Donny Miller

Short Version.

Long Version.

“The administration was opposed to voting on it [the Iraq war] in the Fall of 2002.” -Karl Rove.

Wow. Well, thankfully things are recorded and there are archives. Like this one I found. It’s from a website called whitehouse.gov.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/archive.html
Here is the list with the date and title.

Sept. 24, 2002 President Urges Congress to Pass Iraq Resolution Promptly
Sept. 26, 2002 President Bush Discusses Iraq with Congressional Leaders
Oct. 1, 2002 President Stresses Need for Strong Iraq Resolution
Oct. 2, 2002 President, House Leadership Agree on Iraq Resolution Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
Oct. 5, 2002 President: Iraqi Regime Danger to America is “Grave and Growing”
Oct. 7, 2002 President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat Excerpts from the President’s Address
Oct. 10, 2002 President Bush Pleased with House Vote on Iraq Resolution

Sure looks like the administration didn’t want to go to war. However, the Congress at the time was controlled by the Republican party.

That’s very funny to me. What about all those speeches about Iraq’s links to Al Quiada, weapons of mass destruction, Saddam, September the 11th, 2001, plans to build nuclear facilities and the list goes on and on. Does Karl Rove really think he’s fooling anyone? It’s obvious he thinks the American people are idiots and will believe anything they’re told. The fact is, because of this administration, the next generation of people will without a doubt, be the most untrusting of the government ever. He has himself to thank for that.

Donny

Look down in the fall of 2002 and you’ll find this:

President Urges Congress to Pass Iraq Resolution Promptly September 24, 2002

A Decade of Deception and Defiance

11:00 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks for coming. We just had a very productive Cabinet meeting. We realize there’s little time left in — before the Senate and the House goes home, but we’re optimistic a lot can get done before now and then. Congress must act now to pass a resolution which will hold Saddam Hussein to account for a decade of defiance.

It’s time to get a homeland security bill done, one which will allow this President and this administration, and future Presidents — give us the tools necessary to protect the homeland. And we’re working as hard as we can with Phil Gramm and Zell Miller to get this bill moving. It’s a good bill. It’s a bill that both Republicans and Democrats can and should support.

My message, of course, is that, to the senators up here that are more interested in special interests, you better pay attention to the overall interests of protecting the American people.

We can get budget going. I need a defense bill. The Senate needs to get, and the House needs to get, their differences reconciled and get a defense bill to my desk before they go home. That’s a very important signal to send. And at the same time, since there is no budget in the Senate, they’ve got to be mindful of over-spending. Very important for those up there who keep talking about budget — balanced budget, and all that, to not over-spend. If they’re truly that concerned about the deficit, then one way they can help is to be fiscally sound with the people’s money.

We talked about the need to get pension reform and an energy bill, terrorism insurance. There’s time to get all this done, and we look forward to working with the members of Congress to get it done.

I’ll answer a couple of questions, starting with Fournier of the AP.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Can I have your reaction to two recent assessments on the situation in Iraq? First, Tony Blair said today that Saddam has tried to acquire significant quantities of uranium and can quickly deploy chemical and biological weapons. But there seems to be little new information in the dossier. Secondly, former Vice President Al Gore –

THE PRESIDENT: He explained why.

Q Pardon me, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: Explained why he didn’t put new information — to protect sources. Go ahead.

Q If you could explain why, I’d appreciate it. And secondly, Vice President Al Gore –

THE PRESIDENT: That’s right, I forgot our different roles. (Laughter.)

Q I couldn’t even get on the ballot. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Did that have something to do with the background check? (Laughter.)

Q When I have something on that, I’ll let you know, sir. (Laughter.)

The Vice President yesterday said that you’ve managed to replace the world’s sympathy on Iraq with fear, anxiety and uncertainty. And you’re using the issue to steer attention away from the inability to get Osama bin Laden.

THE PRESIDENT: I’m confident a lot of Democrats here in Washington, D.C. will understand that Saddam is a true threat to America. And I look forward to working with them to get a strong resolution passed.

