With A Voice Like This

Whether it's Music or Media - this is the Voice you're looking for.

You are here: Home / Archives for 2008

Archives for 2008

049 – Is This the Rights Thing to Do? Part 3

Originally this episode was to feature an ASCAP representative, but the timing didn’t quite work out for this show. so the discussion turned to an overview what issues were facing on the Internet with music and content in general.

Topics discussed are:

  • ASCAP’s take with the Songwriter’s Bill of Rights using rickrolling as an example.
  • Music leads the Internet charge in content and how it delivery is being monetized and even moving toward regulation
  • Why does the same free content on the web suddenly become worth charging for and being paid for in a different format?
  • Content on the web isn’t really free? Someone’s making money on content.
  • Protection versus Statements of rights by a subset of people
  • The different factions involved in the music on the Internet trying to stake their claims
  • Limited past delivery systems versus the Internet’s near limitless capabilities
  • Protections versus Control
  • Net Neutrality
  • Selling your Privacy for convenience
  • The double-edged sword of easy access
  • Comments from the Podcast Gallery
  • What’s Freedom without responsibility?

Links discussed in the show:

ASCAP’s Songwriter’s Bill of Rights

My previous post The Perception of Value

Podcasting Legal Guide wiki and in PDF format

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-107903.mp3?dl=1]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

048 – Is This the Rights Thing to Do? Part 2

This episode of With A Voice Like This is the conclusion of the discussion with Independent Singer/Songwriter Samantha Murphy of SMtvMusic.com stemming from the April 10 release of ASCAP‘s Songwriter’s Bill of Rights.

topics in this episode include:

  • Government’s role in resolution of these issues
  • Sound Exchange, its background and methodology
  • What Samantha is doing to put action behind her viewpoints
  • The role of Education in music and the Digital Age – meisa.org
  • Questions and Comments from the Podcast Gallery
  • Creative Commons

Links discussed in this episode:

Samantha Murphy at SMtvMusic.com

Samantha’s e-mail is [email protected]

Performance Rights Organizations: ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, Sound Exchange

Samantha Murphy’s article written for a Princeton Symposium

Samantha also works with [NOTE: Site no longer exists]

SaveNetRadio.org  [NOTE: Site no longer exists]

Fading Ways Online [NOTE: Site no longer exists]

MEISA.org – Music & Entertainment Industry Student Association

Lawrence Lessig article – Commons Misunderstandings: ASCAP on Creative Commons

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-107901.mp3?dl=1]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

047 – Is This the Rights Thing to Do? Part 1

Thursday, April 10, just in time for their big ‘I Create Music’ ASCAP Expo in LA, ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) released their Songwriter’s Bill of Rights. In this episode and the next, recorded live on April 10, I discuss this with Samantha Murphy, an independent singer/songwriter and outspoken proponent of change for how music is delivered, monetized and protected in the digital age.

Topics covered in this episode include:

  • Samantha’s unique experience as a professional performing musician since the age of six
  • The Songwriter Bill of Rights read
  • Transparency of PROs and their methods
  • How this affects Net Neutrality
  • The effect of the Internet on music delivery
  • One PRO’s line in the sand
  • Who do we turn to, the Government?

The conclusion of this discussion with Samantha Murphy can be heard in episode 048.

[Additional Note: At the beginning of this episode, I made the statement that ASCAP’s Bill of Rights was to benefit performers. As Samantha pointed out, while you can have a performer account with ASCAP, it is a completely separate entity of its own and this Bill of Rights deals only with Songwriters.

Edit: A further clarification from Samantha is that the two types of accounts are Writer and Publisher, not Performer .]

Links from this episode:

Samantha Murphy at SMtvMusic.com [EDIT: Removed link as site no longer exists]

Performance Rights Organizations:ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, Sound Exchange

ASCAP Songwriter’s Bill of Rights [Edit: Link redirects to  the ASCAP Advocacy/Legislation page]

Portfolio.com article about the ASCAP Bill of Rights by Sam Gustin

Portfolio.com article Paying the Piper by Sam Gustin

Samantha Murphy’s article written for a Princeton Symposium

Samantha also works with DigitalFreedom.org/

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-103330.mp3″]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

046 – What’s In It For You?

A tribute to Gene Puerling (March 31, 1929 – March 25, 2008)

In this episode: I have three question when it comes to a band’s website

  1. What do you need to see?
  2. What do you want to see?
  3. What do you wish you could see that you’ve never seen before?

