can download it for free online.

All in all, I personally feel like piracy is hurting the copyright online, but this is also bringing awareness to the issues that these companies face when being in the position they’re in. They have to find a way to make money but at a price point, at a convenience and in timely positions where consumers are willing to invest in the authentic distributer versus going to the internet for a third-party torrent to get it for free. It’s going to be an interesting journey to experience from the consumers perspective to see how major production handles the new problems that may arise from their actions in the first place.

Online Communities

Social networks are a major source in today’s age with everything that can be done through these sites. People have launched their careers from some social media platforms and even utilized it to make sure that they have a steady stream of income through companies who are giving out sponsorships for people who have influence on social media to bring more customers their way. Social media has even helped people around the globe find their missing family members because they would post a photo of who they are and where they lost got to see them but someone from another area would reply and give them information to bring their loved ones back together. We all see what social media has done to society, people are a lot less social in person, people have made an ideal version of themselves online while trying to turn themselves into the identity they’ve created and made a lot of people chase the fame and try their hardest to be in the loop by being “viral” but that’s all short lived to the possibilities that social media may provide because in the grand scheme of it all…This is a FREE platform that gives everyone an opportunity to learn, communicate, and expand around the world to create opportunities for yourself that you would’ve had a more difficult time achieve without it.

In the article “Social Network Sites: Public, Private, or What?” it states: “These three features – profiles, Friends lists, and comments – comprise the primary structure of social network sites, although individual sites provide additional features for further engagement. While SNSes allow visitors to wander from Friend to Friend and communicate with anyone who has a visible profile, the primary use pattern is driven by pre-existing friend groups. People join the sites with their friends and use the different messaging tools to hang out, share cultural artifacts and ideas, and communicate with one another.” And this is what makes social media a blessing. There’s no regulation, there’s no fees or even someone trying to extort you to explore the networks, but you have all of the information you need to make all of the difference in your personal life because of what these three elements in social media allow you to do. This is beyond a blessing because there was a point in time where people needed to send a letter to communicate with someone who lives a long distance away from you, but social media changed all of this. Nowadays you can just turn on your phone and send them a text, a direct message via social media or you can even use an app for international texting, calls and video calling. This is a new time of communication which has become the new standard.

Media Theory

The medium is very important to how we consume media due to how much society may rely on it to consume their information and continue to spread information. Sometimes it’s hard to decipher who’s an authentic source because it’s shown that people tend to manipulate media in order to push a narrative that may not be true or accurate to what’s being discussed. The people who are looking to see the truth and are looking to get the latest news have to make sure they to make a conscious effort traversing through mediums to get this information. Also, with that being said the way we consume media also may be result in the act of job loss because these mediums spread news and print media may not be able to keep up. There was a point in time where print media and radio dominated the airwaves and general public to keep everyone informed because technology wasn’t as advanced as it is nowadays. This upgrade in media that’s based around everyone’s computer, cell phone or even smartwatch to consume their information without having to waste paper or wait for the radio when they can get an instant notification about what’s happening.

In the article “The Medium is the Message” General David Sarnoff said “We are too prone to make technological instruments the scapegoats for the sins of those who wield them. The products of modern science are not in themselves good or bad; it is the way they are used that determines their value”, and that’s what we see if happening today too often. People are manipulating the tools we have to spread information in the name of their personal motives that they see fit and a message they want to cast into the social atmosphere that’s already clouded with information that people are still deciphering to be true not. This is a special time in society because we have to work very hard as a society to make sure that we aren’t consuming the wrong information on a daily basis because of its popularity but by the content they’re distributing to the masses. This alone is an issue to combat on its own in the future because seeing that analog is becoming a thing of the past and our lives are becoming more involved and dependent upon with autonomous technology, the message we send on it should be one to keep people on a frequency to where we’re all learning and gathering the right information versus the hot takes that people use as their personal outlet of journalism/newscasting.

