Practice of recording at kutcheris

[khppriya]

NamaskArams to all,

(Apologies in advance; this is not a concert review. However, it is a comment and request for opinions related to kutcheri recordings and this thread seemed to be the most suited for it.)

This post is partly a result of a recent conversation that I had regarding the practice of audience members recording live kutcheris. The conversation was about the fact that many rasikas think that "it is ok for audience members to record (without artist permission) at kutcheris and share such recordings for free on the web at websites such as sangeethapriya; after all, the kutcheri has not been released as a commercial album".

What are we really paying for (and entitled to) when we buy a ticket to listen to a kutcheri (or attend a free concert)? Is it the pleasure/satisfaction of listening to (and watching) the artist at his/her creative best or do we believe that we are entitled to something more? In particular, do we believe that we are entitled to the right to record the music and listen to it whenever we want? Even if we do record the music, does that give us the right to disseminate it publicly (for free, of course) by putting it up on the web for everyone to download?

I think all of us will agree that an artist's alapana or kalpanaswaram is his/her creative idea and, therefore, is his/her intellectual property. I hate to equate going to a kutcheri to watching a movie in a theater, but at some shallow level, it seems to be a bit similar. We don't usually record a movie at a theater (or even if we do, clearly know that we are doing something illegal or violating copyright). But, when it comes to a kutcheri, somehow there are many more people who think that there is nothing wrong... I am a bit curious as to why this difference.

Of course, I am cognizant of the other side of the story, namely that those who upload this music are only trying to provide a service to those who cannot attend these kutcheris. Also, there is the argument from people who download this music that they cannot buy this kutcheri recording, even if they wanted to, because it is not available for purchase from anywhere. Whether these reasons are valid is a subjective issue, but that does not take away from the fact that the person recording this is violating copyright...

I am an academic and deal with copyright and intellectual property quite a bit. The more I think about it, the more I become convinced that it is not right (from an intellectual property point of view) to record at kutcheris and publicly disseminate it, even if one thinks that one is doing a service.

A related question would be that, if an artist prefers that his/her music not be disseminated on the web, would the audience refrain from doing so and would sites such as sangeethapriya delete all the uploaded music of that artist?

I would appreciate the opinion and comments of the learned rasikas of this forum.

Greetings,
Khppriya

Edited: Removed some details to shorten the post.

[Lakshman]

In the recent past Vijay Siva, T.M.Krishna and Bombay Jayashree have objected to having their music posted on the net and I think most people have respected the artists' plea.

[MV]

khpriya... what a livewire subject to start. To start with, I am a total 'Live' concert person but can see the arguments for a recording. I do feel that it has to be artiste's prerogative as to which concert they want recorded. The entertainment industry anywhere in the world is so fickle, the practitioners should get some rights. Having lived in the western world for nearly 20 years, I feel their model in the music industry could be studied and adapted-because you do get dissemination of music but artiste's rights are also protected.

[arasi]

khppriya and MV,
Last year, we had a long and animated (?) thread on this very topic. You will find a lot of information, opinions and other stuff there.
If someone is willing to give the link--or, was the thread locked? I cannot recall...

[balakk]

http://www.rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13657

[arasi]

Thanks, balakk!

[khppriya]

Thanks arasi and balakk! Before posting my message, I went back in the forum history a bit to see if something similar had been discussed before. I guess I did not go back far enough.

[jagan]

I am of the firm view that it is unethical to record any performance without the express permission of all the artistes and the organiser. Even when the performances are free to the public, there are quite a few who record or sometimes even video the performances in full or in part. I do not appreciate the point that they are doing any service to Carnatic Music by such clandestine acts. This practice is nothing but Theft. And most of the organisations who arrange concerts either for free or on payment, do not seem take it very seriously. Practically it is a tiresome business to dissuade them as the concert proceedings would necessarily have to be interrupted.
One way seems to be to put up a notice at the entrances to the hall that recording without wrtitten permission is prohibited and that persons indulging in such acts would be summarily thrown out .

[PUNARVASU]

I am reminded of an incident which our guru told us. I think it happened in Mumbai. In a concert, a gentleman was recording(of course in full view of everyone, the artists including); those were the days when the artists did not mind it.When the tani avartanam started, the person who was recording, switched off his tape recorder. When the cutcheri resumed after the tani, he switched it on; that was when the mridangist(sorry I forgot his name) called the gentleman and told him, 'neenga record paNNNikkOngo; AnAl mridangatta viTTuviTTu paNNikOngO'.

[karthikbala]

It should be a no-brainer that artiste rights etc. are beyond dispute. However, I can't help feeling this a rather academic discussion with scant relevance. The main problem facing Carnatic musicians today is the total disregard for professionalism. Professionals are increasingly crowded out by amateurs with the connivance of willing or indifferent sponsors and organisers. This is why CM remains a poor cousin and why "Indian Classical Music" for most people outside Chennai refers to something else. CM is already so cheapened that I do not think any amount of bootlegging is going to devalue it further.
IMHO, any CM artiste unduly worrying about revenue from recordings is missing the wood for the trees. Just about any piddling job today will pay more. I'd advise any serious artiste to disseminate their oeuvre by any means possible. Posterity, not pennies, is what they should be concerned about. Recordings of mediocrities propped up by sabhas will never endure over the years.

[arasi]

karthikbala,
You rightly bring the focus on to what seems to be the problem.The culprit in all this is when some artistes dilute CM in the name of innovation. There is a superficial gratification in this for some because they think that CM is reaching many more people this way. If this trend takes root, there will still be the same old (not spectacular) number of rasikAS going to hear a tODi or a hamsAnandi elsewhere without their going through such dilution, where confusion reigns in their mingling with other genres of music.
In days of yore, when the milkman came to our door to give us a fresh supply of milk, milking the cow in front of our eyes, some among them who wanted to make a rupee or more somehow tricked us and delivered 'taNNip pAl' (watered down milk)! The essence of CM will stay intact when the innovations are made with integrity--even in a jugalbandhi--that is, if loyalty and honesty as in the case of the milkmen who brought to our doors the same kind of milk which mega-dairies produce under quality control. The responsibility lies with the musicians, of course. Yes, we do have film music which has been doing it for us (with very pleasing results at times). So, what's the need for a fusion of CM which is innovation merely in name? Fusion of a responsible kind where each musician brings his best to the program and finds a sympathetic chord is what appeals to me (which doesn't mean that such happenings should take the place of CM concerts and oust them!). Just as I like to go to a dance performance once in a while, a movie too perhaps, I like to listen to a fusion concert where all the participants, wherever they're from, have respect for each other's music and yes, where they do not make mindless mixes , a mishmash and a jumble of music. I like to listen to a concert where there are no compromises but a common bond in music. How do we know it? It's pleasing to the ear and we see the musicians giving us a balanced fare without short-selling their own music but o giving room to others--those who want to come together with CM because they admire this ancient form of music.
However gifted an artiste, when he goes about hacking and hawking CM in a mangled manner, count me out, I will go to a less crowded place where I can enjoy my own brand of music!

[rshankar]

Karthik - very well said. I wish your slogan,

Posterity, not pennies

becomes the rallying call of one and all!

[VK RAMAN]

In the whole scheme of things, Karthik made the point nicely.

[Mahesh.s]

I beg to differ comparing movie with carnatic music. Our music is divine and its all about god. If music or manodharma is intellectual property of the musician, then what about the composition? Trinities never composed songs to be sung for Kuctcheris. They did for a means to achieve or realise the god. If they didnt allow sishyas to learn then i cant imagine whether our carnatic music would be existant even. Also music isnt just about technicalities. Its pathetic to know that so called musicians are so much commercialised. Our music is divine and should be treated in that way only. Remember the tyagaraja krithi.. nidhishala sukhama.

[khppriya]

@karthikbala: Nice post! But, I disagree with a couple of your statements. First, "The main problem facing Carnatic musicians today is the total disregard for professionalism" is a very broad generalization! My suspicion is that you have some specific instances in mind (same for the wise arasi's follow-up post about innovation - which I agree with, BTW), but that hardly warrants such a broad generalization.

Second, "CM is already so cheapened that I do not think any amount of bootlegging is going to devalue it further." I understand the sentiment behind your statement, but don't you think that it is rather lame if this is offered as an excuse to condone bootlegging? I know you did not do that, but I see so many people try to pass that off as a legitimate excuse.

