I promised myself that I would not write another post in this blog until I had a chance to upgrade this butt-ugly ancient site with legacy hacks to the newer WordPress 3.1 MultiSite Network tricked out blogs that I’ve been building for clients. But as the shoemaker’s kids run around barefoot while the busy cobbler bangs away for paying clients, I too have to make do with this bare-blog for now, as the necessity of respect to fellow songwriters, producers and performers necesitates this post.

What follows is a thread and an account of a woman who asked my wife about buying/licensing her song Playing Solitare and the dozen or so responses I received from other music professionals from whom I sought feedback from.

I’ve fielded similar requests over the past couple of years and have spent way too much time on the phone and emails with tire-kickers, so this time around I decided to reach out to a dozen plus songwriters, producers, and performers I respect.

Some of them have Grammys. Others have Emmys. Others have platinum album credits and famous clients in their dossiers. All have love for the music trade, exceeding talents, and great respect for the Divine Muse(s) that whisper inspiration in their musical souls and leads them to rounds of winning applause from fans.

And all were kind enough to consider my appeal for feedback. So at a minimum I owe them, and their contributions, some air-time with this post in the spirit that it might help others who are looking to sell or buy songs.

This is a bit of a long post as I will include the various comments but edit out names to protect the innocent. I should also mention that these kinds of shared dialogues are something I’m building into the upcoming CoolTea Online site, but I digress.

Scene One - Enter the Prospect

Subject: a song purchase
Hi Katie,

Could you explain how I can license or purchase one of your songs? I have no clue. I love “Playing Solitaire”….it fits my voice…..if it’s not available I’m sure I can find something else.

I usually record old classic country songs, but was advised to look into purchasing originals by a well respected musician in my area.

Thanks, [name removed]

This scene generates great excitement with us, as we never know if we are dealing with somebody who is connected (as many in the past have claimed to be) - connected to music industry pros that is - or if we are dealing with another tire-kicker. Either way, it is exciting to have people think highly enough to consider Katie’s body of work, and we always respond with respect.

Since I have spent too much time in the past fielding funky phone calls and emails only to get to the money part and never hear back, I’ve developed a one-pager that kind of outlines what’s involved, including the fees.

But maybe something is wrong with my one-pager, so before I respond back to this prospect, let me do what most good marketing pros do - is get some real feedback from seasoned pros.

I say this because last Fall I had an agreement with a Nashville artist for three songs but we left off with him having to get his manager’s approval to cut the check, and that is when I never heard back despite numerous follow-up calls and emails.

So I took a critical eye on my previous one-pager and said to Katie that based on what I know now, I can see how a manager might have balked at some of the language, so let’s clean it up, and upgrade it, so to speak.

Scene Two - Soliciting Feedback from Pros

After I had buttoned up the next version of my one-pager, Katie and I made a list of some of the people we know and respect.

Then I constructed personalized emails and sent one at a time to each on my list but essentially said something like this:

Hi … [personalization followed by ...]

on other fronts, i was wondering if you could provide some feedback / reaction on the SongWriting license that Katie and i are working on … Katie has gotten some nice feedback over the past couple years on her songs and has had several people inquire about licensing them … to date, we have not sold a songwriting license (although we have licensed her Sound Recording to a Guide Dog school) …

we re-hashed the license below in anticipation of responding to the current inquiry [see Scene 01 email] …thus thought we’d run it by you in case you had some high-level feedback / reaction you might be able to share ..??..

accordingly, thanks in advance for your consideration and to be continued … cordially, chuck scott

=======================
Typical SongWriting Request from Web Prospect [refer to Scene 01] …

and here is licensing info i was going to send ->
==============================
SongWriting Services by Katie Scott
- at http://www.KissPrint.com
- Management by Chuck Scott
- email chuck@avantigroup.com
- voice 203.438.8801
==============================

[=] Songs for Sale … Technically, Katie’s songs are not sold but are licensed … Thus Katie owns and retains her copyrights to the lyrics and melodies, but you have the option to create your own sound recording copyright thus produce, sell, and distribute per the following licensing parameters …

[=] Licensing Fee … $350 per song plus revenue share …

[=] Revenue Share … Together we share in your success with two splits … 50-50 gross income when you license your sound recording (e.g., sync rights to film, TV) … and 80-20 gross income (i.e., 80% your share, 20% Katie share) with respect to product sales (e.g., CDs, digital downloads) …

