Copyright—Copywrong

This is a subject that used to be exclusively a concern of artists, inventors, authors, musicians, but today it’s a relevant issue for everyone of us. Why? Because digital has changed everything. Because knowledge and information is a non-rival good—no amount of consumption can diminish or limit its supply, and therefore any limit or restriction is a deliberate, artificial obstruction meant to keep others ignorant and disadvantaged. Because information should be freely available to anyone, anywhere, anytime. Because knowledge belongs to humanity. Because human success is built on the cooperative passing of knowledge from person to person, generation to generation. Because copying and distributing has been made easier than ever. The only thing we should pay for is the distribution; internet service, satellite/cable, retail outlet, shipping; or physical medium, print, disc, other recording material.

But this is only part of the issue. Copyright was put into place to protect the original creator(s), to insure he/she gets the credit and the economic rewards for his/her work. We’ve all heard the stories of authors, inventors, musicians who have been exploited by promoters, agents, corporations that took all or most of the profits off the top and passed little, or often nothing, on to the person(s) who actually did the work. We all know many examples of the head of an organization who sucks up all the recognition for the efforts of all the unknown, unnamed employees who are the real brains behind the creative work. We all have an innate sense of fairness, so when fairness is violated, when others are cheated, we feel it. All inequities hurt society. They make the world we live in less safe, less pleasant, less productive.

Who has the right to own the copyrights to products and information? For how long? Should the rights be sellable, transferable, inheritable? Should others, who had no role in the creation, be able to own the rights? Who are the creators of something, such as a recording or movie or a workshop/laboratory product, that takes a long list of individuals to produce? How do you measure the contributions of multiple contributors? Who loses when copyrights are violated, sold, extended? When a unique, one-of-a-kind work of art is sold, who owns the copyright, the artist or the buyer? What does it mean to own the original, or something that cannot be exactly copied? In that case, what constitutes a copy? Is a photograph of a painting a copy? What should or shouldn’t be copyrightable?

To complicate matters, we are talking about three distinct categories.

A) Things produced in quantities of one : unique, original works of art.
B) Things produced in multiple identical copies : recordings, books, apps.
C) Things intangible : knowledge, ideas, data.

Each are different in nature. Can each be treated the same in practice?

There are more questions and more considerations to take into account. Some of them are brought up for discussion in a new series about copyrights. Take a look—think about it : [Copy-me]

Posted in Creativity, Discover, Thoughts | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Hey Zeus

There’s not much biographical information to be found about the Spanish composer Jesús Rueda. (Not to be confused with the Spanish footballer by the same name whose bio info is easy to come by.) He’s written an array of music for orchestra, piano, chamber groups, even electronic and one opera. So, I’m left with only his music from one recording to evaluate. But that’s enough. No, no, I haven’t had enough, it’s enough to know I want to get to know more of his music. This recording, Pocket Paradise, named for the first piece on the CD, is a collection of all but one of his works for percussion.

Each of the five movements of the title piece centers around an instrument group. The first movement begins with body percussion, claps, slaps, snaps, and stomps, along with vocal shushes. Other typical percussion instruments are intermixed as it develops. The second is dominated by the hollow woody sounds of log drums and woodblocks. The third follows by using the woody sound of the marimba as a bridge to highlighting other keyboards; vibraphone, chimes, and steel drum donate their sonorities. His use of the steel drum is interesting to note as he approaches the instrument from a decisively percussive angle rather than from its mostly melodic origins in the Caribbean. Movement four transports us to another world with wind and surf-like noises, again followed by marimba as a common link to the the previous sections. Deep fluttering sounds, reminiscent of giant insect wings also accompany the simple three note motif that recurs until it segues into the final movement. “Pocket Paradise” comes full circle in the fifth movement. Initially startling us with crashing drums before bringing in haunting echoes of the first movement’s vocalizations, this time groans instead of shushes. Body percussion also returns alternating with the deep, violent drumming to remind us of where it all began.

The last piece on the CD is “Perpetuum Mobile.” An aptly titled composition of layer upon layer of consecutive, cascading, overlapping descending scales. Beautifully mesmerizing, a perfect ending to complete the concert.

Rueda is unusual as a composer. Most who work successfully with percussion also specialize in it, yet these pieces represent only a small part of his oeuvre. To be so adept with contemporary percussion music makes me curious to hear his other works.

The recording gets an A for its notably full scale dynamics. The performance by the ensemble Drumming, directed by Miguel Bernat, is exemplary. In every way this CD earns a triple A. If you like percussion music also see the previous CD review [Drumming].

(||) Rating — Music : A+ ║ Performance : A ║ Recording : A ║
 Jesús Rueda, Pocket Paradise, Anemo, 2009

Posted in Discover, Music reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment