Tunes for torture musicians are displeased
#1
Posted 10 December 2008 - 02:58 AM
So to sum up, a herd of those awful liberal music types are getting all worked up just because the government happens to use some of their songs, played at high volume for weeks at a time, to torture Americans and foreign nationals. The nerve of some people! Clearly they are hate freedom.
Props to Tom Morello who suggested placing Bush in a Gitmo cell and blaring Rage Against The Machine on him day and night. GUERILLA RADIO!
Quote
#2
Posted 10 December 2008 - 11:45 AM
I mean, if someone bought an art print... Who's to say that person can't take that print and hang it upside down in their house, and do a little bit of their own painting on it, and maybe glue some taxidermy to it, and then force every houseguest to look at it? No, it's not as bad as torture, but my point is, once it becomes copied and distributed by sales, the owners of those copies can do whatever with them, as long as they don't try to pass it off as their own work. I'm very tired of musicians whining that their music isn't being "used" properly. You don't see Van Gogh complaining that his work has been reduced to mere coasters, do ya?
However, the anti-torture side of the argument, clearly I am in agreement. But for most of these musicians I keep hearing whine, it's not about the fact that people are being tortured, it's about the fact that it's THEIR MUSIC.
#3
Posted 10 December 2008 - 12:34 PM
I can understand people getting worked up when it's about the stuff that they pour their hearts and soul in, but starting a holy war over it...? It just makes it seem as if they are a bit too full of themselves. Add a crowd of
This post has been edited by Gobbler: 10 December 2008 - 12:35 PM
Quote
#4
Posted 10 December 2008 - 02:59 PM
No, the owners of the item in question still have to use that item in accordance with the law. A kid on the street listening to some of this music would be arrested if he blasted it at full volume for weeks on end without cessation. The government is breaking the law here, and entirely too few people give a damn. I'm quite glad that these people are standing up for human rights. In capitalist America it is necessary to link even such a seemingly clear-cut question to copyrights or material posessions to make it hit home with the American public, and even that probably won't work. But I applaud their efforts never the less, and will make it a goal of any future government I end up leading to follow Tom Morello's advice.
As for the copyright issue, let's take a look at that. When your music is used, you become associated with the entity using it, and therefore it's defamation by association. Wagner for instance was adopted as the composer of the Third Reich and still carries a certain stigma. By the same token, the band that did Baracuda asked Sarah Palin not to use their music at her little two minutes hates, because they didnt want people listening to baracuda to think "hang Barack Obama" or "kill the socialists".
That would be bad enough, but when the villains of Bush's gulag are using music to drive kidnap victims to the point of suicide, that's going way too far, because it effectively makes the musicians an accessory to Bush's crimes against humanity. Indeed you can see on page two that one musical scholar from some crack ass band is actually proud of this fact. So, why doesn't the government either stop torturing people, or limit its torture tunes to the music of bands that are happy to participate in evil?
Quote
#5
Posted 10 December 2008 - 04:19 PM
Also, the only people who listen to those musicians are the ones who would listen to them anyway. They need to grow a pair and all come out against Guantanamo Bay period. If this is what it took to get their attention, their priorities are out of line. This certainly isn't the first anyone has heard about torture in that place, and if anyone only cares about it now is an asshole. As for myself, there's little I can do.
I expect this is the sort of thing up with which, however, Obama will not put, so I won't have to worry much longer.
Also, music banned under Taliban rule? That government could use a good ass-kicking, I'm sorry.
Also, JM, that little kid with the boombox would be hauled away for disturbing the peace. The government certainly isn't in this situation. What they're doing isn't right, sure, but isn't the same as the kid with the stereo.
-John Carpenter's They Live
"God help us...in the future."
-Plan 9 from Outer Space
nooooo
#7
Posted 10 December 2008 - 09:57 PM
That's my point. They're coming off as only pissed because their music is being used for the torture. If say, Hannah Montana music was being used instead, these guys would keep their mouths shut. For them, it's not about torture being bad, it's about what they want done with their music.
Those particular sentences get a big fat "ditto" from me, as it is exactly what I meant but I just couldn't word it as well, thanks. :-P
#8
Posted 10 December 2008 - 10:34 PM
Torture is PERFECTLY LEGAL under the Bush regime. Obama's pussy legal advisors have stated that they have no intent to prosecute anyone for torture, ever. There is no legal problem to address, because until there is some sort of real revolutionary action, there will not be any legal problem with torturing people as long as you're "just following orders"
Massive Attack and Rage Against The Machine are both rather commonly known for not being too pleased with the government. I also highly doubt that anyone who listens to RATM would be capable of war crimes, at least not on behalf of the current regime. So, no, I don't think anyone is using Rage to torture detainees. Hell, it might even buck their spirits up a bit to hear some of that stuff.
This is not what it took to get their attention. As I said, Tom Morello has always been against this, and I would endeavour to guess that Massive Attack has as well. This isn't them suddenly saying "hey, they're torturing people with our music and we're not getting any royalties!!!" RATM has offered free downloads of much of their music and even webcast some of their videos, so that's not what this is about.