[=] Gross Income … Defined as the money you receive … Your marketing, production, promotion, distribution, legal, agency, administrative, and/or other fees, are your business and are not factored into the revenue share calculation …

For example, if you sell your produced version on iTunes as a digital download for $1 and Apple’s fee is 75 cents per download, then your gross income is 25 cents per download and Katie earns* 20% of your 25 cents …

Similarly, if you create a CD with 10 songs and sell it for $10 per CD, then the gross income per song is $1 ($10 per CD / 10 songs = $1 per song) thus Katie earns* 20 Cents (20%) for each song of hers on your CD …

And if you license your sound recording to Film or TV, the payment(s) and/or royalties you receive from ASCAP, BMI, or other, constitute gross income thus are shared 50-50 …

*Or Katie earns the statutory mechanical right minimum set by Congress, whichever is greater …

[=] Term … The license is non-exclusive and is valid for two years, after which it is subject to renewal …

[=] Sound Recording Copyright … You own the copyright for the licensed sound recording you produce …

[=] Production Window … Upon payment of the license fee, you have up to six (6) months to produce and submit your finished sound recording for Katie’s final approval … Additional extensions for production granted per written request …

[=] Final Approval … Sound recordings are approved or rejected within 10-days of final submission … Failure to submit finalized sound recording within designated time frame invalidates license and the license fee is forfeited … If reasonable industry standards of production quality are not met, or obscene or offensive tracks, then license is subject to termination at Katie’s sole discretion in which event a full refund of the license fee will be issued and all license options promptly terminated …

[=] Moving Forward … Send your check for $350 license fee per song payable to The Avanti Group, Inc., Attn: Chuck Scott, POB 319, Ridgefield, CT 06877 … Submission of your final sound recording can be forwarded via Audio CD sent to the same mailing address or digitally delivered via FTP or Web per separate arrangement …

- fin -

Scene Two ended with hope that our inbox would get some replies, brutal honesty welcomed and anticipated.

Scene Three - The Various Feedback Replies

Within ten minutes of sending out my first email, replies started to stream in, so I will list them here in order received:

Response 01

Chuck, I know next to nothing about licensing individual songs. Best of luck.

Response 02

Hi
it all depends
no rules
i just bought for $100 the rights to record [song title removed], by [famous artist] — for a 1000 CDs through the Harry Fox Agency for an artist I’m recording.

if it ends up in a film, there’s a whole different set of parameters…

if Celine Dion wanted to record your song, you’d almost give it away for the exposure — so you have to weight these things –how bad do you want this person to record the song?

also there’s the publishing and writers share –

you’re giving them a license to record the song — you’re retaining pubishing and writers share (assuming you have it).

remember you’ll never know how many cds they’re going to sell –

good luck

Response 03

First of all, it is great to hear from you! I think of you and Katie often. I have to make sure that you are on my Fan Blast Gig Alert emails. I just played on …

As to the contract ideas, all of them sound very good, right in what I would expect as a licensing deal. However, you are leaving it all up to him to honestly report all sales and to cut Katie her share. I am not sure that there is any other way of doing this at this point. Perhaps reports from iTunes, Amazon, etc. to track digital sales, but there is nothing to track cash for CD sales. I am sure that you realize this and it is pretty much the state of affairs. It is wonderful that she is getting this kind of interest. I am curious to see how it all turns out.

Take care and I hope that all is well with you. Things are very interesting on our homefront…

Response 04

Hi..Chuck..hope u guys are well..

In regards to your questions:
it is whatever you want to accomplish in todays music biz..There is a lot here to wrap my head around right now…But I can suggest the following..
Normally if someone want to cut your song you keep all your shares(If written alone) then the artist who is interested in your song would license the song from Harry Fox Agency (if you are a member)they collect mechanical licenses then BMI or ASCAP would collect on air royalties..You may work out a deal with this artist and ask for a up front fee for future sales..So she is paying you for possible future sales on day one.. I am going through this now with [song title removed] from a few years ago..I am getting $1000 as an advance of 10,000 sales..I still own my writers and publishing shares..Do the math..This deal is not thru Harry Fox because they would get me a lesser rate..This was offered by the producer and artist.
In regard to all other subjects you’ll have research and read up..I am not that verse in all this..sorry..