Prime Minister Blair, first of all, is a very strong leader, and I admire his willingness to tell the truth and to lead. Secondly, he has — continues to make the case, like we make the case, that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace; that for 11 years he has deceived the world. For 11 years, he’s ignored the United Nations, and for 11 years he has stockpiled weapons. And we shouldn’t deceive ourselves about this man. He has poisoned his people before. He has poisoned his neighborhood. He is willing to use weapons of mass destruction. And the Prime Minister continues to make the case, and so will I.

And I again call for the United Nations to pass a strong resolution holding this man to account. And if they’re unable to do so, the United States and our friends will act, because we believe in peace; we want to keep the peace. We don’t trust this man — and that’s what the Blair report showed today.

The reason why it wasn’t specific is because — I understand why — he’s not going to reveal sources and methods of collection of sensitive information. Those sources and methods may be — will be used later on, I’m confident, as we gather more information about how this man has deceived the world.

Holland.

Q Sir, do you want to specifically respond, please, to Al Gore, instead of just generally about Democrats? What did you think about his –

THE PRESIDENT: About his response — I mean, there’s a lot of Democrats in Washington, D.C. who understand that Saddam Hussein is a true threat, and that we must hold him to account. And I believe you’ll see, as we work to get a strong resolution out of the Congress, that a lot of Democrats are willing to take the lead when it comes to keeping the peace.

Q Sir, Arab leaders are warning the terrorism coalition and your efforts in Iraq are at risk because of the Arafat siege. Why didn’t U.S. support last night’s U.N. resolution, and what can you say to get to Israel to end the siege?

THE PRESIDENT: What we do support is this, Steve — and our abstention should have sent a message that we hope that all parties stay on the path to peace. And I laid out what the path to peace — what the path to peace was here at the — in the Rose Garden: First of all, we all have got to fight terror. But as we fight terror, particularly in the Middle East, they’ve got to build the institution necessary for a Palestinian state to emerge; that we’ve got to promote the leadership that is willing to condemn terror and, at the same time, work toward the embetterment of the lives of the Palestinian people. There are a lot of suffering people there and we’ve got to help end the suffering.

And I thought the actions Israelis take — Israelis took were not helpful in terms of the establishment and development of the institutions necessary for a Palestinian state to emerge. We will continue to work with all parties in the region, Israel and everybody else who wants to fight off terror, we’ll do that.

In order for there to be peace we must battle terror. But at the same time, we must have a hopeful response. And the most hopeful response of all for the Palestinian people is for — to work for a state to emerge. And that is possible; I believe strongly it can happen. I believe it’s — I believe in peace in the Middle East. And I would urge all governments to work toward that peace.

And we’re making progress, and that’s what’s important for the world to know. We’re making progress on the security front, we’re making progress on the political reform front. We’re making progress to make it clear that if there is to be a peaceful settlement, that the Palestinians must be given the opportunity to bring forth leadership which is willing to work toward peace. And it was not helpful what happened recently.

Dick.

Q Mr. President, we haven’t asked you about the economy in quite some time. Consumer confidence numbers out today — not real good. Later this month, lots of Americans are going to receive their 401(k) statements, many of them probably cringing about what they’re going to see in there. Do you feel like the economy is on the right track, that the stock market can mount any kind of a recovery in coming months? And if you are optimistic, what are your reasons for your optimism?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Well, I’m optimistic because, one, I’m optimistic about America in general. I mean, the American people are resilient, they’re strong, we’ve got the best workers in the world, inflation is down, interest rates are low. So when you combine the productivity of the American people with low interest rates and low inflation, those are the ingredients for growth.

But there’s more to do. That’s why we need a terrorism insurance bill. We need to get our hard-hats working again. We need to make the tax cuts permanent so that entrepreneurs and small businesses have got certainty in the tax code. We need to make sure Congress doesn’t over-spend. If Congress over-spends, it will send a chilling signal to markets. And so there are things that Congress and the administration can do, working together to make sure people work.

But I’m an optimist. I’m optimistic because this is America — that’s what makes me optimistic. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong. And we’re really good at a lot of things we do. But, no question that, you know, that things changed, I mean, from the boon days. The market started to decline in March of 2000 — that’s when it peaked. The sellers outnumbered the buyers starting in March of 2000.