Discussing the website for 4-AM and the groups it needs to speak to, Booking Agents, Clients and Fans. What belongs, what is the best use of New/Social Media and some of the resources I use to help me with the ideas.

Links:

Hot Hits, Cheap Demos by Nadine Condon

Promoting Your Podcast by Jason Van Orden

Musician’s Cooler Podcast with Jammin’ Dave Jackson

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-103329.mp3″]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

045 – You’re A Tool

This Episode of With A Voice Like This is a bit different than past episodes in that I’m straight forward on a mission. A lot of static is floating around the Internet on various topics and so it was my turn to state my feelings on a few things. Among them were:

  • Gary Vaynerchuk’s two minute videoblog [NOTE: link to videoblog is no longer avaiable] from March 25 (If you haven’t seen this, you really should)
  • Web 2.0 as the savior of Good
  • Using the internet as a tool
  • Free music and content on the Internet
  • Copyrights and Creative Commons (and my basic understanding)

As always Comments From the Podcast Gallery rounds out the show.
[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-103264.mp3?dl=1]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

The Perception of Value

So what’s it worth to you?

How do you quantify a service to someone who has no frame of reference? I have a Masters Degree in Vocal Pedagogy, which is part performance and part teaching voice, and I’ve spent tens of thousand of dollars on training my voice. If I don’t have name recognition does any of that mean anything to someone who’s looking for some music for their event or venue? What if I’m part of a group, where my name doesn’t come up as much if at all?

I deal with it all the time as a musician. A rule of thumb on how to deal with it is how much you charge, but even that can vary widely. I have an “I won’t step outside the door for less than…” figure. Now that figure for me as a solo singer is 66% higher than that same figure for me as a part of an established group currently. What do I base that on? It’s not like I have production costs to base that figure on to show someone. I have talent, knowledge, expertise and experience, but if you’re working with someone who has no frame of reference, those things don’t mean anything to them. And the money itself? I’ve had people not bat an eye at that money and I’ve had people politely (and sometimes not so politely) brush me off. So what’s the answer?

They don’t know what they don’t know

I learned the answer I use through singing weddings for friends. I was reminded of it because I did a wedding not too long ago, for friends. It’s the perception of value. I used to sing weddings for friends for free because I thought of it as my gift to them. And you know what happened? Nothing. Not even a thank you. It didn’t take me long to feel under appreciated and frustrated by that. Didn’t they know how much that was worth?

And that was it. No, they didn’t know. At least not in a way they easily understood. They had no frame of reference. After all, if I was giving it away, it must be worthless, right?

Flash forward to this wedding I just sang for friends. They knew they wanted to use me in the wedding, but they were looking at additional musicians as well. They did their research and saw what the market was around the Chicago area. When we finally discussed money, they said they’ll pay me whatever I wanted.

I quoted them a price of 20% of my solo figure I talked about earlier. The phone went silent for a few moments, then I heard “Are you sure?” I told them this is my friends’ discount and the rest was my wedding gift to them. I got the now standard reaction which was many, many thank you’s and other people coming up and almost falling all over me to talk to me about it.

What I gained by defining my value

I had given my friends a good frame of reference, a perception of value that they understood and everyone was happy, even ecstatic to the point that they shared it and so on and so on and so on…

That’s the biggest benefit to me. People were excited enough to talk about me and to me. That means I’m more likely to:

  1. Be handing out business cards
  2. Be remembered
  3. Get that next gig

Even though I’m doing a friend a favor, I’m still getting a lot out of it. All because I was able to communicate the value of what I was doing. That’s the answer I needed.

I was reminded of that because I’m working on the website for an a cappella quartet I sing with. How do I communicate the value to three different groups; Booking Agents, Clients and Fans to the point that they share it willingly? With all the social media tools, I don’t have that answer yet. But I know the value. What’s your take?

 

Photo by Redd Angelo on Unsplash

044 – A New Way

With A Voice Like This, What do you do?

Well, you take a slice of life and put it on display. Isn’t that what New/Social Media is all about?

So in this episode I talk about the direction of the show and and a foreshadowing of some future topics, then a couple of personal performance experiences from the past couple of weeks, a brief discussion of PrimeTimeRewind.tv [Edit: site no longer exists], A brief introduction to GrooveShark [Edit: site no longer exists], a music file sharing service, A couple quick shout outs and, of course, Comments From the Podcast Gallery.

[EDIT: 4-AM no longer exists as this a cappella quartet and DeVar Creative no longer books them] If you want to know more about 4-AM, the A cappella quartet I sing with in the Chicago area, tell them Jim sent you.