No, it's precisely the same. The kid with a stereo keeps people up for maybe an hour before the cops come, kick his ass, and fine him/imprison him. The CIA and MI interrogators do the same thing for weeks or months on end, and recieve medals and promotions for it. Also, because other people are hearing it in each case besides the owner of the disc, it constitutes a public performance, for which the bands could argue that they are owed royalties and that their permission should be granted for it.
First of all, they clearly have been talking up about it. RATM recently reunited to do a protest at the RNC. And they have numerous songs referencing the habit of the US government of using torture on their enemies or percieved enemies. And as I made clear already, even though torture is officially legal now, there is still the copyright question. The media is now tired of the whole torture issue, and the public couldn't give a shit. So, if you make it a copyright issue, then it gets interesting again. Just keeping it in the news is doing a lot of good, getting out the word and the names of people folks can donate to and so forth.
Speaking of which, how much have you done to stop these policies? Note that if it is nothing, your basis for criticizing any musician for making a statement on this just fell apart. How would you react if you discovered they were using your intellectual property to torture people? I imagine this answer will be different from the one to my previous query.
And on a final note, No. No one needs to come out against Guantanamo Bay. People need to come out and march in the streets, burn Bush in effigy, and fucking demand a capital war crimes trial, and eventual hanging/firing squad execution for him and anyone else involved in the carrying out or ordering of these policies.(or, at the very least, some sort of imprisonment, as Morello suggested) I would much rather keep Guantanamo open as a place to store former American political and military officials guilty of crimes against humanity. Closing Guantanamo won't do anything.
It's like demolishing a crack house and letting the dealers move across the street to a new one. It accomplishes nothing. Obama's lukewarm repudiation of torture, likewise, accomplishes nothing, because no matter how illegal something is, if those laws are not enforced with penalties, the laws are worthless. That's why I hope that, if Obama does not act promptly, people will take justice into their own hands.
This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 10 December 2008 - 10:38 PM
Quote
#9
Posted 10 December 2008 - 10:49 PM
It's a copy of their work. That they sold. Like a copy of an art print, that gets sold. Heck, I can't even make copies - everything I make is an original (ceramics). But then it gets sold. And the new owners can do whatever the fuck they want with it. They paid for it. They can now resell it, break it, use it, paint on it, shit in it, what-the-hell-ever. I have no more say in it because I no longer own it. If you don't want that to happen to shit you make, then don't fucking sell it.
I hate stupid copyright whiners.
And this whole thing trivializes the REAL issue here, torture. So one band went to a protest before the copyright issue came up. Multiple bands/artists have been pulling this crap, and for more than just torture. Trying to make it political. Not letting someone do something with your music ain't gonna change the world, buddy. There's so much more they could do if they were really against the torture that's happening right now. As it is, they come off it like selfish pricks that only care about who does what with stuff they sold. (And I'm not just talking about the quotes from this particular article)
This post has been edited by Spoon Poetic: 10 December 2008 - 10:51 PM
#10
Posted 11 December 2008 - 12:29 AM
I buy one of your one of a kind ceramics, create a mold with it, and then churn out thousands of them which I sell without providing you, the original designer/producer, with a cent.
I buy one of your one of a kind ceramics, discover that it is a great thing to make a cluster bomb out of, and blow up an SPCA animal shelter.
Etc.
You're so concerned that people striving to raise awareness about this are doing it for some unknown and insane profit scheme, yet you have not bothered to answer my question about what you have or will do to prevent torture or spread awareness of it. This is a new tactic, yes, but would anyone have batted an eye if I had made yet another thread about George Bush's rather extreme bondage fetish? I think no. So, yeah, if they're in the news and they're getting people talking, this is positive.
Examples? I believe I already pointed out that it is perfectly legal to torture people so long as they are Arabs. Copyright infringement however is not legal. It's like the mafia. They couldnt get them for anything they were doing until finally they realized these people didnt pay taxes, so they got a bunch of them for tax evasion. Now, is this really the point? No, but they at least went after them on something. It is silly to criticize the efforts of people working against something like this just because you, in all your moral high ground glory, believe that their reasons are not one hundred percent pure.
Did the lawyers for these detainees (who, I would wager, have a greater stake in their clients fate than you do) criticize the musicians for... something? No, they did not. Because they are legitimately and actively interested in prosecuting torturers, freeing victims, and other such important goals, and therefore are glad for any help or good press they can get.
If they wanted to be selfish, why are they going up against the US government? Assailing a government with a proven record of kidnapping and torturing people does not seem like a selfish action to me, especially when I'm on limewire right now illegally downloading stuff, and do not have a CIA goon squad ready to defend me if someone wants to make a beef.
Quote
#11
Posted 11 December 2008 - 04:57 AM
Artists could protest the use of other musicians' work, you're right, but they wouldn't have any legal argument. I know what you're saying about these guys not having a stand until it affected them personally, but at the same time, protest is just background noise these days. Lawsuits are harder to ignore. On the other hand, maybe they really don't care about music used as torture, but genuinely object to their musid being used int hat context. After all, that's a pretty scathing review right there.
