From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #25 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, January 23 2004 Volume 13 : Number 025 Today's Subjects: ----------------- laptop battle ["Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" ] Re: REAP [Capuchin ] Re: Iraqotopia (WAS: Re: REAP) [Capuchin ] penguin bashing [Tom Rodebaugh ] Captain Kangaroo ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: Captain Kangaroo [Tom Clark ] re:bloodbath [Eb ] Re: laptop battle ["cmb adams" ] doubtful Decemberists ["Natalie Jacobs" ] Glass Flesh 2 - Redux [bayard ] RE: Glass Flesh 2 - Redux ["Rex.Broome" ] RE: doubtful Decemberists ["Bachman, Michael" ] Wow! [Eb ] Re: Wow! ["cmb adams" ] Re: REAP [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: penguins, the coast, Kevin [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: royalties [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:24:37 -0800 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: laptop battle > On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, cmb adams wrote: > > in fact, if anyone in the PNW is going to this loony event > > (http://www.laptopbattle.org) tonight, I'd be happy to hoist a few with > > you there! > > Oh, I'd love to see that... I may well end up at the laptop battle tonight! PDX is going down! Either that or I'm going Ted Leo or Travis or The Small Change, a friend of a friend's band playing at the sunset. Much negotiating amongst our party is yet to occur. > but The Decembrists are at Nocturnal tonight. And they were stellar at the Croc last night! The closed with a mind-bending un-poppy cover of The Smiths' "Ask", which is still my favorite song in the history of mankind. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:23:46 -0500 From: Subject: Fwd: RE: REAP [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:55 , Matt Sewell matt_sewell@hotmail.com> sent: >You could spend that 86 billion on fighting the growing poverty in some >parts of the United States, couldn't you? Sure, but who is in greater need right now? Who had the greater need before the war? Who may still be in greater need long after the region stabilizes? I believe it is about 4% of the budget. Far more than that already goes into social welfare type programs. > And remember, that 86 billion ain't necessarily going to the Iraqi people - more > like to the various corporations charged with "rebuilding" Iraq. Well of course. Nothing has been done yet to improve the infrastucture and we all know nothing is planned for the future. Everything organized is at a complete stand still and the only money going into the iraqi economy is from within. Yeah, we all know that. >Sounds like yet another great way to take cash out of the pockets of taxpayers >and put it in the pockets of the ultra-rich... Another, 'well of course'. What else could it be? gSs > >CHeers > >Matt > >>From: Greg Wow we could spend the 86 >billion on sending a person to >mars or maybe to fund the 'patriot act II'. whether >the miltary action >was justified is worth debate but the import issue i see here >is your >apparent insistance that the violators of the sacred sovereignty of iraq >>should withdraw now. are you a nationalist or a patriot of some type? >that would >surprise me. the "continued occupation" for the near future >is absolutely >neccessary and will continue. anything less, at this time >would mean certain chaos >for iraq. does that mean i think the continued >occupation guarantees anything >else? No, but it improves the odds >dramatically and should continue. > >gSs > > >---- Msg sent via WebMail > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Help protect your PC with anti-virus protection when you sign up for MSN >8 . > - ---- Msg sent via WebMail - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:29:59 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: REAP On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, FSThomas wrote: > I have a good friend down here who works for the GA DOT in urban > planning. I could see urban zoning in order to develop an auto-free > region, but it's something that would be best handled *during* > construction. Pretty much every American city was built before the automobile and they were retro-fitted. To say that "retro-fitting" car-free areas is (to borrow a phrase) logistically difficult is a red herring. It's been done and will continue to get done so long as we change the way we live without changing where we live. > Ideally you would implement some form of transit (light rail, trams, > etc) to get from A to B, and I understand Portland has such a system. > (Light rail?). We have light rail and a fine transit system as well as lots of bicycle support organizations and sidewalks over all but one of non-freeway the bridges (coming soon! on that last one). (Interestingly, we have a new rail line openning in a few months and my guess is that ridership will be VERY LOW because it doesn't go where it needs to go. See, thousands of people commute from Vancouver, WA to