Idolator
The forthcoming album by former next-blog-things Beirut, The Flying Cub Cup, leaked at the end of last month, weeks ahead of its October release date. The sorta-culprit? Music writer Erik Davis, who sold his watermarked copy of the CD to his local record shop; whoever bought the promo copy apparently decided to share his pre-release bounty with his friends and fellow OiNK dwellers. Davis felt pretty bad about the whole debacle—especially since his name's been sorta-sullied among the publicisterati as a result of all this—but his blog entry on the subject also gets into the idea of the watermarked release, and how said watermarking results in a curious spectre being hung over the already-beleaguered-enough profession of music writing:
I would like to close with a brief meditation on the spooky, SciFi aspect of all of this. By watermarking their advance CD, Ba Da Bing was hoping not only that they would make recipients too paranoid to upload, but that the object itself would do the threatening. The physical advance, not the publicist or the label head, is now attempting to renegotiate the time-honored and rather informal promotional contract between company and writer. Such renegotiations can be aggressive, and such aggression destroys the aura of chumminess that rules between publicist and writer. One of the reasons I fucked up is that the Beirut advance did not clearly announce itself as being watermarked—my name was printed on the CD, which I didn't even notice, and there was no further warning.
This is in stark contrast to the data grenade I recently got from Warner Brothers: a CD advance of Mark Knopfler's shitty new record, Kill to Get Crimson. This object is a pure, time capsule-worthy artifact of the copyright anxieties of the early twenty-first century. The cardboard sleeve is yellow and black and emblazoned with an enormous exclamation point, and features the following threat:
RESTRICTED RELEASE! WATERMARKED DISC! Do Not Copy - The Music on this CD Has Been Watermarked With a Unique Identifier that Allows Us to Identify the Intended Recipient (You) as the Source of Any Unauthorized Copies.
My favorite thing here is how the text creates an addressee through the bullying use of "us" and "you". The media organization announces that it is now an "us" acting like a data police force, and it then throws in the paranthetical second person "you" the way a cop shines a flashlight in your eyes. This "contract" creates a you that is already guilty. And you didn't even ask for this thing to show up at your door!
On the flip side of the CD, "you" also find the bullshit claim that by opening the package, you are agreeing to the fat paragraph of legalese plastered below. This language includes the hilarious proviso that the CD can only be listened to by the recipient—no girlfriends, no dogs, no neighbors. When you rip open the package, you discover that bad cop has been replaced with good cop by way of a final note: "Thank You for Agreeing to our Restricted Release Terms. Please Enjoy the Music!"
How is anyone supposed to enjoy music after such an Orwellian negotiation! It is as if, as the loss of the physical storage medium continues to undermine the economics of the record industry, the industry is using the object to fight back. It sends humble scribes packages that speak, that has powers of command, that can manipulate behavior and—if you dare to rip it open—even grant pleasure.
Moreover, the watermarked disc itself is, in some informational sense, alive, or at least virally infected with the digital ghost of my life. When I let that Beirut advance slip out of my hands, a little piece of me went with it, a chunk of virtual identity that I hadn't agreed for it to appropriate and that I didn't even know about. Instead of the old informal economy of circulating copies of music, I had become enmeshed in an emerging and far more claustrophobic world of endless virtual contracts and licenses, a world where objects command and the turn against you, where music has become data, and enjoyment little more than the processing thereof.
In a way, this whole "digital ghost" idea is pretty apt, if kind of spooky; I've seen CDs marked with familiar bylines in pretty much every used-CD emporium I've been to (some even in the shrink wrap, ouch!). Is watermarking CDs really an act of intimidation? Perhaps; I know that when I see my name printed on an advance that I get in the mail, it simultaneously makes me feel a little excited about the album (it's important if it has to get protected, right?) and worried (OH NO HACKERS). But both leak culture and the lousy position that the music business is in are making writers and people who put out music more suspicious of each other, and not in the good "if your mother says she loves you, check it out" way. I still am pretty firm in my belief that the only way to solve this problem is to get rid of the idea of the long-lead advance—for bands like Beirut in particular, where so much of the demographic is Internet-savvy and more likely to pick up a band based on a Pitchfork review than a Blender writeup. But that's an old habit that isn't likely to be broken anytime soon, which means that we'll probably have to hear about stories like this for at least another year or so.
My Data Crime [Techgnosis, via Boing Boing]
Comments
So, this dude feels all Ray Liotta Goodfella's black helicopter paranoid because a record label entrusted him with an advance copy for him to review and he went behind their back to sell it a record store. And, now a little bit of his "soul" was taken away because he committed a crime. Was that Michael Vick's response when he found out the feds wiretapped him? "How could they! I feel sooooo violated!"
Right on. I got the willies when the publicist for Animal Collective sent around that kinda hectoring email a while back about the leak (did anyone ever find out who the unlucky leaker was?) Even though I'm usually pretty careful about letting anything watermarked out of my possession, there's just the sense that I'm just one misplaced disc away from getting cast out of publicists' good graces.