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-101289.mp3?dl=1]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

Regulation, Like the Internet, is a Tool

Equally important as what is regulated is how it’s made compliant

The first question is what is regulated? The knee jerk response is the technology, but that’s not what would be most effective here. The technology is already regulated at least partially, by what is and isn’t allowed beyond certain borders. The technology also changes so quickly, trying to regulate it solely isn’t feasible.

In the United States efforts have been made to both regulate and control Internet usage. You need only to look as far as existing governing bodies, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They have the blueprints of the what needs to be regulated, but their regulations are based on delivery systems much more limited than the Internet so they aren’t as effective as they could be. As for control, just look at the RIAA and the ongoing battle against Net Neutrality. This “Carve out our piece of the pie” approach fails because it doesn’t take into account the rights and relationships of the Business Partners, Clients and Customers and protects no one but the interest group that’s pushing its own agenda.

So start with the what of regulations, based on the rights and relationships and the existing blueprints. Some things will need to be thought of internationally and some nationally, asking the experts in their fields for input. And it needs to be mandated (yes, that means government). This is possibly the easier of the tasks, but by no means will it be simple.

Where regulating the Internet will succeed or fail will be in compliance. Compliance needs to be scalable and seriously determined by those implementing the regulations. In turn the implementing parties will be held accountable on every level for being compliant. And what is the basis for the scalability? Ability and Resources. There are three main reasons/examples of this.

  1. If you’ve ever been involved on any front of bringing a legacy system into compliance with new regulations, you know it’s a completely different process than building a new system to compliance. Both ability and resources come into play on this. So two different companies have two different methods of compliance based on the systems they have and how they have to reach compliance. In some cases that answer is to start from scratch.
  2. Different types of service providers have different needs and concerns toward compliance. ISPs, whether they be DSL, Cable, WiFi or other delivery systems need to approach compliance differently from Application Service Provider, so Verizon, AT&T and Comcast, et al. have a different set of needs than Facebook, Netvibes, Microsoft and Apple.
  3. Those with with most resources have the most to protect through the regulation, multibillion dollar corporations as compared to startups. Any acquisitions of smaller companies will automatically scale compliance based on the gains by the acquiring company/corporation. Those protections will also be shaped by the relationships between business partners, clients and customers.

How does all this happen? By an implementation period as a part of the regulatory process. During this period all the parties responsible for implementing regulations must document what they determine to be compliance based on the best of their ability and resources. Then meet those standards of compliance by the end of the implementation period. The implementing company/partner/corporation will be held accountable to those standards. If they cannot provide the proper documentation or their standards through documentation are found to be inadequate or inappropriate, they are held responsible and are open to any and all penalties for non-compliance. For example, if a Terms of Service Agreement written as a part of compliance is found unreasonable or unenforceable, it’s non-compliant. It serves everyone to be as thorough as possible and it will also provide a basis to be proactive. Anything developed after the implementation period needs to either be compliant to existing documentation or have new documentation completed prior to its roll-out.

It’s not a new approach, nor is it quick, simple or easily understood. It is workable and scalable even as new technology replaces old. It all comes down to this: Publicly available doesn’t mean unprotected and we need to get started on this as soon as possible.

That’s a 30,000 foot view, what do you think?

Exploit the Tool and Not the Community

Never has the chasm between ability and responsibility been so wide as on the Internet.

The Internet is a tool. For me personally, it gives me the ability to create and sell my music and any other merchandise without the responsibility of having to carry an inventory through Print on Demand (POD). It gives me the ability to reach an audience with a podcast without the responsibility of owning a 1000 watt transmitter, an FCC license (Actually, I have a 3rd Class license, but I don’t need it for a podcast) or being employed by a licensed broadcast entity. The internet gives me the ability to publish a blog without the responsibility of owning a printing press or having to maintain a supply of printing necessities which is much more than anything I could do prior to the internet and its capabilities. That’s a powerful tool and I’m not even scratching the surface of its capabilities by using myself as an example.

But like any tool, it depends on how it’s used. The Internet gives the ability of an Internet business/application to release a public statement along the lines of “We are cooperating fully with authorities and encourage our members to report any activities…” without the responsibility to fix the underlying, bigger issue that caused the problem in the first place. It also gives the ability to use journalanteism to push an agenda or spread a conspiracy without the responsibility having to provide a factual basis (The Internet hasn’t cornered the market on this, it’s just far more prolific due to easy access). The Internet ironically, also gives the ability to create an unedited, recorded live podcast where the host talks about the abuses of monitoring telephone calls without court order and then turns around, sometimes even in the same show and call a person without notifying them of either being recorded or broadcast live without the responsibility of understanding the correlation between the two and acting on it. Don’t get me started on copyright infringement, that’s another three or four blog entries on its own. That’s a powerful tool and I haven’t even scratched the surface of its capabilities.

