Skinny Puppy Invoices US Government After It Played The Band's Music To Torture Gitmo Prisoners [Updated]

from the but-was-it-paid? dept

Wed, Feb 5th 2014 9:03am — Mike Masnick

A few years ago, after stories started appearing about the US military playing loud music to annoy prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay, we were among those who wondered if the government paid royalties on those "public performances." We weren't the only ones, as at least some musicians who were on the playlist wondered out loud if they were getting royalties -- while, actually, being a lot more concerned about the whole situation, both the torture and the idea that their music was used as torture. Now, in a recent issue of the Phoenix New Times, in which they interviewed the band Skinny Puppy about its latest album, the band's founder explains that the name for the new album came from hearing that their music was being played at Gitmo, but also notes that they sent an invoice to the US government:

"We heard through a reliable grapevine that our music was being used in Guantanamo Bay prison camps to musically stun or torture people," founder cEvin Key explains by phone from his Los Angeles home. "We heard that our music was used on at least four occasions. So we thought it would be a good idea to make an invoice to the U.S. government for musical services, thus the concept of the record title, Weapons."

The wording there is a little strange, as it may be that the album is a metaphorical invoice, but it would be fascinating to find out if an actual invoice was ever sent... and if it was paid. Oh, and, no the band wasn't happy about all of this:

"Not too good," Key continues. "We never supported those types of scenarios. ... Because we make unsettling music, we can see it being used in a weird way. But it doesn't sit right with us."

Update: Aha. Via Jason Leopold, here's the actual invoice for $666,000.

Skinny Puppy Invoice Guantanamo (PDF)Skinny Puppy Invoice Guantanamo (Text)

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: copyright, gitmo, guantanamo bay, music, skinny puppy, torture

38 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ragnarredbeard, 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:11am

Reminds me of survival school
When I went to USAF Survival School they played really bad metal and prog music 24/7 in the cells. Wonder if they permission to do that from the rights holders?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- smilmsers, 7 Feb 2014 @ 12:58pm
  
  Re: Reminds me of survival school
  USAF survival school, huh? Was this between the massages and triple lattes?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:16am

Where is the RIAA?
Why aren't they screaming at the government to collect their performance royalties?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- justok (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:56am
  
  Re: Where is the RIAA?
  Well, they are, but they call it singing
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Clownius, 10 Feb 2014 @ 6:55am
  
  Re: Where is the RIAA?
  You forget there seems to be some things that trumps "but piracy" and "but terrorism" is one of them as is "think of the children"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:17am

I bet they also played Justin Bieber. Oh, and inb4 blue shoots his mouth off about copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
scotts13 (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:19am

Tomorrows news:
"Copyright to awful torture music seized by Federal government under bizarre interpretation of eminent domain."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:33am
  
  Re: Tomorrows news:
  Scotts: That's actually prohibited by copyright law. And under eminent domain they'd still have to pay them anyway.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - scotts13 (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:23am
    
    Re: Re: Tomorrows news:
    "That's actually prohibited by copyright law. And under eminent domain they'd still have to pay them anyway."
    
    Well yes, under TODAY'S interpretation of the law. Tomorrow?
    
    Point is, I'm quite sure it never occurred to whatever agency runs that prison that they might have to obey every little law and regulation - let alone performance rights.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
zip, 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:22am

ASCAP and BMI only demand royalties for "public performance" - but the common Guantanamo practice of forcing headphones (turned up to earsplitting volume) on a hog-tied prisoner until he *breaks* is probably considered "private listening" so therefore no *songwriter* rights were violated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:54am
  
  Re:
  So if I run a bar and give everyone headphones to listen to the music through, I wouldn't have to pay performance royalties? Somehow, I doubt that ASCAP or BMI would agree with that notion.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:23am
    
    Re: Re:
    Considering the Cablevision ruling, I thought the decision hinged on who had control of playing the content not how many people experienced it, and as the person wearing the headphones has no control over playing the content, it should qualify as a performance even if it's a performance for one.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DADTAXI, 6 Feb 2014 @ 2:34am
  
  Re:
  However prisoners didn�t 'buy' the music much as i don�t 'buy' elevator music, - a cruel and unusual punishment in itself
  
  so if you play music to someone else ( even in a private residence, and by any interpretation a torture cell is a private place) is that not a public performance - by ASCAP and BMI 's own rules?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:32am

Never heard of this group, was curious, found some musing on YouTube.

