We've obviously written about musician Dan Bull a few times, but that's because he keeps doing cool things, both in writing good, insightful and funny songs about topics we're interested in here, but also experimenting with cool ways to connect with fans while also using free music to further his career. A year ago he auctioned off a custom song, and now he's doing the same thing again:
I AM SELLING MYSELF ON EBAY. If you're the winning bidder, I''ll record a custom song on any topic you choose. The song will be awesome. Click and bid now.
Suggestions:
* Anthem for your guild or sports team
* Advert for your business
* Theme tune for your film or YouTube channel
* Something ridiculously challenging just to show that I can do it.
* Battle track against something / someone you disagree with
If I like the topic, I may make a video for it too and it will get tens of thousands of views at the very least.
You can see the auction here, where the bidding is going fast and furious. I'm sure it helps that he's built up a larger and larger audience over the past year since he last ran this experiment...
What I love about experiments like this is that it's not just about doing the same thing that others are doing, but finding what works with your audience, and knowing that if you can build up a strong fanbase, they'll be happy to support you doing cool things.
Today, instead of the usual community favorites post, we wanted to take the opportunity to highlight our own top picks for the week. It was an easy choice, because we love it when artists and creators visit the site to speak about their experiences, and this week we were lucky enough to have guest posts from three different musicians. They all had a lot of great stuff to say, and here are a few highlights.
So how do I feel? What's the right way? Fuck if I know. But I'll adapt and I'll do it with respect and class and not kicking and screaming. There's a hell of a lot I could say about both sides of this particular subject, but honestly does it matter? You all have formed your opinions on it already and in the end people like me are still out here trying to make a living no matter what those opinions are... right, wrong or in-between.
Unfortunately the comment thread on that post was hijacked by one particularly obnoxious AC, but amidst the noise there was also a strong response from some community members who were grateful to El-P for sharing his frank and thoughtful opinion, just as we were.
There's a great story about how bamboo grows. A farmer plants a bamboo shoot underground, and waters and tends it for about three years. Nothing grows that's visible, but the farmer trots out there, tending to this invisible thing with a certain amount of faith that things are going to work out. When the bamboo finally appears above ground, it can shoot up to thirty feet in a month. This is like my kickstarter campaign. The numbers aren't shocking to me, not at all. I set the goal for the kickstarter at $100,000 hoping we'd make it quickly, and hoping we'd surpass it by a long-shot.
Incidentally, as I pointed out on Twitter, Amanda Palmer is an anagram for A Mr. Panda Meal. Coincidence?
Now, thanks to the High Court ruling, no aspiring musician will be able to use The Promo Bay to gain exposure in the UK. Once again, the British Phonographic Industry is throttling any channel of distribution which doesn't allow them the cut to which they believe they are entitled. I'd like to see what the BPI's head, Geoff Taylor, has to say to George Barnett, the unsigned British songwriter whose fanbase skyrocketed after being featured on The Promo Bay. The only thing that the BPI has done for George is to entirely prohibit his primary means of exposure.
Of course, those aren't the only choice words Dan has for the BPI.
Big thanks to El-P, Amanda Palmer and Dan Bull for stopping by and sharing their thoughts! For some other creators featured on Techdirt this week (just not in person), check out game developer Stardock's Jon Shafer on building a loyal fan base, producer Swizz Beatz on embracing technology, My Bloody Valentine's Kevin Shields on a dispute with Sony, and author Paulo Coelho's stats on his $0.99 ebook sale.
We recently noted that, in the same week that Dan Bull had his new single hit the music charts because he promoted it via The Pirate Bay, BPI had convinced a court to order UK ISPs to start blocking TPB. Earlier this year, Dan had already written a song, Bye, Bye BPI, for that organization's initial attempt to block The Pirate Bay, and we asked Dan to share his thoughts on TPB officially being blocked in the UK.
The Pirate Bay would seem an odd primary target for the British record industry's hit list. After all, it doesn't host any infringing content, but serves as a hub for people who want to share their own files directly. Sites like YouTube receive stratospherically higher amounts of traffic, and host hundreds of thousands of infringing videos. Perhaps it is not the infringement itself then, but The Pirate Bay's notoriously defiant defense of its modus operandi that has made it a target. Or maybe it's an underlying acknowledgement that to prevent infringement in any meaningful way would require the impossible feat of blocking every site on the internet that contains a hyperlink.