And then in the summer of 2000, the economy began to slow down, people began to see a serious slowdown. And then we came into office and we had three quarters of negative growth. That’s called a recession. And we’re dealing with it. We’re dealing with a sound — a fiscal policies, starting with letting people have more of their own money. See, the tax cut was actually necessary, a necessary part of economic recovery. And there are some up here in Washington, D.C. who would like to raise the taxes on the people. And that’s just — that’s bad economics, that’s bad policy. People up here want to stop the reduction in income taxes to the American people. That’s bad policy in the face of an economic slowdown.

So you bet I’m optimistic. But I understand we’ve got a lot of work to do. And we will. We will continue to work hard to make sure that people can find work.

Thank you, all.

END 11:09 A.M. EDT

As you know, the WGA is on strike. The writers want a percentage of the DVD and “New Media” sales. The hold up with new media is because revenue generated from new media is usually based on advertising. Studios argue that giving money to writers from advertising is unprecedented, in other words, the writers don’t get money from commercials on TV. Ah ha! But they do indirectly. Where do you think money comes from? Advertising. TV is set up so that the most people will watch it, that’s why it’s often times so dumb. But it’s that way for a reason. More people. Which means more money. Why do you think BayWatch was the number one television show in the world?
Anyway, the money that pays for everything comes from advertising. Now the studios aren’t wanting to share the revenue generated from advertising as if this was never heard of. When in fact, they’ve been doing it since the inception of television.
In the mean time, if you’re a member of the WGA, I will give you a 20% discount on anything I sell on donnymiller.com during this strike. Just email me an image of your card. This extends to art pieces. I love you all that much.
Stay strong, becuase you’re in the right.
Donny

I got asked to be in this show. I’m just going to be signing US Constitution Erotic Coloring Books.

? WAR SHOW
The Anti-War Show
ONE NIGHT Tuesday Dec. 4th 7-10 PM

Corey Helford Gallery
8522 Washington Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
www.coreyhelfordgallery.com

My friend sent me the email below. He own’s a record label and he’s seen the bad effect of downloading music illegally. I really believe something should be done. It will get to the point where movies will be downloaded just as fast as music and will cripple that industry. California is the 5th largest economy in the world and a great deal of that revenue is from the movie industry and well, they’re next.
If you look at it in the way of just downloading ipod size movies, things could get bad fast.

I think a bill must be passed eradicating file sharing. That’s the next step. It’s gotten that bad.
Donny

The crisis within the music record business is becoming extremely acute. The whole file share business has it’s stranglehold on record companies that are already cut down to size. Most all smaller and up and coming artists and smaller labels are on board a sinking ship they seem powerless to save.

Why try and sell your music on the internet when someone else open huge marketplaces (offering your catalogue as well) online where you can get EVERYTHING for FREE?

Cachelogic.com says torrent-traffic alone amounts to around 35 % of ALL internet traffic on a worldwide basis, that says a bit on how much artistic content that is consumed without any artists, bands, labels, movie-companies, software companies etc gets compensation.

The file share sites make money on advertising. The song writer, producers and record labels who put a lot of work into and paid for making the recording, distribution, marketing, promotion etc don’t get a single cent. Is that fair?

Few seem to take into consideration that a lot of work, time and economical resources is put into a song or an album.

Say it took a song writer 500 work hours to make an album and 50000$ in expenses to record and mix it, pay musicians, designers, press records, pay for promotion and marketing etc (And still 50000$ is nothing if you want to have an international career of some sort). The simple fact is that his album can, in theory, be bought by 1 person and then be put on countless file share sites and be downloaded for free by millions of people. One thing is that he put a lot of work and time into making that album, another thing is that it cost a lot – is it fair that he is the only one who suffer as a direct effect of that he made music that millions love? He will not get any mechanical rights compensation for that my music is distributed via fileshare sites, nor any royalties, neither a share of the advertising income at the file share sites.

“Adjust to reality man, find new ways to earn money on your music”, some people say. But how? Who wants to buy a t-shirt with an solo artists name written on it?
Sell his music to commercials and film? Well, one thing is to get access to that market – another thing is what if he does not want his music in shampoo commercials and high-school films?

The only hope to make money then would be to tour all year to earn money, but then again he would have less time to compose music. Since so many bands and artists are losing money on record sales the live market has grown even more important than before. Problem is you need to be “big enough” to pull a couple of hundred people at the least, depending on your touring costs, to break even. And to pull people you need to be marketed, too be made visible. And marketing costs money. And how do you make money to pay the marketing when you can’t get paid for people buying your music?