Portland every day, but the folks in Washington don't seem to understand the importance of urban planning like we do here, so they can't get the funding together to complete the project over the bridge into their city. So we, in Portland, went ahead and built right up to near the bridge and put in a park-and-ride center with the hopes that, in the future, we might be able to complete the route. I think lots of people are going to bitch about the low ridership -- I don't think enough people will drive over the bridge only to take the train the last few miles into the city, but we can hope -- and use that as an excuse to fight future rail projects. While I really appreciate the sentiment and goals of building up to the point where a joint project would have to take over, I wonder if it wasn't a poor move politically.) > The idea, however, of banning autos full stop from an urban epicenter > that *wasn't* built to support a 100% pedestrian population, is plumb > loco.? Well, the idea of adding infrastructure for automobiles was pretty loco in the first place -- especially in dense urban areas. They certainly weren't designed to support even 20% automobile use. > If the monthly ban *is* implemented I would be curious to know what > employer's truancy rates are on those car-free days, and how it impacts > local businesses like restaurants, for example. You'll find that a huge percentage of people are perfectly happy to take the train or bus when they know in advance that driving will be difficult or inconvenient. The trains are packed for every event at the arena, colliseum and stadium (the stadium has essentially no official parking except for a huge number of bike racks). The car-free day proposed has always been a Sunday for the monthly day with the occassional Friday event. Despite what you might see in "The Hunted", Portland doesn't have that kind of car-filled street you see in many major cities. Not on a usual, day, anyway. And rarely are there more pedestrians than are comfortable to be around. You won't find yourself ducking between bodies unless there is a major event downtown. > Do *anything* to hurt small (or large) business and you're harming > everyone. Harming business, though, is probably part of Jeme's master > plan, as anything that earns a profit, pays dividends, or has paid > employees qualifies as Baby-Eating Evil. Blah blah blah. > > Well, we wouldn't need to do any rebuilding if we hadn't > > systematically destroyed their infrastructure over the past 13 years. > > Sack of crap number, what is this, three? (Who's counting?) Saddam's > government squandered what revenue the country could generate. Had he > not entered into the Oil For Palaces program (http://tinyurl.com/bsd2), No, not what revenue they COULD generate, but what revenue they were ALLOWED to generate. And recall that Saddam was largely a US creation. > but rather built up the country's electrical grid, or sewers, or > hospitals, or schools, the infrastructure would not have deteriorated in > the first place. So the rebuilding is necessary because of the invasion which was necessary because of the sanctions which was necessary because of Saddam Hussein who was necessary because of what? Each of those required U.S. action to succeed. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:34:22 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Iraqotopia (WAS: Re: REAP) On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, cmb adams wrote: > On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:31:04 -0800 (PST), bayard wrote: > > If we can help those we formerly harmed - even if it hurts for a short > > time longer - aren't we obliged to try? > > I dunno...we could ask the people we're supposedly helping whether they > want our help. Bingo. > I mean, they didn't invite the US to come "liberate" them, but perhaps > they weren't in a position to. But nobody even bothered to make the offer. Saddam Hussein believed he had the support of his people. At a small fraction of the cost of the invasion, the UN could have (and likely would have, without reservation) put together a one-time "vote of confidence" in Saddam with appropriate safeguards and monitoring. > now that they are supposedly liberated, maybe we could ask them (in the > form of some sort of national referendum) whether they want Our Boys to > stay there and keep on "liberating" them, or whether they'd just as soon > be left alone to sort shit out for themselves. Good idea. > "oh, but that's logistically difficult!" well, yeah. but it's also > logistically difficult keeping up the occupation (to say nothing of the > difficulties of setting up the invasion to begin with). Yup. > "but what if they vote us out and vote in somebody we don't like?" > well, good question. but isn't that their right? Yes, it is. But not according to the State Department. We're talking about an organization that refuses to support the International Court of Justice because (I can't find the quote at the moment, but it is exactly this blatant) they cannot be trusted to support US policies. > it seems to me that we can either say "we're doing this because it's in > our national best interest. we want what they've got, and we want > leaders there who are going to be in our pocket" or "we're doing this in > the interest of human rights and democracy". either one is a legitimate > reason (or maybe not all that legitimate, but at least honest), but I > don't think you can have it both ways. ...and if you're going to claim the latter, you should make some real moves to show that intent has validity and is supported by the people. