Mechanical Music Merited?

Lawrence Lessig recalls the account of John Philip Sousa, an American composer who was unhappy about technological replacement of live music by recordings that could be played by machines. His argument in the early twentieth century occurred during the development of the phonograph, where people began a shift towards prerecorded music and away from live performances. This debate sparked the ongoing copyright controversy and has not been remedied since the development of the radio, television and internet. Sousa’s argument was with the fact that music adds to culture, it is meant to be shared and constructed. The fact that people are now taking a passive attitude towards music is a tragedy, he feels, and must be remedied. This “mechanical music” has much less substance and it is leading to fewer and fewer people looking to break into the creative field. I argue completely to the opposite of any such argument, while Sousa believes that vocal cords will disappear like the tail from man when he came from the ape I believe more people are benefitting from music now than they ever have. Copyright has only restricted our musical progress and has lined the pockets of music industry fat cats. In fact copyright violation proceeds, meaning court costs, fines, etc go to lawyers and bureaucrats rather than actual artists. Music is now shared digitally and is enjoyed by more people than ever before, a fact that cannot be argued. YouTube has been one of the most controversial websites since it went live in 2005, as users can post videos and songs that may not necessarily be considered public domain. By that I mean that this free website streams copyrighted material, an obvious issue that continues to be battled over.

Posted by: Mike Anderson