copying, copyright and originality; imitation ... · musicians and between the different industries...
TRANSCRIPT
Copying,copyrightandoriginality;imitation,transformationandpopularmusicians
KeithNegus,JohnStreet,AdamBehrAbstract
Withcopyrightbecomingevermoreimportantforbusinessandgovernment,thisarticleargues
foramorenuancedunderstandingofthepracticesandvaluesassociatedwithcopyinginpopular
musiccultureandadvocatesamorecriticalapproachtonotionsoforiginality.Drawingfrom
interviewswithworkingmusiciansthisarticlechallengestheapproachestocopyingandpopular
musicthatpitchcorporatenotionsofpiracyagainstcreativesharingbycitizens.Itexplores
differingapproachestothecirculationofrecordingsandidentifiesthreedistincttypesofcreative
copying:i)learningthroughimitation,ii)copyingastransformation,iii)copyingforcommercial
opportunity.Thearticlethenconsidershowcopyingiscaughtbetweenacommercialnecessityfor
familiarmusicalproductsthatmustconformtoexistingexpectationsandacopyrightlegislative
rationalerequiringoriginalsoundswithindividualowners.Thearticlehighlightshowlegaciesfrom
alonghistoryofhumancopyingasameansofacquiringknowledgeandskillsleadstoacollisionof
creativemusicalpractices,commercialimperativesandcopyrightregulationandresultsinaseries
ofunavoidabletensionsaroundoriginalityandcopyingthatareacentralcharacteristicofcultural
production.
Keywords:musicians,copying,copyright,recordingindustry,originality.
***
Copyinghasbeenanenduringfeatureofmusicmakingintwointerrelatedways.First,copyingas
transcriptionofcompositionsorperformances,andasphonographicreproduction,hasbeen
centraltothecommunicationandcirculationofsongs,instrumentalsandideas.Second,copying
fromexistingsongs,performancesandinstrumentalshasbeenanimportantpartofthecreative
process,asmusicianshavesoughtinspirationandsignalledtheirmembershipofgenresand
locatedtheirstylewithintraditions.Thetwopracticesareconnectedbecausecirculatedmusic
(whetherrecordingsorprintedpages)hasprovidedanimpetusfortheacquisitionofmusicalskills,
exchangeofideasandaccumulationofknowledge.
2
Yet,copyinghasincreasinglybeenperceivedasaproblembymusicindustrytradeorganisations
seekingtoprofitfromsellingcommoditiestoconsumers,whilstmaintainingalegalregulatory
frameworkpremisedonintellectualproperty.Inthispaperweexplorethetensionsaspopular
musicpracticecollideswithcompetingartisticimpulses,commercialincentivesandlegal
imperatives.WedrawfrominterviewswithprofessionalUKbasedmusiciansworkingmainly
withinandacrossrock,jazzandsamplebasedgenres,andthosewhoworkwithandrepresent
musicians,inordertoopenupdiscussionaboutbroadsimilaritiesregardlessofdifferencesof
genreandculturalidentity.1
Thequotationsandparaphrasedissuesinthispaperaredrawnfromin-depthinterviewswith21
fulltimeworkingmusicians(somealsogainingincomefromgivinginstrumentaltuition),aged
betweentheirearly20sandearly60s.Weselectivelyapproachedmusicianswith
sustainedcareersofreleasingrecordingsandperformingandwithsomedegreeofexperienceof
practicesrelatingtocopyingandcopyright.Theaimofthisresearchwasverymuchtoexplore
issuesindepththroughqualitativeresearch,askingmusicianstoarticulateandtoreflectupon
mattersthattheyrarelyaddressovertlyintheirpractice.Whilstkeentohearfrompractitioners
workingacrossdifferentgenreswithinpopularmusic,asbroadlyunderstood,andtogetasenseof
howattitudesandpracticesmayhavechangedovertime,wedidnotseeka‘representative
sample’ofanything(awarealsoofthepracticalandphilosophicalproblemsofmakinganyclaims
aboutany‘sample’).Wedidnotaskmusicianshowtheydefinedtheirclass,racialorsexual
identitiesandthesesocialattributesdidnotariseasasignificantissueforcopyingduringour
interviews.Onlytwoofthesemusicianswerewomen,andweacknowledgethatfurtherresearch
mayexploretheextenttowhichmaleandfemalemusiciansmayadoptdifferentapproachesto
copying.Wealsointerviewedtwoartistmanagerswithsome20yearsexperienceofmanaging
bands,anexpertwitnesswithexperienceofadvisingincopyrightinfringementcasesandfour
personnelworkingformusicindustrytradeorganisations.Interviewswereconductedbetween
October2013andJanuary2015.ForlogisticalreasonstheinterviewswereconductedinLondon,
EdinburghandGlasgow.Interviewswereconductedontheagreementofanonymitytoencourage
respondentstobeopenabouttheirpracticesandtomaintainconfidentiality.Wehavealsodraw
widelyonpublishedinterviewswithmusiciansandarangeofsecondarysourcesinwhichthese
issuesaredebated.
3
Wefocusonmusiciansincontrasttothetendencyofrecentwritingstopresentargumentsfrom
theperspectiveofanindustryanditseliteofsuccessfulartistsoramultitudeofcreativeusers.We
seektochallengethewaydiscussionoftenveersintwoincompatibledirections,onetowards
‘theft’or‘stealing’theothertowards‘borrowing’or‘sharing’.Focusingontheexperiencesand
beliefsofmusiciansallowsustoexplorethepracticalandethicaldecisionsanddilemmasthatare
oftenunacknowledgedwiththecollapsingofdistinctionsbetweenarelativelystraightforwardact
ofreproducingandpassingonorallowingaccesstoadigitalfile,andamoremultifacetedcreative
practiceentailinguseofandreferencetoexistingwork.Astheargumentaboutpiracyandstealing
isprimarilyposedbytherecordedmusicindustryandsharingembracedbytheoristsofactiveand
creativecitizens,theexperiencesofpractisingmusiciansleadsustoseriesofmorenuanced
relationshipsbetweennotionsofcopying,creativityandoriginality.
Weaddressargumentsforthepositivevalueofcopyingintwosenses:First,theimportant
cultural,educationalandcreativeroleofcirculatingrecordingsoutsideofanydirectpayment
madebyconsumersorrevenuebeingreceivedbymusicians.Second,theimportanceofcopying
asanimpetusfortheacquisitionofskill,innovationand,notleast,asastimulusforachievingthe
commercialgoalofmakingprofits.
Wefirstacknowledgecontrastinggenerationalandchanginghistoricalresponsestodigital
circulation.Wethenidentifythreebroadwaysthatcopyinginformsthecreativepracticesof
musicians.Thefirstoftheseisamoreinformalprocessoflearningbyimitation,apracticethathas
alonghistoryinmusicpedagogyandenduresoninstructionvideosmadeanduploadedto
YouTube.Second,iscopyingasrevival,remodellingandrewriting–anactivitycharacteristicof
manyartformsthatseekinspirationfromthepast.Third,weidentifyamorecalculatedactof
copyingforcommercialgainentailingcoversorsound-alikes.Itisinthisareawhereaccusationsof
plagiarismaremostoftennegotiated,andwehighlighthowthisoccursaccordingtoethicalideas
aboutartisticrespectandresponsibility.Akeythemewewishtohighlightthroughoutthisarticle
concernsthewaylegaciesinheritedfromalonghistoryofvernacularandformalisedhuman
learningandcreationisinconflictwithmusicasoriginalcopyrightedcommoditywithidentifiable
ownerasoriginator.
