Who Gives Kudos: (2) ist (2) (2) Ruth McCart.. (2) Codebreaker (2) Ashley Hutc.. (2) (2) Carlingus (2) (2) Amanda (2) Our Dad (2) Bombs and B.. (2) intergalact.. (2) (2) (2) x (2) Martin Picton (1) Flies That .. (2) XAOS (2)

	Billy Bragg	Yeah you've hit the nail on the head...the real problem is the fact that they can sub-license it to any company they want and keep the royalities themselves without paying the artist a penny. It also doesn't stipulate that they can use it for non-commercial use only which is what I'd want to see in that clause. The clause is basically far to open for abuse and thus I'm very wary. Please get a lawyer on the case if you can...I'm getting one to look at it and when we know exactly what it all means to artists we can take it forward from there. I tried messaging myspace but they just replied with a generic message on how to post videos on the site...I don't think I'll be doing that!! Hopefully we can get this sorted with enough people on board so that we can all get on with enjoying the beauty that is myspace...;)   Posted by Billy Bragg on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 15:52 [Reply to this]

	Sue	Just want to say thankyou - its always amazing how little people read the small print, the old saying that you dont get anything for nothing is so true!  - and thanks too to My Space for responding so quickly. By the way I know its nothing to do with this particular subject but I read the small print of the contract that X Factor send out to one of my students - I cant believe that its actually legal to insist that every single contestant has to sign it ... before they even turn up! Thanks again x   Posted by Sue on Friday, September 01, 2006 - 13:01 [Reply to this]

	Gary Duncan	Well I CAN believe it comrade!! Don't you know the world is upside-down? People are meaningless. Only PROFIT matters. Either get used to it or do something about it. Check out the RESPECT party on the net. We're fighting for a world where PEOPLE come before money!! Power to the people!!!!!!!!   Posted by Gary Duncan on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 18:12 [Reply to this]

	Our Dad	It is so very easy to share your music without losing legal ownership. I used www.creativecommons.org to set up licenses for my music. My music is no longer available on MySpace.  Along with BB, I'm waiting for Rupert's guys to explicitly deny commercial rights.  Then we're back in business.  I can still put stuff up on the net for free, using the internet archive, that is linked in to the creativecommons stuff.  Hey Tom!  we're still waiting!   Posted by Our Dad on Monday, June 12, 2006 - 23:09 [Reply to this]

	paul is paranoid	that clause does not mean myspace owns the content. it says they have a license to that content. there's a big difference... the publisher/writer/etc. still owns all rights... but myspace gets to store, display, and use the content. it's like software, you the rightful (non-pirate ) owner are granted a license to use the software -- but not to make copies of it or use the code etc.. this clause i think basically protects myspace from hassles over the fact that copywritten content is all over their site by posting content here, you're granting myspace a license to actually have it on their site and display it to the world. (anything you create is automatically copyright to you BTW, unless you put it in the public domain, of course... and interestingly i'd interpret this licensing clause as meaning myspace isn't public domain, which means you keep ownership of anything you post say in your blogs... which is good)... so the ownership of the content is not in question... but according to that clause it seems like myspace basically gets to do whatever they feel like with the content... it protects them, it allows the site to function smoothly for everyone... but it doesn't seem to protect myspace from "re-using" content or from giving it to other people. and that's where IMO the problem might be... that's my take on it, anyway... if there are any socialist lawyers kicking around (actually, i happen to know one... ) please correct me if am inaccurate or just downright wrong... but in conclusions :) i don't think there's an issue with ownership or anything and i think you'd be fine to put the music back up. murdoch doesn't OWN it by you putting here......   Posted by paul is paranoid on Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 23:27 [Reply to this]

	Jazzmonk	nicely balanced Paul.. If I had read your comment first and properly , I probably wouldn't have written my two further down ! as I make many of the same points but not quite so eloquently . However the fact that MySpace used to have a clause allowing them the right to keep 'residual' copies AND had license to 'adapt, copy ,modify, translate etc.etc.' AND reproduce through subsubsublicensees ...the fact that they have withdrawn this untenable clause makes me slightly suspicious of motive ! see my other comments and as I say thanks for the balance. julian>>>myspace/afrocortex   Posted by Jazzmonk on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 18:10 [Reply to this]