Another all-time favorite excuse seems to be "but, music is divine...". Of course it is! I don't think anyone on this forum or elsewhere will say anything to the contrary! But again, to use that as an excuse to defend bootlegging seems lame to me. And no, the great composers did not ask for copyright (which expires 20 years after the holder passes away, BTW), but how childish is it to insist that "the artists did not pay the composer copyright; why should I worry about their copyright?". So, your action is now conditional on others?

Yet another excuse seems to be from the self-annointed saviors of CM (forgive the sarcasm) that "without me bootlegging this concert, the music would be lost for all posterity". Yes, it might be, and that is a shame. But, come on... don't use that as an excuse to legitimize your bootlegging.

I also don't think the monetary angle is the main thing here. Come on, artists are smart... they know very well how unlikely it is that they will earn a fortune through their concert recordings. I am not saying that monetary considerations are non-existent (I am not a musician, so I don't know), but to me, it is more of a simple issue of copyright. That DOES NOT mean that music is not divine, or that somehow musicians are money-minded if they ask rasikas to respect their copyright. Would people feel differently if an artist just said, "for every concert of mine that you record or download, please donate Rs. 200 or $5 to such and such a charity (say XYZ)"? How many people do you think would do that? My suspicion is that it would be very very few. So, forgive me when I say that this excuse of "commercialism of CM" is just that.. an excuse (nondi saaku) to condone bootlegging.

I am also in agreement that artists trying strong-arming or threatening tactics will not help (it only puts people off even more). Rather, what I think is needed is a combination of things: (a) artists should make it clear if they would prefer that rasikas not bootleg record, (b) more rasikas should be cognizant of copyright issues and respect an artist's preference, without making moral judgements, either way, and (c) we need something similar to what Moser Baer did for movie VCDs with their Rs. 25 or so pricing. Imagine numerous unedited live kutcheris available for purchase like this (one can always wish, can't one?)

Greetings.

[harimau]

I am of the firm view that it is unethical to record any performance without the express permission of all the artistes and the organiser.

How about permission from the sponsor of the program? After all, it is Indian Bank, State Bank of India or Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited or some such business entity which sponsors the concert by giving money to the organizer.

Do we write to the Chairman of the State Bank of India and get his written permission to record the concert and then approach the artists?

Why should I get the permission of the organizer at all? Whose permission does the organizer obtain to record concerts? Or, is the organizer's attitude that since he/she is arranging the concert by having/renting a venue and paying a pittance to the artists, he/she is entitled to trample over the copyright of the artists?

As to the artists' rights under the copyright law, has a single artist cancelled a contract in the US though every sabha in the US not only records the concerts but also distributes them either for free to its members or sells to the public at large. Do you doubt me? Just go the website of Sri Siva Vishnu Temple of Pittsburgh and see how many concerts dating back even to the 1980s are for sale. Or just call up the local Indian Fine Arts Society in any US city and ask to buy copies of concert recordings.

Finally, having seen the "ethics" of various artists in action and having been a recipient of the consequences of their "ethical" behavior, I can safely say that they are the last people who should complain about their rights being violated or about the lack of ethics in recording concerts without permission.

By the way, I am of the firm opinion that the last recordable concert was gone when Sri M D Ramanathan passed away.

[gardabha_gana]

I am so thankful that Purandara Dasa/Trinitiy didn't exercise copyrights or royalty
If I were a professional carnatic musician - I would say - come one, come all - record my concerts - spread it far and wide. Let carnatic music blossom outside of Mylapore and T.Nagar. We need to propagate the music far and wide. Only condition - don't do it for financial gain.
If I feel I need to be compensated, I would charge extra for folks who want to record the concert but will not say, don't record my concert, just hear it and let the music be not heard outside the hall. I would also say - carnatic music is at its best when it is live and spontaneous and not rehearsed and recorded multiple times in a studio.

[srikant1987]

By the way, I am of the firm opinion that the last recordable concert was gone when Sri M D Ramanathan passed away.

http://rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=16760

;(

[Nick H]

Random thought...

Carnatic music is cheap? Actually it is free (at least here in its capitol city) for the most part. If we had to find Rs500, or even Rs50 for every concert we attended, I think attitudes and practices would be very different.

Music is divine. So, people have taken permission from the gods to record? The gods pay the artist's living expenses?

On the topic itself, I am just about neutral. I do not believe that artists loose anything from personal concert recordings: on the whole, they probably gain.