Mashups

In simple terms, mashups are generally when the vocal from one song is laid over the music from another. In the article “1+1+1=1 The New Math of Mashups,”  a well-known mashup album called “Collision Course” is a combination of Linkin Park’s vocals with work from Jay Z’s “The Black Album” which proved to be an issue because “Jay’s song ‘99 Problems’ uses two huge samples and has four different credited publishers. That’s before you’ve added anyone else’s music to it, which would be yet another publisher or two. Making a mashup with that song means the label issuing the mashup has to convince all the publishers involved to take a reduction in royalty—otherwise, it won’t be profitable for the label.” According to Wikipedia, a royalty is a payment made by one party, the licensee or franchisee to another that owns a particular asset, the licensor or franchisor for the right to ongoing use of that asset. So to ask the other publishers to take a reduction in payment clearly proves to be an issue because it’s the limbo of whether the label as a whole earning profit is more important than the publishers themselves earning a greater profit. Also, the level at which the artists are at is important because the publishers won’t want to agree to earning less profit if the aren’t well-known as Jay Z or Linkin Park. One of the main issues will always be the labels wanting to ensure that they are gaining some profit from the mashup even though the only part they had in it would be the the ownership rights to the vocals or beats from the artists under their name. I’m the same article, it was stated that you can “See mashups as piracy if you insist, but it is more useful, viewing them through the lens of the market, to see them as an expression of consumer dissatisfaction. Armed with free time and the right software, people are rifling through the lesser songs of pop music and, in frustration, choosing to make some of them as good as the great ones.”  This is one of the main potential threats to copyright laws online because you can’t argue with the fact that most people create mashups because they are unhappy with the choice of songs being released by various labels/artists. People have an idea of what they want to hear or what songs/artists they think would make a great combination and if the labels aren’t giving the people what they want, you can’t blame them for wanting to take matters into their own hands and create music they crave. Most of the time people want to hear something new, fresh, different and many artists continuously release similar sounds and beats on every album. There is no ill intention in mind when people create these mashups and it’s technically not stealing or interfering with profits, so that’s the real threat is that there is no threat. Companies/labels want to make profit from the hard work and passion that people who create mashups possess, but will not give back any form of profit when they take our creative ideas and claim them as their own.

Mashups

How are mashups posing a potential threat to copyright laws online?

 

A mashup, is a technique that allows for a website, or web applicator to use data from different sources to create a new content. Mashups, are definitely posing a threat to copyright laws online because, everything is accessible for you to use and even though copyright laws prevents you from stealing content there are still loopholes to get around them. For example, in the article 1+1+1=1 by Sasha Frere-Jones, the author breaks down to us what one Dj did to create a “new content”, but was it really “new”?. The author states “Using digital software, Brown isolated instrumental elements of “Debra,” a song by Beck from his 1999 album “Midnite Vultures.” Brown, who is thirty-three and has studied with Max Roach, adjusted the tempo of “Debra” and added live drums and human beat-box noises that he recorded at his small but tidy house in Long Island City. Then he sifted through countless a-cappella vocals archived on several hard drives. Some acappellas are on commercially released singles, specifically intended for d.j. use, while others appear on the Internet, having been leaked by people working in the studio where the song was recorded, or sometimes even by the artist.” Later she states that after finding the right vocals for the song, they are no longer to different songs but now one, “Frontin’ on Debra” is an example of a “mashup,” in which, generally, the vocal from one song is laid over the music from another. I think that Mashup is a form of piracy because you are taking someone’s work, changing its form and calling it yours,  However the article doesn’t see mashups as piracy “Mashup artists like Vidler, Kerr, and Brown have found a way of bringing pop music to a formal richness that it only rarely reaches. See mashups as piracy if you insist, but it is more useful, viewing them through the lens of the market, to see them as an expression of consumer dissatisfaction.”

