Downhill Battle

4th January 2006

posted in disruptive-technology, economics, intellectualproperty |

This t-shirt from the website “Downhill Battle – Music Activism” is rather amusing:

Downhill Battle’s “reasons to get rid of the major record labels” include:

Music diversity will grow.
Pay-for-play radio will end.
Independent music won’t be marginalized.
The lawsuits will stop.
Artistic freedom will expand.
Musicians will make a better living.

All of these contentions are certainly worth considering and exploring further, in a broader study of 21st century intellectual property rights issues. You won’t be reading or hearing anything from the RIAA encouraging this sort of research and inquiry. The links at the bottom of the Downhill Battle homepage for “Who’s getting the job done” are excellent. The link categories are:

Activists and Non-Profits
Music Projects and Organizations
Copyright and Culture
Finding New Music
Key Technologies
Sharing Music

Several links here I have not heard about previously like Illegal Art and FreePress.net, described as:

a national nonpartisan organization working to increase informed public participation in crucial media policy debates, and to generate policies that will produce a more competitive and public interest-oriented media system with a strong nonprofit and noncommercial sector.

If Downhill Battle has not already been sued for their “iTunes iSbogus” webpage, I wouldn’t be surprised if a suit isn’t pending. I had not read about the proposed INDUCE act of 2004, info and links about it are available on www.savetheipod.com. The info on the “iTunes iSbogus” page about what an “artist’s cut” of a 99 cent iTunes song is (11 cents) was news to me.

An RSS feed from Downhill Battle is also available.

Are K-12 schools too conservative and controversy-shy to let students do research on REAL issues like those raised by websites like Downhill Battle? I certainly hope not, but my guess is that most probably are.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 4th, 2006 at 3:31 pm and is filed under disruptive-technology, economics, intellectualproperty. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.