I do not record (well, a very occasional snippet, maybe) but it is not at all any matter of principle. Quite the opposite! I am lazy; I do not like to be distracted from a concert by fiddling with gadgets; I have no patience at all with sub-cassette quality recordings and cannot afford the equipment that would do better. All my reasons are selfish!

Harimau, I guess you are 99.999% correct in what you say about foreign performances. I know of one instance in which a CD was made, and the artist concerned had not given permission and would never accept another booking from that person.

The dance world is very different. Are people permitted to video dance performances? I know that, in UK, dancers are very much against it --- but, sadly, dance is a commodity that can be bought and sold by the yard.

[MV]

Arasi, I so agree with you when you talk of gimmickry in the name of innovation. You can count me out too..
NickH, I can't be bothered fiddling with gadgets either. Its like getting 100 pics on the camera and missing the experience all together. But I look back at my kids pics and think thank god for cameras. Same with some old recordings of GNB or Brindamma. Thank God somebody did them or I would never have heard them. So, like many things in this world, we need to work out where the line in the sand is.

[Nick H]

Yes, MV, you are very right.

I remember one superb concert. It was not very well attended, and I sat in the front. At the end, the artist's family introduced themselves, and asked if I had recorded the program. They looked so disappointed when I said that I hadn't!

(of course, neither had they)

[rajumds]

Khpriya - bootlegging is not the word to be used in this context .What does wrong mean - legally wrong, morally wrong ?

Unless there is a copy right agreement between all the concerned (artists, organisers, sponsors and audience ) and announced well before the concert, there is legally nothing wrong in recording the concert for personal use.

Yes it is morally wrong to record a concert if the artists make a request to the effect.

If I were a professional carnatic musician - I would say - come one, come all - record my concerts - spread it far and wide. Let carnatic music blossom outside of Mylapore and T.Nagar. We need to propagate the music far and wide. Only condition - don't do it for financial gain

The problem here is that a few not so good concerts may float around and spoil the image of the artist

The artists should record the concert (most of them do it and compared to 15 years ago, it is a very easy process), decide whether it is worthy of being put in public domain and upload it in their site or a public site like sangeethapriya. If artist start uploading even 25% of their concerts, no one from the audience will record the concert. The artists will have a control over what is released in public domain

I also don't think the monetary angle is the main thing here.

I am not sure but there may be pressure from recording companies on the artists to discourage recording by audience.

[VK RAMAN]

Even if the kutcheries are spuriously recorded, how many can reach out to the millions of CM rasikas all around the world. Even artist himself/herself cannot do that. Interested rasikas will still buy commercial recording if the renditions have bavam, ragam, talam and layam IMHO.

[MV]

Answer could be privatising the recording of concerts world over. I know you are adding a middleman to the process but it could be worth the hassle.

[harimau]

One way seems to be to put up a notice at the entrances to the hall that recording without wrtitten permission is prohibited and that persons indulging in such acts would be summarily thrown out .

Three seasons back, the Music Academy had signs posted on all doors that recording of concerts is illegal.

People in the front row used to stand up and use their cell phones to video a few minutes of any concert in progress. I don't think it was a conscious act of protest on their part but they just wanted to capture a few minutes of their favorite song/artist. Starting two Decembers back, the signs disappeared.

You can't stop the progress of technology. There are smaller and smaller recording devices that run forever on batteries so anyone who wants to record concerts today can do so with impunity.

[MV]

@ Harimau.. Thats why if its a separate recording company-not the artiste, or organiser or rasika,... they will find a way to protect their turf. And a lwayer-type person, I'm sure will find a win-win situation for all concerned

[Nick H]

Answer could be privatising the recording of concerts world over. I know you are adding a middleman to the process but it could be worth the hassle.

Isn't it called "the music industry?" As in Sony, etc etc etc?

And isn't one of its main functions to try to restrict everything and bully everyone?