 

Mashups

Mashups are when content gets remixed or people remix online content. It creates a potential threat to copyrights due to producers creating their own media based off of a original idea. So, they are not stealing, just editing it to their own taste. With copyright, it is mandatory to receive permission to use someone else’s content and upload it. With remixes, no one can claim their music if someone else’s vocals are over it.

With new technology, we have many ways to avoid having copyright issues. We learn to move around the law and find ways to download content. If we did not depend on websites like youtube, Vimeo, etc, it would be easier to keep track of. Frere-Jones states “See mashups as piracy if you insist, but it is more useful, viewing them through the lens of the market, to see them as an expression of consumer dissatisfaction.” In a way, I agree. Not all remixes are due to dissatisfaction, but they become more creative or brings good vocal and good beats together. Many artists listen to songs like “I wish I had thought of that first” or “I wish I heard that beat first.” Now, thanks to remixes we don’t have to worry about stealing ideas because we can just add on to it.

I do not think mash ups and piracy are necessarily the same thing. Piracy is downloading illegal files that someone has shared online. Mash ups are simply editing over media that has already been used. Piracy is kept more secret, remixes are public and sometimes tend to receive more attention than the original.

Mashups = A Threat to Copyright Laws? By Jaritza Flores-Garcia

Copyright laws were made to ensure the safety and security of the World Wide Web but in some situations, users made music to gain popularity from their fans and their songs could top the charts in the music business, then what happens when two recordings were combined to create a powerful song that could spread a message about the world around humans, that is called a mashup. There are two definitions of a mashup: in music, a mashup is a recording created by digitally combining and synchronizing instrumental tracks with vocal tracks from two or more different songs, while in computing, it’s a web page or application created by combining data or functionality from different sources. Mashups could create new things by mixing two or more objects together so users could get the hang of them but are mashups a threat to copyright laws so users could use them to get more songs?

In the New Yorker article entitled, “1+1+1=1: The New Math of Mashups”, Sasha Frere-Jones pointed out that “Mashups find new uses for current digital technology, a new iteration of the cause-and-effect relationship behind almost every change in pop-music aesthetics: the gear changes, and then the music does. If there is an electric guitar of the mashup, it is a software package called Acid Pro, which enables one to put loops of different songs both in time and in tune with each other.” This quote is a fact that musicians used software packages to create more mashups so they could give them out to their fans without the hassle. Another example is Corey Moss’ MTV article, “Grey Album Producer Danger Mouse Explains How He Did It”, which is about the producer of the Grey Album, Brian Burton and a mashup between hip-hop icon Jay-Z and 1960s British band The Beatles. Moss explained that “In December when he heard Jay-Z was releasing an a cappella version of The Black Album for remixers, he came up with a crazy idea to blend it with the Beatles’ famous The White Album and make The Grey Album. Three months and a cease-and-desist letter later, the album is at the center of a massive downloading debate and is the most in-demand piece of media since the Paris Hilton sex tape.” He also stated that “As the album has become a cultural landmark, though, Burton has felt a need to explain the process behind it. A cease-and-desist letter he can handle, but hordes of rookie remixers thinking it takes a couple of days to make a similar album is burning Burton.” This quote made me believe that mashups can make the music industry more relevant to its advantage in society.

Mashups not only does work in music but also work in computing that in the Mute article, “InfoEnclosure 2.0”, Dmytri Kleiner and Brian Wyrick mentioned about the use of Web 2.0 that “The value produced by users of Web 2.0 services such as YouTube is captured by capitalist investors. In some cases, the actual content they contribute winds up the property of site owners. Private appropriation of community created value is a betrayal of the promise of sharing technology and free cooperation. Unlike Web 1.0, where investors often financed an expensive capital acquisition, software development and content creation, a Web 2.0 investor mainly need to finance hype-generation, marketing, and buzz. The infrastructure is widely available for cheap, the content is free and cost of the software, at least that much of it that is not also free, is negligible. Basically, by providing some bandwidth and disk space, you are able to become a successful internet site if you can market yourself effectively.” This meant that Capitalists wanted to use Web 2.0 as an investment so they could earn millions or billions of dollars for their business.