Althoughthemainsectionsofthisarticlefocusoncopyingincreativepractice,thecirculated
recordingweavesthroughoutandiscentraltohowskillsaredeveloped,allegiances
4
communicatedandcreativeideasexpressed.Forarecordedmusicsector,thecirculationof
recordingsmayhavebeenprimarilyaboutmakingprofitsfromthesaleofindividualproducts,but
formanymusiciansithasbeencentraltolearning,copyingandcreating.Whilstsharingonthe
internethasallowedmusicianstolearnfromnotationofvariouskindsandtranscribedlyrics,the
recordingcontinuesasthemaincurrencythroughwhichmusicalideasareexchanged,circulated
andappreciatedregardlessofitsvalueasanartefactforlistenersorthepriceitmightfetchfor
labelscompetinginthemarketplace.
Copyinganddigitalcirculation;resistance,adaption,acceptance
Sincetheturnofthenewmillenniumcopyinghaspreoccupiedthosesectorsofthemusicbusiness
anxiousaboutadeclineinrevenuesfromthesalesofrecordingstoconsumersandtryingto
comprehendhowdigitalisationhaschangedthehabitsandvaluesoflisteners(Hardy,2012;
Leyshon,2014).ReportspublishedbytheInternationalFederationofthePhonographicIndustry
haveregularlyemphasisedunregulated‘pirate’copying,illegalcirculationandpeer-to-peer
sharingwhenaccountingforlossofrevenues(seeIFPI2011,2012,2013,2014).Thishasresulted
inthe‘criminalisationofsharing’(David,2010)andprosecutionsofindividualconsumersfor
downloadingtracksaccessedfromotherfans(Alderman,2002;Knopper,2009),alongwith
prosecutionsoforganisedcriminalentrepreneurs,suchasKimDotcom,forprofiteeringby
encouragingmusiccirculationwithoutrightspayment(Forde,2012).Researchbyacademicshas
consistentlycontradictedtherecordingindustry’sstraightforwardcausalclaimsabouttheimpact
ofillegaldownloadsandpeer-to-peersharing,suggestingthatthishashadanegligibleimpacton
salesrevenueandisindicativeofachangeinthewayconsumerswishtoengagewithmusicrather
thansimplytheresultofpiracy(Aguiar&Martens,2013;Rogers,2013).AsthefoundersofSpotify
recognised,peer-to-peercirculationproducedaspaceforthosewhowishedtolistenbutwhodo
notwanttopurchase,prefiguringaccesstostreamedmusic(Milne,2014).
Aconsiderablebodyofresearchwithinmediaandculturalstudieshassoughttoemphasisethe
broadervalueofunrestrictedcopyingbyshowinghowthishasallowedconsumerstorealise
themselvesascreatorsandparticipatingcitizensoveralongerhistoricalperiodthanthatduring
whichdigital‘piracy’hasbeenviewedasaproblem(seeLessig,2005;Johns,2010).Ourspecific
focusonmusicalcopyinginthisarticlecouldbeviewedasoneaspectofabroaderandmore
profoundpracticeof‘commons-basedpeerproduction’(Benkler,2006).Thevalueofcopyingin
5
popularmusicculturehasbeenasalientthemeinwritingsonremixesandmashups(Lessig,2008;
Shiga,2007;Brøvig-Hanssen&Harkins,2012)andinthosewritingsthatofferbothaphilosophical
andpolicyawarecounterargumentagainstthecorporatedemonizationofpiracy(seeMcLeod&
Kuenzul(eds)2011;McLeod&DiCola,2011).Wetakeinspirationfromthewaythisbodyof
researchhasarguedfortheimportanceofcopyingandhowithasfacilitatedaestheticchange,
bondsofsocialcommunicationandindividualcreativefulfilment(enablingusersofmediaandart
formstobecomecreators).However,researchoncopyinginpopularmusicculturetendstodraw
fromtheoriesofhowactiveaudiencesandcitizensareabletopositivelyredefinemediaproducts
andcultureforms.Wewishtoaddafurtherdimensiontostudiesthatvaluecopyingbyfocusing
ontheseissuesfromtheperspectivesofproduction(ratherthanuse)andfromtheviewpoints
andpracticesofworkingmusicians.Whilstwecertainlywishtodrawattentiontothepositive
valueofcopying,wealsowanttoaddresstheethicaldilemmasandambiguitiesexperiencedby
musicians.Wewillbehighlightingandexploring,tensionsbetweenprinciplesandbeliefsthatmay
comeunderquestionandwhichcanbechallengedduringsongwriting,composingandrecording.
Ourresearchinitiallysuggestedvariedresponsesamongstmusiciansinrelationtoquestions
aboutthelossofincomefromrecordings.
Theeconomicimpactofillegalsharinganddownloadingcontinuestobeacceptedasamajor
concernbymusicianswhoestablishedtheircareerswithregularincomefromrecordingsrather
thanfromtouring,sessionworkandliveshows.Thebeliefthatfanscirculatingandsharingtracks
isdeprivingmusiciansofalivelihoodbystealingwasfamouslyexpressedwhentherockband
MetallicasuedthepeertopeerplatformNapster,identifyingdigitalmusic‘piracy…as…
traffickinginstolengoods’,athemethatbecamerepeatedinthemanyclaimsmadebythe
recordingindustryandartistsofthisgeneration(seeAlderman,2002;Marshall,2002).Yet,the
targetofangerhasnoticeablyshiftedwithgrowingawarenessthatprofitsarebeinggeneratedby
phoneandcomputercompaniesusingrecordedmusicasa‘customerengagementtool’
(Seabrook,2014),leadingtorenewedclaimsofaninequitableallocationofthisrevenueto
musiciansandbetweenthedifferentindustrieswithastakeinrecordedmusic(seeNegus,2015).
Whetherthevillainisthefanintheirbedroomdownloadingsharedfilesorthedataandphone
companiesnotpassingonafairshareofrevenue,manyofthesemusiciansclingtotheideaof
recordingsasanartefactthatshouldbepaidforbyconsumers.
6
However,somemusicianshavemodifiedtheirattitudesovertimeandhavereachedasimilar
belieftothatofyoungermusicianshavecometoacceptthatadigitalrecordingissomethingthat
isofferedforlittlefinancialreturnonitsownterms.Intheperiodoftimesincedigitalrecording
wasintroducedtheeconomicvalueofliveshowsandtouringhasincreaseddramatically(Behr,
Brennan,&Cloonan,2016).Whilststillbelievingthattheyshouldreceiveincomefromrecordings,
oldermusicianswespokewithhavepragmaticallycometorecognisethatarecordinghasbecome
moresignificantforhowrecognitionisaccordedandtothewaymoneyismadefrom
performancesandmerchandise,orfromsessionwork(gigsgainedasaresultofcirculated
recording).Amemberofanacclaimedband,whoisalsoanexperiencedproducer,explainedhow
hehadreluctantlycometoacceptthesituation:
It’sapromotionaltool.…Music’sbeendevaluedandso,togetpeopletohearit,youhaveto
givethemafreesample...I’veneverfeltcomfortablewithitbecauseI’mabitoldschoolinthe
sensethatIfeellike,“You’veworkedhardandpeopleshouldpayforit”.Butthewhole
industry,sinceNapsterbasicallystartedthefreesharingthing,howeverlongagoitwas,that
literallychangedthewholegame.
