Obtaining the opinions of three musicians

http://www.flickr.com/photos/47422005@N04/6720673741

In a continuous effort to understand different views on copyright, I have recently interviewed Miss Joanna Rosen, who is not only a terrific friend, but also both an artist and a performer with very distinguished opinions on copyright. Joanna has participated in various shows and performances. Since she is currently only sixteen (and according to her, “not in the Actors’ Equity Association”), she generally isn’t paid, but there has been occasions in the past where she was paid. Either way, it is obvious to the both of us that performing is not currently her most lucrative source of income. Joanna states that because she doesn’t make a living off of her productions, she is fine with (and has grown to accept) the fact that some of her performances are available for viewing on the internet.

However, Joanna also points out that because she is mostly a “Broadway styled performer” who sings primarily non-original, musical theater pieces, she does not feel like she has the right to be paid to perform somebody else’s music, nor does she expect people to pay for watching her videos, though she would feel uncomfortable with the fact that people are enjoying her performances without paying the composers or herself. It appears that Joanna does care for copyright, but only if the work is by or belongs to her originally. To conclude our intellectually-stimulating interview, I asked Joanna, “I happen to know you aspire to be on Broadway in the future; If you were a renowned Broadway star, would your opinion for any of the preceding questions change? How?” Interestingly enough, she replied, “Well, if I was on Broadway I don't think my opinions would change much. However, if I was in an original Broadway cast, I would get paid for my work on that cast's album. I don't think I would feel great about the fact that someone could look up a video of me performing one of the songs on that album instead of buying that song or the entire album.”

"Though I do love listening to music on YouTube for free," she says,"I always try to buy my favorite musicians' or performers' music so that I support them in a way that will help them. I think copyright rules are in place for a reason and it's important to follow those rules so that performers' and musicians' don't get ripped off."

In contrast, artists such as Trent Reznor and Erin McKeown publicly support the internet as a way to publicize their work and thus, they strongly oppose recent petitions such as SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect IP Act), two controversial anti-piracy bills, intended to “strengthen protections against copyright infringement and intellectual property theft.” To them, the internet is a way of allowing them to reach new audiences and communicate directly with millions of fans, which they obviously find very beneficial.

After a friendly interview with a close friend and some tedious research, I can reasonably conclude that... this world is a strange place. Joanna, who as far as we know, is not yet a victim of the disadvantages of the internet, seems to care more for the free distribution of work than artists who are victims. Fortunately, artists such as Trent Reznor and Erin McKeown may be victims, but are not suffers, of the internet. In fact, unlike most stingy and unoriginal artists today, they’ve completely embraced the internet as a method of distributing their work. Joanna is right: we should support our favorite artists, and certain rules exist to be obeyed. But the world of entertainment is a highly competitive battlefield. Which artists are more likely to survive: the ones who you can afford to listen to, or the ones like the extremely bored person who spent the past few months suing Carly Rae Jepsen for supposed violation of copyright, meanwhile disregarding her own decline in popularity?