	Jazzmonk	Ah Yes ....BUT ....although you would still own the copyrighted work you are by default granting complete , worldwide license to 'copy, adapt, modify ,translate ,reproduce and transmit etc. . The clause could just contain 'publicly display and replay worldwide ' because that's what you do on MySpace ..yes? In 30 years in the business I  have been signed with various bands to 4 Major labels and often signed contracts with phrases like 'until the end of the world ' and ' by reproduction methods yet to be invented ' and such like ; I agree one can over re-act to these ; we just chuckled and signed anyway . However the fact that the clause maintaining a right to keep anything that had been on MySpace  and all rights everywhere for those works ...the fact that that has now been excised from the terms under duress makes one a little suspicious . Thanks for the balanced view. julian>>jazzmonk www.myspace/afrocortex       Posted by Jazzmonk on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 17:54 [Reply to this]

		As you probably noticed, I've reposted your bulletin to my friends, so more people will know about that. I just can't believe it! I support you 100%.   Posted by on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 01:36 [Reply to this]

	Krila Sounds ♬	Are you sure you're not over reacting on this??? I certainly wouldn't want Murdoch to own either Billy's music or anyone elses, for that matter... Isn't this just his cover-your-arse clause which says he doesn't wish to pay royalties to every artist on here each time a song is played? After all, MySpace is a free service, so he wants to be relieved of all responsibilities where copyrights are concerned... Esther Angel   Posted by Krila Sounds ♬ on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 02:02 [Reply to this]

		Esther, you are probably right. But music copyrights is a dirty business and can be such a pain in the arse. As an artist and a record producer, I don't want nobody to touch my babies (my songs). But Myspace has to make things clearer to the artists if what you're saying is right. Thanks for bringing that point. Support Billy!!! Strummerville joined the movement, too. Best Regards, FranK, O.S.P.   Posted by on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 03:06 [Reply to this]

	Billy Bragg	I have to agree that it may be an over reaction, but at the day of the day I'd rather be safe then sorry and sort this out for everyone!! You have to ask yourself the question why that clause is there and why it is so damn open...   Posted by Billy Bragg on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 15:55 [Reply to this]

		That's what I meant.   Posted by on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 18:12 [Reply to this]

	ORGAN	Ah the sound of the old school music business managers and labels running because we're all communicating without them....   Posted by ORGAN on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 16:13 [Reply to this]

	ist	Thanks for making us aware of this. I've been looking into it, and it seems to be a bit of both of the opinions offered here... It's a prevention against MySpace having to pay streaming royalties, but it does offer room for abuse... i.e. MySpace using content in advertising OF MySpace etc, without appropriate compensation. I completely agree that the clause needs to be tightened to protect artists on all levels of the poverty tree. : ) We'll be making a decision on how to handle our MySpace music in the next couple of days, but we'll keep making people aware. Kenton ist/Pink Box Records   Posted by ist on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 23:01 [Reply to this]

	Jobian Day	wow... this is like the myspace-rights-revolution...   Posted by Jobian Day on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 23:58 [Reply to this]

	Krila Sounds ♬	Having just re-read the entire Terms and Conditions section 6 of MySpace, I have to agree that it leaves Murdoch far too much room to do with the music as he pleases! I have sent out a bulletin and also blogged it on my page with Sarah's original message and her reply to me. This way I hope the warning about the above clause will get through to more people and they can then make their own decision whether they want to remove their music or not... In any case, many thanks to the Billy Bragg office for making people aware there's something fishy on MySpace!   Posted by Krila Sounds ♬ on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 10:40 [Reply to this]

	Project Opus	We are providing a player for use on MySpace or any website. Some Project Opus members have the same issues with MySpace. In response we have provided a Music Player that enables files to be played on MySpace, but does not transfer control of those files to MySpace. Similar to the way YouTube works. Here is the thread with a link to the player I'm not sure MySpace is trying anything nefarious to be honest, but it certainly isn't clear. We hope this player helps those who are uncertain to remain using MySpace with a bit more comfort. Please check out our service and let us know if it helps or if you have any concerns. Thanks, David   Posted by Project Opus on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 16:58 [Reply to this]

	Project Opus	Previous link broken sorry: Here is the right link for post above   Posted by Project Opus on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 17:00 [Reply to this]

	Katie	I've sent out bulletins to warn people anyway. Thank you for letting me know. I'll have to ask my band whether we want to keep our music up or not. KDH.   Posted by Katie on Thursday, May 25, 2006 - 11:12 [Reply to this]