I’ve focused on finding deals and partners for Norwegian bands and artists in a wide variety of label segments: metal, jazz, experimental, electronic, hardcore etc.

3 years ago, for example, I got one of the bands I worked with – punk / hardcore band JR Ewing - license releases in UK, Sweden, Central Europe and USA. All on small labels, all hopefully-break-even projects, but great fun for the band and great for me in terms of getting more knowledge and a bigger network.

Nowadays it’s very hard to find someone who dare sign Norwegian artists. One thing is that few indie record labels dare to sign a Norwegian act that is stuck in a corner of Europe, another thing is that it’s difficult to even find a Norwegian label that is willing to sign new artists (Unless you appeal to people over 40 who still buy cds).

Some people within the file share business tend to create an impression that they contribute to kill the “evil, capitalistic major label industry”. It’s fascinating to see how much hate there is for businesses that in fact just release something as harmless as popular music. I might personally think it’s a tragedy that The Ketchup Song was the biggest hit ever some years ago, but hey a lot of people liked it – and nobody forced them to like it either. However, yes, the major labels do suffer under file share, and a lot of people have lost their jobs. But: their back catalogues and infrastructure are so solid, although they do regroup and adjust themselves at this very moment (Like ANY other business need to from time to time), maybe even turn into one BIG company in the end, but it’s NO WAY they will disappear.

So, in other words, those who start to feel it now, where it will really start to hurt the coming years, is among artist and indie labels.

One of the most DIY labels on earth – Gold Standard Laboratories - shut down it’s business a couple of weeks ago. Part-owner and main man Sonny Kay ran the label either from a dirty office in LA or from internet cafes and phone boots across the world while being on tour with his own screamo punk bands. Addressing in an email what forced him to shut down he said: “Filesharing was never much of a problem until everyone got the ipod, then the sales disappeared overnight.” And this comes from a label which is, I mean was, looked upon as the Warp of punk rock – releasing extreme punk and experimental music - NOT a label that produce radio hits.

Concerned by the current situation I wrote some indie label contacts across the world to ask them how they felt about the present situation.

Please read.

Support the artist – BUY their music.

Best regards Vegard Waske

Jeff Abarta - Epitaph Records - US
Profile: Punk and hardcore
Artists: Bad Religion, Tom Waits, Grinderman, Elliott Smith, Converge +++
www.epitaph.com

1. In 5 years – how do you think your label structure be?
I wish I could say for sure, but I don’t know.

2. Is it realistic to think that in the future music will, or can, be given away for free?
No way. Who’s going to pay for marketing? Studios? Producers?

3. IF music were to be given away for free – how would, do you think, an up and coming band or a small label be able to finance recording, marketing and administration of a release and feed the artist?
They would have to have a piece of the touring / merchandising pie.

4. Do file share affect your label?
Of course. It’s impossible to say exactly how badly, but of course it does.

5. When the bigger parts of people under 30 in Europe has been allowed to get think that you can “tap” music from internet like water from a crane for free, is there any hope for making them pay for downloading music? How can this be done if so?
Technology is going to have to come to the rescue, and force the issue. I don’t know exactly what needs to be done, but SOMETHING needs to be done, that much is clear.

6. Can changes be made in the way people consume music without governmental action towards file share sites?
Not without having unity not just within the music business, but the electronics business is going to have to lend a hand by creating affordable hardware to implement a new format.

Julie Weir - A&R director - Visible Noise Records - UK
Profile: Hardrock / emo / metal
Artists: Lost prophets, Bullet For My Valentine, The Legacy ++
www.visiblenoise.com

1. In 5 years – how do you think your label structure be?
It will be an all encompassing structure as it is the only way a label can currently make things work. We currently look after recording, publishing, booking, management, street team and are currently getting into Graphic Artists too…we have our own gallery in Berlin which we will be using as an exhibition AND performance space. Majors are doing deals cross copyright currently but I believe the well structured indies will be able to provide this quicker and more effectively - as everyone communicates.