[periyaganesan]

In my view, one should not apply the same model used in U.S.A.and Europe here in India. And the terms 'ehical', 'non-ethical' could not be used here as the recordist most probably is not recording stealthily. Also you forget what a yeomen service the site you have mentioned is doing. Very few commercial albums of yesteryear stalwarts like Ariyakkudi, Maharajapuram Viswanatha Iyer, Madurai Somu etc are commercially available. If not for this particular site I would never have heard the first two and many like them but for this site. And recently many others and I have had the most fortunate opportunity to listen to Madurai Somu's recordings. I can not describe my enjoyment here. And coming to the present days also, I am getting opportunity to listen to many young and budding vidwans and Vidushinis . Because of the recordings only this is made possible. As for the site you have mentioned, it has stopped making available concerts of artists who objected to this. And many artists have approved the availability of their concerts also. It speaks volumes about the benefits to both the artists and listeners.

Traditionally carnatic kutcheris have been considered public properties. And as pointed out earlier in this site you mention, are the artists paying any royalty to the composers? I strongly support the recordists here.

[srikant1987]

I like rajumds's ideas, of it by default being "OK" -- and of artists recording and releasing their concerts themselves.

The "by default being OK" reminds me of another thing. It seems a European country earlier had its citizens sign a "I'm willing to donate organs after death" document to get organ donations. Later, it turned the system around and made "I don't want to donate organs after death" documents, with the default being that a person agrees to donate. While the person still has the complete freedom to NOT donate, most people don't exercise it.

I too am sceptical about MV's suggested "middle men". The whole audience-records-everything-:( issue is thanks to technological advancement. The very same weapon can be used to solve the issue if the artistes exploit the new-found ease of recording and music transfer themselves!

Ultimately we need to rely on the people who have copies of the music to desist from violating the interests of the artistes.

[harimau]

Answer could be privatising the recording of concerts world over. I know you are adding a middleman to the process but it could be worth the hassle.

All of you think that the issue here is copyright, and folks like T M Krishna and Vijay Siva like to frame the discussion around that and you all fall for that. The real issue is power-play.

When an artist is coming up, he needs all the publicity he can get and would willingly let you not only record but distribute it as far and wide as possible. Once he reaches a certain level of acceptance in the market, he feels that he should exercise greater control over his "product".... and that is precisely what it is, despite the talk about "divinity of music", etc.

Why have these musicians who talk the loudest about copyright issues not paid one penny in royalty to modern composers? Kritis of Thyagaraja, Deekshithar and Syama Sastri may not enjoy copyright protection but certainly the likes of Periasamy Thooran, Papanasam Sivan, Ambujam krishna and other neighborhood mamis who seems to have "Ambal kataaksham" in sufficient quantity to produce hundreds if not thousands of compositions all deserve to be paid for the use of their mental efforts. But they want publicity for their kritis and for themselves so musicians can tell them to go fly a kite on Marina Beach if they demand royalties.

As to sabhas, the organizers want to exercise power over the public. This is why they don't want you recording concerts. They want you to go hat in hand and beg the organizer (here is the middleman you are talking about) for a copy of some concert which they have in their archives. If the organizer is in a good mood (which is rarely) you may get a copy. Brusque dismissal of your request is the politest response you can expect from them.

In the good old days, even the likes of Semmangudi Mama depended on the goodwill of the rasikas so they let them record their concerts. That was because gate collection covered a substantial portion of the musician's honorarium. With more sabhas offering free concerts because some sponsor is paying for it, the musicians today feel that they can sing to near-empty halls and they would still get paid so they don't have to cultivate the rasikas. Thus, they are asking that no recordings be permitted.

I have heard it said that Semmangudi Mama, when his concert recording was once played back, asked, "Why would anyone want to eat what has been vomited?" The current generation believes that their output on stage is of the quality of "amrita" (elixir of life) and this is another reason they want to control recordings. We wouldn't want the rasikas to live beyond their allotted 120 years on earth, would we? So much for their humility!

There are only 650+ Thyagaraja kritis, 450+ Deekshithar kritis and 40+ Syama Sastri kritis. After that, there has been a steep drop in the quality of composers. With recordings of concerts floating around, people will have even less reason to attend concerts as they would have the most popular of these 1200-odd compositions on hand and they could listen to them at any time, without waiting for 7 pm on a Friday evening for a live concert. So, the musicians will be singing to empty halls if more recordings are available.

Musicians are not afraid that the average rasika will be listening to concert recordings without paying for it. After all, when the rasika attended the concert he paid zilch so why should he pay for listening to the recording? They are afraid some other musician may get his hands on the recording and learn some kritis without paying them any guru dakshina. The people who complain the loudest have been the beneficiaries of recordings. Without the tapes of Semmangudi's concerts, T M Krishna would be known as Bhagavathulu Seetharama Sarma's student and not as Semmangudi's.