Despite the industry's readiness to insist that copyright infringement threatens the future of musicians - especially those who are lesser known - there are plenty of examples where the opposite is true. In fact, every musician I know utilizes filesharing in some form or another. Let me tell you how filesharing has allowed me to turn my creative ambitions into something real.
I use a program called Cubase to compose my music. Initially I bought a legitimate copy for several hundred pounds. It was buggy and regularly crashed. Eventually it stopped working altogether. Rather than buying a replacement, I downloaded a cracked version via The Pirate Bay. It was far more stable. I also downloaded some industry standard plugins which would have cost thousands of pounds. I was unemployed, so the choice wasn't between downloading or purchasing. It was between downloading or nothing.
Using this cracked software I produced an album about overcoming self-destructive thoughts and coping with Asperger syndrome. A while after publishing the album I was contacted by a young man who I'll call Rupert. Rupert suffered the same problems, and was preparing to take his own life. After listening to the album, he realized that he wasn't alone, and chose to face his problems. This music, he said, saved his life. If the British Phonographic Industry had gotten their way sooner, my album wouldn't exist, Rupert wouldn't have heard it, and perhaps his story might have taken a turn for the worse.
Another example of how filesharing and creativity go hand in hand is The Promo Bay - The Pirate Bay's launchpad for unsigned artists. Thousands of musicians have applied, eager for their work to be given the spotlight that traditional, industry-sanctioned channels will never allow. Now, thanks to the High Court ruling, no aspiring musician will be able to use The Promo Bay to gain exposure in the UK. Once again, the British Phonographic Industry is throttling any channel of distribution which doesn't allow them the cut to which they believe they are entitled. I'd like to see what the BPI's head, Geoff Taylor, has to say to George Barnett, the unsigned British songwriter whose fanbase skyrocketed after being featured on The Promo Bay. The only thing that the BPI has done for George is to entirely prohibit his primary means of exposure.
A few months ago I asked The Pirate Bay if I could help to manage The Promo Bay for them. They reluctantly refused, telling me that if I worked with them in any official capacity, I may be regarded as a co-conspirator, meaning that if I ever wanted to visit the USA I could be detained on criminal charges. Yes - helping to promote unsigned music on a popular website meant that I could be kept prisoner in a foreign country for supposedly conspiring to help kill the music industry. If ridiculous situations like the above are allowed to happen, then perhaps killing the music industry wouldn't be such a bad thing...
Having said that, it's laughably easy to circumvent the block enforced by the courts; it takes a single click. This is as difficult as it will ever be, unless the internet is policed and regulated so much that it ceases to function at all. Preventing internet filesharing is impossible because - quite simply - the internet IS filesharing.
Last week we wrote about the UK High Court ordering ISPs to start blocking The Pirate Bay just about the same time that UK musician Dan Bull had successfully used TPB as a promotional platform to launch him onto the UK charts. The first comment on that post, by Duke raised an interesting point: the court made this ruling despite the lack of any trial.
This isn't much of an expansion, Newzbin2 was ordered blocked last year, but it is a major step. The big problem here is the lack of any sort of trial. While there was a ruling back in February, declaring that the operators and users of The Pirate Bay were probably infringing copyright, the ISPs didn't try to make a case (for fear of massive costs orders), and the Pirate Bay was given no opportunity to argue anything. As for today's order, looking through the Court listings, there wasn't even a hearing, so it was probably all done through written applications.
This highlights how judicial oversight alone isn't enough (in a common law system) to ensure justice is done. Without an adversary to challenge the claimants (record companies), none of the possible defences, or issues (such as proportionality, anti-competitive practices, or negative consequences on people like Dan Bull) can be raised.
Whether the end result is right or not, it's not justice when a few companies can have a website blocked, with no one from the website or elsewhere in a position to challenge or question it.
This is a pretty key point that has received very little attention compared to the general order to block the site. I'm curious if folks in the UK can explain how this is defensible? While I recognize that free speech rights aren't as well respected in the UK, ordering ISPs to block a website without even allowing for any adversarial hearing seems like a pretty huge violation of basic concepts of due process.
This was mostly expected since earlier this year, but the UK's High Court has now ordered a bunch of ISPs to block The Pirate Bay. This is pretty unfortunate, given that we were just talking about how UK-based musician Dan Bull used The Pirate Bay to help him get on the charts. That avenue is about to be closed off to up and coming musicians... all because the legacy recording industry remains too closed-minded to figure out how to adapt and provide consumers what they want. And, of course, the blockade won't even be remotely effective. Lots of people will just use VPNs or proxies to get what they want anyway. Even more ridiculous is that it will hinder perfectly legitimate activity. Just a few weeks ago I was in the UK, and I was doing some research on The Pirate Bay's "Promo Bay." I wouldn't have been able to do that if The Pirate Bay was blocked. I did nothing illegal, and yet the UK courts want to treat it as such. That's sad.