2. Is it realistic to think that in the future music will, or can, be given away for free?
I would prefer to think this would be a NO…..for smaller artists, I think it will still have to be bought and have a value given to it as that is the beginning of a bands career. Giving away for free wouldn’t really work here. With people like Prince, the issue was the album as a promotion of the huge run of gigs he did (which he was still paid 1 million pounds for by a daily newspaper in order for them to covermount the album). This spurred on his concerts at the o2 arena to be sold out for an entire month, again generating live and merch revenue. The music end here is a stepping stone - similarly with Radiohead who used the promo of pay what you want for their new album in order to garner unprecedented publicity. They made money from this AND are now out to release worldwide as a physical product.
Bands having music out gets them press coverage, which in turn sells live tickets, which sells merch. The issue that will arise is how publishing payments are made and how PUBLISHERS also make money if everything is being given away so cheaply so it effects more than just the labels.

3. IF music were to be given away for free – how would, do you think, an up and coming band or a small label be able to finance recording, marketing and administration of a release and feed the artist?
See question 1…..the industry will just get riskier though. New channels of diffusion such as videotones, ring back tones, animated screensavers etc will become the new “singles”.

4. Do file share affect your label?
Absolutely - it affects every label….the indies more so than the majors as they cant write off such things and swallow them up into wider budgets.

5. When the bigger parts of people under 30 in Europe has been allowed to get think that you can “tap” music from internet like water from a crane for free, is there any hope for making them pay for downloading music? How can this be done if so?
Incentives such as different artwork, additional tracks, opportunities for limited edition items…

6. Can changes be made in the way people consume music without governmental action towards file share sites?
They will have to be as it will be impossible to get rid of all file sharing sites - again, the way we consume music has changed so much over the last 30 years it will have to continue to evolve really… However, legal action and legislation must also be put in place to stop the major offenders, really.

Vique Martin - Revelation Records - USA
Profile: Hardcore label started mid 80s. One of the worlds leading hardcore labels of all times.
Artists: Gorilla Bisquits, Youth Of Today, Bold, Judge, Shelter, Quicksand etc
www.revelationrecords.com

1. In 5 years - how do you think your label structure be?
For Revelation Records we have already really scaled things down. We have no A&R person OR publicist anymore. All publicity is being handled by outside companies and all A&R duties split up amongst the staff for the distribution side of things. It’s working out OK. The sales for the label just do not justify any full time staff. New releases sell, on average, between 3000-4000 copies [including vinyl and downloads]. This isn’t enough to sustain a label - but fortunately we have our extensive back catalog which still chuggs along. I think in 5 years it would hopefully be the same, but who can tell? Everyone is hoping that things will level out and stop dropping, but that’s just hope…

2. Is it realistic to think that in the future music will, or can, be given away for free?
No I don’t think it is. Very few bands would make enough from tour or from merchandise to cover the costs of recording their music. So I think things will splinter and big bands will possibly do that [like Radiohead just did] and even big indie bands too. But smaller bands will either not have the money to record records [labels won't be able to fund it!] or will have to pay for recording themselves and hope that they make back the money eventually. This could lead to either some really talented people never getting the opportunity to record their music, or get it ‘out there’ so people can hear it. Or could help with the ridiculous glut of bands [a huge percentage of which have no talent] being culled and only really talented musicians / songwriters being given record contracts - more like the old days!

3. IF music were to be given away for free - how would, do you think, an up and coming band or a small label be able to finance recording, marketing and administration of a release and feed the artist?
I don’t think they could! Bands themselves would be able to from merch and show money - if they are successful enough. But labels are usually shut out of that side of things. Some labels are changing their contracts with bands with the aim of getting a peice of this pie - getting 10% of merch and tour income - which can help offset the cost of recording.

4. Does file share affect your label?
Definitely. Sales are way down compared to years ago. But I don’t think it’s just file sharing - I think it’s also a combination of cd burning along with entire libraries of music being shared via ipods. I totally know people who go to each other’s houses and just plug their ipod into their friend’s itunes and download onto their pod everything that they want to hear!

5. When the bigger parts of people under 30 in Europe has been allowed to get think that you can “tap” music from internet like water from a crane for free, is there any hope for making them pay for downloading music? How can this be done if so?
I think that they might figure out that it’s a really bad idea if their favourite bands can’t afford to tour, can’t afford to make new records, and can’t afford to write more music [because they have to have shitty jobs to make ends meet rather than living off their band] that might have an impact. If a lot less records start to be released - it might make people think twice about it. And if people start getting fined and prosecuted for it - that might make them think twice too!

