Archive Quotes
Phil Lesh
***1/5/06***
I had two conversations with Cameron Sears, our CEO at GDP, regarding Archive, starting when our material first showed up there. I told Cameron that I was fine having the audience tapes up there, but that he should talk to everyone, including Bob Hunter and John Barlow, regarding the soundboards. A year later when I had not heard anything about the boards, I mentioned to Cameron that I felt by not doing anything we were making a decision about the boards and that I was fine with that. Again I urged him to talk to everyone. I was caught by complete surprise when, right before Thanksgiving, the recordings were pulled. I feel that Bobby was not updated properly and unfairly took most of the heat. A lot of our business disagreements are the result of poor communication from advisors. Bobby is my brother and I love him unconditionally; he is a very generous man, and was unfairly judged regarding the Archive issue. -Philzone
***11/30/05***
“I was not part of this decision making process and was not notified that the shows were to be pulled. I do feel that the music is the Grateful Dead's legacy and I hope that one way or another all of it is available for those who want it. I have enjoyed using Archive.org and found it invaluable during the writing of my book…Your concerns have been heard and I am sure are being respectfully addressed.” -PhilLesh.net
Bob Weir
***12/2/05***
""We had to cover our asses. What they’re doing is illegal, unless there are arrangements made… particularly in the case of covers — other people’s material.If we’re perceived to be distributing their songs without their agreement, they have every right, and really and every obligation, to sue us…We had to take it down. We had no choice. It’s archive.com’s [sic] job to make arrangements with the other people whose material… we’re playing, and then everything’s good….Probably a lot of it is stuff that we intend to release in the future anyway.We need revenue. Our music division needs revenue so we can digitize all of that stuff.The ‘information wants to be free, man’ — those folks… this is not information, this is music. It’s kind of value-added information. Some people prefer to call it art….We had to go ahead and do the right thing, and it upset some folks. I’m really sorry about that. So they started up a petition, a boycott, and all that kind of stuff. I really hope they can stick to their guns, and boycott us, and… seeya."" -KBCO Boulder
Mickey Hart
***12/02/05***
"The last several days have been a whirlwind of activity and commentary regarding the Grateful Dead and archive.org. I am posting this message due to the fact that despite news stories to the contrary, I have been one of the earliest backers of the taping and sharing of Grateful Dead music. I fully support the position taken by Phil in his message and always have. Being a field recordist myself, I stand united with the taper community and always will notwithstanding anything in the media to the contrary. Efforts have been made by Grateful Dead Productions and archive.org to rectify the situation and I hope our loyal fans, friends and family will continue to enjoy and participate in Grateful Dead music." -MickeyHart.net
Robert Hunter
***12/1/05***
“The more I learn the more there is to know about this remarkable public relations meltdown. All you saw was the mushroom cloud. My best hope is that by the time its reported in this Sunday’s NY Times’ entertainment section it will be ancient history.” -DeadNetCentral
John Perry Barlow
***11/29/05***
“You have no idea how sad I am about this. I fought it hammer and tong, but the drummers had inoperable bricks in their head about it.
What's worse is that they now want to remove all Dead music from the Web. They might as easily put a teaspoon of food coloring in a swimming pool and then tell the pool owner to get it back to them.
It's like finding out that your brother is a child molester. And then, worse, having everyone then assume that you're a child molester too. I've been called a hypocrite in three languages already.
How magnificently counter-productive of them. It's as if the goose who laid the golden egg had decided to commit suicide so that he could get more golden eggs.
This is just the beginning of the backlash, I promise you.
This is worse than the RIAA suing their customers.” -BoingBoing
Dennis McNalley
****11/30/05***
“it was the band's conclusion, after a long discussion with [the Archive], to request that they change their policies…The idea of a massive one-stop Web site that does not build community is not what we had in mind. Our conclusion has been that it doesn't represent Grateful Dead values.” -New York Times
***11/30/05***
"The band has not fully made up its mind…Things have already changed, and God only knows if they'll change some more." -New York Times
***11/30/05***
the removal on November 22 of all downloadable Dead recordings from archive.org was the result of “a great communication snafu...It is my understanding that by the end of the day, the audience tapes will be restored to archive.org” -Relix
***12/01/05***
"At this point, all I've been asked to communicate is, 'Go look at the archive.org Web site.'" -Rolling Stone
***12/02/05***
"There was a consensus to address this issue and it got addressed…We are confronting an entirely new set of circumstances with moving new music around, and we are struggling with it like a lot of others." -Reuters
David Gans
***11/23/05***
“I have sympathies on both sides of this issue…I think it is worthwhile to ask ourselves if there isn’t some greed on the other side of the equation.” Playback
Stanley Owsley
***12/3/05***
Best thing they have done in years, in my opinion. I was never in favour of allowing the bootlegging of shows by audience members. The original idea for audience taping- about which I was not consulted - was to allow a certain group of audience members to record at shows with microphones. NO real soundboard tapes should have ever been let out, but then, only the ones that Healy gave connections out for, and of course those that Latvala, an unrepentant sneak-thief, gave away are real, many are fakes. I have NEVER allowed anyone to copy my sonic journal tapes, which were made and kept as a personal diary of my work. The music belongs to the musicians who wrote and perfomed it. It is not public property and the continued survival of all of us who particpated in bringing it to the world should be respected by all who love it. Buy the albums we make from our archives and know that you are helping pay our rent and keep food on the table. I have nothing but contempt for those who claim they were ‘robbed’ by the band’s decision on this." -Ratdog.org
View the Archive controversey timeline
posted by SLC Library Boy at Tuesday, January 17, 2006
4 Comments:
I followed the whole archive.org "controversy" and think that no one is thinking about the differances between sdb and audience tapes. The sbd was gd property and if you notice the ticket, the tapers tickets contained a pretty specific license to record for personal use only. Bobby had a great point about the covers. Too many early artists were ripped off by many of the great R & R bands.
Owsley is right on in his comments.
I am someplace in between the two points of view. The genie got outo f the bottle when audience taping was allowed & even encouraged. for me it is NOT a case of "the information should be free" - since if sbd quality material is being offered, the band has EVERY RIGHT to charge bucks for it, packaged in quality materials and with a mind toward archival honesty. When all the taping began, most of us who collected GD music did so with absolutely NO monetary gain, & many of us who continue to do so, do so with the same integrity. And as for paying performance rights to artists the band covered, who amongst the band paid those persons for the original performances to begin with- was thought ever given to that, when so and so decided that'd be a nice one to try, tonight?
But on the other hand, "the right to make a living" is not a guarantee in this life. Artist's careers exist at their own peril as for the fickleness of public taste. People have the right to choose whom they shall support in the musical life.
For me personally, this no longer includes three of the "post-Jerry survivors"- I am sorry for that, but then, they have driven me away due to their own personal arrogance and
insistence on greed over community.
if people no longer choose to support you-then "tough luck"!
Add to that I feel the quality of the music offed by these three folks does not add up to 1/2 of what it did when Jer was around... I was amazed to find my own self-initated boycott joined by the multitudes when the archive.org flap fizzed & spewed- my position has not changed, although my feelings and sensitivities toward the fourth surviving member have.
Peace.
Of course the Grateful Dead have always paid to perform other writers
material. It's an expense deducted from the revenue at each concert and paid to ASCAP/BMI to distribute.
Each songwriters publishing company collects royalties from the sale of
every record, tape,CD or digital download sold.
Yes, the old integrity has been
lost to corporate titleholders and Executive Reproducers
Post a Comment
<< Home