The moment it started playing, my dog (who is always sleeping next to my feet when I'm at my desk) left the room. Go figure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 11:50am
  
  Re:
  Do you agree with your dogs opinion of the music, that it is unlistenable? ;-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 12:43pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I don't want to be an asshole to SP's fans, I'm not in a position to dictate my music tastes to them. Let's say It's not my thing (and, apparently, not my dog's either). ;)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
MondoGordo (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:54am

I once actually owned ...
a Skinny Puppy T-shirt from the Too Dark Park tour in the early 90's. I may still have it ...

But yeah their sound is dissonant and disturbing to say the least ... not surprised it's been used to torture people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Karl (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 11:35am
  
  Re: I once actually owned ...
  he Too Dark Park tour in the early 90's
  
  I actually went to one of the shows on that tour, the one in Cincinnati. They certainly put on one hell of a show.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - kyle clements (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 5:37pm
    
    Re: Re: I once actually owned ...
    I'm seeing them in two weeks.
    
    After 30 years (1982-2014) these guys are still going at it.
    
    I read another interview that they never actually sent the invoice, but it was the idea that inspired their latest album, "Weapon".
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:20am

Updated...
updated with the actual invoice!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:22am
  
  Re: Updated...
  666k? Interesting, considering the music was used for torture.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ninja (profile), 6 Feb 2014 @ 4:19am
    
    Re: Re: Updated...
    Sounds like they are mocking the Govt and engaging in some activism. Which seems great!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - btrussell (profile), 6 Feb 2014 @ 5:46am
    
    Re: Re: Updated...
    4 songs
    $150K per song
    
    $66K for lawyer to send notice.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wally (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:31am

Ok now I'm not happy
For those who have never heard any sings by Skinny Puppy...if you had the CD-ROM version of Interplay and Paralax Software's Descent II....the song that has a part where a woman is screaming as if she were being raped...the one from the second level of the first chapter...that is a song by Skinny Puppy...Many of you have no idea how unsettling that sound really is...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:56am

"We can see it being used in a weird way. But it doesn't sit right with us."
If they find this use of their music unsettling, like their music, does that imply that it is their kind of use?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
s7, 5 Feb 2014 @ 11:54am

As a huge fan of Skinny Puppy since about 86' I find this whole thing hilarious.

It's also nice to know that I'd be immune to their torture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gabriel J. Michael (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 12:22pm

Publicity stunt. Probably nothing owed.
Why are we assuming this qualifies as a "public performance"? The MPAA claims that prisons require a public performance license, but that's probably your classic prison movie showing situation. If they're blasting music at one or two detainees in Gitmo, that's not a public performance, and no license is required. If they're using headphones, as one commenter above suggested, should be an open-and-shut defense.

If they actually want to sue, the hurdles are higher for suing the federal government for infringement than private parties. And they'll be limited to minimum statutory damages.

Obviously they can object to whatever they want, but copyright is not a tool to silence all uses you disagree with. We might not like the use, but this is borderline copyright abuse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- beltorak (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 1:34pm
  
  Re: Publicity stunt. Probably nothing owed.
  as much as i like the story, you are probably right. the government could just claim that this was a private performance for a few "close acquaintances" and therefore covered under fair use.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 9:04pm
    
    Re: Re: Publicity stunt. Probably nothing owed.
    If they can claim performance rights for playing music to horses, then surely prisoners of the US government count
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
bjr70 (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 12:59pm

Just wanted to check in as another huge Skinny Puppy fan. This makes me love them just a little bit more. I'll be seeing them again this month. I can't flippin' wait.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 2:40pm

Stepping on the wrong toes.
I wonder if the band members will find themselves on a no-fly list now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Sunhawk (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 3:44pm
  
  Re: Stepping on the wrong toes.
  There's probably a lawyer or two salivating over the possibility...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
fred, 5 Feb 2014 @ 7:57pm

Techdirt, used to promote has been punk bands. They pretty much sucked you in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:33pm
  
  Re:
  They aren't a punk band. Fail.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws (profile), 5 Feb 2014 @ 10:58pm
  
  Re:
  They did some nice tracks for the Descent 2 soundtrack.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 8:17pm

but, but FAIR USE !!! (or are we supporting copyright now?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- btrussell (profile), 6 Feb 2014 @ 5:49am
  
  Re:
  Fair use is part of copyright.
  
  Or tell you what, you abolish copyright and we will do the same for fair use.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2014 @ 8:37pm

I don't think Guantanamo is a member of the Berne Convention. APB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]