“This is the unsexy part of curation: conservation, cataloging, preservation. And it’s one of a curator’s highest obligations. There are plenty of reasons why tracks, albums and entire discographies have gone missing. Lawyers, publishers, contracts. Bad metadata. And then there’s a lot that slips through the cracks and out of sight simply because no one who’s in a position to care for it does care for it. Curators can and should make it their job to fight through these weeds of chaos and neglect every day. These are battles in need of soldiers.”
— I disagree - it’s sexy! And the streaming world clearly needs librarians. via today’s Music Redef email.
“Here’s a crazy idea: maybe the next Register of Copyrights should register copyrights.”
— Just a thought! Kyle Courtney and Mary Minow join in, too - check it out here: http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2017/01/copyright/library-experts-weigh-in-on-next-register-of-copyrights/#_.
“A common generalisation in discussions of data sharing is that it undermines the career prospects for researchers, especially in low and middle income countries, exposing them to “research parasites” who will ingest their data into far-off computers and beget papers for high impact journals. We could find no evidence for this.”
“Society’s become enamored by the romantic myth of creativity,” he says. “The idea that inspiration comes to us in a genius-like way from God or the spirit or whatever. Often for songwriters, that is how it feels emotionally. But, of course, every songwriter is partly a product of their influences. Allowing yourself to be influenced by a song — just not copying the melody, chords or lyrics — is perfectly fine. I mean, isn’t that what songwriting actually is?”

The Man Musicians Call When Two Tunes Sound Alike - The New York Times

Oxendale says he takes 450 cases a year!! So most weekdays he’s doing two new cases every day? Nice work if you can get it.

In which I summarize the intriguing session on legal issues at the Software Preservation Network meeting in Atlanta this past August.

“There are viral videos of a cat or a dog, doing something, that are probably more valuable.”

Hillary Clinton’s fainting video is making money for Rupert Murdoch - Recode

‘Merica. Fair use should have some play, here, but perhaps more tragic than monetizing fair use is this sad commentary on what’s valuable in the market for social media video.

“By making sampling unobtainable and only an option for the rich (let’s face it: Ye & Hov the only cats who can afford samples in hip hop) but what these greedy lawyers and corporate leeches don’t comprehend is that sampling is an education AND it gives back”

(via Questlove Gomez on Instagram (via @MusicRedef) (emphasis added)

So, what’s really going on with sampling? Is it a market that works, or is it making hip hop too expensive for ordinary people? I have no idea. QuestLove seems like someone who would know, FWIW.

“This regulation we call copyright is good. It’s an extraordinarily important part of any modern society. It’s necessary to protect against a certain type of unfair competition. A world where you write and I can take is a world which is unfair to you and will produce less for us… . So we use this right to assure a certain type of commercial activity.”
— You’ll never guess who said that, at a lecture here at UVA 12 years ago. At least not if you think every critic of copyright is an anarchist who wants free stuff.