	< ( e ) >	those corporate m***er f**ers!   Posted by < ( e ) > on Friday, May 26, 2006 - 19:37 [Reply to this]

	Codebreaker	Gosh y'all we are talking about Fox media here! You guys are concerned that Billy is going overboard?! That CLAUSE is fucking overboard! Since when are we more concerned about the rights of Ruport Murdoch over the rights of the artist? "With the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicences" THAT'S OVERBOARD!   Posted by Codebreaker on Monday, May 29, 2006 - 04:34 [Reply to this]

	Codebreaker	With you all the way Billy, thanks for all the inspriation. I've been spreading the word regarding this...got alot of people reposting etc...   Posted by Codebreaker on Monday, May 29, 2006 - 04:35 [Reply to this]

	Jazzmonk	Hi Sarah and All , Yes it is an insidious clause and I am very grateful to you and your colleagues for starting the trend towards change : esp. My Spaces' right to retain copies which thankfully is no longer valid . A lot depends on what ' ON AND THROUGH THE SERVICES' means because that is the only area 'world wide' for which this license is ...er.....shall we say "extorted" from the unwitting artist . I don't think this clause means that some 'subsubsublicensee' could put on a West End Musical called Billy Bragg using a cover band to do songs he had up on the page , because surely The West End Theatre is not 'ON OR THROUGH THE SERVICES '? which surely refers to Internet Based My Space Services . But it is unclear ; and if this assumption is correct then why on Earth is 'publicly perform 'in the clause ? Basically if there is no ill intent in the clause then it doesn't need to be there...! My compositions are too long, interconnected and megabyte rich to get the whole of any of them all up there anyway so I am forced to go for 'clips' but they are long enough 3 minutes to 'sample loop reproduce adapt translate and transmit..!' ...I have to say this could happen anyway from promo copies I have given out of my new album.....and would I care to go to law.?hmmm..... I have temporarily taken down my song files and posted bulletins that I hope are balanced as a gesture but will return soon as MySpace would need an army of thieves to trawl through the zillions of files in order to misuse them ....or am I being naive ? After 30 years in Pop, Rock and Jazz very little surprises me . with kind regards julian >>>www.myspace.com/afrocortex   Posted by Jazzmonk on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 17:36 [Reply to this]

	Ashley Hutchings	Massive Thanks, Billy. Let's all stand and be counted and let them know, we will never be cowed, never be kept down...a VERY brief quote from the singer/songwriter John Tams, which states "Keep the spirit keep the way Stand up - stand up now Unity will win the day Stand up - stand up now"   Posted by Ashley Hutchings on Saturday, June 03, 2006 - 21:01 [Reply to this]

	Billy Bragg	Thanks for all your support guys...and your opinions!! I'm still trying to get a consensus on this issue which is proving harder than what I first expected! I will keep you all informed! Cheers Sarah x   Posted by Billy Bragg on Monday, June 05, 2006 - 13:09 [Reply to this]

		Keep Fighting the Good Fight!   Posted by on Wednesday, June 07, 2006 - 23:43 [Reply to this]

	Carlingus Carl stroud	Oi dammit!  Billy-you go girl!  (kinda sux not having any braggy tunes on my page, though)!   Posted by Carlingus on Thursday, June 08, 2006 - 16:08 [Reply to this]

	Thought Crime	If MySpace were the nice friendly website it claims to be, one might be convinced that the legalese was boilerplate and not malintentioned. The fact that MySpace is owned by News Corp leaves a bitter taste in our mouths whenever we consider this, and this does nothing to calm our suspicions.   Posted by Thought Crime on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 01:17 [Reply to this]

	Russell Brand Russell Brand	Yep, small revolution is the right phrase.  I offer the services of my goat.   Posted by Russell Brand on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 12:42 [Reply to this]

	Amanda	Considering these terms and conditions are hidden away in the small print and are not made absolutely clear. I dare say one would have a case to argue they are unreasonable and basically a confidence trick. They are trying to trick people into signing away the rights to their intellectual property. I'm no legal expert but I undertand certain unreasonable clauses in contracts can be challenged, and of course one can put anything thing in a contract, they don't normally affect the statutory rights of the consumer. So I dare say that could be challenged. But in the light of this, personally I wouldn't want to put anything good on Myspace. Best just to use these things for advertising links to one's own Web sites. That said I understand some ISPs have similar terms and conditions. Generally it's best not to put anything on the Internet that one doesn't mind giving away for free. Amanda (Webmistress www.taffia.biz)   Posted by Amanda on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 03:07 [Reply to this]