Please refer me to any artist that need professional productions…As you know I can write and produce in all genres…thanks..

See u

ps - also do not give any of your song % away..this is your property..unless someone is taking a piece of the publishing for a nice advance..

Response 05

Man, I have no idea about this stuff. If someone just wants to record a tune for a “vanity” CD to give to friends and family, I’m sure they will not pay $350. But for a major established artist you probably can’t ask for too much. :->)

All else is fine here….

Response 06

Howdy, Chuck.

Congrats on getting licensing interest! It’s a serious step forward.

As to the proposed licensing, I’m curious about the up front charge. I’m wondering if that might discourage the use of Katie’s song.

Perhaps it would be better to just ask for a bigger songwrighter’s share? You know the local market and the licensee better than I.

*smiles*

I rarely do covers, but, recently I was mulling over a couple of them and found this company that helps get covers licensed. Maybe they have some relevant persepctives for you.

http://www.songclearance.com/

Cheers,

Response 07

Hi Guys, your license is very good. :)..

I would attempt to get more than 350 upfront so maybe 500.

Also, $1 per CD sold for one song is amazing for you to get, however, it is FAR from industry standard.

So, if you can get it, than do so but industry standard according to HARRY FOX Co. for mechanical sales is 9.1 cents per CD sold per song(s) on a CD.

I hope this helps and best of luck!

Response 08

hey chuck,
good to hear from you and glad things are working well with katie’s songwriting.

really, you can set things up any way you like - or is mutually agreeable. looks like you’ve got a good set-up here. i think the main theme should be everyone is comfortable with the immediate arrangements as well as the long-term specs.

when it comes to licensing - like most things - win/win is where you want to be.

best of luck and hope you are well.

Response 09

Chuck,

I assume you submitted Form Pa to the
US Copyright office, with words and a recording of the work.

If so, seems like you covered everything.

Good luck to Katie…may this song be a big hit!

Response 10

chuck,
i find that any time you can streamline things and qualify things…that’s a good thing. sounds like you’re heading down that road.
peace,

Scene Four - Email to Prospect with New License

So after all the feedback received, here is the email I sent to prospect:

Hi [full name] … thanks for touching base and glad to hear you love Playing Solitaire … that is one of Katie’s favorites :>)

licensing songs can get a bit complicated and typically depends on what you are trying to do … for instance, if you want to produce 1000 CDs and include a cover tune, you can go to Harry Fox Agency and for $100 or so get the mechanical rights license to do so … but that license does not typically cover digital downloads or if you sell your version to Film or TV etc …

thus below is a license that Katie provides that for $350 allows you the flexibility to produce both product (e.g., digital downloads and CDs) as well as sell to TV or Film (see license info below) …

the music business is in a stage of flux with all the new digital options these days and this license is not a take it or leave but has been one that has received enthusiastic response from other performing artist …

feel free to contact me at your convenience … cordially, chuck scott

==============================
SongWriting Services by Katie Scott
- at http://www.KissPrint.com
- Management by Chuck Scott
- email chuck@avantigroup.com
- voice 203.438.8801
==============================

[=] Songs for Sale … Technically, Katie’s songs are not sold but are licensed … Thus Katie owns and retains her copyrights to the lyrics and melodies (i.e., publishing and writing shares), but you have the option to create your own sound recording copyright thus produce, sell, and distribute per the following licensing parameters …

[=] Licensing Fee … $350 per song plus revenue share …

[=] Revenue Share … Together we share in your success with two splits … 50-50 gross income when you license your sound recording (e.g., sync rights to film, TV) … and 80-20 gross income (i.e., 80% your share, 20% Katie share) with respect to product sales (e.g., CDs, digital downloads) …

[=] Gross Income … Defined as the money you receive … Your marketing, production, promotion, distribution, legal, agency, administrative, and/or other fees, are your business and are not factored into the revenue share calculation …

For example, if you sell your produced version on iTunes as a digital download for $1 and Apple’s fee is 75 cents per download, then your gross income is 25 cents per download and Katie earns* 20% of your 25 cents …

Similarly, if you create a CD with 10 songs and sell it for $10 per CD, then the gross income per song is $1 ($10 per CD / 10 songs = $1 per song) thus Katie earns* 20 Cents (20%) for each song of hers on your CD …