Your example of art being used to sell coasters is interesting, but considering that you only mentioned examples from the public domain, you've overlooked something significant there: copies of art still under copyright can't be put on coasters without the artist's permission. But since we're talking about music for political endorsement, and not copying, the analogy isn't relevant anyway.
I agree with everything JM said about soft liberal attitudes toward torture as a military punishment. Because don't believe what TV is telling you: torture is ineffective at getting information. I'd like to add that the use of music banned in another regime is ridiculous. Are we trying to convince this other people of the superiority of out culture? And to do so, we fugure the best bet is to capture them one at a time and play music at them really loud? Wouldn't commerce and cultural exchange be more effective? It worked for the Greeks and the Romans ...
#12
Posted 11 December 2008 - 05:55 AM
I don't think they choose the music to express cultural superiority, it's simply what they had at hand when it came to thinking of tunes that are loud, noisy, disturbing and obnoxious enough to have a psychological effect.
Using music for torture was already used by some very early Chinese dynasties, there's no secret to it that being bombarded with disharmonious sounds for long enough can drive you insane.
Quote
#13
Posted 11 December 2008 - 01:37 PM
Using it as a bomb, while horrible and illegal in many other ways, I can't expect any profit/whatever from that. If they use my teapot to beat people over the head, again, it's illegal for other reasons, but they bought that piece of ceramics from me so it's not like I'm gonna have some kinda claim over it just because they didn't use the teapot for tea.
And what does it matter what I have done to stop torture? I don't have the ways or means except to talk to people about it, make people aware, etc - which I have done when possible. Famous musicians have a much larger forum and more options - people listen to them, they have money, they have power, people do what they say, etc. So to turn this into something as trivial as a copyright issue (especially when having done little to nothing before this) irks me, and I'm allowed to feel that way no matter what I have or haven't done. The argument that I can't have an opinion on something just because I haven't, what, gone to a protest, isn't that the most you've done? Is ridiculous. If we're going to play that way, then pretty much no one on these forums can have an opinion or argue about much of anything.
And when the hell did I complain specifically about RAtM? They make ugly music with political statements, sure. And apparently went to a protest. Whatever. But I sure don't recall complaining specifically about them as you claim. I'm talking more about the issue of many bands/musicians trying to be political and "change the world" by whining about copyright, not saying RAtM is anything in particular.
#14
Posted 11 December 2008 - 02:55 PM
What it matters is that you're criticizing the efforts of others. Let the righteous Spoon cast the first stone, and all that. Regardless of whether the issue they choose to focus on is trivial or not, it has a chance. We've been politely asking these assholes not to apply electrical shocks to peoples genitals for what, seven years? Capitalist society and its legal appendages as it exists in the US is more concerned over intellectual property violations then about the government torturing people who happen to be a different race or religion. Once again I think that is obvious by the amount of interest this story has drawn both on the news and in the forums. And I once again suggest that if this had been a clear cut story about how Bush is bad for torturing people, no one would have been terribly interested.
My point about what you've personally done is that it's kind of uncool to go about challenging how comitted others are to the struggle when you don't seem to have too great an interest yourself. I've personally attended protests, written articles, edit: also, dedicated my last book to the disappeared of this war, signed petitions and given to legal defense funds for alleged terrorists (most of their lawyers are working for free or for donations) I have demonstrated through action that I want all these people freed, and their captors tried and executed or imprisoned. I applaud anyone who helps achieve that goal in any way and for whatever reason. Vladimir Ilyich, when a Menshevik told him that one of his comittee members was a scoundrel, said that scoundrels had their uses, and he would not expel someone on these grounds alone. These people are most certainly not scoundrels, but even so if they help towards my goals, I will make sure they know it is appreciated. The Mensheviks were happy to criticize the efforts of others, because they were comitted to the struggle, but only so far.
The article specifically mentions two bands involved in the concert: Tom Morello of RATM, and Massive Attack. Both have a clear record of being committed to leftism and global freedom. You are now
A: Belittling both their music and actions, just so that you can try to pass off your baseless accusations that they're somehow in this only to make money, or something.
and B: Claiming at the same time that you aren't talking about the subject we're talking about directly, but about all musicians in general, even though only two groups are in question here.
The only two bands that were "whining" are RATM and Massive Attack. No other bands were mentioned or made party, except for some group of hillbilly fucks that said they were glad their music was being used to torture ayrabs. So, unless you have something to say about the actual concrete subjects, I really don't know where you're trying to take this argument.
This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 11 December 2008 - 03:00 PM
Quote
#15
Posted 11 December 2008 - 03:20 PM
Why the rant about Capitalist America? It's not like there would ever be a possibility for a purely capitalist, socialist or communist state, so why bother thinking in such extremes?
Torture is wrong, yes, we get it, but it happens and I'm very sure that it would also happen if there was a Communist America - I mean, after all, you seem to be following a doctrine that accepts polemic and calls for the bloody execution of others.
Quote