6. Can changes be made in the way people consume music without governmental action towards file share sites?
I don’t think so. And I personally think that the file sharing sites SHOULD be prosecuted and fines. More so than the people who do the downloading. If the sites weren’t there they couldn’t do it!

7. Any other comments?
Revelation Distribution is fortunately staying strong by still selling a fair amount of CDs, along with a lot of vinyl and t-shirts. But it’s getting tougher and tougher to sell less and less cds, and if this continues I think we’ll see a lot of labels going the way of GSL over the next 2-3 years. It’s a shame. But then again - there’s been a LOT of really shitty music put out over the last decade. A lot of resources used to manufacture them [trees and oil] and transport them. There’s a huge amounts of cds in landfills now. Back in the 90’s a band had to record multiple demos and tour a ton before they could get a record deal. These days there are SO many labels and everyone so concerned with missing out on the next BIG band, that they get snapped up before they’ve had time to mature. There’s a lot of releases that didn’t need to have come out in the last decade. Perhaps this will take us back to the days of bands struggling to get deals, growing and developing their song-writing skills and musician-ship, and less records coming out - but those records being much better!

Molly Neumann - Lookout Records - US
Profile: Punk and hardcore
Artists: Green Day, Alkaline Trio, The Donnas, ++
Molly also works as director for Emusic
www.lookoutrecords.com

1. In 5 years – how do you think your label structure be?
Lookout has already scaled down considerably in the last 3 years. We have focused on keeping our catalog in print and selling as actively as possible via digital channels. Because I still love new bands a year and a half ago I began Simple Social Graces Discos (www.simplesocialgraces.com) to expose bands I love and wanted to document but it is more of a labour of love and not necessarily something I’m trying to do to compete commercially.

2. Is it realistic to think that in the future music will, or can, be given away for free?
Well is IS being given away and I hope that some mechanism will improve to encourage people to value the music they want and that a model will exist that will make it economically viable for them to purchase music. We are certainly at a crossroad between what the owners of the content feel music is worth and what many consumers consider it to be worth.

3. IF music were to be given away for free – how would, do you think, an up and coming band or a small label be able to finance recording, marketing and administration of a release and feed the artist?
That’s exactly it. It’s not a viable model for investment unless there is a way for revenue to be generated in a different way. There are already so many bands competing and so many labels trying to stay afloat, it’s a difficult effort.

4. Do file share affect your label?
Yes and unfortunately I think they even affect the psyche of some of the artists who operate on a small scale. Some can’t imagine why anyone would pay for an MP3. I work with many bands from Spain where file sharing is extremely popular (similar to Norway.)

5. When the bigger parts of people under 30 in Europe has been allowed to get think that you can “tap” music from internet like water from a crane for free, is there any hope for making them pay for downloading music? How can this be done if so?
I believe the internet providers can be better partners to the content owners and help us limit the amount of file sharing that is happening. They know how much data is being passed through their system and what is likely to be illegally downloaded. There are many areas to investigate in this regard.

6. Can changes be made in the way people consume music without governmental action towards file share sites?
A larger conversation that is not just enforced by the government can happen with kids to help them understand that what they are doing is stealing. They know they can’t walk into a store and take what they want and they should feel the same way about music. The industry needs to understand that consumers are very sensitive to price and figure out ways to present music in a more economically viable way, and to help expose the consumers to the music they want.

Justin Pearson, 31G Records, USA
Profile: Electronic, experimental, punk
Artists: Blood Brothers, Black Dice, Moving Units, The Locust +++
Justin also plays in grind/noise band The Locust (Signed to Anti / Epitaph)
http://www.threeoneg.com/

1. In 5 years - how do you think your label structure be?
Honestly I have no idea. 5 years ago, I had no idea. I suppose it might be that cds will become obsolete. There might be other ways to have more elaborate aspects added to digital formats with the advancements in technology. Also ways to avoid illegal downloading. But maybe all labels will have to die and / or rethink what they are and how they function. I know that we are trying to figure it all out. But as of now, I have no solid answer for you on this.