And if you license your sound recording to Film or TV, the payment(s) and/or royalties you receive from ASCAP, BMI, or other, constitute gross income thus are shared 50-50 …

*Or Katie earns the statutory mechanical right minimum set by Congress, whichever is greater …

[=] Term … The license is non-exclusive and is valid for two years, after which it is subject to renewal …

[=] Sound Recording Copyright … You own the copyright for the licensed sound recording you produce …

[=] Production Window … Upon payment of the license fee, you have up to six (6) months to produce and submit your finished sound recording for Katie’s final approval … Additional extensions for production granted per written request …

[=] Final Approval … Sound recordings are approved or rejected within 10-days of final submission … Failure to submit finalized sound recording within designated time frame invalidates license and the license fee is forfeited … If reasonable industry standards of production quality are not met, or obscene or offensive tracks, then license is subject to termination at Katie’s sole discretion in which event a full refund of the license fee will be issued and all license options promptly terminated …

[=] Accounting and Reconciliation … Successful license requires that every six (6) months, a statement of gross income must be submitted with check for outstanding revenue share within 30 days of six month intervals … Failure to do so invalidates the license unless other arrangements are agreed to in writing …

[=] Termination … Upon license expiration or termination, any additional product sales from unsold inventory (e.g., from previously manufactured CDs during license period), and/or royalty payments (e.g., from sound recordings contracted during license period), still inure Katie’s revenue share to be accounted for and settled during six month integrals … Failure to do so, unless previously agreed to in writing, means that you (or your heir or estate) are responsible for all legal and collection expenses, if applicable …

[=] Moving Forward … Send your check for the license fee per song payable to The Avanti Group, Inc., Attn: Chuck Scott, POB 319, Ridgefield, CT 06877 … Submission of your final sound recording can be forwarded via Audio CD sent to the same mailing address or digitally delivered via FTP or Web per separate arrangement …

- fin -

Scene Five- The Climax and Response from Prospect

Drum roll please …

Thanks for getting back to me. It seems pretty complicated…lol. I’m just a 43 year old hometown wife who wants to record a CD locally - and hopefully sell them to family, friends, and people who compliment me when I’m singing out somewhere in town. I get asked a lot if I have a CD. I’m not into being a recording artist, being on tv or the radio…etc…lol…just some local fun. I’m too old, too fat, and too family oriented to do anything other than be around town. But I will reread the info you sent and share it with the hubby. You probably don’t hear from a lot of people like me….I’m not into being a “star”…..

Scene Six - Follow Up with Feedback Friends

Along the way, I enjoyed several additional emails bouncing back and forth discussing various points about licenses and fees, but perhaps this clip sums it up best:

… i reached out to a number of other producers and performers i know and received similar feedback … some said ask for more upfront, other ask for less upfront and more of a cut … and others said the mechanical fee was too high but in the end all said similar in that today there is so much flux that almost anything goes …

i’m with you on win-win and what i was trying to do is get a simple one page to bounce back to inbound prospects as i’ve gotten a fair amount of tire-kickers over the years … some have been phone calls from nashville circa midnight wanting to yap about projects - i even remember this one guy [name removed], telling me about his recording studio and client and how he likes to drive big rigs - to which i responded that when it comes to driving rigs, i’m more of golf cart guy … he laughed and that deal never happened thus the search for one-page that helps explain a bit of how songs are licensed not sold and there are a bunch of issues ..

with respect to this most recent inquiry, i had sent a modified license one pager to her based on some of the other feedback received and got the following reply [refer to Scene 05] …

anyhow, thanks again for honest feedback … cordially, chuck scott

Scene Seven - Conclusion and Closing Curtain

Okay, so I walked away from all this without a sale. But I also have a tighter one-pager and confirmation from a diverse group of pros that I’m not off base and that it is a fair basis to build upon.

More importantly, I am reminded how lucky Katie and I are to know so many wonderfully talented creative people who are so willing to share.

While I know many other professionals that are Intellectual Property experts, they just don’t share the same way musically centric folks seem to do.

Yes I know. Lawyers get paid for their time and expertise and often don’t have product extensions like CDs that they can sell in exchange for exposure.

But years ago when I was in my first band as a 30-something late-to-the-band-gigging game, one of my bandmates told me something I’ve never forgotten.

