2001-08-06 / Today’s Reading. ‘Intellectual Property and the Good Society: A Structural, Outcome-oriented Approach’ by Jon “Hannibal” Stokes.

the article at the Ars Technica site.

2001-08-05 / Public Works makes a ‘Top Ten’ list. Jon Nelson writes: “…just writing to let you know about a new webzine, Indieville. It’s devoted to underground music of the recycled kind, and I authored one of the various ‘top ten’ lists they have available from their front page. A top ten list is a list, wherein one has given details about ten of their favorite things, people, bands or organizations, following some kind of theme or other restriction. I think you’ll like to see who I chose to mention. It looks like it could shape up to be a great resource for news about media collage artists — if we all step up to the plate and offer our two cents. Let’s keep it interesting.” Here’s what he says about Public Works:

Public Works They’ve also gotten some attention, being the Tape-beatle’s side project, but this work is slightly lesser known — and they have a new record coming out, so look for it soon. Not as crunchy as the Tape-beatles, Public Works is a slightly more classical approach to appropriation-based music, while utilizing most of the same techniques. Look for their latest release on Elevator Bath — Its a 9-inch record, an oddity in and of itself, titled Numbers. You can order their stuff straight from their website.

who else besides Public Works he put in his ‘Top Ten’ list.

the Indieville site.

Free-form News Update

2001-08-02 / Part One (editing). Confronted as we are with the monumental task of sifting through miles of bought, found, donated and ‘otherwise acquired’ footage, the two remaining Tape-beatles find themselves locking horns over every minuscule decision. Nonetheless, progress is being made on their soon-to-be débuted ‘expanded cinema’ work based on the CD Good Times.

Just have a gander at this rare view of a Tape-beatle work space (left): their improvised film editing bench. From the sharpie-marked frame counting board, to the nearly antique ‘Kal-Art’ editor-viewer, to the eBay-acquired (cheap!) ‘Catozzo’ tape splicer, to our newly-acquired set of ‘Meopta’ rewinds (not pictured); it all smacks of jerry-rigging. (The bottle of Gambrinus beer, or ‘pivo’ as it’s known over here, is a temporary fixture.)

Part Two (breaking down). All the pre-planning and improvisational skills that are so characteristic of this impudent duo, The Tape-beatles, cannot in the end save them from the occasional unexpected catastrophe. On Thursday last, and with an understated though emphatic “pop!”, the CBX bulb in our ‘Kal-Art’ editor-viewer shone its last. With such a key piece of equipment now as dark as a vacant dwelling, we needed to replace it, and the sooner the better. Of course, such a specialty item, coming from America after all, is not to be found in Prague (believe me, we tried), so we had to order it — from America, of course. So the part of our process made possible by that device is crippled until the replacement lamp arrives.

Part Three (plans afoot). We are currently working with people ‘on the ground’ so to speak to arrange a variety of Tape-beatle performances in the upper Midwest. Specifically, we have agreed to take part in the Sound Unseen festival, which will be held in Minneapolis around the first week in October. We will do a live show, and later on, participate in a panel discussion on intellectual property issues. In addition, Steev Hise, Wet Gate, Escape Mechanism, and Wobbly will be making appearances and doing performances. After that, we are arranging at least one and possibly more gigs in Chicago. We will post dates, times, and spatial coordinates as soon as it all becomes clear.

2001-07-25 / New Review of ‘Numbers’. Another review of our newest release, the 9-inch EP by Public Works entitled ‘Numbers,’ has been received and posted. Written by Antron S. Meister of the UK site Freq, we are pleased to announce that the review is generally positive.

the new Numbers review from Freq.

In addition, a number of ‘ordinary’ (and by that I mean, ‘non-reviewing’) listeners have written in about the disc to express their approval. Here’s the evidence:

“By the way, ‘Numbers’ is a phenomenal piece. It totally nails the uneasiness/dread of the Conet and Ghost Orchid records — in a way, it really gets to the effectiveness of the source material. Arguably, the whole reason that numbers stations and EVP are frightening (not just accounting for the pure sound of them) is because they are random, unexpected, and impossible to order in the rational mind. Instead of putting on a CD that says, ‘You are going to hear a neatly ordered catalogue of disembodied voices,’ which effectively prepares and therefore somewhat numbs the listener to the shock of the experience, the Public Works piece reinstates the illusion of randomness — and creating a context. Anyway, it’s great. I love it. Thank you for sending it.” [Myke Weiskopf, Jamaica Plain MA, compiler of the Obscure-Disk CD releases]

And one more:

“I just wanted to let you know that i very much like ‘Numbers.’ It has some hörspiel (radio play)-like touch that is not only bound to political statements/media discourse which got a bit tiring after 15 years, though still actual and important. … If you should ever plan to play in Hamburg i’d be happy to help you.” [Felix Kubin, Hamburg DE, of Syndicat für gegenlärm]

Public Enemy ‘Open’, but not ‘Open Source’

2001-07-26 / The writer of the MusicDish article Public Enemy Goes ‘Open Source’? got it wrong. To call a song contest promotion ‘open source’ is to stretch an overused phrase out of proportion of its established meaning. The free use of an open source work is granted provided any works based upon it are also open source. Public Enemy’s latest project (detailed in the article in question) is simply the making of another PE album, with PE apparently taking ownership of the derived works. To call this project ‘Open Source’ belies both a complete misunderstanding of the practice, as well as lazy journalism signalled by an over eagerness to pepper the text with trendy buzzwords. The one responsible for the misleading invitation is the writer of the article: ltvnet@musicdish.com.

In PE’s defense, neither they nor their site SlamJamz.com use the phrase ‘open source’ in their texts concerning the project. Mr. ltvnet should know better, as he’s close to the business, that the kind of contracts provided to music entities, entertainers, and media personnel don’t allow the freedom to give away the goods.

Open source is like a truly public library filled with public domain materials, where you are granted the key to the stacks for the simple fact that you live in the community. The result of so many young persons having access to such a powerful institution through their formative years forms the hope that someday one of them may make a mature contribution to those stacks, to the benefit of all.

Public Enemy has made significant contributions to music, and we mean them no disrespect, but their output has been locked up by and shelved behind a cash register down the street. Their current project exploits their fanbase, many of whom are no doubt eager to appear on a PE release, regardless of the legal requirements. The Tape-beatles see the offering of $1000 as a kind of insult; why not simply ask the public to collaborate without the collusion of lucre?

Mr. ‘ltvnet’ responded:

To whom it may concern:

I apologize if I mislead anyone with my recent MusicDish article about Public Enemy.

Our target audience is substantially new media professionals. When I placed quotations around the phrase ‘open source’, I assumed most of our readers would understand that I was being ‘tongue in cheek’ and not literal.

Either way, I take responsibility if this caused any misunderstanding. I will forward your info to my superiors. We will publish a clarification if necessary.

Thanks, Chas - MusicDish

the notice in MusicDish that started it all.

IF YOU WISH to receive an e-mail announcement whenever there is significant content added to this site, tell us so by sending an e-mail message to that effect by contacting us at: ll@detritus.net -- correspondence and contact of any kind is welcome and encouraged.