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:57:13 -0500 From: Tom Rodebaugh Subject: penguin bashing . . . one of the problems with the digest is that, by the time i send this, someone else will have beaten my 320.9 on this site: http://ze999.ru/stuff/ping/ but i'm proud of it anyway. and, er, "iraq!!" or, er, "robyn!!" yeah, that's this list, right? cheers, tom ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:06:49 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Captain Kangaroo Hmmm... thought he'd already left us. I musta been thinking of Mr. Green Jeans. - -Rex "or was that Green Genes?" Broome ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:09:37 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Captain Kangaroo on 1/23/04 1:06 PM, Rex.Broome at Rex.Broome@preferredmedia.com wrote: > Hmmm... thought he'd already left us. I musta been thinking of Mr. Green > Jeans. > > -Rex "or was that Green Genes?" Broome You were thinking of Mr. Green Jeans' son. He died 12/4/93. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:14:55 -0800 From: Eb Subject: re:bloodbath Damn, I had no idea that this silent-film discussion would turn so heated and ugly! Can't you pro-Chaplin and pro-Keaton types just agree to disagree??? Eb (I penguin'ed a 323.3...nyaah!) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:18:04 -0700 From: "cmb adams" Subject: Re: laptop battle On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:24:37 -0800, Jason Brown (Echo Services Inc) wrote > > On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, cmb adams wrote: > > > in fact, if anyone in the PNW is going to this loony event > > > (http://www.laptopbattle.org) tonight, I'd be happy to hoist a few > with > > > you there! > > > > Oh, I'd love to see that... > > I may well end up at the laptop battle tonight! PDX is going down! this whole laptop battle thing is so freakin' cool, I can't believe it. it's like Poetry Slam for computers! it's like the Dozens for pasty-faced indie rockers! it's like...so nerdy that it comes straight back around the other side and turns out to be cool! I wish I'd thought of it. (in my defense, it's not too different from an idea that I did want to try at Bumbershoot next year: the drum machine circle.) > Either that or I'm going Ted Leo or Travis or The Small Change, a friend > of a friend's band playing at the sunset. that show at the sunset also features the Radio Nationals, whom I saw a few months back as the opener for I Can Lick Any Son of a Bitch in the Room. RN was really fun. ICLASoB kinda overshadowed them though. > Much negotiating amongst our > party is yet to occur. well, if you decide you're going to the Battle before 5, drop me an email. otherwise, you'll just have to try and pick out my posse at the show. we'll be the ones who look like pasty-faced indie rockers. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:19:32 -0800 From: "Natalie Jacobs" Subject: doubtful Decemberists >James, I was just leafing through my book of David Doubilet underwater >photography and was delighted to discover that New Zealand boast a body of >water named Doubtful Sound. I claim this as a band name. Everyone else keep your paws off of it! As Jeme mentioned, the Decemberists are playing here tonight, and I am geeked. I'm kind of boggled by the fact that a person I know - a mere feg, in fact - is now the ringleader of my new favorite band. I just got the "5 Songs" EP and love it to death. "Angel, Won't You Call Me?" has been added to my small roster of Perfect Pop Songs (along with "Queen of Eyes" and a very few others). Perhaps audience fegs can shout out Robyn songs for Colin Meloy to play (again). He essayed a bit of "Flesh Cartoons" last time but forgot the words. Oh, and the nice lady at Nocturnal says they're not selling tickets in advance, but "get there at 8:00 and you'll be sure to get in." n. _________________________________________________________________ Check out the new MSN 9 Dial-up  fast & reliable Internet access with prime features! