Drake, Once Again, Shows That It Makes Sense To Embrace Your Fans Who Infringe, Too
from the connecting-with-fans dept
A few months back, we wrote about how famed singer Drake was angry at Universal for sending takedown notices and getting his leaked tracks taken down. Given Drake's history of building up a lot of popularity through releasing mixtapes, it's not a surprise that he realizes that getting content spread far and wide creates more benefits than it does "downsides." Now he's confirmed that point of view even further, tweeting his somewhat enlightened views on file sharing:
Hopefully more artists will make their position on such things much more clear than it is today.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: connecting, copyright, drake, embracing, fans, piracy
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
He actually dropped an "it".
"Listen, enjoy it, buy it if you like it... and take care until next time."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FUD Mike this, and Pirate Mike that, Fat Boy, Couch Potato, bla bla bla.. You are not convincing anyone of anything, other than you are a complete and utter moron.
Go post on RIAA your brain washing rhetoric, oh, that's right, you can't post on RIAA, they don't accept creative thinking..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Then he shouldn't have a problem!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, to hell with contracts when it suits /your/ notions.
"Now, as I'm sure people will quickly point out, he signed a contract with Universal, and that means he almost certainly handed over the rights to the music in question. To some extent, you can argue that if he was doing it for the people instead of for Universal Music, he shouldn't have signed a deal that gave all the rights to Universal Music."
But in the Huffington Post pieces, you objected to people suing for a cut of hundreds of millions after they'd "agreed" to contribute for "free". -- Yes, I know that bringing up your past pieces and expecting consistency is futile. I soldier on. -- But it's definitely breach of contract for this guy to distribute songs after signing a contract and presumably getting paid for it.
Malleable Mike: in favor of explicitly breaking contract so long as harms Big Media, but when Arianna Huffington gets $310M, he'll hold people /strictly/ to web-site TOS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeah, to hell with contracts when it suits /your/ notions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeah, to hell with contracts when it suits /your/ notions.
The earlier Drake post on Techdirt was not lauding him for violating his contract - in fact it was not even about whether what he did was 'right' or 'wrong' or legal or illegal. It was about demonstrating that labels do not always represent what artists want, despite their insistence that they do - and demonstrating how labels that go nuts with takedowns end up doing really silly things that benefit nobody.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Finally someone noticed that SOPA is really a blacklist censor tool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fixed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fixed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
when reading OOTB posts, think of a downs syndrome Special Olympic winner accepting his trophy and speaking in drooling, slurred words, it helps me get past his first word or two..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I gave up after that..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Before the internet
George Bernard Shaw
Saw this and thought it applied to most of the postings on techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And then go DIY ! They would make a better living both away from the MAFIAA and without their taking of his income which would be going towards who he has hired not who the MAFIAA has hired.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If my understanding is correct, and please feel free to correct me if it is wrong, labels will obviously want to handle distribution, whereas those who tour will want to pump up whatever will help maximize attendance during their tour.
Clearly there is a conflict, but to me it seems that if the parties have entered into a contract of the type I would anticipate, that contract binds both parties. If a musician engages in acts subverting the contractual rights of the other party, I have no sympathy for the musician. He/she made a deal, and it is undeniably his/her obligation to live up to it. After all, if those with whom the musician has contracted concerning the tour began breaching those contracts, the musician would have every right to be upset to the same degree that labels are upset.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misquote
"Buy it if you like..." and "Buy it if you like it" have very different meanings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misquote
Not hatin', just curious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]