T M Krishna and Vijay Siva Speak Against Concert Recording

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 29 Aug 2010, 23:19

>>music and medicine idellam professionla serkalama?<<
Translation: Can we characterize music and medicine as professions?

YES, positively, in these times. Way back medicine was also dispensed free or "from each according to his ability" basis. Music was sustained by wealthy benevolent landlords.

Now doctors have incorporated themselves. They have business advisors, accountants, and insurance companies to work with. They ask for the money before they even start looking at you (in India) or ask for your insurance card (both in India and elsewhere). Likewise, the musician negotiates the remuneration before he/she agrees to perform. So, yes, they are businesses and are subject to the same rules as other businesses--such as grocery, restaurants, transportation, and others.

carnaticlaw · Post by **carnaticlaw** » 30 Aug 2010, 02:38

Way back medicine was also dispensed free or "from each according to his ability" basis.

MK,

Obama is as such facing a lot with it

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 23 May 2012, 07:52

I wonder how the new Copyright bill affects classical music?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 401993.cms

varsha · Post by **varsha** » 23 May 2012, 08:47

I wonder how the new Copyright bill affects classical music?

Answer lies here
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 446658.ece

And look at this beautiful bit !!!
Quote
The copy which promised abundance but then threatens to eat into the ..... seems to parallel the larger movement of the word copy, whose etymological roots in copia (“plenty”) moves in English from an original sense of “abundance” to the more recent sense of derivativeness. It passes, thereby, from a sense of plenty to a sense of scarcity.
Unquote
The choice for CM ARTISTS , is between abundance and scarcity , hundreds of years down the road.

venkatakailasam · Post by **venkatakailasam** » 06 Jan 2015, 19:47

Ragam thanam varnam.....Shri TM Krishna at MA 2012...

This clip was lying in my files for long unattended..

I requested Shri TM K for permission to share as I am sure many would not have listened to it: but comments were flowing...

With out any hesitation He permitted me
I am forwarding it to the moderator by mail to satisfy himself...

TMK 003- RTV - Bhairavi - Pallavi....

http://mfi.re/listen/2sk25ln4rs8skph/TM ... allavi.mp3

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 06 Jan 2015, 21:57

V'kailasam, acknowledged

raghukumar · Post by **raghukumar** » 07 Jan 2015, 02:42

It seems nobody has answered this question: what is the actual LAW when it comes to an artist asking a audience member to stop recording? Does the artist have that right or not?

venkatakailasam · Post by **venkatakailasam** » 07 Jan 2015, 06:08

While going on the road say with your family, some one take snaps..What will you do?

harimau · Post by **harimau** » 07 Jan 2015, 10:14

venkatakailasam wrote:While going on the road say with your family, some one take snaps..What will you do?

It is not uncommon in Chennai for guys to take pictures with their cell phones of attractive girls in the beach and other public places.

A friend caught a guy who took a photo of his daughter and threatened to call the police. The guy promptly erased the photo.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 07 Jan 2015, 10:29

vk,
Your counter question seems to be erroneous. Taking your photo by a wayfarer is infringement of your privacy. But concert is a public function where the artist comes with full knowledge of what to expect. He can at best ask for IPR and then he is being paid for the concert - isn't it? Isn't payment a compensation for IPR? How the vocal signer only gets IPR, every artist - including accompanyists have IPR; the sabha has IPR. The lyricist has IPR; the composer has IPR. How the main artist can arrogate to himself all the IPR of the concert?

Rsachi · Post by **Rsachi** » 07 Jan 2015, 10:32

This is less of a legal and technology issue and more of a moral and ethical issue.
Musicians give us through their music their life blood. They live and die by their music. It is a different matter that some of them have parallel careers in writing, speaking and acting.
Recording secretly their music without their permission is ethically wrong and causes a chasm between the listener and musician.
I am glad Sri. Kailasam wrote and obtained permission from TMK.
Thanks.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 07 Jan 2015, 11:07

Ethically it is wrong ( unfortunately). There are ubiquitous devices to record as much those many cracking programs for protected softwares. This is tantamount to that. Rec = cracking, I mean .

The problem is when we place the musicians in a different pedestal and accord them with a special status. If a musician has his music as one of his means of survival , which clearly is these days, he would mind getting recorded slyly. Musicians are as much a profession like anything else when it involved public staging and if he sees that as a long time career. If the same musician is performing free of cost and does not want to make a living out of it and does singing truly for his pleasure , then it may be unethical of him to stop someone recording his music. In such a case he would want his music to be more and recorded so it spreads musical knowledge in people. Wearing their shoes , it is not easy to allow someone recording if you have a long term plan to pursue as a singer , of course SANS remuneration.