Foryoungermusicianswithnoexperienceofincomefromsalesofrecordingstheissuesaremore
straightforward.Anelectronic,samplebasedmusician,spokeofhowhehadgrownupnot
expectingtomakemoneyfromrecordings:
I’veneverreallyreceivedmuchintermsofincomefromrecordedmusicandsellingmy
recordingsorrecordingsofmymusiceitherthroughthebandoronmyown.Forthatreason
it’snotaconcern.IfIweretomakethemajorityofmyincomefromsellingmyrecords,it
wouldbemoreofaconcern.ButbecauseImakethemajorityofmyincomefromlive
performancesandthingslikethatit’snotreallysomethingIthinkabouttoomuch.…
Aguitaristmemberofabandwhoreleaserecordingsusingcreativecommonslicensesthought
thatfanssharingrecordingswasnotanissuebecause‘forthevastmajorityofbandsthechallenge
isnot,“Imustprotectmystuff”,it’s“HowdoIgetheard?”’.Thismusicianalsostressedthatthis
wasalsoabusinessdecision‘becausetheroutetofandomisrecommendation,listen,love,buy’.
7
Ourinterviewswereconductedwhensubscriptionstostreamingservices(suchasSpotify,Deezer,
AppleMusic)wereincreasingandillegaldownloadingdeclining,partlyduetothesuccessof
industryorganisationsinlobbyingtoblocksites,andduetolistenerspreferringstreamedcontent
overdownloads,whetherpaidforornot(seeMarshall,2015;Morris&Powers,2015).Recent
anxietiesaboutdigitalcopyingarebutthelatestepisodeinalongerrunningtaleof‘illegal’
reproductionofrecordings(Cummings,2013),andechotheparadoxesofthe1970swhenPhilips
manufacturedtapemachinesthatpermittedconsumerstocopyontoportablecassetteswhilst
theirmusicdivision,PolyGram,wasamemberoftheBritishPhonographicIndustry(BPI)
campaigningwiththeslogan‘hometapingiskillingmusic’(Cummings,2013).Moreenduringhas
beencopyinginthecreativeprocess,theissuewenowaddress.
CreativeCopying1:Learningthroughintuitive,informalandinstitutionalimitation
Copyingasawayofgainingunderstandingandlearningtodosomethingispossiblyaninnate
humanimpulse,andhowweachievesuchbasicsaswalkingandeating.AsLucyGreenhas
observedinherstudiesofhowchildrenlearntobecomemusicians:‘Childrennotonlycopythe
behaviourofadultsandotherchildren,buttheyalsomakecopiesofobjectswhichtheyfindinthe
environment’(Green,2002:60).Greenhasalsohighlightedhow‘learningbylisteningand
copying…combinedwithclosewatching,hasalwaysbeenthemainmeansoflearninginallfolk
andtraditionalmusicsandmanyartmusicsundoubtedlysincethedawnofhumanity’(Green,
2002:186).
PeteSeeger,oneofthemostinfluentialtwentiethcenturyarchivists,composersandactivists,a
musicianwhoplayedanimportantroleintheprotestandcivilrightsmovement,onceexplained
folkmusicas‘notanyparticularsong,it’snotanyparticularsinger.It’saprocessbywhichordinary
peopletakeoveroldsongsandmakethemtheirown’(Zollo,2003:5).Ordinarypeopletakingover
songsandmakingthemtheirownmightapplytoanymusicians,DJs,songwritersandproducers
workinginanycontemporarygenreofmusicasmuchasitdescribesthewaychildrenintuitively
acquiremusicalskills,asGreenfoundinherresearch.
Acommerciallysuccessfulsongwriterwasaskedtoreflectonhowhebalancesinfluencesand
originalitywhencomposing.Hisseeminglyjumpyandhesitantresponse,astranscribed,is
indicativeofhowtheseissuesarenoteasytoarticulateandresolve:
8
Theotherday,forexample,Iwasstudyinghowthechordprogressionin‘Starman’byDavid
Bowiewentbecausethatwasthesortofthing.Andwedidn’tdothesamethingbutby
analysingityoucanworkouthowtheliftworks,comingintothechorus,andwheretheminors
go,whichleadsintothe,um…Butthesearekindoftechnicalitieswhicharen’treally…Idon’t
thinkthatit’s…It’scopyingbutit’snotplagiarismassuch.Musicis,musichasalwaysbeena
progressionaboutpeoplelearningfromeachother.
Althoughhewasaskedaboutinfluencesandoriginalityhisresponsedirectlyledtotheissueof
learningbyinstinctivelyanalysingandimitatingstructures,patternsandsequences.Musiciansalso
copyfromrecordingswhenacquiringtheskillstoachievesonicqualitiesandthetimbresof
performance,apointalsoemphasisedbyGreen:
Byfartheoverridinglearningpracticeforthebeginnerpopularmusician…istocopyrecordings
byear…Itseemsanextraordinaryfactthatmanythousandsofyoungmusiciansacrossthe
worldhaveadoptedthisapproachtolearningoverarelativelyshortspaceoftime–coveringa
maximumofeightyyearssincesoundrecordingandreproductiontechnologybegantobe
widespread–outsideofformalnetworks,usuallyatearlystagesoflearning,inisolationfrom
eachother,withoutadultguidanceandwithverylittleexplicitrecognitionoftheubiquityof
thepracticeacrosstheworld(Green,2002:60-61)
Numerousmusiciansacrossgenreshavespokenofhowtheylearnttheircraftanddevelopedtheir
initialattemptsatsongwriting,performing,makingbeatsordevelopingrhymesfromthesetwo
inter-relatedtypesofcopying–analysingthestructuralcomponentsofsongsandlisteningto
recordings(seeZollo,2003;Cross,1994).
Learningthroughimitationhasbeenformalisedasapedagogicpracticeasevidencedininstruction
manuals,instrumentaltuition(mentionedbyanumberofourinterviewees)andnotableina
plethoraofonlinevideosinwhichprofessionalteachersorenthusiasticamateursseektopasson
theirknowledge..Anexperienceddrummerwhoalsoteachescommented:
Imitationisthesincerestformofflattery.Imean,that’swhereyourinfluencescomefrom.And
that’swhatIteach,aswell,Isay,“Getyourfavouritemusicians:copythem.Whynot?That’s
9
OK”.You’renevergoingtodoitexactly,exactly:noonecanplaythedrumslikeStevieWonder
orplaythedrumslikeSteveGadd.Youjustgettheessenceofit.
ThisiscopyingaspartofatraditiongoingbackatleasttotheItalianRenaissancewhenimitation
wascentraltolearning.HowardMayerBrownwritesof‘whatmusthavebeenoneofthemost
widespreadpracticesinallbranchesofartisticendeavourinearlier,asindeedinmodern,times.
Composersaswellaspoetsandpainterslearnedtheircraftbyimitatingoldermasters.Composers
modellednewpiecesdirectlyonoldones’(Brown,1982:8).
Popularmusicianswholearnbycopyingfromaudioandvisualrecordings,andwhoteachtheart
ofcopyingasawayofachievingskillandunderstanding,areparticipantsinalonghistorythat
travelsthroughkeymomentsincanonicalEuropeanart,poetryandliterature,andthreadsthough
countlessfolk,bluesandvernaculartraditions,enduringinschoolclassroomswherechildrenare
encouragedtoworkouthowtoperformpopularsongsbyimitation(Green,2008).Itslegaciesare
onYouTubewhereimitationisadvocatedasawayoflearningaguitarortrumpetsolo,an
instrumentalist’stimbreandforappreciatingtheartofparticularmusicians.