“Chuck you need to respect all musicians regardless of the type of music they play. Music is a gift that comes from Source - Him - Divine - call It what you want - but all musicians will confess that they know there is a Muse that touches them. And it is for this reason that each one of them, regardless of their genre, style, lyrics, should always have your respect even if you don’t agree with them or appreciate them since all of them, all of us, share that gift of the Muse’s touch from somewhere else.”

Lastly, I am reminded of another friend who told me their definition of an artist “is somebody who makes the unseen see-able for everybody else.”

Accordingly, thanks to friends who shared, thanks to all the prospects who have considered Katie’s songs, and more importantly, thanks to all those artists who listen to the Muse and bring forth sound currents for the rest of us to enjoy!

ps - I now am toying with the idea of creating a new license, one for people like the prospect mentioned here, a win-win amateur license I’m calling “NonCommercial Just for Fun” … so what do you think, $75 bucks sound right? The stipulation would be gotta give the CDs away but can charge shipping and handling - I jest!

It’s Thursday night, Dec 31st 2009 circa 5:30PM as I pen this blog post and while most people are prepping for festive New Year celebrations with family and friends, I’m thoroughly bummed at a recent email I just received from Monty, the creator of MySQL (see below).

Long story short, here is my comment I sent to Monty when I signed his petition just now:

allowing Oracle to control MySQL is akin to allowing Oracle to take over the English Alphabet’s 26 letters … the alphabet is free and no society can grow unless there are communal commons of communications that nobody owns but all of us are free to use and build upon … SHAME on ORACLE … pray the EU sees and endorses societal wisdom in keeping MySQL the free, open source, rich LAMP cornerstone it is today … THINK “eminent domain” … to that level, forward thinking EU Leaders should exercise eminent domain on WinXP SP2 … Oracle and M.Soft are companies that are out-dated akin to out-dated principles like Human Slavery … Long Live the Best of Open Source … Viva MySQL … cordially, chuck scott, ridgefield connecticut, www.chuckingit.com …

Accordingly, please follow the links in Monty’s email to learn about the evil doings where the Sun does not shine (literally).

Happy New Year and here is hoping 2010 brings about more love, joy, success and positive growth for all and our planet.

Email from Monty - Creator of MySQL

Hi!

I am contacting you because you have in the past shown interest in
MySQL and from that I assume you are interested in the future
well-being of MySQL.

Now you have a unique opportunity to make a difference. By signing
the petition at http://www.helpmysql.org you can help affect the
future of MySQL as an Open Source database.

You can find more information of this on my latest blog post at:
http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html

Help us spread the world about this petition!
http://www.helpmysql.org is available in 18 languages and every vote
is important, independent of from where in the world it comes!
If you know people that are using MySQL, please contact them and
ensure they also sign the petition!

Regards,
Monty
Creator of MySQL

PS: If you already have signed the petition or know about it, sorry for
reminding you about this! Because of the importance of this issue,
I am trying to contact every person that I have ever communicated
with regarding MySQL.

- fin -

Recently there was a thread in a Yahoo Developers Forum that I subscribe to about how to sell and value a domain name.

Since I’ve bought and sold many domains over the years, I thought I’d post this Yahoo thread here as it ends with my response which may be of value to those who are thinking of buying and/or selling domains.

The Yahoo thread started simply when one member reached out to the group and said:

I was contacted last week by an attorney who wanted to know if I was interested in selling a domain that I own funpoints.com

I have never used the name and have held onto it thinking that the right project would come along. Anyway, he later offered $1000.00 for the domain. Before I just blow him off, I thought I would ask the group if I am over valuing the domain name. By the way, he specializes in the Entertainment Industry and Trademarks.

I always thought it would be a great name for a rewards points program for one of the airlines or card issuing banks.

The first reply to his question was this:

I feel you have legitimate reason to hold out for more. That’s actually a really good domain name. Just come up with a counter offer of $7,500 and then he’ll meet you at 5,000.

And the second reply was this:

you might want to start the negotiations by letting him think you are not that interested in selling (instead of throwing a number out there right away). you will then find out how interested he is in buying. That is usually the best starting point.

