From: owner-jewel-digest@smoe.org (jewel-digest) To: jewel-digest@smoe.org Subject: jewel-digest V8 #50 Reply-To: jewel@smoe.org Sender: owner-jewel-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-jewel-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk jewel-digest Thursday, February 13 2003 Volume 08 : Number 050 * If you ever wish to unsubscribe from this digest, send an email to * jewel-digest-request@smoe.org with ONLY the word * unsubscribe in the BODY of the email * . * For the latest news on what Jewel is up to, go to * the OFFICIAL Jewel web site at http://www.jeweljk.com * and click on "calendar" * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: jewel-digest V8 #___ gives fellow list readers * no clue as to what your message is about. Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [EDA] jewel related dreams i have had ["Blanch Lee L" ] Re: [EDA] Hows this for a great idea.... [Paul Schreiber ] Re: [EDA] Me yammering on Sharing & Kazaa ruling [Paul Schreiber ] [EDA] the solo acoustic album possiblity [DPS8315@aol.com] [EDA] Intimate and Interactive ["Fabio (wnet)" ] RE: [EDA] Intimate and Interactive ["Connell, Michael P" Subject: RE: [EDA] jewel related dreams i have had - -----Original Message----- From: now and zen girl [mailto:lemming523@hotmail.com] Sent: 12 February 2003 18:43 To: jewel@smoe.org Subject: [EDA] jewel related dreams i have had ...i have jewel dreams a lot. and even cooler i have normal dreams with jewels music playing in the background, im thinking this is because i listen to her music all night long on repeat... - ---------------------------------------------- Does this not sound a little psychophantic? You're starting to sound like a Michael Jackson fan! (No offence intended, just an observation.) L ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 23:51:33 -0800 From: Paul Schreiber Subject: Re: [EDA] Hows this for a great idea.... Lindsay wrote: > I mean, according > to the law, or whatever, it's illegal to be trading our own recordings > anyway... but artists like Jewel just don't come after us. Recording concerts and trading isn't *necessarily* against the law. It's up to the performer. They can reserve the right to make and distribute recordings (like, say, Britney Spears) or they can give it to you (like, say, Phish). Dave wrote: > More money would eventually reach the artist, which is where it should > go > anyway. The artist could do what they wanted with it at that point. > Jewel > could give it to her own charitable causes. My only hope would be that > Clear > Channel wouldn't horde the cash for themselves. I trust Clear Channel about as far as I can throw them. I bet it'll get written into the contracts that artists will make very little money off of this. And if they _do_ make money, who gets paid? The performer? The songwriter? The musicians in the band? etc. Paul shad 96c / uw cs 2001 / mac activist / fumbler / eda / headliner / navy-souper fan of / sophie b. / steve poltz / habs / bills / 49ers / your love is better than ice cream / better than anything else that i've tried / - -- Sarah McLachlan, "Ice Cream" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:04:26 -0800 From: Paul Schreiber Subject: Re: [EDA] Hows this for a great idea.... On Wednesday, February 12, 2003, at 11:51 PM, Paul Schreiber wrote: > Lindsay wrote: > >> I mean, according >> to the law, or whatever, it's illegal to be trading our own recordings >> anyway... but artists like Jewel just don't come after us. > > Recording concerts and trading isn't *necessarily* against the law. > It's up to the performer. They can reserve the right to make and > distribute recordings (like, say, Britney Spears) or they can give it > to you (like, say, Phish). One quick followup: this is covered under 17 USC ' 1101. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap11.html Anyone who, without the consent of the performer or performers involved (1) fixes the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance in a copy or phonorecord, or reproduces copies or phonorecords of such a performance from an unauthorized fixation, (2) transmits or otherwise communicates to the public the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance, or (3) distributes or offers to distribute, sells or offers to sell, rents or offers to rent, or traffics in any copy or phonorecord fixed as described in paragraph (1), regardless of whether the fixations occurred in the United States, shall be subject to the remedies provided in sections 502 through 505, to the same extent as an infringer of copyright. Paul shad 96c / uw cs 2001 / mac activist / fumbler / eda / headliner / navy-souper fan of / sophie b. / steve poltz / habs / bills / 49ers / "all the radios agree with all the TVs / and all the magazines agree with all the radios / and I keep hearing that same damn song / everywhere I go" -- Ani DiFranco, "Fuel" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:22:15 -0800 From: Paul Schreiber Subject: Re: [EDA] Me yammering on Sharing & Kazaa ruling Lisa wrote: > I agree that artists deserve money for their work, but when it comes to > sharing mp3s amongst ourselves I just don't see why it's illegal. This may be illegal -- and I say may because noone's getting arrested or convicted for downloading MP3s -- because it's a violation of copyright law, which allows the rights holder (artist, or in the case of a major label artist, record company) to say who gets to make copies. This right of reproduction is covered under 17 USC ' 106, which states: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106 "the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords." > The p2p services that charge a monthly fee aren't doing well > financially, & it's > obvious why. There are no p2p services that charge a monthly fee. Can you name one? > Are you paying to download mp3s? Is ANYONE on this list > paying? I doubt it. Why? Because it's FREE! Why pay when you can have > it > for free? If it's a physical or online store, you HAVE to pay. But p2p > services are not stores, they don't provide the music, WE DO! And since > there's no money exchanged between us, it's not illegal, it's simply a > fair trade. People aren't paying for MP3s because no one is really selling them. You can sign up for a service like MusicNet, Rhapsody or PressPlay, but there are so many restrictions, it's crazy. You can download x songs per month, but only burn some of them. Or you can stream but not download, or whatever. And the files are probably in a closed, proprietary format such as Windows Media or Liquid Audio instead of MP3. If Atlantic sold you _This Way_ at 25 cents/track for MP3s (total cost, $3.50) versus $12 for the CD, I'm sure thousands, if not millions, of people would be willing to pay. > If we traded shirts(or anything for that matter), does that > mean we have to pay the designer because we traded? Of course not! I > know > what you're thinking- because the shirt was paid for, right? Well, > guess > what- so is the music we download! 90% of the music we download comes > from the actual cd which someone PAID for, therefore the artists > already > got their money. If you trade shirts, you aren't increasing the number of shirts with the design. Therefore, the designer has already been paid for the total number of shirts in existence. However, if you were to start making your own shirts with the same design without permission, that, too, would be illegal. > The only reason the music industry is complaining that > cd sales went down is because of the price. If they lower the price, > people will be more likely to buy, then sales will go up & the record > companies/artists will get more money. What you're saying doesn't make sense. They aren't complaining that CD sales went down because of the prices of CDs. Rather, they (Rosen et al.) are complaining that CD sales are down because of file sharing. The real answer is much more complex -- fewer titles were released, record company staff was cut, singles were discontinued, DVDs and video games took up a larger share of disposable income, the economy was in a downturn, et cetera Sandy wrote: > It doesn't matter how many times you try to say this and justify it, it > doesn't matter IT IS STILL ILLEGAL. period. It's not the RIAA that's > saying it's illegal, it's the LAW. The law isn't as clear as you (or anyone else) would like it to be. Say you install and launch Kazaa, and share your music folder. Have you done anything wrong? Remember, nobody's downloaded any files from you yet. What you've done is make files available. US copyright law doesn't currently enumerate or reserve a "making available right," so it's quite murky. Now, say someone downloads one file you made available. You've now _distributed_ a file. Is that wrong? More likely. But suppose the person who downloaded the file deletes it without listening to it. Would you still have done something wrong? Why? All you did was shuffle some bits around. If someone were to get paid for this exchange, who would it be? The songwriter? The performer? Why would the performer get paid if the song was never listened to (performed)? What about if they download the song and _do_ listen to it? Is it wrong now? See where I'm going with this? It's messy. Is a digital