	Alan	For a dedicated socialist you're surprisingly sympathetic to the concept of private property...at least when it's your ox being gored.   Posted by Alan on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 06:10 [Reply to this]

	Our Dad	I'm with Billy.  My music is now missing from MySpace, until they fix the T&Cs. Steve (Our Dad) Weeks   Posted by Our Dad on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 07:27 [Reply to this]

	Andreas Saag aka Swell Session	THEY NEED TO CHANGE THIS! IS THERE ANY PETION TO SIGN ANYWHERE`?   Posted by Andreas Saag aka Swell Session on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 11:11 [Reply to this]

	Bridgeydrums	Only recently started using myspace - and felt really positive about the potential to spread some music - I'm now feeling conned - as is so often the case as a musician - these corporations want it both ways - one minute the corporates are suing the individual fans for downloading - the next minute the corporates are tricking the individuals into handing over their own material for free. I hope this gets sorted, cause I don't want to have to take my music away! Bridgey.   Posted by Bridgeydrums on Monday, June 12, 2006 - 13:20 [Reply to this]

	Bombs and Beating Hearts (RIP)	We've hopped on the bandwagon as well. Love, Rob Banks   Posted by Bombs and Beating Hearts (RIP) on Monday, June 12, 2006 - 21:09 [Reply to this]

	intergalactic pig sausages	Nobody wants to hear our crap anyways. But i took all of my stuff down (just to be safe), and replaced it with an awful song nobody would want anyways. Im using putfile.com to upload my music instead, and then placing links to my songs on my myspace page. That way FOX cant put their grubby rotten blood stained hands all over it. Also, putfile will let you upload tons of songs for free. Myspace only lets you have 4. Also FOX news is run by republicans, so i am against anything with the fox name on it. Except The Simpsons. That kid who goes "Ha Ha" everytime somebody dies or gets their nuts burned off is HISTARICAL.     Posted by intergalactic pig sausages on Monday, June 12, 2006 - 21:41 [Reply to this]

	matthew	Good on you Billy to find that out..Always read the small print!!..last man you want controlling your music is murdoch   Posted by matthew on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 13:58 [Reply to this]

	kim	Hi, ok, so you removed "your" songs from MySpace. Cool, but isn't also true that you had no legal right to put them there in the first place? Or did you actually get it in writing from your record company that you could serve their recordings for free on internet? Or did you check with your Rights Society that they don't mind the fact that you stream material for free on the internet that you have asked them to watch? I don't get it? Is this somekinda PR thing for your new release or just plain bad advise from the wrong people? Get with it! All the best, Kim    Posted by kim on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 22:08 [Reply to this]

	Phil	The problem is that there are record companies with space on MySpace and some of them are actively encouraging their artists to post music here. Small record companies often do the whole deal, including publishing rights, so if they say post it the artist does have the right, but that doesn't stop MySpace from being able to do whatever they like with the artist's material so long, as I understand it, as they only do so through MySpace. The other bit of the small print which the labels, and Billy, may not have read is the bit which says if you post anything here which gives rise to a claim for royalties, you have to pay those royalties. This is something which I can't see a problem with except that artists may have posted covers without thinking.  They could be in for a shock. -- Phil.   Posted by Phil on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 00:32 [Reply to this]

	x	Hi Billy. Thank you for the fingerpoint. Best wishes. Andreas Rumba del Sol   Posted by x on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 08:23 [Reply to this]

	Martin Picton	Of course, "the terms" apply to the videos and photos you've posted too. Are you intending taking these down too? Maybe you should also check your real world licensing agreements too - you'd be horrifed what you'll find.   Posted by Martin Picton on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 15:40 [Reply to this]

	Peter "Reggae" Cooper	Those people are Idiots all the un-established artist are probably being ripped off all around the world and dont even know it- I will get on posting a bulletin etc right away. PS you are a credit to England!   Posted by Peter "Reggae" Cooper on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 09:42 [Reply to this]

