Date: 2022/06/11 - La vida loca of the content creator - Themes: opinions, arts, copyright

---

Opening party

i was at the debut party of a podcast lately and been caught up in a loophole.i do not remember exactly the full context but i think it was an argument on where to listen a podcast because there's an opening party, a trailer even but no podcast and most important: no date for the release on the radio. I said "If you got no date, you could release it elsewhere" I was thinking of streaming platform, secret links, anywhere.

They answer me "No i can't" and i just said the opposite, then they repeated themself so i asked "why not". I needed a reason because i didn't saw why. They explained me there's licencing and copyright laws, that's why they cannot release it elsewhere. i squinted my eyes "what?" then we repeated ourselves another time. And i said the line "i see your mental barrers but you don't have to follow them, you know" and they said "it not mental barriers, it's the law"

I had a huge desire to start the debate, but when people just want to follow the rules arbitrarily now I hold back. I contextualised the whole interaction in my mind. I am at the opening party of an unreleased podcast, there no place to hear it. It should air on the local community radio. They pay the tax for copyright music so the podcast is bound to the community radio by that. And that's why they cannot release it elsewhere - end of buffer

Taxpayers, Podcast landlords, Moms, The Girls living in a van

I get the whole copyright talk, artists need to eat and be respected for their work. But there's a thing. Among the pool of french-speaking podcasts created, how many play fair, i mean by that, play by the law, which say: "pay the f tax". I get it that's why we got a shit-ton of podcast editors who regroup and pay collectively as they should, such as the community radio But the now you have to play along the publisher/producer's rules and what is that? Yeah that's right, that's editorial rules.

I don't say it's bad per se, i have some exemple:
What happends if you prepared a 3 hours long super cool podcast and publisher/producer says "no, it need to be 1h long"? You make some cuts in your super long podcast. Now it is just some 1 hour long assembled cuts-without the whole substence. And they don't give you a date of release on Loyal-Good-Radio.
You played by the podcast landlord rules. Made it 1 hour long. Now it's all chopped up, you remind yourself about the super fun 3 hour long version you initially did. You want people to hear this version aswell since it's the original without the deep and hurtful cuts, and the release date of the 1h version being on hold, it's maybe ok to do so.

And here we are You hear about The Girls that also doing 3h long podcast and they have copyrighted music too and they're living in a van - so why you can't share the 3h version like them?
Then You remind yourself that your podcast landlord is also an All Provider Mother that's also a Taxpayer and you cannot do such trahison to your all provider mother, she gave you a place, pays for you. She says stuff like "I'll pay for your 10 minutes of music in your 1 hour long masterpiece, because i'm a Loyal-Good Mom".
At that instant you receive a text from The Girls telling you this:

"Hi cutie, we saw your tweet about the deep cuts in your 3h long podcast, wanna share it on the Van-Girls-Network? We're living in a van so we'll never interact with your Loyal-Good life provided by your tax payer, podcast-landlord Mother".

Finally you reply "No, i love my mom, she's a Tax payer unlike you"

It really felt like that. there's no cut in the real story, it's an exemple of what a podcast landlord can ask to fit in their schedule and/or editorial agenda.

Personal opinion & further thoughts

Once again i know, Artists need to be paid, and in the case of more than 50% of a podcast is music content i think being in the lovely arms of a taxpayer podcast-landlord mom is an excellent option.

To think about that whole copyright argument felt like a placeholder to me. If they wanted us to listen the stuff they'll find a way. I said mental barrier, because in this case it felt like it. It shouldn't block your capacity to release something you made just because 3, 6 minutes of 1hour, less than 20% aren't yours. However it is critical to cite the sources and tracks and artists if you want to live The Van Girls' life. Maybe my love for the creation, remix, rework and adapt is still very strong.

Then i wanted to add something. They created something from scratch using copyrighted music. But why not something more permissive, something under Creative Commons license like CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, CC0?
Anyway. Be gay, do intellectual property crimes