Creativecopying2:Transformationthroughrewriting,remodellingandrevival
Whilstlearningandaccumulatingknowledgethroughimitationmayleadtoadroitreplicationand
accomplishedimpersonation,thepossibilityoftransformationisalsoinherentinlearningby
imitationasPeterBurkenotedinhisintroductiontotheItalianRenaissance‘imitationwasnot
slavish…Theaimwasrathertoassimilatethemodel,tomakeitone’sown,andeven,ifpossible,
toemulateorsurpassit’(1997:17).Theimportanceofimitationhasbeenidentifiedasamore
generalculturaldynamicandevokedtoexplainhowJapanesemusicianshavecopiedAfrican-
Americanperformersbyadoptingblackface.ShuheiHosokawahasarguedthat‘mimicryisakey
processbywhichaculturalformistransferredfromoneplaceandpersontoanother,andby
whichtheboundariesbetweentheoriginalandthecopy,thedesiredobjectandthemimicking
subject,areblurred…Theterminfluencealwaysconnotesacertaindegreeofimitationand
mimicry’(2002:223/4).
Imitation,mimicryandreferencingiscrucialtohowmusicianscommunicatetheirideas,compete
andcollaborate,andcentraltoacreativeprocesswherebyexistingmusicalideasaretransformed
10
intonewmusic.Influenceisusedtosignalaffiliationandasawayofcreatingnewmusicas
conveyedinthefollowingcommentsfromamusicianwithconsiderableexperienceofproducing
andperformingjazz,Latinandfunk:
Wewouldabsolutelybesaying,"ThatsnaresoundsliketheOhioPlayersfrom'Fire'.That's
great.That'swhatwewantasnaretosoundlike.Right,keepthatsnare.That'sbrilliant".Sowe
wouldabsolutelybethinking"CanyounotgetthebasstosoundexactlyliketheGapBand
[singsbasssound].Good,wegotit."Soonthetechnicallevelwewouldabsolutely
becompletely,Idon'tknow,copying,imitating.Butmixingthemthrough,withafewdifferent
things.Again,itwasourownthing.Soweneverfeltanyshameaboutthat.
Anumberofourintervieweesspokeofseekingideasbylookingbacktoaparticularperiodeither
immersingthemselvesinagenreorstyleinanattempttoabsorbandtoimitateitskeyqualities
andcharacteristicsorreplicatingandlearningfromindividualsongs.So,forexample,one
memberofa1980srockbandexplainedhowoneofhiscriticallyacclaimedsongswasmodelledon
SydBarrett’s‘Octopus’.HehadobsessivelylistenedtoBarrett’ssongrepeatedlyandworkedout
thestructure,writtenoutthelyricsanduseditasamodel.Hewasaskedifhecouldrememberhis
attitudetocopyingatthetimeandrespondedthathewasnotbothered‘becausethat’swhat
songwritersdoanyway’.
Jazzmusiciansprovideabridgelinkingthehighlytrainednotationalliteraturemusicianandthe
autodidactwithkeenears.Oneweintervieweddiscussedthesimultaneousimitation,homageand
inspirationthatcanformthebasisfortransformativecomposition:
Thetromboneplayerbroughtinasetofchangeshethoughtweregreat,butitturnedoutwas
aSteelyDansongprobably,youknow,reallyclosetoSteelyDansong.Butweuseditanyway
andhadalaughbecausewewerewithX[nameremoved]atthetimeandwejustthoughit
wasabitoffun.Sohomagewouldoftenhappen.
AmemberofabandthathadanumberofhitsinglesintheUKinthe1970srecalledlookingback
andseekinginspirationinstylesfromthe1940stothe1960s:
11
Well,youknow,Imakenosecretofit,weweresuchhugefansofthatkindoferaofmusicDoo-
wop,R&B,throughtosoul,blackmusicbasicallyfromsortof‘40sthroughtothe‘70s,thatin
termsofourwritingwepurposefullywroteandcameupwitharrangementsthatmimicked
thoserecordsthatweloved.And,yeah,wemadenosecretofthatandwenevereverwere
challengedaboutit.Youknow,‘[songtitledremoved]’and‘[songtitleremoved]’thatIwrote
arevery,very…theydrawvery,veryheavilyonwellknownsoulandMotowntracks.It’sjust
somethingyoudid.
SimonReynoldshasbeendismissiveofthosewholooktostylesfromthe‘immediatepast’and
within‘livingmemory’,arguingthataconservativebackwardlooking‘retromania’hasbecome
dominant,apracticethatcanbedistinguishedfromthe‘antiquarianismorhistory’ofthe
Renaissance,gothicandfolkrevivals(Reynolds,2013:xiii-xiv).ButReynoldsevadestheimportant
waysthattwentiethcenturymassmediatedandtwentyfirstcenturydigitallycirculatedpopular
culturehasbeenasignificant‘immediatepast’andprovidedastimulatingrepositoryofrepertoire
forinspiration,learning,homageandrenewal.
Thefolkrevivalmovement,forexample,acquiredmomentumasaresponsetoindustrialisation,
urbanisationandtheimpersonalinstitutionsofmodernity.Therevivalsofthenineteenthand
earlytwentiethcenturyelevatedruralthemesaspartofapastoralcritiqueofmodernitywhilst
therevivalofthelate1950swhichleddirectlytotheprotestmusicofthe1960s,sought
inspirationinthevaluesofaradical‘people’s’music,celebratingstrandsofurbanresistanceto
capitalismandindustrialisationasawayofrenewingasenseofcommitmenttosocialcausesand
toevokeanewmusiccommunityatoddswith‘massculture’(Brocken,2003;Lloyd,1967).Like
thenineteenthcenturyGothicrevival,andthewaysofmakingthingsassociatedwithWilliam
Morrisandtheartsandcraftsmovement,thefolkrevivalsoughtinspirationinasetofaesthetic
andhumanvalues,sensibilitiesbelievedtohavebeenlostwiththeriseofconsumercultureand
advertising(seeWilliams,1963).
Ourpointhereisthatrevivalisthusnotsimplyaboutseekingre-birthbyborrowingastylefrom
thepastbutentailsanethicalandmoralcommitmentconnectingmusicalpracticestostructures
offeelingandsentiments.Revivalsarenotjustaboutastyle,butalsoanattempttoretrieveand
retainasetofethicalandartisticvalues.
12
Creativecopying3:Covers,clonesandcommissions
Coverversions,tributebandsandtheperformanceof‘classicrepertoire’hasbeenacharacteristic
ofpost-SecondWorldWarpopularmusicculture,impulsesdrivenbythedesiretousefamiliar
soundstoreacharecognisablecommercialmarket.Musiciansavoidorabandonanyopportunities
tobeoriginalorinnovative,usingimitationtocopyforcommercialendsratherthanasameansof
learningandacquiringknowledge.AsAndyBennetthaswritten
Oneofthedefiningcharacteristicsofpopularmusicperformancesincetherock’n’rollexplosion
ofthemid-1950shasbeen‘imitation’.Throughoutensuingdecades,thehitsofthedayhave
beenslavishlyreproducedor‘covered’bylocalbarandpubbandsincitiesandtowns
throughouttheworld.Inmorerecentyears,thisdesiretoimitatehastakenonasignificant
newdimensionintheformofthetributeband.(2006:19)
Manymusicianshavefoundthattheyhavebeenunabletoearnalivingperformingtheirown
unknownmaterialandhavetakenthetributebandoptionasawayofmakingaregularincome,
sometimesusingthistofinanceothermorepersonalprojects.