Trinities would not have minded definitely.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 07 Jan 2015, 16:20

The law is simple, and I think that it must have been covered in the previous pages of this and other threads. It can be a condition of admittance that recording is prohibited, but also every performance belongs to the performer (or the organisation presenting it, depending on the performer's contract).

I don't think there is any comparison with photographing people on the street or the beach (even musicians!) which is not illegal at all unless it crosses the line into the sordid. Unwanted attention may well lead to a punch in the face: the punch would probably be less legal than the pic, even though the morality may be on the side of the puncher.

sridhar_ranga · Post by **sridhar_ranga** » 07 Jan 2015, 18:01

does the sabha or a press photographer have rights to photograph the audience?

what can I do if have an objection, other than cover my face with a shawl? i may not want to be caught nodding appreciatively at the tup-tup dugu-dugu alapana, or worse still, a monkey song or a fat ghost song! I mean whoever on this forum would like to end up as the tiger's next meal?

venkatakailasam · Post by **venkatakailasam** » 07 Jan 2015, 19:43

"I don't think there is any comparison with photographing people on the street "

Nick...can I differ with you...??

Taking unauthorized snaps at will is to abuse the vulnerability...of privacy..if you go around taking photos of people without their knowledge, you are being a creep. ...

What is needed is not law – we have law enough already – but a consensus to take the notion of privacy in a public place seriously..

Shri vgovindan..

As Nick says every performance belongs to the performer (or the organisation presenting it, depending on the performer's contract). ..
Also, it is more of a moral and ethical issue.

Why one does not want to approach the performer and take his permission for recording?? and do things in a clandestine manner?

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 07 Jan 2015, 20:12

I am not in favour of clandestine recording - that is totally unethical. However, I am not at all in agreement with the statement "every performance belongs to performer..." CM concert is not a Rock show where the lyrics and music belongs to the performer. Excepting for Manodharma aspects, every kRti, varnam, etc sung by the performers cannot be appropriated by the performers and also assuming that the 'performer' here means the complete ensemble and not the main singer only. This is the reason why accompanyists are totally neglected in so far as remuneration is concerned. In the absence of 'troupe' culture, CM accompanyists will always be at the mercy of main artists.

balakk · Post by **balakk** » 07 Jan 2015, 20:18

VK Sir, since we are stretching metaphors here, may I offer a counter metaphor? Suppose you visit a tourist attraction in some nice location, and you want to preserve the moment as photos/audios/videos. Would you prefer that you ask for permission? Does that feel unethical to you? Most tourist attractions in India have started fleecing customers for this as well

I'd say it's unethical for an artist to prevent how I enjoy/preserve the musical experience that I paid for. Public distribution of that is an entirely different matter - it has no relation to the act of recording. Asking permission for publicly redistributing it is perfectly fine; I don't see a problem with that at all.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 07 Jan 2015, 21:49

Photography and the law is a much talked about subject in Camera related web sites.
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2012/ ... ate-guide/

In the U.S., taking photographs that are plainly visible from public places is fine. Creepy, but Harimau's example is a legally protected use case

Don't know about India.

Anyway, the contexts of photography and a music concert are quite different.

VK RAMAN · Post by **VK RAMAN** » 07 Jan 2015, 21:54

99% of those who record are sincere Carnatic Music fans and rasikas and stifling them will only hurt the artists. These fans are amateurs and the atmosphere of recording is completely polluted unlike a recording instrument professionally used by artists commercial organizations. They are making a mountain out of molehill. Give it freely and see how their officially recorded music sells.