So it seems now that whenever there is an issue on the Internet, as a whole we’ve reverted to the elementary school defense of “They started it!” and all the finger pointing and snapping at each other, choosing sides and a slap fight commences until everyone is tired and forgets about it. The real problem is that these individual battles have a cumulative effect and we’re quickly approaching the saturation point. So the topic is starting to roll around to Regulation of the Internet, as it should.

Just remember Regulation, like the Internet itself, is a tool…

043 – Interview with Gillian Kelly of VoiceQuest Inc. Part 2

Technique is the Servant of Communication

Gillian Kelly

Recorded on February 8, 2008 -In the second half of this interview with Gillian Kelly of VoiceQuest Inc., we talk about:

  • Where Gillian is performing in the next 6 – 8 months
  • The cabaret projects Gillian and Claire have in their repertoire
  • Some directing work that was Jefferson Award recommended

And of course, Comments From the Podcast Gallery. This leads to a discussion of where technique fits in the performance process and as life in general and how it affects and everything works together and how that affects working with singers in different genres and their demands on the voice.

If you haven’t heard the first half of this interview, you can listen here.

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-99539.mp3?]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

042 – Interview with Gillian Kelly of VoiceQuest Inc. Part 1

A Base of Technique

Gillian Kelly

Recorded on February 8, 2008 – VoiceQuest Inc. is a Chicago-based performance studio founded by Gillian Kelly and Claire Bigley. In this episode and the first half of the interview, I speak with Gillian about her training, past experiences and what brought her to the point of starting VoiceQuest Inc. Other topics discussed, Voice Teacher and Vocal Coach and the differences and how they are combined at VoiceQuest Inc. and all their offerings at the studio including performance classes and opportunities. Also, we talk about Davenport’s, a piano bar and cabaret in Chicago and why technique is so important in the teaching of singing. And a bit about the innovative way they use the web. VoiceQuest Inc. can be found at http://VoiceQuestInc.com.

More to come in the second half of the interview.

[audioplayer file=”http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-52008/TS-89337.mp3″]

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes

You might have noticed it’s been awhile since I’ve either made a blog entry or put out a podcast. It’s been an unplanned hiatus, some of the reasons for it will be upcoming entries and podcasts and some of it you can simply see here. I’ve changed the website over from JamesGoodrich.net to WithAVoiceLikeThis.com, but if you take my feed, the only thing you would have noticed is that you got a lot of the entries reloaded to you as new. The fact that you didn’t have to change a feed and the graphics work you see here recquire a special Thank you. That is to Kim Fenolio of KimFenolio.com. Kim is both Graphic Artist and Social Media Maven and gave a lot of advice in how to set up this blog/website so that in case of domain switch or drastic failure of any particular service used in this site, there’s always a workaround.

There are also some changes in what I’m doing with the blog and podcast. If I’m reminded of anything every time I try something new, it’s the fact that things evolve and change no matter how well planned. My focus will still be on my music and how all of this Interwebs stuff works, but it will also include Interwebs stuff period, since this is where I am free to make my music and promote it and sell it. So you’ll still here about what I’m doing by myself, with the a cappella group I’m in called 4-AM (website to follow soon) and how to promote and make the Internet work best for me that way. It’s a musical slice of life approach. And while I write about all things internet and music, you’ll still get to hear the original stuff I’m working on in its various stages and interviews of folks that I know, be they musicians or performers at large and maybe more, we’ll see how it all turns out. As always, Comments from the Podcast Gallery are most welcome, whether they are received live in the podcast, by voicemail or e-mail.

Here’s to more of everything. (c;

Day 74 – Some Belated Thanks

Since my EP release podcast, I’ve found out that two more podcasts had played my music previously, and I wanted to make sure to let everyone know who had played my music and thank the podcasters in the public forum. I’m preparing a complete list for a future blog entry, but I also listed each as soon as I found out about them. So here are two

Podcasts that played my music:

Virtual Yooper – Dec 23, Christmas in the Keweenaw – The Wassail Song
flick-a-brac – Dec 15, EPISODE 018 – Happy Hollandaise! – We Three Kings

Thank you to all who supported me by playing my music this past holiday season.