Aswellasastraightforwardcommercialdecision,thereisacertainpostmodernironyatplayin
thewaythatthecopyingoftributeactsandcoverbandsisjudged.Thetributeactavoids
accusationsofinsincerityandpejorativedismissalasderivative,maintainingitsintegritybecauseit
cannotbeaccusedofpresentinganimpersonationasoriginal.
Thisisnotthecaseforcomposerswhoearnalivingfromcommissionsstipulatingtheproduction
ofsound-alikework–acompositionthatisentirelyderivativeofanexistingpieceofmusic.Such
workiscontractedbecauseamusicianorbandhasrefusedtolicenseortoallowarecordingor
songtobeusedinanadvert,orbecauseanagencydoesnothavethebudgettopayforthe
originalandrequiresasound-alike.Onemusicianrecalledhowhewasaskedtofollowavery
specificexistingwork,andafterconsiderableendeavourwastoldthathisworkwastoocloseto
theoriginaltobeused.Yet,arepresentativefromatradeorganisationwithconsiderable
experienceofworkingwithsongwritersandcomposersthoughtthatitwasfarmorecommonfor
mediacomposerstohavetheirworkrejectedbecauseitwasjustnotcloseenoughtothepiece
theywererequiredtocopy.
13
Aninstrumentalist,composer,producerandteacherspokeofthesedilemmaswhenasked
whetherheworriedaboutcopyrightwhenproducingsound-alikes:
Well,Iworryaboutitwhenthereisanactualverbatimrepetitionofachunkofamelody,for
thesimplereasonthatmostofthetimewearealready-whenwedosound-alikes,weare
doingstuffthatwearedeliberatelysoundinglikeanoriginaltrack.So,atthatpoint,youhaveto
beveryawareofwhatyou’redoing.Ifthenyousuddenlystartcomingupwithsnippetsof
melody–it’seasytodo,becauseeverybodyhasgottheoriginalintheirhead–thenyou’re
askingforit.…thesecret,Ithink,forsuccessfulsound-alikes,istodosomethingthat’sinspired
bytheoriginal,butithasanessenceoforiginalityaboutit,too.So,ifsomebodysaid,“Let’sjust
blatantlycopyStevieWonder,”itwouldsoundlikeablatantcopyofStevieWonder:itdoesn’t
reallyhavethatoriginalessence.Whereasifyousay,“Look,Iwantafunkthing,Motownstyle,
reallysoulful,busy,plentyofclavinet,slightlysloppy,funkydrums”–Steviestyle,butwhat
haveyougot?Someonewillcomeup,thereareoodlesofartistswho’vedonethat,andthey
candoitquitesuccessfully,someofthem.
Despitethiscomposer’savowedintentofseekinganelementoforiginalitywhenmakingasound-
alike,itisusualforthecommissioningcompanytorequestacopyofanidentifiablecomposition.
Theinclusionoforiginalelementsmayleadtorejectionandwastedtimecomposingand
recording.Asthesamemusicianalsoacknowledged:
WhenI’mdoingadvertising,stufflikethat,youknowsometimeswedoadverts,andwethink,
“Oh,that’svery,veryclose,Imean,theyobviouslyknowwhatthey’redoingbeforetheyput
thatonTV,buttodostufflikethat”–theyknow,they’vegottomakeadecision.Peopledoget
sued:theydogetsued.…ingeneral,peopleknow,whentheygoforstuff,theyknowroughly
whatthelawis.…Youknowhowfarpeoplestandawayfromthebonfireinordernottoget
burnt,andthat’showit’spoliced.
Theissueofsound-alikesdrawsattentiontosomeoftheethicaldilemmasincopying.The
musicianquotedaboveretainedhissenseofintegritythroughthebeliefthathewasputting
something‘original’intothecomposition.Yethewasacutelyawarethattheproductionofa
sound-alikepushesrightuptothelimitofplagiarism.Sound-alikecompositionispremisedona
14
deliberateimitationofanexistingrecordingforquitecalculatedcommercialreasons–usuallythis
isforanagencywishingtousethetracktocreatebrandidentificationwithsoundsthatsignifya
historicalperiodorlifestylewiththeaimofincreasingsalesandpsychologicalaffiliationto
products.Itishere–inbothcreatingandrespondingtosound-likes–thatcopyingaccrues
ambiguitiesandposesethicaldilemmas,anissuewepursueinthenextsection.
Theethicalaestheticsofcopying
Bothsound-alikecomposersandcommissioningcompaniesareawareoflegaldisputesabout
plagiarism.Theconvolutedhistoryofmusiccopyrightisusuallytracedto1777whenJohann
ChristianBachandCarlFriedrichAbelclaimedagainstpublishersLongmanandLukeyfor
reproducingandsellingunauthorisedcopiesofcompositions.Althoughtheissueconcerned
circulation,asArewaOlufunmilayopointsout‘withtheapplicationofcopyrighttomusiccame
greaterawarenessamongcomposersthattheirworkconstitutedintellectualpropertythathad
economicvalue’(2011:1838).Yet,thisawarenessinitiallyonlyinfluencedcopyingincirculation
andnotcopyingaspartofthecreativeprocess,thelattergraduallybecomeanissuethroughout
thenineteenthcentury,asDonaldBurrows(2012)haswritteninhisaccountofHandel’suseof
othercomposer’smaterial,andasRonaldRosenhasobservedwhencomparingConcertos
composedbyVivaldiin1712andJSBachin1730.Copyingandreusewasasmuchpartofanart
musictraditionasitisintegraltovariousformsoffolkandvernacularmusicmaking.
Plagiarismcanbeintentional,asinthecaseofsound-alikesandinHandel’sborrowings.Oritcan
beunintentional.Thelinebetweenbeinginfluencedandcryptomnesiawasarticulatedinthis
quotefromamusicianwhomadealivingfromcomposing,producingandperformingalternative
andelectronicmusic:
I’msureIrememberbitswhereI’dwrittenapartoversomethingandthensomeone’shadto
go,“No,no,thatistherifffromsomeoneelse’ssong”.Yougo,“Oh,shit,itis”.Andthat’s
happened,andit’snotbeen,ofcourse,intentional,andyou’vejustsortofworkedsomething
outanditsoundsright,andthenyourealisethatyou'rejustreplayingsomething.Ithinkin
hindsightyougo,“Oh,yeah,therearebitsinthosesongswhereIknowexactlywhatIwas
listeningtowhenIwroteit”.AndIcanprettyhonestlysaythatIdon’tthinkanyofitwas
15
intentional.AndIcanprettyhonestlysayIdon’tthink,atthetime,Iperhapsrealisedhowclose
itwas.
Itisherewhereimitationascreativepracticecanclashwithethicalprinciplesthatarearticulated
inrelationtocopying.Themusiciancitedaboveisnotaloneinhavingunintentionallycopied,nor
inlookingbackatpastworkandretrospectivelyrealisingjusthowclosehismusicwastothatof
othercomposers.Onemanagerwithnearly15yearsexperienceofrepresentingmusicians
referredtohowanacthadbeenapproximatedbyasound-alikeintheseterms:‘Itsoundslikea
re-recordingofthetrack,andthey’vejusttakensomeofthelyricsandthekeythings,soit’squite
abrutalisationofthetrackitself,whichinitselfisnasty,notagreatthingtohear.’
