Continuing Questions on Ownership

Here's a great CBC radio 3 podcast on the topic of "Who Owns Music?"



In it, there are three suggested 'owners'; the labels, the artists, and the listeners. There is also a question of whether or not ownership is transferred from producer to consumer at the time of purchase.

The final comment that ownership is a legal matter while sharing is for everyone is interesting. There's no doubt that piracy in no way benefits the producer, but 'sharing' is still more inclusive than 'ownership'. I'm not defending piracy, but the notion of owning something that we cannot actually hold is kind of strange, despite the fact that we can still interact with it and engage with it.

My questions are then, who do you think owns music? Do you agree that ownership is a legal matter while everyone should be able to share? How do you feel about the ownership of physically intangible digital media?

Bon Jovi vs. Steve Jobs

I heard an interesting blurb on the radio this morning about Bon Jovi accusing Steve Jobs of "killing music". I didn't actually read the original article because that would require a subscription, but a Google search of the topic brings up various sources that paint a pretty decent picture of the situation.
As interesting a topic this may be from all perspectives, I'm interested in discussing what these implications mean for the active participant and the remixer. On one hand, I understand Jovi's suggestion that being able to download music and take it with us everywhere we go on iPods has changed how we listen to music, but I'm not sure that his claim that we no longer put the time aside dedicated solely to listening to our new musical investment has changed the 'magicalness' of the musical experience holds water. I think the act of remix may prove a bit of a counter to his claim. Although the way we listen to music may have changed, in order to be able to remix and interpret music, there still needs to be active participation. The ease by which people may now remix and the vastly growing number of remixes out there, regardless of medium, would suggest that there is still a pretty decent amount of active participation. By no means am I suggesting that Steve Jobs has been the sole provider of this opportunity, but I certainly don't think that his empire has impeded this at all, either. The only thing is, that these modes of participation have changed, and this is what Bon Jovi seems to have a problem with. They have changed in the past, and they will continue to change well into the future.
I'm curious to know if anyone else has any thoughts about what iTunes and iPods have done for music. Has the way that we interact with our music changed so much that we are totally disconnected from what we're consuming? Or have these modes given us new ways of sharing and obtaining? Have they given us the potential to remix or have access to new music that we may have never otherwise had the opportunity to be exposed to? Is music really dead?

Even The Biebs Remixes

I think its a sign of the times/demand for variations on music and culture that we have already consumed that Justin Bieber can release "Never Say Never, The Remixes" and likely still make a profit. I was walking through the mall today when the poster caught my attention. My first thoughts were how many albums can he release with the same freaking songs? Then, I realized that he, or whoever is managing him, is actually a genius. This is what he has to say about who is present on the album:



So, the concept is easy. Take songs that were already loved and adored by his screaming fans (from his movie of the same name) and then "remix" them by "singing" with other famous artists. However, from what I can gather, these remixes aren't "true remixes" because the songs are actually pretty much the same with the exception of the vocal overlays of the additional artist. As well, I feel that it is almost taking the fun away from fans when the "official" remix is released rather than something that fans created and did, but this seems to be the growing trend. A signal of the subculture being circumvented by capitalism? Or is it just the Biebs looking to make another dollar?

And yes, the album did indeed debut at number one the week it was released. Somehow.