Last week we wrote about Dan Bull's experiment to release a song, "Sharing is Caring" for free via The Pirate Bay (and other sites) and to see if he could still get it to show up in various charts. As we discussed, it definitely was making its way onto the lists of Amazon UK's top hip hop sales. And, on Sunday, the official UK charts came out -- with Sharing is Caring coming in at number 9 on the Indie singles chart and number 35 on the RnB singles chart.
In both cases, "Sharing is Caring" was the top new entrant on both of those charts. While some will say that not making the pop charts suggests this was a failure, it sure looks like a ton of folks were happy to support Dan's effort. As for the US charts, those have a weighted system that includes radio airplay, meaning that there's simply no way Dan could get listed, because he's not going to play the payola game to get on the air. Either way, it was a great experiment, and a job well done by Dan.
Earlier this week, we wrote about Dan Bull's new song and new experiment: could he release a track via The Pirate Bay for free... and still get it onto the music charts? We talked to Dan to see how the process has been so far, and discussed a few other things as well. Dan also mentioned a new carrot that he's added to the promotion. If you buy all 10 versions of his song he'll put your name into his next song (and try to make it rhyme with something). You can see him talking about that program here:
Onto our interview:
What are you hoping to accomplish/show with "Sharing is Caring"?
I want to show that it's possible for musicians to achieve whatever they set their mind on without the need for the protection / interference of record labels and their lobbyists. The BPI, who already helped to force the Digital Economy Act through Parliament during the scrutiny-free wash-up week, are now trying to have The Pirate Bay censored in the United Kingdom. This is a website that does not host any copyrighted material but merely connects people who want to share their own files. It's also a site that does more for unsigned musicians like myself than the BPI ever have. Of course, on top of this, it'll be a great personal achievement and hopefully give a boost to my musical career.
What is your opinion on the music charts?
As a young lad I used to listen avidly to the charts every Sunday, and I'd promptly go to the record store and buy the top hits the next day. The charts is a powerful force in influencing young people's musical purchases. It's a shame, because the charts are no mark of musicianship or long-term listenability - merely whatever has managed to sell the biggest quantity of copies that week. It's odd that weekly sales is considered the most important measure by which we judge the success of a piece of music.
What do you think the successful music careers of the future will look like?
The long tail of the music business is going to get longer and fatter. Many more unsigned and niche musicians will find their audiences and be able to support themselves thanks to the way the internet allows them to find a sizeable audience around the globe. The top 1% of musicians might see a dip in sales - perhaps they'll only be millionaires rather than multi-millionaires. Why is this such a problem?
What's the reaction to "Sharing is Caring" been so far?
The feedback has been great. People like the idea behind the campaign, and equally importantly they're enjoying the song. There have been detractors too - someone said "you're not getting a free song into the charts, you're selling it. Every other song in the charts is available for free somewhere online." The difference is that I have published the free download myself and am encouraging people to download it - in hope that it'll lead to more engagement later. Major label artists who do this (or are even allowed to do this) are few and far between.
I'm not sure how well the single will do in the "official" charts - whatever "official" is supposed to mean - but it's currently swamping the Amazon hip-hop charts with half of the top selling MP3s being my songs. One of the b-sides is also at number one in the reggae charts - three places above Bob Marley, despite the release of the new documentary film about him.
Are there certain protections you think artists do need? As in, how do you deal with truly bad actors?
I don't see why creators need special legal protections more than anyone else in society. I was asked yesterday "well what if someone uploaded all your music and claimed it was by them - wouldn't you want it taken down?". Well, yes I would want it taken down, but I don't think there needs to be a law enforcing that to happen. It just means that the person was behaving like a dick and I would make that fact known. It's too difficult to draw a line between "fair use" and "unfair use", I believe we'd be better off giving everyone the benefit of the doubt in order to stop mashups and parodies being caught in the crossfire.
Is there still a role for pop stars, or is that going away?
People will always love a pop star to read about and gossip about. They won't go away any time soon, but as I said before - people are listening to a lot more music. You used to buy a new record every couple of weeks perhaps and not listen to much else. With the advent of services like Spotify, a person might spread their listening time over 50 artists rather than 5. This is probably a far bigger reason than piracy as to why the sales of the biggest artists might be reducing. Listening habits have changed and you can't legislate against that.
