Penfold Shush!
There is only one Danger Mouse.
Danger Mouse seems to want fans to pirate his blocked release
A legal dispute has led one of pop music's most exciting artists to take a novel approach to the release of his latest work: the album is a blank recordable CD on to which buyers can record illegally-downloaded versions of the album. Fans of Danger Mouse can buy a luxurious package of a poster and a book of photographs by cult …
-
Tuesday 19th May 2009 09:52 GMT Dennis
id anyone else read this thinking
It was about a certain mouse superhero.
So EMI are killing music and innovation.
Well who would have thought it?
I would love a danger mouse Icon but I guess it could be misinterpreted as some musician that I have never heard of.
So make do with a Paris although I hate to scrap the bottom of the barrel
-
Tuesday 19th May 2009 10:37 GMT Peter Foulkes
An old cynic says...
This looks like a very good marketing exercise.
Who is printing and providing the distribution of the album with no music? EMI perhaps?
It seems a great deal of publicity has been created by an artist and record company who are well aware of the availability of free downloads and have the opportunity here to actually recoup some money by falling back on the old style physical product.
It is like the Emperor's new clothes and I would imagine there will be a great deal of self congratulating if they manage to pull it off.
The legal issues regarding the release are likely to be rights related, i.e. someone else wants paying for the use of their music. What a genius way of avoiding the payments. Sorry guv, we never sold it to the kids, look we even sent out a 1000 press releases telling the world we weren't selling it.
-
-
Tuesday 19th May 2009 12:23 GMT David
@AC 10:57
Look for an album by Dean Gray, called "American Edit", which contains many mashed up tracks and is, IMHO much better than American Idiot that it was based on. Oh, and by the way, sampling other peoples music to use on a track of your own isn't theft, even if you don't get the right holders permission, as long as the clip that's sampled is under a certain length (3 seconds IIRC)
-
Tuesday 19th May 2009 13:08 GMT Anonymous Coward
"one of pop music's most exciting artists"
Danger Mouse's output is about as exciting as a Sunday afternoon watching the repeats of Eastenders. There is nothing innovative about "mash ups" - Steinski and the Mass Media were doing the same thing back in the mid 1980's using the same kind of technology. As for claims that three second samples of copyrighted works are legal, that's not what was decided in court. The sample has to be insignificant in the sense that the original must not be recognisable. A three second sample of a drum pattern may be generic enough to fall into this classification, but the way Danger Mouse's mash ups use samples is clearly not. Frankly, if the talentless twat wants to do cover versions he should get some musicians in - the results might sound a bit less like a Jive Bunny novelty song.
-
Tuesday 19th May 2009 13:15 GMT Anonymous Coward
You can get the download from NPR
See Wikipedia's cite notes. Here is a link in case it changes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Danger_Mouse_and_Sparklehorse_Present:_Dark_Night_of_the_Soul&oldid=290905110
@Peter Foulkes: Danger Mouse is distributing it himself from his website www.dnots.com. No EMI involved.
-
-
Tuesday 19th May 2009 15:55 GMT Tony
I demand...
...That all musicians should be locked up.
They all plagarise notes that have been used before and just play them in a different order. Thieves the lot of them!
They should either come up with some new notes or not be allowed to charge for their music.
:p
I can't comment on the artistic value of what this Mr Mouse produces, as have never listened to his stuff - I may check it out this evening when I get home (although the mention of Jay-Z puts me off). In general though, DJs do not get enough credit for their work.
A good DJ uses samples from prior work, but they do something different and innovative with it. They create something new and often something that appeals to an entirely different audience to the original work they 'stole'. That being the case the person that produced the original has not lost out in any way, so how exactly are they being wronged?
There does obviously have to be some common sense - Playing huge chunks of an existing work with minimal modification is clearly not adding anything significant and IS just plagarism, but all too often people with no taste for or understanding of dance music just dismiss DJs as parasites. That's bollocks. A good DJ is every bit as much a musician as the bloke the played the guitar or sang the lyric he samples/remixes.
Interesting video here on how one 6 second drum loop is the basis of whole genres of modern music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac
If The Winstons had jealously guarded their creation and sued the hell out of anyone that reused it, the history of dance music would be very different and while some of you rocktards probably don't care, an awful lot of us feel the music world would be poorer as a result.
-
Wednesday 20th May 2009 08:53 GMT Anonymous Coward
Hmm...
Now why would I waste $50 to buy an album that includes a free burnable disc when I can do the same with my own bought for less than .10 cents each and do it that way for free? After all you are promoting the method of getting your songs and/or others like it. Thanks but no thanks but still thanks for the idea that I can still get your content for free ;)
A fan that loves what you do and shall do so in its freest form.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
