Hacker News Reader

Comment by ehnto | Hacker News Reader

The web has been quite unempathetic when it comes to DJs and the music culture that surrounds it. The key difference between mix DJs and other types of music is that the culture around mixing is made by and for DJ sets. The music makers want their music played by DJs on radio, in clubs, in livestreams, at house parties, that's why they made it in the first place. A blanket ban on music means even cooperative parties can't belong.

Same goes for platforms with automated copyright checking. Enough music makers get caught up in labels that don't get this either, that you'll almost always have three or four tracks striked out of your recording making it pointless to upload.

There has never been any money in live online DJing, it's done for fun and the love of it. So it just feels like petty fun policing.

View on HN

> The music makers want their music played by DJs on radio, in clubs, in livestreams, at house parties, that's why they made it in the first place.

Presumably musicians that want this release their work under a license that allows it.

> Presumably musicians that want this release their work under a license that allows it.

Vast majority of musicians have no clue about licensing or copyrights or/and do not care, be it permissive public ones or strict ones.

If the artists don't know or don't care, then neither should end users.

Most musicians are effectively end users. A relatively small fraction of musicians are actually involved in the production and sale of commercial recorded music.

I think that’s too broad a definition and renders the term near useless (someone who can play an instrument regardless of skill).

In this case I’d regard musician as someone who derives significant portion of their income from making or playing music or at least puts in a significant time into becoming the above (practice, learning and playing).

Unless they’re under the yoke of Sony, Universal or Warner..

Just kidding, those three companies have been granted a state guaranteed monopoly over enough of human culture to be able to bully other entities like YouTube, Spotify or whatever, into accepting onerous terms.. (think youtube automatically (and legally) stealing ad money and giving it to these companies, for a video of a person playing historical scores on a recorder. Or Spotify accepting that the money you pay them will get rerouted to famous artists you have never listened to)

Musicians often don't know what they're signing up for, and sometimes labels change their mind about how to manage their catalogues anyway. There are a lot of great labels that do all the right things for artists and DJs, but it's a big industry with lots of players.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com