copy of a file a distribution, a performance, both, or neither? Depending on which one it is, different people get paid. > Once and for all, read very carefully : > It has NOTHING to do with money being exchanged between the people. > You are > stealing *potential* income from the artist. It doesn't matter if you > make > no money off of it, you are still stealing it. It does, actually. Private, noncommercial copying is a non-infringing (i.e. legal) use in Canada. So copying your friend's CD is okay. Copying your friend's CD and selling it is not. > If you go into a store, and > steal a shirt, and then give it to your friend, it's still illegal even > though you didn't make money off of it. A comparison of physical goods such as t-shirts to virtual ones such as MP3 files is a flawed one. Let me elaborate: Marginal costs: - - the cost of making the 100th t-shirt is, say, $2 - - the cost of making the 100th copy of an MP3 file is basically nothing Rival nature of goods: - - if i take your t-shirt, you can no longer wear it - - if i copy your MP3 file, you can still listen to your copy Theft and infringement are two very different crimes, as I explained in my post last week. Paul shad 96c / uw cs 2001 / mac activist / fumbler / eda / headliner / navy-souper fan of / sophie b. / steve poltz / habs / bills / 49ers / "I've heard about your witness protection program -- it's called woodlawn cemetery." -- _Law & Order_ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 03:30:41 -0800 (PST) From: Christy Subject: [EDA] Carnivore help I have the tabulature for "Carnivore," but I'm having a really hard time with the rhythms. Can anyone help me out?? Thanks. Christy the Tattoed angel ===== "We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams." Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day http://shopping.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 09:46:58 EST From: DPS8315@aol.com Subject: [EDA] the solo acoustic album possiblity >>w> ell, this is not her last album of her contract, the next one is. the > >>possible solo acoustic album!! woohoo!! You know, I'm as excited as everyone else about the possibility of an acoustic album, but thinking about it, most artists use tours to promote albums, correct? And she already did a solo acoustic tour, correct? So if she released an acoustic album, what are the chances that a) she would actually tour to support an album that, in all reality, doesn't need to have big sales or make any money, or b) the tour would be successful in the case that she did do so? That's not to be cynical, I would just rather see another two new-material albums AND two tours than this new material album and a greatest hits acoustic CD. James ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 14:50:54 -0300 From: "Fabio (wnet)" Subject: [EDA] Intimate and Interactive I was re-watching I&I from 97 and in the end, they talk about Jewel meeting Steven Spielberg and Woody Allen, and Jewel says Steven wanted her to do a movie. Then she says she was audictioning for an Ang Lee's movie, and it would probably be her and Leonardo Di Caprio. Interesting... I wonder if it really had been Leonardo if it would have been more successful... Fabio ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:55:25 -0500 From: "Connell, Michael P" Subject: RE: [EDA] Intimate and Interactive > I was re-watching I&I from 97 and in the end, they talk about Jewel meeting > Steven Spielberg and Woody Allen, and Jewel says Steven wanted her to do a > movie. Then she says she was audictioning for an Ang Lee's movie, and it would > probably be her and Leonardo Di Caprio. > Interesting... I wonder if it really had been Leonardo if it would have been > more successful... When they started filming Ride With The Devil, Matt Damon was in it the first few days or so but had to pull out. He was then replaced by Skeet Ulrich. By the time RWTD was released Matt Damon was as hot as a pistol and it certainly would have been more successful. