Scott Andrew - lo-fi acoustic pop superhero!

A few months ago I was one of 2,755 musicians and songwriters who participated in a Pew Internet survey for the The Future of Music Coalition, a non-profit think tank that “strives for the creation of a musicians’ middle class.” The preliminary findings have been posted and indicate that many of the artists surveyed think P2P services are more helpful than harmful.

The FoMC has recently filed an interesting letter with the Senate Judiciary Committee expressing concerns over Orrin Hatch’s consarned INDUCE Act. (Consarned — it’s my new favorite old-school swearword.) The letter brings up three points that no one seems to be talking about:

1. Creators are Stakeholders

FMC would remind this committee that the music industry extends far beyond that which is represented by the RIAA and its member labels. There are many thousands of musicians who record, release music, and perform shows that are not part of the major label system. Many of these artists have different levels of concern about the effect of P2P file-sharing on their careers and livelihoods.

Damn straight the RIAA doesn’t represent me. Where are the artists in this debate? The whole thing feels like a bitter child custody battle.

2. The INDUCE Act assumes that all copyright owners do not want their works to be shared on a P2P network.

Under the INDUCE Act, it is the facilitation of the act of copyright infringement that is the target of legislation, irrespective of the kind of material being shared. This does not take into account the evidence that some musicians and copyright owners encourage consumers and fans to upload, share, or download their songs on peer-to-peer networks; in fact, FMC has discovered that many musicians and songwriters think file-sharing has improved their careers instead of hindered them.

3. The INDUCE Act does not allow for market-based solutions to occur

As drafted, the INDUCE Act suggests that the only remedy left for the music industry is making peer-to-peer services subject to direct litigation for inducement. The FMC would argue that this remedy absolves key parties from considering a market-based solution that would involve the licensing of peer-to-peer services so that the copyright holders would authorize the distribution of music.

Suffice to say, I *heart* the FoMC. Read the whole letter here.