Why Does it Have to Be a Data ‘War’?

After writing this response to Chris Brogan’s open question, I wasn’t planning to write a follow up on this subject because this blog isn’t specifically about Data Portability and Accountability, but here it is. I’m going to use examples that may seem unrelated, but they’re all about rights and protecting them.

In regard to the Facebook/Plaxo/DataPortability.org issue, the current line is that the issue is all about open portability of data. If that’s the case, two questions come to mind. First, if the entire intent of the situation was to highlight the open exchange of data, why were the methods used by Plaxo and its agent (Agent meaning the individual representing Plaxo by the mechanism of a non-disclosure agreement) anything but open? And Second, why wasn’t the DataPortability.org banner raised and blogged about until after the fact, when everything had already happened?

I’ve been a podcaster for only a little over six months now but I’ve been a professional musician for over twenty years and I’m always interested in the ongoing debate of music use. In fact, this blog/podcast shows a lot of my research into what defines Public Domain and and its relationship to copyrights. I know a fellow podcaster who uses a certain album of music for their show and put a footnote in their blog about the album not being copyrighted, therefore it is in the Public Domain. I’m no copyright lawyer and technically they may be right about that particular album (Ask George Romero about ‘Night of the Living Dead’), however the album title starts with ‘Favorite Songs of…’ so if there are any arrangements of a copyrighted song on that album, more than likely the podcaster is in violation of the copyright laws (Check with Thomas Dolby about sampling for that one). I don’t for a minute believe that podcaster is doing anything with malicious intent, it’s just more complicated than a simple statement can handle. Oh and by the way, let’s talk about how those rights are being ‘protected’ by the RIAA. That seems to be a war and we all know how that is working for them.

I don’t use Skype anymore. It’s not an issue with the application itself, but more with its usage. I’ve been involved in multiple conversations using Skype with other podcasters that have been recorded and used in podcasts without my knowledge, consent and/or sometimes without me even knowing a recording of my part in a call was used in a podcast. When I was growing up, my Dad owned part of a radio station and he was the Chief Engineer and News Director. Now the FCC regulations have changed some and they’re ambiguous at best about private parties recording , but if a licensed Broadcast entity did that, the result could be fines or loss of broadcast license. Once again, I don’t think the podcasters were doing anything with malicious intent and it got my blog and podcast a little attention, so I made the choice to not use Skype unless it’s under very specific circumstances. My rights, my choice.

All of that to prove that the situation is complicated, so let’s talk about similar situations that are being handled well. How about online banking? It’s a good analogy. Who owns the money being moved electronically back and forth, or the accounts? I don’t remember reading about online banking wars, maybe about usage fees, but not the banking itself. And they deal with personal information.

Or how about one I have some personal professional experience with. Personal Health Information. In July of 2000, I became the first full time employee at First Health Group Corp involved solely with the Internet as the Internet Operations Coordinator, becoming the Manager of Internet Operations, the highest position solely dedicated to the Internet through August 2005 even presenting on Capitol Hill in July 2003 at the Healthcare Leadership Council Innovations. Among my duties were the creation and implementation of security and privacy corporate policy and a large part of that was in conjunction with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) passed by Congress in 1996. This issue could have easily been a war, take a look at the timeline. Passed in 1996, when the then current administration made a failed attempt at Health Care Reform, but by no means were the waters friendly for the Health Care Industry. And whether is was a concession or a flexing of its muscle, the Health Care Industry said “We can’t do this on our own” and HIPAA was brought into existence. It’s been a long, complicated process and continues to be, but it’s by no means a war and a good start to a blueprint when it comes to Data Portability and Accountability on the Internet.

Let’s not confuse arrogance or ignorance with altruism and let’s discard the bad road we took to get here and focus on why we are here. Oh and I really like the idea of of the ‘PA’ part of HIPAA and feel it definitely applies here, Portability AND Accountability. Right now, everyone’s discussing the ‘Freedom’ of Open Portability without discussing the ‘Responsibility’ of Accountability.

Pictures of me presenting to various members of Congress in July 2003 (left to right): Dennis Moore – Kansas, John Shimkus – Illinois, Ron Kind – Wisconsin

Jim Goodrich and Congressman Dennis Moore of Kansas - July 2003 Jim Goodrich and Congressman John Shimkus of Illinois - July 2003 Jim Goodrich and Congressman Ron Kind of Wisconsin - July 2003