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].