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=dialup/home&ST=1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:14:35 -0800 (PST) From: bayard Subject: Glass Flesh 2 - Redux Hey there, fegs! Just a quick note to let you know that the super special sale price on "Glass Flesh 2" is ending - as promised so long ago - so now is the time to buy if you haven't! You get an extra day, b/c of leap year: Feb 29th is the final day for this. I'm also running low, due to a bad business deal whereby I gave most of them to a distributor in exchange for marketing (doh.) So before too long you won't be able to get one at any price. Check it out at www.glasshotel.net/glassflesh - you can download some of the songs too, including a complete (and excellent) MP3 of "Surgery". There're some reviews written by your fellow feglisters, too. No one has had much of anything bad to say about it, actually - it's all-around much more professional than the first, for sure, and in a good way. woj, if you would make a note to this affect on the top of your fegpage, I would be much obliged. Anyone else who has a fegpage, too. Thanks! Sincere apologize to those who see this message twice or are tired of seeing it at all. On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Rex.Broome wrote re. Capt. K: > Hmmm... thought he'd already left us. I musta been thinking of Mr. Green Jeans. You know, I thought that too, years ago. But he was fine then. And now I thought he was alive, and he's not. Sad. =b - -- "Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong." - Dandemis ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:35:17 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: RE: Glass Flesh 2 - Redux >>Hey there, fegs! Just a quick note to let you know that the super >>special sale price on "Glass Flesh 2" is ending - as promised so long ago - so >>now is the time to buy if you haven't! As one who took advantage of the super special sale price and as such first heard this (and the first GF) rather more recently than many... do snap it up if you haven't already. Good stuff. In related news I am now one song shy of completing the tentatively titled Tinfoil Thoths: Songs from the Globe of Fegs compilation, so look for that soon. The tracklist and contributors are just about hardwired and postable if anyone is curious (although perhaps surprise would be preferable?) Professional-presentation-wise it won't be a patch on Bayard's discs, but should offer something for every member of the whole fegfamily. Reserve yours today! - -Rex Broome, Acting CEO, Astonishing Panda Inferno Records *and* Minco Records ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:46:21 -0500 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: doubtful Decemberists N. wrote: >As Jeme mentioned, the Decemberists are playing here tonight, and I am >geeked. I'm kind of boggled by the fact that a person I know - a mere feg, >in fact - is now the ringleader of my new favorite band. I just got the "5 >Songs" EP and love it to death. "Angel, Won't You Call Me?" has been added >to my small roster of Perfect Pop Songs (along with "Queen of Eyes" and a >very few others). A candidate for a Perfect Pop Song: Hobart Paving by Saint Etienne. The Perfect Pop Band, for a while at lease back in the 1990's IMHO. Michael B. Hobart Paving Lyrics [intro sample (on the album):] Do you think a girl should go to bed with a feller, if she doesn't love him? No. [pause] Unless it's me. I heard she drove the silvery sports-car / along the empty streets last night. / Hanging around / with hair-dos like mine. / No, I haven't seen the kids for some time. / Picked up her shoes from the red-brick stairway, / just like a harpsichordist she moved. / And back upstairs / at half past two, / with a paper folded, outside the loo. / Rain falls / like Elvis tears. / Oh no, / no sugar tonight. / Out on the high street, / dim all the lights and / cry coloured tears again. / And baby, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / don't forget to catch me. / (Don't forget to catch me.) / Hobart paving, don't you think that's it's time, / on this platform with the drizzle in my eyes? / And baby, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / don't forget to catch me. / (Don't forget to catch me.) / Hobart paving, don't you think that's it's time? / The ticket's in my hand, the train pulls down the line. / Rain falls / like Elvis tears. / Oh no, / no sugar. / Out on the high street, / dim all the lights and / cry coloured tears. / And baby, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / don't forget to catch me, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / don't forget to catch me, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / don't forget to catch me. / (Don't forget to catch me.) / Oh no, no sugar tonight, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / Oh no, no sugar tonight, / (Don't forget to catch me.) / No no, no sugar tonight. / (Don't forget to catch me.) / Don't forget to catch me... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:53:35 -0600 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Re: REAP > From: Capuchin > Subject: RE: REAP > > It's sick, isn't it? Give me back my wonder, I've something more to give! I guess it doesn't matter, there's not much more to live. > I think you forget that I'm opposed to the use of private automobiles, > too. My uncle has a country place that no one knows about. He says it used to be a farm, before the Motor Law. > Because people don't think about the consequences of their own actions. Absolutely. They're quick to judge, quick to anger, and slow to understand. > What about your own nation's sovereignty? Isn't that sacred to you? We talk of a peaceable kingdom, talk of a time without fear. But the ones we wish would listen are never going to hear. > That's definitely one of my fears. We are secrets to each other -- each one's life a novel no-one else has read. Throw off those chains of reason and your prison disappears. > Well, we wouldn't need to do any rebuilding if we hadn't systematically > destroyed their infrastructure over the past 13 years. Ten score years ago, when we defeated the kingly foe, a wondrous dream came into being. We tamed the trackless waste, no virgin land left chaste, all shining eyes, but never seeing. > If we did that, it'd probably end up going to the same place anyway. Well, you won't get wise with the sleep still in your eyes. No matter what your dreams might be. > I'd like to see us pledge the money to whatever government the Iraqi > people put together for themselves, so long as it's democratic. Let them > hire whoever they choose to do the work. Leave out the fiction. The fact is, this friction will only be worn by persistence. > You've got to draw the line somewhere. Conform or be cast out! > It's certainly chaos right now. Order doesn't come at the barrel of a > gun and you don't buy peace with blood money. Sing! O Choirs of Cacophony! The king has kneeled to let his kingdom rise. > The nation is so distressed that surely the only order to arise out of it > will be a dictatorship. Right now it looks like it'll be a U.S.-backed > dictatorship that claims some dubious democratic credentials (based on the > caucuses driven by the wealthy of each region rubber-stamping the U.S. > nominees). But I think that just assures more violence for the next ten > or twenty years. Totally. The things that we fear are a weapon to be held against us. And we can walk our road together, if our goals are all the same. Gene "Too many hands on my time, too many feelings" Hopstetter, Jr. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:03:48 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Wow! Jethro Tull musician has sex swap op A former member of seventies band Jethro Tull has had a sex-change operation and become a woman called Dee. Once bearded keyboard player David Palmer now has long blonde hair and wears make-up and black leggings, reports the Evening Standard. She broke the news to flute playing frontman Ian Anderson by saying: "There's something I need to get off my increasingly ample chest." Anderson stood by his former bandmate, saying: "I found it difficult at first but I fully support his decision." Palmer, 66, a former soldier in the Royal Horse Guards and Fellow of the Royal Academy of Music, is set to embark on a solo career. She said: "I want to be judged on my musical ability alone, and nothing else." Her desire to change sex had been an "open secret" in the music business for many years, she said, but she did not go ahead with the operation until the death of wife Margaret nine years ago. Palmer lives in Hove, East Sussex, but is currently in the Spanish resort of Lanzarote, recording her first solo album before launching a British tour next month. She said: "I've felt like this since the age of three. It's not just wimps who want to do this. To be a girl, it goes a lot deeper than that. Yes, you are speaking to the person you thought I was - the keyboard player in Jethro Tull." Jethro Tull was formed in 1968 and had a string of hits including Living In The Past and Teacher. Palmer left the band in 1980. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:24:20 -0700 From: "cmb adams" Subject: Re: Wow! On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:03:48 -0800, Eb wrote > Jethro Tull musician has sex swap op > She broke the news to flute playing frontman Ian Anderson by saying: > "There's something I need to get off my increasingly ample chest." > > Anderson stood by his former bandmate, saying: "I found it difficult > at first but I fully support his decision." ian my friend, don't you start away uneasy. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 11:40:40 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: REAP >I think that's rather an assumption - Just because one believes the >coalition invasion and occupation illegal and immoral (and I for one do) >doesn't make the insurgency legal and moral. I always bristled at the >insurgents being labelled as loyal to Saddam (not necessarily or >necessarily at all the case), so I think I'd steer clear of the emotional >overtones of the words freedom fighters... the problem is, there is no unweighted word that can be used emotionally. "Terrorist" is just as weighted, as is "insurgent", "partisan", "loyalist", "nationalist", "militiaman", "patriot", "guerilla", "bomber", "infiltrator", or any of the other words which could be used. As soon as you start using any of those terms, you're automatically making