Deadheads rebel against Web crackdown

Grateful Dead's decision to stop a Web site from offering free downloads has fans threatening a boycott.
The New York Times

The story "Deadheads rebel against Web crackdown" published November 30, 2005 at 6:56 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.

[dam7ri]

There is some logic to this.

The Dead are trying to play both sides of the fences here. They have their financial interests and the interests of their fans in mind, and I think they have come up with a starting point for how music will be listened to in the future. The music industry should take some notes on how to deal with the hand that feeds them.

What I like about this is that the Dead are not trying to stop their music from being available for free, they are just trying to contain it, which is reasonable. Streaming audio versus no audio, which would you prefer?

What I do not like is the attitude of the Deadheads. Don't they recognize that if the RIAA had any control, they wouldn't have anything at all?

[cosmic.charlie]

Well.... not exactly.

The Grateful Dead have for decades encouraged taping and the trading of these tapes. They even allowed tapers to patch their equipment into soundboards for direct recording. The only thing they asked was that you didn?t make a buck off it.

There was an interview with Jerry Garcia that was actually hosted on archive.org. It was from the early 80's and Garcia mentioned that after the music was played by the band they didn't care about it.

When Jerry passed, it left a huge void for many people that were personally involved in the day-to-day aspects of the Grateful Dead. Since Jerry's passing, the management of the Grateful Dead has taken on a more business (and less counterculture-like) approach to Grateful Dead decisions. Oh Phil Lesh's website (bass player for the Grateful Dead @ www.phillesh.com) he makes a statement of not being aware or informed of what has happened. He even mentioned using the archive.org community service himself.

The big glaring problem in what they have done is that they have gone against the wishes and principles that the artists spent 35 years developing. It is understood and obvious that this is a business decision but the Grateful Dead were never about business decisions. That was a huge part of their appeal? and success.

What Grateful Dead Merchandising (GDM) and David Gans are taking for granted and failing to realize is that if it were not for Deadheads they would not be where they are today. Deadheads do not exist due to Frisbees and Golf Club covers that have a GD logo on them. They exist due to a community that shared a common bond of the love of the music created by the Grateful Dead and all their different configurations.

That community thrives online and this is a major step that takes away from that community.

No logic here

Sounds like the Dead are trying to protect their interests from a bunch of individuals intent on _stealing_, yes stealing, their music. Trading cassettes among friends is one thing, making their music available for mass download across the globe is another.

I'll keep this short so you can get back to the bong smoking. Peace.

[aabcdefghij987654321]

On the contrary

As simple as that, there was some sort of covenant with their fans: you can record and share but not make money off it.

Now, since they are obviously not doing concerts much anymore, the business side wants to "live off the past". In short, "milk the never-dying golden egg goose" (lol). Which can be called, printing free money with no effort.

This is radically different. I think that we are barely seeing the tip of the iceberg with the problematic value of virtual creations.

There is indeed a severe lack of balance between the value of traditional work (I do this once and get paid once) and these works (I do this once and collect life long royalties for "free").

[System Tyrant]

RE: No Logic Here

Well, maybe not, but it may not have been the wish of all the members of the Grateful Dead.

I think if the Dead allowed those recording to happen with the intent of free distrabution then what they effectively did was push those recordings into public domain (maybe not in legal terms). I think one could argue that since the Dead allowed those recording then those tapes are the property of the recorder and as long as the recorder does not sell those recording for profit then are in compliance with the agreement for distributing those songs.

I think what will happen is those songs will go back up on archive.org. You will probably see an appology from the remaining member of the Grateful Dead as well. If not, I would be willing to bet it ends up in court over the legal uses of those recordings.