Read the BBC’s commentary on Bowie’s mash-up motives and the contest’s fine print. In short, after reading the fine print, the author states:
[Y]ou can take the stuff, make something really great with it, but it is still theirs. You get a chance to win a car, but all your work and effort belongs to Bowie and his agency, RZO Theatricals.
The author even suggests that the contest is a reaction to Danger Mouse, played by the record industry’s rules instead. Which makes me wonder: in the history of popular music, when and what was the first 3rd party remix produced and distributed? Was it sanctioned? I know as a DJ, there have existed a number of remix services — some of them authorized and licensed, and some of them not so authorized and licensed. But which came first? Is this history repeating itself?
One blog author summarizes the matter: “David Bowie’s mash-up contest is a crock of shit.”
One Comment
The cash-in is on. The cool hunters have found mash-ups. They’ll see a great opportunity to break new acts and cash in again on older acts. It’ll be like this - find a well-known track from the 80’s that everyone likes, get a well-known masher to mix it with a suggested track by a relatively unknown artist. Watch as the track gets people interested in the older artist’s back catalogue again, and the new artist’s single gets a boost on the charts. Suddenly there’s a greatest hits package of the older artist, with the mash-up thrown in to make sure people get the connection and buy the CD. More money for the record company, on their terms. Just the way they like it. The same thing they’ve always done. Record companies don’t mind the idea of raiding their own back-catalogues - they just want to be in control of the process so they can maximise the return on investment. “Here, listen to this, now buy it, trust us, don’t listen to other music unless we tell you to.”
Post a Comment