In the end, mashups are truly a threat to copyright laws online because people wanted to use their money to finance websites so they could make them private without sharing online content to users in society today but users could take down capitalism by creating websites that feature sharing technology and freedom to ensure their safety and security for the Internet.

mashups

How are mashups posing a potential threat to copyright laws online?

 

Mashups are posting a potential threat to the copyright laws especially in this generation because it is so easy to do now. In today’s world music is easily made through apps and software and mashing up songs together has been more easier than ever. Personally, I sometimes find myself listening to mashed up songs from artist that are passed away and having their voice on a more modern instrumental. For example :

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC2-_L1TomY

2Pac ft. Lil Uzi Vert – XO TOUR Llif3 Remix (Produced By TM88)

 

When it comes to the copyright laws this can cause a lot of harm because these songs are fan made and money is not getting pushed through that artist and the record label. It’s almost like it getting stolen from the artist without permission. They are ways you can get certain permission for things sampled from songs although a large amount of your pay will go to them as well.

 

Something similar is happening in the youtube world,YouTube is forcing major media companies to opt in or out of participatory culture — with companies like MTV Networks enabling certain content to circulate through this channel or several major Japanese media companies deciding to yank their anime-related content off last week.” With these copyright claims, it’s almost impossible to make things like the old anime music videos that people around my age group use to watch that were once popular when youtube was first introduced to the public. I feel like it isn’t fair because people should have the freedom to use what they want especially  if it’s for non profit at least. It mashups don’t really hurt the sales of the music listener as much because they usually come out much after the song is released somewhat making it more relevant again.

 

“Capitalism, rooted in the idea of earning income by way of idle share ownership, requires centralised control, without which peer producers have no reason to share their income with outside shareholders. Capitalism, therefore, is incompatible with free P2P networks, and thus, so long as the financing of internet development comes from private shareholders looking to capture value by owning internet resources, the network will only become more restricted and centralised.”

Mashups

Mashups are starting to become more common in the music industry today. Mashups are when two or more artists collaborate and create a new type of sound. One artist can supply the beats while the other artist supplies the lyrics. Mashups are innovative ways to bring the fans fresh, new sounds. Mashups could also be when the vocals from one song is laid over the music from another. Youtube is an app that has many examples of mashups. Youtubers always feature each other on videos without violating the copyright laws. However when it comes to copyright laws, it becomes complicated in the music industry. Record labels and artists always want to protect their music but at the same time, they like the artistic freedom they have to put their spin on another person’s song. In the article 1+1+1=1 The new math of mashups by Sasha Frere-Jones, “Mark Vidler, known professionally as Go Home Productions, explained some other benefits of digital technology to me in London not long ago: “You don’t need a distributor, because your distribution is the Internet. You don’t need a record label, because it’s your bedroom, and you don’t need a recording studio, because that’s your computer. You do it all yourself.” The internet makes it easier for artists to find new sounds that they could put their own spin to and make a profit. Copyright laws online are being threatened by mashups in a sense that music that comes from searching the web does not always have copyrights. I believe that it is not fair that artists don’t always get paid when someone uses their song for a mashup but at the same time, if the artist changes the song enough to make it sound original they should be free to do as they wish. It is becoming impossible to not violate copyright laws online. Even if a regular person posts a video with music playing can get their post taken down because that person does not own rights to the song. The exact situation happened with Jacquees when he put his spin on Ella Mai’s song “Boo’d Up”. Ella Mai made Jacquees take his version of the song down because he did not own copyrights to the song. Copyright laws are needed to ensure that artists get paid for their work but at the same time, artists should be able to use other artists’ songs to create unique sounds and keep their fans satisfied.