Herecopyingismediatedbybeliefsaboutcompositionalintegrityandauthorialresponsibility
towardsothersongwritersandperformers.Asonemusiciancommented:
Ithinkthere’sarespectagenda,andalwaysthetopmusiciansarenotgoingtowanttobeseen
…assomeonewhonicksotherpeople’stunes,forwantofabetterexpression!Theplagiaristis
aninterestingexample,becauseit’saterriblething,it’sarealinsulttothepersonit’saimedat,
andeverybodyknowsthestory,andyouwouldhatesomeonetoevenconsiderdoingthatto
you.
Notonlyistherea‘respectagenda’amongmusicians,theinternetanddigitalcirculationofmusic
viavariousdiscussionpages,blogsandforumshasalertedmusicianstohowlistenerdiscussions
areinformedbyanethicsofcopyingandinfluence.Asthemanagercitedobserved:‘Ithinkas
soonasyougetagroupofkidswhoaregoingonabouthowitsoundsliketheirfavouriteband,
theninvadeyourspaceintermsofFacebook,thenIsuspectyouprobablywillhaveproblems’.
Thismusiciandrewattentiontothewayfansmaybeabletocommentandharassbands,making
judgementsabouttheirsourcesandoriginalityofthetheirmusic.Atthesametimethatcopyingis
mediatedandmonitoredthroughtheethicsofmusiciansandfans,italsoconfrontsafurtherset
ofvaluesassociatedwiththebusiness,commerceandcopyrightasweshallnowdiscuss.
Theownershipoforiginalityandtheconflictsofcommerceandcopyright
16
Thecreationofnewpopularmusicispremisedupontwoseeminglyincompatibleaestheticbeliefs.
First,isadesireofmusicianstocreatemusicthatacknowledgespeers,thatrelatestoa
recognisablerepertoire;tocommunicateidentitybysignallingatraditiontowhichthemusician
andaudiencebelong;anorientationshapedbyimitating.Second,musiciansaremotivatedbyan
imperativetobeoriginal,tobeexistentiallyauthentic;toconformtobeliefsaboutprofessional
pride,creativeintegrity,sincerityandartisticresponsibility.
Publishers,promotersandproducersrequirefamiliarproductsthatconformtoexistingformats,
withknownmarketsandaudiences.Companiesacrossthemusicindustries,fromrecordlabelsto
advertisingagenciesandgamesounddesigners,areallfocusedonthefamiliarwhensigningand
recruitingsongwritersandwhencommissioningmusicduetoaresemblancetoexisting,successful
models.Writingbackinthe1940sTheodorAdornoandMaxHorkheimerhighlightedacomparable
paradoxwhentheywroteofacultureindustrydrivenbya‘constantpressuretoproducenew
effects(whichmustconformtotheoldpattern)’(Adorno&Horkheimer,1979[1944]:128),with
Adornomakingthesamepointwhendrawingevidencefromthestudyofmusicpublisherswrote
‘Thepublisherwantsapieceofmusicthatisfundamentallythesameasallthecurrenthitsand
simultaneouslyfundamentallydifferentfromthem.…thisdoubledesideratumcannotbefulfilled’
(2002[1941]:448)
AlthoughAdornohighlightedacontradictionattheheartofthecommercialmusicproduction,his
writingshavefrequentlybeendismissedduetotheirattentiontoapparentlyout-datedor
irrelevantmusicwhencomparedwiththerepertoirevaluedinthepopularmusicstudiescanon.
Evensympatheticcritics,suchasRichardMiddleton(1990),acknowledgethatAdorno’scriticism
haveahistoricalvaluebutarguethathefailedtoidentifymusicalexceptionstohisarguments
aboutsamenessandpseudo-individuality,casesthatmightofferalternativepossibilities.Yet,for
Adorno,theexceptions(writingwithHorkheimerheacknowledgesthefilmsofOrsonWelles)
simplyconfirmthecrushingpressuretoconformratherthanofferingnewpossibilities.
Yet,BernardGendronhassuggestedthatAdorno’saccountofproductionisindeedplausible
beyondhistimeandappliesequallyto‘theSexPistolsasitdoestoGuyLombardoandthe
AndrewsSisters’(1986:25).GendrontakesissuewiththewayAdornoignoredhowaudiences
‘takeasmuchpleasureintherecognitionofsamenessastheydointhediscoveryofminute
17
differences’(25),andcautionsagainstmakingaleapfromcommercialindustrialstructuresto
politicalandaestheticjudgments.
Ifaudiencesfindpleasuresinsameness,asGendronsuggests,thensotoodomusicians.Copying-
inthevariedwayswehavediscussed–isanillustrationofthepleasuresofthefamiliar.Rather
thanviewthisasalienating,asadistractionfromimpulsesforsocialchange,wemightviewthisas
anindicationofthehumandesireforempathy,understandingandcommunication.Adornovalues
thenewoverthefamiliar,butourresearchsuggestsaprofoundvaluetothefamiliar.
Musicians,aswehaveshown,areacutelyawareofhowthesepleasuresanddesires–for
similarityanddifference-becometensionswhencreativepracticeconfrontscommercial
imperatives,compoundedwhenfilteredthroughcopyrightlawwithitsrequirementof‘original’
intellectual‘properties’withidentifiable‘owners’.
‘Originality’wasusedinEnglishsincethefourteenthcentury,butbecamemorewidelyapplied
onlyfromtheeighteenthcentury(Williams,1983).Duringthistimethetermshiftedfromastatic
senseoforigintooriginalas‘anauthenticworkofart’(Williams,1983:230);fromasenseofthe
firstwork(origin)toanotionof‘new’withoriginalityinthesenseofunlikeotherworks(not
involvingimitation)becoming‘acommontermofpraiseofartandliterature’(p230).Justascritics
andscholarscametoadjudicateonthecriteriathatmakeanartwork‘original’,sotoothelegal
establishmentcametomediatehowcopyrightlawarbitratesinthejudicialprotectionof
originality.
Copyrightlawdoesnotdefineoriginalitybutmerelyvaluesitastheactoforiginatingsomething,
regardlessofanyotheraestheticcharacteristicsorcriteria.Asaconsequence,judgesandcourts
mustinevitablyabandonthisnarrowdefinitionwhenevaluatingclaimsaboutcopyingand
originality.Typically,thenotionof‘originality’thatisarticulatedincourtcasesdrawsupon
Romanticismoranarrowlyunderstoodlabourtheoryofvalue(Barron,2006;Lutticken,2002).As
JaneGaineshasobserved‘thestrictlegaldefinitionof“originalwork”[is]nothingmorethana
workproducedbyanoriginator.Butitmaythenabruptlylapseintovaluejudgementsthatbetray
preferenceforeliteculture’sdismissalofanythingthatis“imitative”orgenuinely“original”.’
(1991:12).
18
Ineverydaypractice,thetensionshighlightedinthisessayremainsubmergedorlatent.Copying
becomesanissuewhencommercialsuccessandfinancialrewardareinvolved;whenthe
consequencesofcopyingcanpotentiallyimpactuponrevenuesandreputations(whichinturn
affectemployabilityandearningpotential).Amateurandunknownmusicians(Finnegan,2007
[1989])andthoseatthe‘margins’ofthemusicindustry(Phillips&Street,2015)tendtocreate
musicwithlittleconcernforthelegalconsequencesofanycopying.Thispointcameoverstrongly
whenmusiciansreflectedonthemomentwhentheyhadtoconsiderhowtheymightgetaround
orcomplywithcopyrightlaw.Asongwriterwhohadachievedcommercialsuccesswithanumber
ofsongssaid:
WhenIknowasongisgoinggetalotmoreairplay,orthere’llbealotmorepeoplelistening,I
dobecomemoreaware…SoIsupposeIhavethoughtaboutit,sincesongshavebeenplayed
ontheradio,youjusthavetoabebitmore,justextracarefulIguess.