	Phil	The way I understand it, this only allows them to abuse you through MySpace itself. Bad enough, but apparently it was worse before someone kicked up a stink and the terms & conditions were changed on 1st May. Personally, I don't trust the Dirty Digger as far as I could throw him and I only signed up to MySpace to alert artists I have taken photos of that those photos are on Flickr (which is much better at handling these issues but is only for photos, not music). Anyhow, the Chief Operating Officer (sounds like he should be a surgeon with a title like that) of MySpace murdered the English language when he said of MySpace, "We've just scratched the surdace of how to monetize it."  So expect more attempts to extract value by the Dirty Digger and his merry men.  I complete agree with your stand. Phil.   Posted by Phil on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 00:20 [Reply to this]

	XAOS	DEAR COMRADE BRAGG: ACTUALLY I WORKED AS COUNSEL (YES BY LAW BEFORE THE COURT, WHILE INCARCERATED) IN REPRESENTING THE ILLITERATE BLIND ETC (SEVERAL TIMES)AND AM QUALIFIED AS A RESEARCHER THOUGH I TOO FIND PROBLEMS WITH EMPLOYMENT WITH MEMBERS OF THE BAR (IN US) BECAUSE THEIR POSITION COMPROMISES THEM ALL (THER IS A LEGAL ARGUMENT FOR THIS) I UNDERSTAND THE MYSPACE PROVISIONS WHICH SHOULD ASSURE THOSE PROVIDING CONTENT THAT IS ANY PROFITS ARE DERIVED FROM SALE OF SAID PRODUCTS THE ARTISTS RETAIN THEIR RIGHTS AND THAT PERMISSION FOR MYSPACE TO POSSESS SAID MATERIALS IS CONDITIONAL (A VERY PROBLEMATIC LEGAL ISSUE I ACTUALLY DO NOT SUPPORT THE CAPITALIST VIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW NOR THEIR SOCIAL SYSTEM) PLEASE CONTACT FOR FURTHER ASSISTANCE   Posted by XAOS on Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 01:46 [Reply to this]

	Gary Duncan	Corporations have taken over the physical world and now they are busily conquering our minds! They have us all addicted to this stupid fucking site!! Try and do without it and you'll see what I mean. You're all zombies and putty in their hands. Instead of whingeing via the very tool that has you indirectly contributing to your own enslavement,why don't you get out on the streets and start a fucking riot?!!   Posted by Gary Duncan on Thursday, June 07, 2007 - 01:19 [Reply to this]

	Gary Duncan	Corporations have taken over the physical world and now they are busily conquering our minds! They have us all addicted to this stupid fucking site!! Try and do without it and you'll see what I mean. You're all zombies and putty in their hands. Instead of whingeing via the very tool that has you indirectly contributing to your own enslavement,why don't you get out on the streets and start a fucking riot?!!   Posted by Gary Duncan on Thursday, June 07, 2007 - 01:19 [Reply to this]

	Flies That Fight	Thanks so much for the tip-off.  I remember seeing language like this associated with the MySpace Featured Artist.  I didn't see this when creating the account.  I am really interested to see what will happen when a major label's attorneys (like Sony or Virgin) go head-to-head with the MySpace attorneys to see who will ultimately hold property rights to the music (I'd be suprised if it was the artist). Thanks! FTF   Posted by Flies That Fight on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 21:09 [Reply to this]

	Nick	"without paying the artist"? Wow, I didn't know you were just in it for the money. How disappointing.   Posted by Nick on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 07:38 [Reply to this]

		It's not about "being in it for the money", it's about not helping some dirty corp to make money off artists' backs, with songs they DON'T OWN. There's more than money in music, there's a lot of pride in the music artists write. Parents won't give their kids away, Songwriters won't give their songs away. Nothing to do with cash....   Posted by on Sunday, June 25, 2006 - 04:03 [Reply to this]

	Gary Duncan	Corporations have taken over the physical world and now they are busily conquering our minds! They have us all addicted to this stupid fucking site!! Try and do without it and you'll see what I mean. You're all zombies and putty in their hands. Instead of whingeing via the very tool that has you indirectly contributing to your own enslavement,why don't you get out on the streets and start a fucking riot?!!   Posted by Gary Duncan on Thursday, June 07, 2007 - 01:21 [Reply to this]

Previous Post: Billy to support Hard-Fi!! | Back to Blog List | Next Post: We've got press!