These are some of the reasons why musicians don't want concerts to be recorded. Don't believe a word of their highfaluting nonsense against the idea of recording concerts.

[mahavishnu]

Harimau, this is your best post yet.

[Nick H]

Agreed.

I do suspect though, that where the "highfaluting" (as opposed to "ordinary") nonsense is concerned, it is emulation of their Western counterparts: they see the pop stars doing it and think that it is part of being a pop star.

If I am being unfair to anybody... well, sorry. I guess it will have neither been first, or last, time I am unfair!

[khppriya]

@harimau: I completely agree with your earlier post that it is very difficult to "police" recordings at concerts. I am pretty sure that no one has, and no one will ever, beat the march of technology. It has to be a voluntary decision.

However, your most recent post about "power-play," while making valid points, does not take away from the fact that it is also a copyright issue! Yes, power-play by some artists exists and is in poor taste (as I said, it only puts rasikas off), but you can't dismiss the issue as power-play. This is not a very good analogy, but it is what comes to mind, so I will make it... If a store or shop issues a lot of coupons/discounts initially but subsequently cuts down on that, would you accuse it of going on a power-play? This analogy also underscores a finer point that, although you and I (audience) might not view it in that light, CM is also a profession (a special one, of course).

Your point about organizers is well-taken. I am not sympathetic to sabha secretaries going on a power-trip (in general, I am skeptical of middlemen). Also, I know how bad sabha politics can be very well (my father has co-run a large sabha in India for several decades now and I head a very small sabha in the US), but that is another topic altogether.

@periyaganesan: You just used several of the excuses that I alluded to in my earlier post (e.g., "without such recordings, I would not have gotten to hear this concert...", "people doing this are doing a service...") to "strongly" defend such recorders. But, you hit the nail on the head when you said that websites stopped (or should stop) hosting a concert recording if the artist objects to it... some artists will, others won't. Up to them.

If an artist requests not to record or disseminate, why is it so difficult to just respect his/her wishes and not disseminate, as opposed to getting indignant that "how dare he/she ask me not to record and deprive me of what I consider my birthright?" As people have pointed out, several artists have no problem with people recording, so you will still have a lot of opportunities to record! If an artist's choice (either way) helps him/her in the long run, the credit goes to them. If it hurts him/her, the responsibility for that also lies with them. Bottomline, they are entitled to make that decision without any moral judgements being passed...

[periyaganesan]

I definitely believe that the performing artist has 100% right to make his decision in this regard. We have no right to question how much an artist earns. Some time back when an artist objected to free dissemination of his concerts came, a few people were discussing this. But I feel it very unfair of others to pass comments on his remunerations etc.As we all know, the market forces decide the remunerations. It is up to the artist to decide. My view is when an artist does not explicitly prohibit recording his/her concert, it is okay to record and disseminate.

[MV]

I think this is bigger than copyright and motives of individuals/groups. It is actually recording this time period. For eg we can't hear say Kalyanaraman live today unless someone recorded and did it well. Again, say TM Krishna may sing his best concert in a small town to an audience of 20. It is actually, meticulously taking notes like a scientist.
I feel, there are 3 factos to it-cost, recording quality and fair distribution. It is that big picture which matters.

[Nick H]

But I feel it very unfair of others to pass comments on his remunerations etc.

It is not unfair to comment in such instances as when an artist claims that recording is damaging his or her income, and we do not agree that that is a matter of fact, and it is not unfair to comment if we perceive them to be misrepresenting the situation in law. If they comment in public, then they can expect response in public.

In fact, as performers are public figures, they can expect comment anyway!

[uday_shankar]

even the likes of Semmangudi Mama depended on the goodwill of the rasikas

Well then, more power to any artist who is trying to change the model of dependence on anybody's "goodwill" ! I am glad my livelihood is not - at least overtly - dependent on anybody's "goodwill" and would love nothing better than to extend that freedom to all Carnatic artists. The unhealthiness of the Carnatic economic model all round is reflected in these discussions. On the one hand "music is divine" and all that crap, on the other we won't pay a penny for it and all that crap. It sucks.