That said, selling back used CDs isn't like, this inalienable right of music journalists, and while I know everyone does it, the justifications are usually pretty thin and boil down to "We don't get paid much." If you're not making much, there's always law school, or PR, or advertising. But then you don't get to write about music for a living.
@Rabi: "Entrusted...went behind their back...committed a crime." We're not talking about A.Q. Khan and the Case of the Missing Nukes, guy. Even if you work at the label, you can't seriously think it's that black and white.
@RickSlick: Exactly. I mean if you're that hard up for some cash maybe try a new career...one where you don't have to deal with such ethical dillemas.
Do music writers have arguments like this with their girlfriends / boyfriends after the get caught cheating?
I know you said you'd break up with me if I cheated...but...but...I didn't think I'd get caught! really! how am I supposed to enjoy my cheatin' ways if I'm worried about getting caught again..! sniffle...
I now feel obligated to refer to the latest by Mr. Formerly of Dire Straits as "Mark Knopfler's shitty new record from the Gestapo company."
Let's all refer to it that way online heretofore, shall we? I mean, clearly the label wants any publicity it can get for Mr. Knopfler, and "shitty new Knopfler record shover down critics' throats" is certainly memorable.
What if everybody who got a watermarked promo CD just put it in the shredder? No listening, no review, no buzz.
The thing I have against watermarking? It's expensive. And all it takes is ONE leaker to make the entire thing worthless. Was all that cost worth it? I love Ba Da Bing and respect their decision, but why not just release it later? People will still write about Beirut, right?
@beta.rogan: It's more like, "Baby, we, as music writers, don't get a lot of action generally speaking, so when said action presents itself, we must take advantage, okay?"
Also, to be clear, I don't think what Davis did is particularly wrong -- I just think he's trying himself in knots a bit to justify selling back CDs. He almost makes it seem like a journo tradition, up there with TKs, grafs, and heavy drinking, where really it's just a perk of the business, and one that, because of of exactly what happened in his case, is gonna go away soon. Lots of digital servicing in the future. Yay...
Dude, you're a rock critic. Buck up. Or at least take pleasure in the fact that your ancestors worked 16 hour days in a mine shaft so that your life could be relatively free enough from worries that you could not only feel "paranoid" about the practices of a record company, but you could feel fit to express that feeling to the world.
as a fellow music journalist, i have no sympathy for this dude, and loads of sympathy for the musician/record label side of this argument... personally, getting so many cds for free over the years has made me superlazy and completely ignorant to the ways of music pirating, and i couldn't make music available to my 'peers' if i wanted to. i also almost never give (and NEVER sell!) my promos. i have boxes and boxes. it's totally like a penis size thing.
Come on. I mean, does getting caught selling a watermarked promo really necessitate a self-justifying essay full of half-assed Derrida conspiracy bullshit? Bottom line: if dude had waited until after the release date to sell his copy, this wouldn't be a big deal. It's a simple mistake, and it deserves a simple apology.
Can't Erik Davis just "magick" the copy back from the internets?
Guess I better not sell my review copy, either.
I found myself in a bit of a shitstorm last week as well, concerning a leak that I didn't even leak. We posted some of the new Down tracks to hit the Internet, and the label came down on us HARD, accusing us of betraying the trust of the watermark. Funny thing is, we never even received a CD -- just found the mp3s on the internet, leaked by god knows who -- and got blamed anyway. Couldn't the label just have checked the watermark to see it wasn't us? Just goes to show how badly the majors are doing, and, as such are looking to point the finger at ANYONE.
My watermarked copies now go straight into the shredder. Most the time they won't play, anyway. And, hell, I've had more damage done to my computer by these watermarks than anything I ever found on in the wild on the internets.
Fraid just gave the best advice for writers.
I have no clue if Davis asked for this CD or not. If he didn't ask for it, it's his, and he can do whatever he wants with it.
Trying to stop music writers from selling back promo CDs is just as nearsighted a goal as trying to stop illegal immigration. How do you tell people in a not-so-profitable career (excepting the lucky few) that they're not allowed to do one of the few things to allow them to financially survive? I'm not defending the selling back of promo CDs. I'm just pointing out the reality.
That said, unwanted promo CDs are a form of junk mail. Some people want to clear out this junk mail as soon as possible. I don't expect record labels to send out out SASE's to writers who write them back saying "I'm not going to get to review this. Sorry" And neither should the writers get crucified if a promo CD with their watermarked name leaks if the CD is sent before release date.
But hey, maybe it's a good time to invest in CD shredding companies for the time being.
Didn't he sell the CD BEFORE the album was supposed to come out? Why isn't anyone talking about that? Obviously the album wasn't that good that he didn't even want to hang on to it, so much so that he'd have to sell it a whole month before the album came out.
Always amusing when folks try to assert that it's somehow illegal for journalists to sell promo CDs. Just cause there's a sticker on them saying they're property of the record company doesn't make it so. There's absolutely nothing illegal about it. Ethically, well, that's a different matter. If you're working for a publication and through that job you get promo CDs, it's not very ethical to line your profits through the sale of those CDs. But it's hardly illegal.