How important have tools like YouTube (and Megaupload?) been to you
in getting your music out?
They've been absolutely vital. YouTube is how most of my listeners discover me. I also became a YouTube partner last year which means I can earn money from streams of videos I've uploaded. It's a great place to discover and collaborate with other artists.
The Megaupload takedown damaged my musical career. Supposedly done in the interests of artists like me, what it actually did was turn all the links to free downloads of music, on blogs, review sites etc, into deadlinks. Why was this allowed to happen? I'd love to see Megaupload's prosecutors explain to me personally how their actions are helping artists such as me.
Check it out: a rare bonus Sunday post. Dan Bull, the independent UK musician who we've written about quite frequently for his songs about topics near and dear to our hearts, has come out with another awesome new song, Sharing is Caring. However, there is one thing different this time around: he wants to see if he can get his freely available song on the music charts. To that end, he's using the Promo Bay, having The Pirate Bay promote his song to its millions of users, and also posting the fun videos (yes, multiple videos) of the song on YouTube.
Traditionally, the major labels tend to get their hits to chart by "buying" their way onto the list. In some cases, this was a literal situation, where labels would effectively scam the Soundscan system to get their albums/songs listed. That's become more difficult these days, but still a major label release will also include millions of dollars spent on marketing to get it on the charts. Dan, however, is wondering if support from the folks at The Pirate Bay might be enough to get his song to chart and to make a pretty powerful point:
The singles charts are worthless as an indicator of quality, and artists needn't strive for the validation of reaching them.
However, by taking a free song by an unsigned artist to the echelons normally reserved for the industry elite, I want to smash the glass ceiling and show that there is another way of doing things.
There are ten different versions of the song—one each focused on Facebook, Twitter and Google+, several remixes, and a selection of instrumental and acapella tracks for other musicians to build upon. You can download all ten from the Pirate Bay (of course, if you're in the Netherlands, too bad), and you can support Dan's shot at the charts as much or as little as you want by buying some or all of them individually from iTunes, Amazon or Play. There is a convenient list of direct store links on Dan's website.
So check out the video for the first version of Sharing is Caring here, and if you'd like to help show the old guard that it is possible to release music freely on sites like The Pirate Bay, and still have that music "sell" well, purchase the track at your favorite online retailer.
With Newzbin2 getting censored in the UK, BPI -- basically, the UK wing of the RIAA -- has been looking to have courts order many more sites blocked, with The Pirate Bay being target number one. Dan Bull, the UK-based musician who we've written about many times for his consistently awesome songs about the music industry, file sharing, copyright laws and the like has now put together another wonderful song, called Bye Bye BPI. You can watch it here:
Like his SOPA Cabana song, Dan had a bunch of his Facebook followers participate in the video by taking pictures of themselves with the various lyrics. This time, since the song is about why musicians don't need (and don't want) the BPI, he sought out musicians to take part in the video, so everyone you see is a musician who doesn't need BPI. Yes, they're mostly amateur musicians, but the point of the video is that it's misleading to suggest that BPI supports musicians. It supports a tiny percentage of musicians. The rest get along just fine without, and wish that it wouldn't muck around with the technology everyone else uses.
Oh yeah. It's also worth noting that Dan's got a new album coming out, which (of course) you can download for free. You can also buy it to show that you support the artists you like.
* Bonus points if you can spot our own Leigh Beadon in the video somewhere.
Independent musician Dan Bull, who we've written about a number of times, is one of many independent artists who used Megaupload on purpose, to distribute his own album. All of the links out there to download his album -- which he wanted -- point to Megaupload. And, unfortunately, they now all point to nowhere, because the US government used questionable reasoning to completely shutter the site. So Dan did what Dan does best... he wrote and recorded a song and video about it. Check it out below:
My favorite line? "Make money giving away things for free? Ah! Why can't the majors do similarly?" It's a key point. As we explained on Friday, tons of artists have figured out that Megaupload and similar sites are a fantastic new business model, but they're a business model that the major labels hate... so they work double-time to make it look like some evil conspiracy. If anyone in the US government actually bothered to understand how music is distributed, marketed and monetized today, they would have realized that Megaupload isn't the problem -- it's one way to make things better for artists. But, as we know, the folks in the US government only get their information from the RIAA. So they end up making life much more difficult for indie artists by shutting down useful services for those artists. And, in the end, that is exactly what the RIAA wants.