2. Is it realistic to think that in the future music will, or can, be given away for free?
There was a similar thing with cassette duplicating in the 80’s but that has been forgotten. Cassettes are obsolete. So are cds next? See, there has to be a way for bands, artists, and even labels to generate funds for what they do. So something will have to change. There is no way that as soon as one digital format is put on line, that its there for everyone, for free. It just can’t stay that way. Sure, I have another job, on top of me being a label owner and a musician, I don’t make much. But the Justin Timberlakes, the Rolling Stones, the Whoevers, they all need to make money and their bosses need to do the same. I’m sure they can lobby for something monumental. Or maybe collectively, the artists will change things.

3. IF music were to be given away for free - how would, do you think, an up and coming band or a small label be able to finance recording, marketing and administration of a release and feed the artist?
I’m not sure. I ask this with every release. We pay for a recording, promotion, manufacturing and it’s out there for free before we sell a single copy. Not only are artists being threatened, but so are distributors, retailers, etc. With a lot of majors, its all about publishing rights. So selling material for commercials and films would essentially generate some money to help recoup. But for us, it’s a bit harder to see something like Orthrelm on a car commercial.

4. Do file share affect your label?
Yes, of course.

5. When the bigger parts of people under 30 in Europe has been allowed to get think that you can “tap” music from internet like water from a crane for free, is there any hope for making them pay for downloading music? How can this be done if so?
Well people in the bigger parts of Europe, say Germany, hated the jews and that changed. But seriously, it’s changed from when Napster first hit the scene. Things are changing and will change once things are figured out. It can’t stay this way forever.

6. Can changes be made in the way people consume music without governmental action towards file share sites?
If you mean how the government is not regulating illegal downloading I’m sure there can be methods to produce files that can’t be copied, or even uploaded. If someone cracks that, there will always be someone else to figure something else out. It’s just going to take time.

7. Any other comments?
We’re screwed.

Peter Quicke – Ninja Tune / Big Dada - UK
Profile: Electronic, jazz, hip hop
Artists: Cinematic Orchestra, Pop Levi, Spank Rock, Roots Manuva ++
www.ninjatune.net

1. In 5 years – how do you think your label structure be?
I guess the trend will continue as now, to spread our efforts across as many different activities as make sense and can provide a contribution to our overheads. Our focus used to be to make money from selling records - we’d do lots of things but our living came from selling records. Now selling records is just one (important) part of the effort to survive promoting music and our artists. And it enables to create the other key businesses - digital sales and subscriptions, publishing, licensing (mainly synch licensing) - and the new areas we are developing: artist management, promoting gigs, selling gig tickets.

2. Is it realistic to think that in the future music will, or can, be given away for free?
Music must not be completely free. There must be ways to nurture talented writers and artists.

3. IF music were to be given away for free – how would, do you think, an up and coming band or a small label be able to finance recording, marketing and administration of a release and feed the artist?
There will be subscriptions services - all you can eat for a monthly fee. Free, and we get a share of advertising revenue, like from Youtube when Merlin do a deal with them on behalf of all indies (see http://www.merlinnetwork.org/). Free but we get a cut from ISPs, hardware manufacturers (AIM is lobbying government for a ‘value recognition right’, the right to force companies who profit from music and film etc to license the right to sell storage and media transfer - probably won’t happen for a while. See for example http://www.openrightsgroup.org/press-releases/music-industry-proposes-isp-tax/

4. Do file share affect your label?
Well it does help promote artists. But along with CD burning and the rise of personal MP3 players (IPods) this is the reason that punters don’t feel music is worth paying very much for. Or feel they need to pay less often.

5. When the bigger parts of people under 30 in Europe has been allowed to get think that you can “tap” music from internet like water from a crane for free, is there any hope for making them pay for downloading music? How can this be done if so?
I don’t know. Under 30s do pay for music on phones a little, not sure if this will continue. Services like Emusic are great, cheap if you use them a lot. Not as successful as iTunes but still earning some money…

6. Can changes be made in the way people consume music without governmental action towards file share sites?
I think government needs to give copyright holders (music, film, books) the right to license, sue companies that profit from music without licensing it. Ipod makers, ISPs, broadband, etc… See above.

I’m redoing my site right now and this is part of it. I’m going to be updating it often. I just found out that 99 Cents Only Store saw my piece I did and they loved it. More on that soon.
Here it is if you hadn’t seen it.

Donny