[mahesh3]

Uday, Your comments again boil concert recordings down to a "payment" issue - this is wrong! The issue I think Harimau is bringing up is more like we wont pay only one or two artists for it. If not for communities like sangeethapriya and rasikas, I doubt artists like the Sugunas, Vedavalli would have even got the broader recognition they are starting to enjoy...yet, their season concerts available as a cd is a rarity. Its really tiring to keep buying TMK and Sanjay concerts only...and part of the issue there is that only these 2 artists are marketed by the recording companies...something they don't really need, since they are quite adept at being where the action/news is.

A larger and more complex issue is the economic model of carnatic music....thanks to the recent available recordings, I for one can easily note trends where concert attendance for "lesser known" artists is much better than it ever was. Today, the number of artists starting to give performances using ancillary instruments etc is also because there is better awareness of these folks, than was at the turn of the century, and it is primarily due to recordings and people spreading the word. Like Harimau says, my suspicion is the ones complaining the most about recordings are those who are losing ground to the increasing competition and increasingly nuanced appreciation of rasikas nowaways..it could also be the middlemen (such as recording companies)....who have a lot to lose since if artist popularity becomes more dynamic on a monthly basis, it is harder for them to develop profitable products! This is how a marketplace develops...from one or two players to increasing specializations...and to me, this is a strong and healthy sign of a better economic model, dont bother too much abt the noises from people who are vested in ensuring a monopoly or an oligopoly!

[mahesh3]

Finally, "depending on the goodwill of the rasikas"...if u convert it to "goodwill of the customers", u will note that its basic business common sense. Inconveniencing, angering or disabling consumers has never been a good business proposition, Semmangudi mama clearly knew what he was talking about...

[mahesh3]

Looking back in 2000, the US recording companies made such a big noise about napster and illegal recordings, but the fact was that the marketplace was demanding a move from paying $10 for each cd...to a sample and then buy-if-u-like format...its not surprising therefore, that Steve Jobs was able to gauge the pulse of the customer, and started to provide 99c downloads....iTunes today is a $5Billion annual business, and a zillion new artists have come up, and the music industry by and large in North America is way more healthy than in the mid-90's...the carnatic music purchase model today is very much like the mid-90's...pay $20 for a cd if u want to listen to carnatic music, or get lost, which is myopic and short sighted!

[rshankar]

Isn't Charsur moving to a carnatic iTunes-like model?
Anyway, the ideas in this whole thread have been getting rehashed in one form or another for many years now. I do not think we've ever come to a conclusion, or that we ever will. I am reminded of this song from the movie amar prem - this is a topic that will remain immortal - amar!

[Nick H]

I am glad my livelihood is not - at least overtly - dependent on anybody's "goodwill" ...

Isn't it? For most of my working life (if not all) it was dependent on the good will of my bosses (not to say that there were not a few ups and downs ) and the colleagues that I worked with or provided services to. It sometimes extended to the customers of my employers too.

"Good Will" --- something I have huge amounts of for my favourite artists. Isn't that the same for all of us? It is something that I think they appreciate too, on a number of levels, from the simple desire of an artist to be appreciated, to the more earthy requirement to house and feed themselves. Seems to me that they have quite a lot of "Good Will" towards us too, and that is one of the things that we feel in a performance. Probably there are contrary examples, but would we go to see someone who felt contempt for us?

Unless I just misunderstand what you mean, of course...

[VijayR]

I don't mean to revive this topic (yet) again, although I fear that is exactly what I might end up doing. Despite that concern (and with advance apologies), I will go ahead and make this comment:

@harimau said: "As to the artists' rights under the copyright law, has a single artist cancelled a contract in the US though every sabha in the US not only records the concerts but also distributes them either for free to its members or sells to the public at large. Do you doubt me? Just go the website of Sri Siva Vishnu Temple of Pittsburgh and see how many concerts dating back even to the 1980s are for sale. Or just call up the local Indian Fine Arts Society in any US city and ask to buy copies of concert recordings."

As far as the Sri Siva Vishnu Temple (of Lanham, MD) is concerned, I have written assurance from them that every single recording they make and sell has been explicitly authorized by the artists. They say that if any artist objects either to the recording or selling of the CDs, the organizers do not record that concert... period! What other organizations do, I do not know (however, it is very likely that what harimau points out is true in the case of lots of organizations).