SrinathK · Post by **SrinathK** » 07 Jan 2015, 22:01

TMK has talked about it in his book ... the one thing that hurts an artiste when they give their life's effort to making that musical creation but only to see it taken away without so much as a word or a request. It would be better if it was all transparent and mutual. Again, back in the day when recordings were scarce the efforts of rasikas did a lot to preserve some REALLY valuable treasures of music (even by sneakily recording some artistes who did not like their recordings being heard in places they did not like). We have to give them credit for this. But today, it's rather the opposite problem in the information explosion age where there is too much info and with the exception of a global digital catastrophe, there really isn't a cause to fear about lost music. But that also creates the problem of some stupid algorithms that aren't letting us record our own bathroom music

Meanwhile I still have a huge bunch of cassettes at home that are desperately in need of being converted to Mp3 before they go extinct ... (While most of them have been bought over a couple of decades, I bought a couple of hundred or so from a now deceased rasika who spent 50 years buying the equivalent of a few rooms (!) worth of cassettes quite a few of which were unfortunately lost (!!) by him in some accidents

, but even then I have never found some of those recordings elsewhere! I was told by his family that he had a few thousand cassettes with him when he was alive -- talk about music preservation efforts!). To think that all those recordings would fit in about 400 GB which is just 40% of a typical laptop HDD today ... unimaginable.

Anyway, in the last couple of years I have taken a step towards buying more recordings and commercial releases of all current artists, downloading only those I feel are rare and not in commercial release (that too now I only choose artists who are long gone) -- that itself is a lot. Can't buy that much though, despite moving on from cassette to DVD and the like, the DVD packages are if anything, only bigger than ever and are in fact occupying more space than the cassettes used to do. Haven't explored paid internet downloads yet. Should see where I go from here. But yeah, nothing compares to the quality of a proper professional recording. Proactive effort to sustain the future of CM rather than being reactive about the present time is what I think should be the contribution of today's "i-age rasika".

PS : Besides, my old obsessive collector's tendency has faded somewhat now that I am able to make my own music, play my own swaras and all. But all one has to do to awaken the devil is to say the word "rare"...

Rsachi · Post by **Rsachi** » 07 Jan 2015, 22:14

I know people are in their right when they object to being photographed, even in public places and near monuments.

venkatakailasam · Post by **venkatakailasam** » 08 Jan 2015, 19:42

balak.... yes at certain places snaps are prohibited...Tourists who snap the Eiffel tower at night are breaking copyright laws

The purpose for which you take the snap is the deciding factor...
Here, many people indulge in clandestine recording...the purpose will not be known to the Artist..
Shri vkr..This particular clip...RTV by TMK is not commercially available...as I understand..

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 08 Jan 2015, 20:18

in another thread the copy right issue was discussed and many questions were raised about the claims by recording companies. However, in this thread there seems to be convergence of opinion that performers have complete right over the concert recording. In what way this is different from the claim of the companies? Isn't it a contradiction?

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 09 Jan 2015, 08:53

Not at all: it is the difference between rights in an original work, in the performance of a work, and in a particular reproduction or recording of a work. This has been explained lots of times.

I guess it is a little difficult to grasp that, unlike a car or a cooking pan, there is no one simple ownership of an object when it comes to an artistic work, but many different rights.

If you have ever bought an original picture, you own it, but you almost certainly do not (unless you have it in writing) own the copyright. However, even if the artist wants others to reproduce it, as owner of the object you can still say, "No, you may not enter my house and photograph this picture." That is how galleries control reproduction of objects which, like this music, have long since ceased to have any copyright: they control the access, and the terms on which they allow such access.

CRama · Post by **CRama** » 09 Jan 2015, 09:47

VK Sir, I wanted to hear the Varnam with Ragam and thanam. BUt in that clip, there are two Viribonis by TMK- One normal varnam and another with neraval and swarams. NO ragam or thanam. KIndly check up.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 09 Jan 2015, 20:42

Nick,
Thanks for explaining the difference with example.
Taking the example cited by you, is a CM concert an original work? Is each concert an original work?
When the Swaras are finite, when the rAgas are finite, when the contours of rAga are finite,when the lyrics are finite and belong to someone else - all that can be called original is the manodharma aspect of concert only. Therefore, how it is claimed that the whole performance belongs to the performer? What is the role of accompanists?
Unless there are clear rules formulated in this regard, it is futile to counter the claims of recording companies. I am fully aware that the recording companies can insist on not copying the material like the art galleries not allowing photography of their collection. But there is a crucial difference - a music record is not art piece in the gallery meant only for display - it is for sale and that too duly replicated.
The statement that musicians have given their life blood is true only to a limited extent. That argument is applicable to any profession.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 09 Jan 2015, 21:11

is a CM concert an original work?

It is a unique performance and there are performing rights. The rules are actually clear, but the music world itself, with all the Youtube stuff as per other threads, is not helping to make, or keep it clear.