some kind of statement as to where you stand on the issue. Sadly, even if you invented a new word - a totally neutral term - it would become weighted very quickly by usage. In exactly the same way, the term "the coalition", originally a nice, neutral sounding term, has become weighted. But what do you use in its place? The invaders? The liberators? The occupying forces? James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 12:18:25 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: penguins, the coast, Kevin >Just got 319.9, but in fairness I must say that I'm *really* pissed at >penguins today. > >Where do they get off, anyway? the edge of the icefloe. >Joke: why don't polar bears eat penguins? They can't get the wrappers off >(nb. may be less funny to non-UK fegs)! great ghu but that brings back memories. We don't have penguin biscuits here, but I can still remember the old "when you feel a p-p-p-peckish..." jingle. - --- >>>Alice doesn't care for him - she's more inclined to watch Edward Norton or >>>Kevin Spacey movies. > >Hmmmm... what is it with fegwives and Kevin Spacey, I wonder? I can do a passable KS impersonation if my hair is slicked/tied back so far as to not be seen. I suspect my face is ageing more like Robert Lindsay's though. >James, I was just leafing through my book of David Doubilet underwater >photography and was delighted to discover that New Zealand boast a body of >water named Doubtful Sound. Makes me wish there were more such bodies of >water to be discovered so we could start naming them High Lonesome >Sound... Wild Mercury Sound... Surround Sound... the Sound of Sound... My favourite NZ crossword clue: "Um... scenic coastal feature?" (8,5) Doubtful sound is in the wilds of Fiordland, NZ's biggest (and only World Heritage recognised) national park, about 250 miles from here. Not been to DS itself (its only accessible by boat or long (couple of days) walking track, but I have been to nearby Milford Sound, which has the most astonishing scenery I've ever seen anywhere. Apparently DS got its name because Captain Cook wasn't sure whether it would be safe to anchor there, so he moved on to the next one up the coast. James (who frequently sees penguins down at the beach) James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 12:18:36 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: royalties >So, if you're adding verses to someone else's song, at what point do you >get a co-writing credit despite the fact that, say, Woodie Guthrie almost >certainly didn't want some asshole adding words about the Internet to his >songs decades after he was dead or whatever? > >I can think of some anecdotal answers to this, but they're sort of >conflicting. For one thing, parodies (when they're retitled and >substantially lyrically reworked, at least) are usually credited as being >"co-written" by the parodist and the original artist. And generally when >an artist writes a song consisting of a borrowed melody (and they realize >it), they include that artist in the credit (as in that song on "Up" that >borrows the melody from "Suzanne" and is credited to >Buck/Cohen/Mills/Stipe). Surely ASCAP or someone similar have a website you can check out - that would have the info you need (or if not, a contact address for someone you can ask). I don't think there are any hard and fast rules. having said that, I nearly got myself into a mess of trouble a few years back, when I wrote a parody song based on an old NZ folk song, and it was played on the radio. Turns out the writer of the old folk song was still alive and well, but it was such a well-known song that most people (me included) asssumed it was a Trad. In that case, the writer himself didn't mind at all, but his publishers weren't amused. it's a complex area - remember the hilarious example where Mike Batt added a minute's silence into an album and co-credited it to John Cage - Cage's estate sued. However, Billy bragg's song "Ideology" is simply credited to him, whereas it's so obvious that it's based on Bob Dylan's "Chimes of Freedom" that it hurts. Personally, I'd say if at all possible try to get at least a nod of approval from the original writer. I realise this isn't possible when your average Joe Bloggs borrows a melody from a megastar, but in many cases it's possible. >But... it seems to me, although I can't put my finger on an example, I've >seen writing credits like "S. Barrett, with additional verses by Jay Z". >Conversely, I don't think Malkmus sings a single one of the original >lyrics on Pavement's cover of "Camera", but I'm pretty sure he didn't take >a writing credit, either. Seems like there's a lot of individual >discretion involved, but that seems odd given that there's a >business/money/legal/copyright component to crediting, right? one example is my version of "Serpent at the gates of wisdom" on the Glass Flesh project. But in this instance, although I added a verse, I did not add my name to the credits. James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #25 *******************************