DMCA: It's happened again

This was an email from 4AD the other day:

With a pretty extensive summer tour under way, Danish collective Efterklang have managed to take time out to remix tracks by fellow Copenhagen acts and friends and are very generously offering them for as free MP3s to one and all.
[...]

Follow these links to download the four MP3s for free:...

And, you might recall, we provided those links in a handy post. Because that was why they were sent to a music blog in the first place.

So, can anyone at 4AD explain why we've had a DCMA takedown notice - again, for files which are HOSTED ON THE BANDS' OWN WEBSITES?

That's twice now I've linked - not even hosted - to tracks that I've been invited to share by press officer/publicity people, only to have some dunderhead in America somehow decide that that "infringes" something and Google, with their understandable but unworkable 'take down first, ask questions to be answered by snail mail much, much later' approach.

Doesn't exactly make me warm to either the bands involved, or their record labels.

You might, by the way, be wondering if I've had the promised results of Jon Bleicher, the press bloke for Seasick Steve, looking in to why I was asked to offer links to a free track, and then got sent a DCMA for it. Bugger all from him, bugger all from Rykodisc, bugger all from Warners.

Seasick Steve, the DMCA and me

At the end of March, I got an email from a promotional company which included a Seasick Steve track "approved to post", which I duly did. After all, who doesn't love Seasick Steve, eh?

A few days later, when I logged in to, I dunno, post a long thing about Billy Corkhill or something, there was a cheery message from Google telling me that somebody had issued a DCMA takedown, claiming that the track had breached their copyright.

Funny thing is, I wasn't even hosting the track, all I'd posted was a link to the song. Which was on the record company's own server.

Frankly, being slapped with a DCMA notice for a song which was being promoted to music bloggers as safe to post was irritating enough - I have no respect for the copyright laws, but I try to abide by them - but getting a smack from Google for merely linking to a file that had been made public by, presumably, the very same label who had published the file online was grating.

The same email had, it's worth mentioning, a link to a full download of the album, with a request not to share that. If I had been trying to rip off the labels, wouldn't I have posted that?

I wrote to the promo guy who originally sent the link, and to be fair, he apologised swiftly and said he'd talk to Rykodisc about it. That, though, was the last I heard from anyone.

I know Rykodisc are part of Warners, and perhaps you shouldn't expect any better from a fake indie. But I did think they were better than that. Disappointing.

Set against the scale of misery inflicted on people by the mess of copyright law, it's not a big deal. There is a wider point, though: if Warners are effectively accusing themselves of breaking copyright law, how can they ever be trusted when they issue lawsuits and threats?

Gordon in the morning: Seasick and buried

If only I had a range of made-up prizes to share out, like Gordon's 'Shagger Of The Year' prize, I'd be reaching into my sack to give Bizarre one today, for giving an unlikely lead story to Seasick Steve. It's unexpected, and it's quite a nice piece:

The former hobo told me: “I didn’t even know what the Brits was. My record label had to explain it to me. I thought they were joking."

That's a wonderful quote. They can add it to the press releases, right after someone from the BPI tries to claim that the Brits are one of the most impressive global events of the year.

Nice work, everybody. And putting a bloke with a beard and a check shirt at the heart of your double-page spread is surprising and uplifting.

What a pity, though, that the online edition of Bizarre has the story buried away at the bottom of the page, making vital space for stories about Caprice in her pants and Lady GaGa in her pants.

There is some breaking news, though: Universal have sent an executive out to have a word with Amy Winehouse. Sorry, I say "executive" - according to Richard White, he's actually a "bigwig":

AMY WINEHOUSE’s record label yesterday flew a bigwig to her holiday resort for a heated showdown.

Universal’s commercial director Brian Rose was dispatched to St Lucia to “drive some common sense” into the singer.

A heated showdown, eh? Is that one that you pop into a microwave for thirty seconds before using it?

For those who haven't been keeping up, there's a recap of Amy's behaviour:

The 25-year-old has been snapped crawling under tables begging for alcohol from other guests after staff at the swish Caribbean resort refused to serve her.

Guests also said the Rehab star has been blowing as much as £8,000 on food and drink for people she barely knows.

Actually, if she's been taking drinks off people, and buying drinks for people, doesn't that make her more or less square with the other guests?

So, Universal is putting its foot down, is it?

Universal last night confirmed Mr Rose had flown to St Lucia but insisted the meeting was to discuss future projects.

Well, yes - but that could take the form 'when are you going to stop crawling under tables and start making us some more money', couldn't it?

I think we know how this story ends, though, don't we?:

CHERYL COLE was looking as good as ever at London’s Zuma restaurant, where she was discussing plans with American music execs to crack the US.

We have that she was doing this on good authority because, erm, of some eavesdropping:

A fellow diner at the Japanese hotspot said: “They told her she’s in big demand.”

... before explaining that he'd dropped a bread roll on the floor, and that was the only reason he was crawling around under the table listening, you understand.

Cheryl Cole is in big demand in America, is she? Can we have some calibration for this - is it more or less than the demand for a revival of Melrose Place, for example?

Mojo give the gongs

We're a little surprised that in these multimedia end days in which we live that Mojo appear to have not bothered covering their own awards online, allowing the BBC to carry the winners first. Like not eating the cake at your own birthday party, surely?

Or perhaps they're just a little awkward about the winners:

Butter-advertising Ozzy Osbourne has won the Icon Award; Rehab was the song of the year; The Stooges picked up lifetime achievement awards and, while Ike Turner's habit of beating the shit out of Tina might be causing problems for him at the Edinburgh Jazz festival, it hasn't stopped Mojo presenting him with Best Legend.

Actually, can Legends be comparative? "I'm a better legend than you"? Alice Cooper picked up the hero prize, which is different to being a legend, of course.

Best album has gone to The Good, The Bad and the Queen; Arcade Fire are best live act; Surprisingly, Seasick Steve won the breakthrough act, which will probably do him about as much good as it did Colin Barely Rae last year.

Surviving Marleys a-plenty came out to accept the classic award for Exodus on behalf of Bob; Bjork took what the BBC call "the prestigious inspiration award" - we suspect the adjective is the BBC's, but we're not sure; Joy Division outstanding contribution and Suicide the inspiration in sound prize, whatever that means.

Apparently, all the EMAP magazine awards shows are henceforward going to be sponsored by Bitburger beers:

Adnams marketing director Steve Curzon said: "We know that music and movies are two subjects that score highly among the Bitburger target audience.

"Q, Empire, Mojo, Kerrang and Arena are all titles that embody socialising and exclusivity - these are watchwords of the Bitburger positioning within the UK."

We're not entirely sure that if we were trying to position a lager as exclusive we'd throw it at the Kerrang awards, but then we don't work in advertising.