[bala747]

Frankly speaking, how many current artistes are even worth recording? Listen to one concert, you've listened to them all. I never contribute to Sangeethapriya, not because I don't want to, but because I don't see a need to. I listen to what I have, and I am happy listening to it. I record all concerts I go to, not to listen to them for pleasure, but to hear them a second time while writing a review.

If some artist wants to claim copyright I just will ask him or her this, 'How can you copyright Thodi? Did you come up with the raga? No. You just sang it, and frankly in my opinion your singing wasn't even worth the ticket price I paid to attend this concert so instead of worrying about people recording, worry about being a better singer first'. This is a non-issue for me. If you want to record a concert. Go ahead. If you have a problem with it, don't. What is there to discuss?

[Nick H]

I come from a country where copyright and performing-rights (not necessarily the same thing: you may not own the copyright in the song you sing, but you probably own the rights in that performance of it) law is strict. Even if our tendency to respect it is based simply on the amoral fear of getting caught, it has left me with a reluctance to enter the concert hall, recording gadget at the fore.

Apart from that social conditioning, my main reason for not recording concerts is that I will never want to listen to a recording that is [even] worse than the sound quality I witnessed at the hall.

But, they tell me that gadgets have improved a lot, and that something like one of the products from Zoom or Tascam may produce ok results. Along with a little friendly persuasion from a fellow forumite, I am reviewing the situation!

[VijayR]

@bala747: I generally don't take offense to many things, but in this case I am sorry to say that your comments are just smack full of arrogance and are outright disrespectful (e.g., "how many current artists are even worth listening to" - are you serious? If so, I really wonder what stuff you are smoking). Before making such statements (claiming that you will mouth off thus to artists), please understand what performing rights are. As Nick correctly pointed out, they are very different from copyright. An artist who claims performer's rights is not claiming to have come up with Thodi.

Here's a suggestion: As the original post in this thread suggests, just try recording at a movie theatre and then mouthing off to the owners that they did not invent cinema, hence cannot prevent you from recording and that in any case the movie wasn't worth the ticket price you paid for it. In the *best* case, you will be dragged out kicking and screaming and thrown out of the venue. More likely, you will have some battle scars to display once you recover.

I'm sorry if my response seems rude, but your statements are just not cool (and are ill-informed)...

[laks1972]

Three seasons back, the Music Academy had signs posted on all doors that recording of concerts is illegal.

People in the front row used to stand up and use their cell phones to video a few minutes of any concert in progress. I don't think it was a conscious act of protest on their part but they just wanted to capture a few minutes of their favorite song/artist.

If the recording is for a few mins only, then it can be recorded blatantly even if artists object

As per 'fair use' clause of copyright act, upto 5% can be copied and will not be considered as violation. Such a percentage of recording can be used for 'commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship' purposes

[Nick H]

We have been through the legal ins and outs quite thoroughly in a previous thread, sometime over the past year or so (sparked off by TMK's decision to legally bully somebody, I think, or maybe it was a subsequent newspaper article he co-wrote, which was full of legal inaccuracy) and one of our members was able to produce the opinions of a friendly advocate.

Despite my comments about performing rights elsewhere in the world, it seemed from that thread that, at least without a specific prohibition, there isn't actually much artists can do about it.

My memory is faulty ... we should go back to that thread!

[gobilalitha]

no music lover records the performance for commercial purposes. H e knows how much amount he has to spend to prepare copies and put up for unauthorised salewith a lurking fear whether he may retrieve at least a part of the amount he has invested.T he recording is for his own enjoyment. of course it is is a different matter with newly released films with legend stars

[laks1972]

Frankly speaking, how many current artistes are even worth recording?

Valid question. I ask this myself many times.

If some artist wants to claim copyright I just will ask him or her this, 'How can you copyright Thodi? Did you come up with the raga?

Valid point. Unlike western music where someone writes the lyrics, someone sets the tune , someone conducts the orchestra and someone plays it note by note, Carnatic music is in a way 'open source'. The lyrics are handed over to the artist with expired copyright or without enforcing copyright. The tune has been set already in most cases and the artist does not pay anything to get lyrics and tune. The raga scale and raga grammar have all been handed over without copyright. Of course the artist brings his/her intellectual part during alapana, swaras etc, but the foundation of the innovation itself is 'open source'.