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 13:03:11 -0500 From: "Sandy" Subject: Re: [EDA] the solo acoustic album possiblity > >>w> ell, this is not her last album of her contract, the next one is. the > > >>possible solo acoustic album!! woohoo!! > > You know, I'm as excited as everyone else about the possibility of an > acoustic album, but thinking about it, most artists use tours to promote > albums, correct? And she already did a solo acoustic tour, correct? So if > she released an acoustic album, what are the chances that > > a) she would actually tour to support an album that, in all reality, doesn't > need to have big sales or make any money, what does touring have to do with the album having big sales? artists make most of their money off of touring, therefore, even though she might not technically be hurting for money, I'm sure she would still like to make some more (who wouldn't?) and I think though she's not fond of constant touring, she probably does enjoy touring when she restricts it to have her own breaks. and yes, she already did a solo acoustic tour, but she's already done that before as well - when she did and didn't have an album to promote... I don't think her having done a solo acoustic tour means she wouldn't do it again, especially to support an album. > or > > b) the tour would be successful in the case that she did do so? why wouldn't the tour be successful? because perhaps the "ilikewhat'spopular*now*" crowd wouldn't go to her shows? her band tour for this way was successful, even though that 'this way' was only marginally so (compared to a lot of "popular" acts) I think the people who are stilling buying her cds, and going to her shows are real fans, not fans of the moment, like those who selling off their POY and Spirit CD's all over the net ;) her strong fan base that exists mostly because of her solo acoustic music is what keeps her going. the tour that has a chance to probably not be successful is the one in support of her next album, depending on how it turns out. either people embrace her new sound, new fans and old, or she alienates some old fans, doesn't impress the new ones, and it's a splat. > That's not to be cynical, I would just rather see another two new-material > albums AND two tours than this new material album and a greatest hits > acoustic CD. no one (including Jewel) has said it was going to be a "greatest hits" acoustic CD. in fact, "greatest hits" implys radio hits - like Hands, WWSYS & YWMFM... and I definately do not think that's happening after only 4 cd's (including the next one, excluding joy) of only which 2 have produced any top 40 hits (I don't think standing still did that well, though it was at least the only one that did anything from the singles she released from this way) if you meant "greatest hits" to include what you think are her greatest songs, one's that she's played at concert but maybe not recorded... I never got the impression that was what she was doing either. I don't think Jewel's one to be lazy and just record an entire record of stuff she's already written... if she's doing a solo acoustic record, she'll most likely have new material on it, though no doubt she will record some oldies but goodies as well, kind of like this way. ~ Sandy > > James ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:50:56 EST From: JeWeLNuMbEr1FaN@aol.com Subject: [EDA] JeweLink Street Team Someone wrote the team asking what was wrong with the boards...If anyone cares...But they told them they are gonna be down for a while for a month or so, so check back or something...They suck! lol, o well, maybe they are getting it ready for the new CD or somethin ~micheLe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 18:55:34 -0800 (PST) From: nessa1327@bolt.com Subject: [EDA] v-day request hello all :o) in the spirit of the holiday of love and caring and whatnot, i would like to make a request. see, i've been a jewel fan for a long time, 7 1/2 years. 7 1/2 years ago i was in forth grade and did not have the internet, so therefore i didn't know anyone else who liked jewel like i do (it sounds like i have a crush on her, lol). anyway, while i have grown up and become more capable of keeping jewelified, there is still one area where i am barren. i have no angelfood. mainly because i've had no idea how one begins to collect angelfood. i have lots of random songs from the internet, but no actual shows. so, i was wondering if any of you loving angels would donate to me a piece of angelfood with which to begin a collection, as well as perhaps educate me on the ways of the trade :o) i would be much obliged and forever indebted. i would be more than willing to repay you at any time with whatever skills i posses (perhaps you have a burning trig question?) as well as pay for S&H. if you would like to brighten my day, please e-mail me and thank you :o) nessa this-is-the-year angel p.s. i think it sounds kind of oddly eloquent, don't you? - ------------------------------------------------------- Bolt. Everything you need to speak your mind, hang out, hook up ... whatever. Tagbooks , Bolt Notes , message boards, personality quizzes, photos, free stuff and lots more! http://www.bolt.com ------------------------------ End of jewel-digest V8 #50 **************************