As I have mentioned in other threads, I know a little bit about copyright, albeit a little outdated, from a previous job: I know almost nothing about performing rights, other than existence, and the principle of the difference. I can compare it by analogy to my former work like this: The Mona Lisa is absolutely not still in copyright, but the prints published by my former employer most certainly are. Nothing to stop another publisher making their reproduction from the original, but everything to stop them making one from our print.

VK RAMAN · Post by **VK RAMAN** » 09 Jan 2015, 21:16

One's voice can be a copyright if one can prove that it is his/her voice. Everything else unless ones own lyrics/composition, IMHO is not copy-right able.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 09 Jan 2015, 23:03

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Related_rights#Performers

"Related rights are independent of any authors' rights, as is made clear in the various treaties (Art. 1 Rome; Art. 7.1 Geneva; Art. 1.2 WPPT). Hence a CD recording of a song is concurrently protected by four copyright-type rights:
Authors' rights of the composer of the music
Authors' rights of the lyricist
Performers' rights of the singer and musicians
Producers' rights of the person or corporation that made the recording"

What about Authors' rights which precede that of performers?

askn · Post by **askn** » 10 Jan 2015, 17:13

IMHO the simple solution is for the artist to record the concert and make it available. Can be made available for streaming and / or download
They can do it on their own website , YouTube or across the various streaming platforms or produce a CD for sale.
This should go in some way to address everyone's concerns / needs.
The rasikas get to listen to the concert again at any time , it becomes available to listen to rasikas who we unable to attend the concert .
The artist can earn royalties etc from YouTube or the streaming services or from sale of the download / CD.
This meets everyone main requirements , compliant with copyright laws , available for posterity and less angst

pattamaa · Post by **pattamaa** » 10 Jan 2015, 20:58

very good idea... love it..

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 10 Jan 2015, 23:31

askn, even that requires a deal to be worked out between the sabha and the artists, I think. But yes, they can do that and that is what Sanjay does.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 11 Jan 2015, 12:02

askn, what you suggest is happening --- and you can see on this forum that, even when no copyright law is broken, the record companies and youtube/google are still causing a great deal of trouble and pain.

There is nothing wrong with the principles of copy- and performance rights, but it seems that the system, not the principle, is completely broken.

In the context of this particular thread, you also have to add to all that, "but what if they don't want to?"

askn · Post by **askn** » 11 Jan 2015, 14:48

vasanthakokilam wrote:But yes, they can do that and that is what Sanjay does.

Sanjay is really ahead in making his music available. More artists should take a cue from him.

Nick H wrote:he record companies and youtube/google are still causing a great deal of trouble and pain.

recognize this , and understand the background. There are other platforms other than YouTube available for this.

Nick H wrote:but it seems that the system, not the principle, is completely broken.

True , but this is a very fixable , need the ecosystem participants to be a more open minded and trustful

Nick H wrote:In the context of this particular thread, you also have to add to all that, "but what if they don't want to?"

This quaetion , is an extremely important one. Hope that so artists on this forum would step forward to answer that.
In any case , Make it available is a better option than ranting against your listerners / fans ?

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 11 Jan 2015, 15:38

Maybe, but the background context of this thread, which dates back four years, is that certain artists do not want recordings made of their performances, and go so far as to stipulate that. I see TMK only once in a blue moon, or even decade, but I see Vijay Siva regularly: as far as I know, he still requires that recordings should not be made.

Any music that is then released by those artists is within their own power and choice, whether they do it by CD, free or paid internet, or not at all. That is fine by me, and I think we should respect the artists' decision.

It is four years back, but, if I remember right, my argument was not with that decision or principle, but with using spurious, wrong legal arguments and threats. But that might have been another story...

recognize this , and understand the background. There are other platforms other than YouTube available for this.

Don't forget the record companies: they will poke their fingers anywhere there see a threat to their income. Even that is not wrong, just the currently used mechanism is broken.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 12 Jan 2015, 00:56

The record companies miscalculated that they can double dip, sell music and also make money on streaming through ads or subscriptions. But they are wrong. A lot of people are comfortable with legal streaming like Beats and Spotify ( and not owning ) and so there is a danger of implosion of music sales.

Artists putting their stuff on YT and getting paid by ad revenues or subscriptions will become the mainstream way for that whole business. In that sense, Parivadini is ahead of the times, acting as a platform provider and aggregator for such things. SanskritiSeries is taking a hybrid model, they sell music and dance recordings and stream on YT.