Whenaccusationsofplagiarismareconcludedviaoutofcourtsettlement,orwhenjudgesmake
decisiverulingsaboutwhatconstitutesoriginalityandcopying,itisusuallypublishers,agents,
lawyersandprofessionalexpertsthatareengagedintheargumentsandtheresultingdecisions
aboutrecompenseandallocationofresources.Rarelydomusiciansgetinvolvedinthediscussion,
unlesscalledaswitnesses.Anexperiencedmanagerofbandsandmusiciansmadethisverypoint
whenobservingthatdisputesareusuallybetweencompanies.Hesuggestedthatmusiciansmay
haveamoreprofoundandphilosophicallynuancedunderstandingofcopying.Whenreferringtoa
specificcaseheobserved:
Thesedisputesaboutauthorshipareeffectivelybeingcarryingoutbypeoplethatarenotthe
authors,whichIfindintriguing.Whatwouldhavebeenafarmoreinteresting,atleastona
conceptuallevel,wouldhavebeentohave,iftheguythatwrotethesongwasstillalive,and
thebandtositdownandtotalkaboutit.Notasabasisofnegotiation,butitwouldbereally
interesting,becausemysuspicionwouldbethatonneithersidewouldmoneybetheprimary
concern.…Ithinkyouwouldfindthatthepeoplewhohavebeensampled,whilstobviously
enjoyingthefinancialrewardsofitwillalsogetagreatdealof–I’mnotsayingthatthiswasin
anywaythecaseinthisexample–butincertaininstancesthekindofculturalrecognitionor
culturalcapitalthatyougetoutofbeingincorporatedintosomebody’swork40yearson,or30
yearson,mustbesomeformofvalidation,surely.
19
Thisbringsusbacktoapointmadeatthebeginningofthisarticleandre-connectscopyingin
circulationwithcopyinginthecreativeprocess.Manymusiciansallowtheirrecordingstobe
circulatedwithoutpaymentbecauseitencouragesawarenessandultimatelymayleadto
recognition.Asaconsequence,recordingsbeingcirculatedhaveimpactandinfluenceonother
musicians,signalledinthewaythattherecordedsongisreferenced,usedasamodel,quotedor
sampled,orsubjecttohomageintributesoronlineuploads.Thefollowingquoteistypicalofa
musicianthinkingabouttheimportanceofcommunicationandrecognition,andhowbecoming
partofatraditionisasimportantastheincentivetomakemoney:
I'mnotgonnamakemoneyoutoftheysalesoftheCDs,right,becauseIreallycan'texpectthat.
Thenjustpurelyforatleast..ego...it'snicetoseethatsomeonethrewthewholealbumupon
YouTubeandlotsofpeoplearesaying'Ahman,Iusedtogoseetheseguysbackintheday'and
allthatkindofstuff.It'squitenice.So,honestly,ifnothingelseIcansay,'Heylook',Icanprove
it.Icanshowittosomeonewhowouldhavetroublebelieving.…Andallthesepeoplewhostill
likeit.So,onthatsideofit,thissortofmassavailabilitymeansyou'renotcompletely
forgotten.
Here,allowingcopyingincirculationbecomesawayformusicianstoacknowledgeother
musicians.Itisaripostetotherhetoricalmetaphorof‘piracy’thatcollapsesallnuancesof
circulationtoaneconomictransactionandanequallynarrowunderstandingof(copy)rights.
Thevaluesofcopying
Inthisarticlewehaveillustratedthevariedwaysthatcopyingiscentraltothecreationand
circulationofpopularmusic.First,wehavestressedtheimportanceoftherecordingasan
inspirationalsourceofknowledge,learningandskillacquisition.Thedigitalrecordingmayno
longerhaveeconomicexchangevalueforanindustry,norsymbolicvalueforconsumerswhoskip
intoandoutoftracksontheirmobilephones.But,therecordingenduresasameansbywhich
musicianslearn,passonknowledgeandcommunicatetheirartandsignaltheirbelongingto
traditionsandstyles.
20
Second,ourstudyofmusicianssuggestsavaluetoimitation.Anengagementwiththeknownand
familiarillustrateshowcopyingallowsimportantformsofempathy,understandingandbelonging.
Ourpointinhighlightingthisistosuggestthatweshouldbecriticalofbelievingthatthesame
styles,genresandsongsstructuresaresimplytheresultofacommercialimperativeandwe
shouldalsobescepticalofperspectives(dominantinmodernistdiscourse)which
unproblematicallyclaimsavalueforthenewwithoutinterrogatingtheimportanceofthefamiliar.
Futureresearchshouldperhapsexploreinmoredepththeaestheticandpoliticalpossibilitiesof
familiarity,andhowthismightbepartofamuchlongerstoryaboutcollectiveorcommon
patternsofhumancreativity(seeBoyle,2008)
Third,weshouldbescepticalofanyargumentforthevalueoforiginalitythatdoesnot
acknowledgehowmusiciansachieveoriginalitythroughcopying(howeveroriginalitymightbe
defined,debatedorcontested).Inthisessaywehaveoutlinedthreetypesofcopyingthatare
integraltopopularmusiccreativity,practicesthatcarrylegaciesfromalonganddiversehistory
andwhichcrossgenresandsocialidentities.Copyingasimitationtoacquireskills,knowledgeand
understandingcanleadtocopyingasameansofbreathingnewlifeandattributesintopre-
existingmodelsandrevivedforms,andcanalsoleadtoadecisiontoimitateforcommercialgain.
Finally,themusicianswespokewithhighlightedhowaudiencesareincreasinglyconsciousof
inspirationandimitation,awareofhowbandsandmusiciansknowinglydrawonexistingsources,
andarescepticalofclaimstooriginality,areawareofinter-textuality,copyingandinfluence.This
isapparentindiscussionsonvariousforumsandplatformsthroughwhichdigitalmusicis
circulated.Yet,attheverysametime,audiencesandmusiciansalsomaintainanethicsof
originality,oftenusingsocialmedia(suchasFacebook,TwitterorYouTube)toexposeandto
provokedebateaboutexploitation(speakingofplagiarismand‘ripoffs’).Fartoooftenarguments
aboutplagiarismarereducedtotheapparentlyobjectiveclaimsaboutmelodicandharmonic
similarity,ratherthanthemoreintersubjectivedebatesaboutresponsibilityandrespectasthese
mediatethecreativemomentsfromcopytooriginal.
Bibliography
Adorno,Theodor(2002[1941]‘OnPopularMusic’inRichardLeppert(ed)EssaysonMusic.
Berkley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
21
Adorno,TheodorandHorkheimer,Max(1979[1944])DialecticofEnlightenment.London:Verso.
Alderman,John(2002)SonicBoom:Napster,Mp3,andtheNewPioneersofMusic,NewYork:
BasicBooks.
Aguiar,Luis&Martens,Bertin(2013)DigitalMusicConsumptionontheInternet:Evidencefrom
ClickstreamData,Sevilla,Spain:JointResearchCentreoftheEuropeanCommission.