A few publicists I deal with have completely replaced the term "CD" with "watermarked CD" -- as in, "Did you receive the watermarked CD?" I like to reply, "No, I got the one that said 'Please put leak this to the Internet immediately.'"
he fucked up. he got caught. now he's diverting attention.
and look, its working!
That reminds me - what became of the "Thou Shall Not Leak" guy?
Hey, Idolator: Is there any way you could shut down SoundExchange, too? How about Sam Brownback?
@horkles: Precisely. When was the last time a label actually asked for a promo CD back? Although if you're not supposed to sell a promo CD back... well, what exactly are you supposed to do with it when you're done? Furnish your house?
This Erik Davis character is a bit self-centered, even for a music writer, no?
The mean ole label is infringing on his inalienable right to sell off CDs. Boo hoo. I wonder if that ever conflicts (inside his mindular conscience-like area) when he tells chicks he is trying to bone all about how he writes because he "loves music."
I had kind of a similar experience, complete with a Pinkerton agent. Remember kids, every time you leak a song, you are fighting "the man" and the Bush administration gets a collective shock to the taint. So keep on leaking.
Makro and Horkles are 100% right. You may not feel selling promos is "right" but there's nothing illegal about it, scary record company stickers be damned. Just sold a shit load of old promos today, in fact.
It's been a while since I've been on the promo train, but my expirence with these watermarked discs was pretty dismal. Good luck trying to find anything that will play them.
And after reading the blog linked (which I see most commentators and the author of this post haven't done) it looks like this guy lost track of the CD and it apparently got thrown in with a batch of stuff he dropped off at a thrift store. He didn't sell it, not that that would matter if he had. (What store buys CD-Rs anyway?)
So, he doesn't know he's lost this disc, someone else finds it, leaks it and he comes home from Burning Man to an inbox of angry emails and this label guy going around trashing his reputation with other promoters as a leaker without ever hearing his side of the story. I'm sorry, that's a load of crap if you ask me.
Enough of this, the Flying Club Cup is one of my favorite albums of the year. Heart-breaking in its beauty.
Yeah, Bob Loblaw, it is that black and white. The label sends me shit all the time. I review it (or not) and keep if I like. To compete w/ other books, I get the advanced copy to inform my readers asap. Writing about music--no matter what you are paid--is a privilege and a . . . (insert wagging finger) a responsibility. Even post release date, its kind of tacky to sell the CD for money after you review it. Most of the time, I just toss it in our giveaway bin for readership contests (post release date, of course.) I didn't sign up for the gig to open my own ebay site.
Barry Bonds redux: don't forget about Beirut.*
*punchline explanation: Beirut, Babe Ruth
Leaking, and downloading leaked material, isn't so much "wrong" or "justifiable" as it is "overwhelmingly popular." Are leakers and downloaders going to be bullied into submission by labels? Are they going to, under the weight of 30Frames' awesome moral superority, change their ways? Or is the music business going to have to completely rebuild itself?
You can argue about the ethics of this until the cows come home, but the thing that freaks me out is when I get watermarked CDs with other peoples' names on them. Which, I assure you, happens regularly. This means that the CDs with my names on them are in someone else's hands. Now, how can you trash someone's reputation for something as prone to error as this obviously is?
I'm sorry. I don't see anyone arguing for this situation in any other job. Like, "yeah, I mean, I accidentally gave away a file cabinet full of social security card numbers to goodwill. oops... I didn't ask for them, though. I just run a university, and it happened..."
When that shit happens, people are up in ARMS. don't bitch because you like downloading leaks. real live actual people work at record companies - big and little - and whether you agree with them or not, this is affecting their lives. and artist's lives. i'm pretty sure beirut's not raking in the bucks kanye west style, so is it that hard to help a brother out and not leak his record? like... if you don't want it, fucking make some marks on the back w/ a sharpie, or break the CD in half, period. not that hard.
Maybe this wasn't a problem 10 years ago, 5 years ago, or even 2 years ago, but it is now, writers. You adapt to the technology and the job. If there was someone at your job who refused to know how to use a computer or something, you'd think they were out of touch. Get used to it, or get kicked out. It's harsh, but I don't care.
And cry me a river, Erik. It's completely irrelevant, btw, what you thought of the CD.
@Reidicus: If you get a CD w/ someone else's name, write the company that sent it. If you got a credit card in someone else's name, what would you do? use it? no. you'd probably cut it up or throw it away. same shit. have some courtesy.
Spin's band of the day is Drug Rug. What's the Deal? Together the two's vocals, paired with their brand of sunshine lo-fi, teeter on the shrill end, a la the beginnings of electric-Dylan. But like the D-man, it fits seamlessly.
@bedpan: Of course that's what I do when I happen to notice someone else's name besides mine on a CD. Good grief, what did you think I was saying? But you missed my point -- if I'm getting someone else's CDs, then it means my watermarks are going elsewhere. I can hope that the others are being as fastidious/anal as me but that's all it is, hope.
Comment on this post
Reply by EmailLogin with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?