The biggest advantage of YT is the network effect and lock-in. The consumers are there and hence that is where the suppliers go and hence the consumers go there and stay there. It is like our age old 'sundai'(சந்தை). But we know from experience that for niche genres the network effect and the lock in is less of an issue. It is conceivable that platforms like Vimeo and Dailymotion can offer attractive terms and agree to take an aggressive stance against record companies instead of kowtowing to them like YT does.

Also, let us not give any prominence to the record companies/YT issue and act as a deterrant. There are some bad apples, but there was a lot of misunderstanding about the root cause of it (it is the google algorithm was the biggest culprit and that seems to be improving)

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 12 Jan 2015, 02:12

You might to need to correct me on the history, but I thought YT/Google only did this stuff under threat from the music industry, which is not so much kowtowing as giving in. If Youtube itself could be held liable for each and every copyright infringement it probably wouldn't last long. I don't know if it can, in law.

But, at the same time, whenever I think of some piece of rock music from 1960- or 1970-something that I want to hear... it's there. On Youtube. Often multiple copies, infringing many rights, and, out of my my marked 'favourites,' only a very, very few vanish from time to time. I'm sure that some of that music is worth vastly more to Sony, or whoever, than a Carnatic kriti.

Which leaves me just scratching my head...

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 12 Jan 2015, 09:12

The minimum Google has to do is to remove the copy righted material once a complaint is lodged. There is a whole work flow and document flow for that. It is highly biassed in favor of the record companies. That is not surprising. Fine.

Google went beyond that and came up with a way to detect copy right infringement automatically. As with any such algorithm, there are false positives ( i.e. it identifies a few as copy-righted when it is not). That is what we talked about last year. This got conflated with another piece of info that the CM recording companies claim copy right on Thyagaraja's compositions and not just the recording. That infuriated all of us. I am sure there is a case or two of some bone headed recording companies actually claiming that but a vast majority of them are false alarms including our own VKR's recordings. There were all due to the algorithm. As it happened in VKR's case, the label released all those false positives identified by the algorithm

That is the history. YT is so big that as long as they keep the recording companies happy ( and even generate revenue through advertisements ), they are happy. All their actions and procedures are like this. If there is a complaint either through their algorithm or manual, follow the established process and if that is not resolved, YT will ask the parties to take their dispute off of their system and until the issue is resolved, the account will be suspended. In this process, they do not have the bandwidth or practical means to challenge the complainant. That is what was in my mind for using the 'kowtow' word. But another platform like Vimeo or Dailymotion, as a matter of competitive advantage, can setup a business plan that is less of a hassle for legitimate content producers. That is an advantage smaller players have and they can peel off niche producers and consumers from YT very effectively.

askn · Post by **askn** » 12 Jan 2015, 09:47

Nick H wrote:Which leaves me just scratching my head...

When you are registers as a Content partner with YT ( like the labels have ) and the music is on the Content ID platform , when a video is flagged , the content owner is provided with a cupole of options, a. do nothing b. issue a takedown c. let the video remain up , but re-direct the advertising revenue that is generated to the content owner d. share a % with the uploader , where the uploader has added value / used part of the song etc like in a remix / or has sampled music as part of a somg.

So in most of the these video on YT the label leaves the video up and takes all the ad revenue that is generated

askn · Post by **askn** » 12 Jan 2015, 09:54

vasanthakokilam wrote:T. But another platform like Vimeo or Dailymotion, as a matter of competitive advantage, can setup a business plan that is less of a hassle for legitimate content producers. That is an advantage smaller players have and they can peel off niche producers and consumers from YT very effectively.

Vimeo now has its version of Content ID running , it not a s sophisticated as Google's yet. Vimeo is growing as platform for short film , documentary and indie film and event broadcasts.
Soundcloud also has implemented a version of this as they are transitioning their business model to a more mainstream listening service and licencing content from the major labels.

This is a ineviatable trend for platform that is based on user / 3rd party uploaded content

These platforms have immense value for contnet distribution , but people will have to understand and manage the constraints as well

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 12 Jan 2015, 10:09

askn, Yes, understood.

These other platforms can institute a different procedure for dealing with complaints and infringement detection by Content ID. A system that is more balanced unlike how the very existence of parivadini on YT was threatened last year and the various hassles our own VKR had.

Many producers will switch from YT if they are treated better and a fairer process is assured for them.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 12 Jan 2015, 20:55

Thank you both for the recap and further explanations, with good points.