Arewa,Olufunimilayo(2006)‘CopyrightandBorrowing’inPeterKYu(ed)IntellectualProperty
andInformationWealth,Vol1,SantaBarbara,CA:Praeger,33-52
Arewa,Olufunimilayo,(2011)‘Creativity,ImprovisationandRisk:CopyrightandMusical
Innovation’NotreDameLawReview86(5):1829-1846.
Barron,Anne(2006)‘CopyrightLaw’sMusicalWork’,Social&LegalStudies,15(1),101-127
Beatles(2000)BeatlesAnthology,London:Cassell.
Behr,Adam,Brennan,Matt,&Cloonan,Martin(2016)‘Culturalvalueandculturalpolicy:some
evidencefromtheworldoflivemusic’,InternationalJournalofCulturalPolicy,22:3,403-418
Benkler,Yochai(2006)TheWealthofNetworks,HowSocialProductionTransformsMarketsand
Freedom,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.
Bennett,Andy(2006)‘Evenbetterthantherealthing?Understandingthetributeband
phenomenon’inShaneHolman(ed)AccessAllEras:TributeBandsandGlobalPopCulture,
Maidenhead:OpenUniversityPress,19-31.
Boyle,James(2008)ThePublicDomain:EnclosingtheCommonsoftheMind,NewHaven,CT:Yale
UniversityPress.
Brocken,M.2003.TheBritishFolkRevival,1944-2002,Farnham:Ashgate
22
Brøvig-Hanssen,Ragnhild&Harkins,Paul(2012).Contextualincongruityandmusicalcongruity:
theaestheticsandhumourofmash-ups.PopularMusic,31:1,pp87-104
Brown,HowardMayer(1982)‘Emulation,Competition,andHomage:ImitationandTheoriesof
ImitationintheRenaissance’JournaloftheAmericanMusicologicalSociety,35(1):1-48.
Burke,Peter(1997)TheRenaissance,SecondEditionLondon:PalgraveMacMillan.
Burrows,Donald(2012)Handel,SecondEdition,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Cross,Brian(1994)It’sNotAboutaSalary:Rap,RaceandResistanceinLosAngeles,London:
Verso.
Cummings,Alex(2013)DemocracyofSound:MusicPiracyandtheRemakingofAmerican
CopyrightintheTwentiethCentury,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
David,Matthew(2010)PeertoPeerandtheMusicIndustry:TheCriminalisationofSharing,
London:Sage.
Finnegan,Ruth(2007[1989])TheHiddenMusicians,Music-MakinginanEnglishTown,Second
Edition,Middletown,CT:WesleyanUniversityPress.
Forde,Eamonn(2012)‘HowFreeisRuiningEverything’,QMagazine17July2012,
http://www.qthemusic.com/470/column-free-ruining-everything/-accessed12April2013.
Gaines,Jane(1991)ContestedCulture:TheImage,TheVoiceandTheLaw.ChapelHill,NC:
UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress.
Gendron,Bernard(1986)‘TheodorAdornoMeetstheCadillacs’inTaniaModleski(ed)Studiesin
Entertainment:CriticalApproachestoMassCulture.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,18-36.
23
Green,Lucy(2002)HowPopularMusiciansLearn,Farnham:Ashgate.
Green,Lucy(2008)Music,InformalLearningandtheSchool:ANewClassroomPedagogy,
Farnham:Ashgate.
Hardy,Phil(2012)Download,HowtheInternetTransformedtheRecordBusiness,London:
OmnibusPress.
Hosokawa,Shuhei(2002)‘BlackingJapanese:ExperiencingOthernessFromAfar’inDavid
Hesmondhalgh&KeithNegus(eds)PopularMusicStudies.London:Arnold,223-237.
Johns,Adrian(2010)Piracy:TheIntellectualPropertyWarsfromGutenbergtoGates,Chicago:
UniversityofChicagoPress.
IFPI(2011)DigitalMusicReport2011,London:IFPI(InternationalFederationofthePhonographic
Industry).
IFPI(2012)DigitalMusicReport2012,London:IFPI(InternationalFederationofthePhonographic
Industry).
IFPI(2013)DigitalMusicReport2013,London:IFPI(InternationalFederationofthePhonographic
Industry).
IFPI(2014)DigitalMusicReport2014,London:IFPI(InternationalFederationofthePhonographic
Industry).
Knopper,Steve(2009)AppetiteforSelfDestruction:TheSpectacularCrashoftheRecordIndustry
intheDigitalAge,NewYork:Simon&Schuster.
Lessig,Lawrence(2005)FreeCulture:TheNatureandFutureofCreativity,London:Penguin.
24
Lessig,Lawrence(2008)Remix:MakingArtandCommerceThriveintheHybridEconomy,London:
Bloomsbury.
Leyshon,Andrew(2014)Reformatted:Code,NetworkandtheTransformationoftheMusic
Industry,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Lloyd,AlbertL(1967).FolkSonginEngland,London:Lawrence&Wishart.
Lutticken,Sven(2002)‘TheArtofTheft’,NewLeftReview,13,Jan-Feb,89-104.
Marshall,Lee(2002)‘MetallicaandMorality:TheRhetoricalBattlegroundoftheNapsterWars’,
EntertainmentLaw,1(1),1-19
Marshall,Lee(2015)‘Let’sKeepMusicSpecial.F–Spotify’:On-demandstreamingandthe
controversyoverartistroyalties’CreativeIndustriesJournal,8(2):177-189.
McLeod,Kembrew&Kuenzul,Rodolf(eds.)(2011),CuttingAcrossMedia:AppropriationArt,
InterventionistCollage,andCopyrightLaw,DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress
McLeod,KembrewandDiCola,Peter(2011)CreativeLicense:TheLawandCultureofDigital
SamplingDurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress
Middleton,Richard(1990)StudyingPopularMusic,MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversityPress.
Milne,Richard(2014)‘TheSpotifyEffect’FinancialTimesMagazine,24/25October,onlineversion
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/59e6e6d6-5a49-11e4-8771-00144feab7de.html-accessed22
October2014.
Morris,Jeremy&Powers,Devon(2015)‘Control,curationandmusicalexperienceinstreaming
services’CreativeIndustriesJournal,8(2):106-122.
25
Negus,Keith(2015)‘Digitaldivisionsandthechangingculturesofthemusicindustries(or,the
ironiesoftheartefactandinvisibility)’,JournalofBusinessAnthropology,4(1),151-157
Phliips,Tom&Street,John(2015)‘CopyrightandMusiciansattheDigitalMargins’Media,Culture
&Society,37(3):342-358.
Reynolds,Simon(2013)Retromania,PopCulture’sAddictiontoItsOwnPast,London:Faberand
Faber.
Rogers,Jim(2013)TheDeathandLifeoftheMusicIndustryintheDigitalAge,London:
Bloomsbury.
Rosen,Ronald(2008)MusicandCopyrightOxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Seabrook,John‘RevenueStreams’TheNewYorker,24November2014,
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/24/revenue-streams-accessed5January2015.
Shiga,John(2007)‘Copy-and-persist:thelogicofmash-upculture’,CriticalStudiesinMedia
Communication,24:2,pp.93–114
Williams,Raymond(1983)Keywords,AVocabularyofCultureandSociety,London:Fontana.
Williams,Raymond(1963)CultureandSociety,London:Pelican.
Zollo,Paul(2003)SongwritersonSongwriting,FourthEdition,NewYork:dacapo.
26
1ThisworkwassupportedbytheRCUKfundedCentreforCopyrightandNewBusinessModelsintheCreativeEconomy(CREATe)[AHRCGrantNumberAH/K000179/1].