And the third reply was from me - enjoy!

i happen to have some decent experience buying and selling domains for self and clients and your situation reminds me of one of my early 5 figure sales … so here are a couple rambles for whatever it’s worth dept …

a) values … there are a number of sites out there that will give you a valuation … some are bogus, some are legit … in the end, domain values are a lot like antiques - sure your Picasso might be worth $10 million but the bigger question is not the value but finding a buyer who is willing to pony up the $10 million at a time when you are looking to cash in … thus there is an opportunity cost vs a valuation … ultimately, it is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it …

b) domain values are also a lot like diamond valuations in that there are several characters that determine value (e.g., cut, clarity, carrots, etc.) … ditto for domains (e.g., shorter = better, dot com = better, phonetic one-way spelling = better) … consider one of my domains, cooltea.com … this is short, a dot com, but if you say it aloud or heard it on a radio station, one could spell it as KoolTee, CoolT, etc … vs a longer domain like DiscoverNewEngland.com but can only be spelled the way it sounds … thus on some level the second domain could be argued to be more valuable than the shorter one ..

now this concept of values does not take into account any revenue generation from ppc (pay per click) or ecommerce you might be doing (all of which would add to the domain value)

c) selling yourself short … i got similar out of the blue offer for a real estate domain i had in my portfolio (without naming names, lets call this domain “SomeStateRealestate.com” … the guy offered $2k in his initial email thus i knew he wasn’t a tire kicker … so we picked up phone and spoke … ultimately i settled for $12k by financing the domain … e.g., i modified the name servers to point to his network so he could use domain while he then paid monthly payments … when paid in full, i transferred domain and was done … the legal contract i had to produce was a bit of a head scratcher as i didn’t want to be liable for anything while he was using the domain during the finance period but i digress … later, i learned of a related domain, NewYorkRealEstate.com, which sold for $100k … thus i knew i undersold but that is part of the learning and at the time i was happy to get the money and break into the five figure sales …

d) another scenario … a couple years back i had been contacted by large travel web site that hired former Microsoft brand strategists to negotiate for one of my domains, LuxuryForLess.com … the company had a brand issue in that they were known as “CheapTravel” or something like that and their suppliers (e.g., the Marriots, Hyatts, Hiltons, etc.) did not want to be associated with “cheap” anything … the MS guys went and got a domain evaluation from independent group that came back with valuation under $5k … i laughed at him because around the same time i found high end domain brokers in Boston who had a minimum $20k commission (yes, twenty thousand) and confirmed that my domain was a minimal 6 figure, possibly 7 figure valuation …

morale of the story = domains are the brand in today’s global wired economy … who cares if you have a trademark for McDonalds - as long as you own mcdonalds.com … besides, there are common law trademarks and the legal eagles will tell us that when it comes to law, possession is 9/10ths of the game … ditto for domain brands …

thus my feeling is your domain, funpoints.com, is a minimum $20k domain … and possibly $50-60k for the right buyer … e.g., i know of a company locally that purchased patio.com for $100k and built their analog stores around said domain name … thus funpoints.com for a Mastercard or Discovercard kind of player (or even Las Vegas types) would have no problem ponying up fair market value … and besides, they aren’t making any more dot coms so the price will only increase with time …

accordingly, here is hoping you get what you are entitled to :>) cordially, chuck scott

And fyi, here is a PS that was not part of Yahoo thread …

Earlier this year we were approached by a group in the UK with a phone offer to buy DiscoverNewEngland.com for $5k … I didn’t inquire if that was in Euros or Greenbacks but promptly declined that offer and wouldn’t even consider unless it had another zero attached … thus beware of those low ballers out there … this is also another reason I don’t advocate domain auction sites like Sedo … the only real buyers and prospects at domain auction sites tend to be bottom feeders looking for basement bargain prices knowing they can flip the domain at a future point to a real brand at a hefty profit … i also have real concerns about ethics of firms like Sedo as they have stolen PPC money from us and their featured domain service produced not one inquiry but I’ll post that account separately …

Last night was a Friday night and a night that was once the all important date night. But now that I’m part’n parcel of a happily married couple, it was a night like many others except for the fact that I was wired as I entered the master bedroom that featured resting wife and snoring dog.

I was wired with ideas and spirit not because of substances, but high on new technologies I was evaluating earlier that day. Technologies like XAMPP, TikiWiki and Moodle - awesome open source tools that the more I learned about and experimented with, the more juiced I got with ideas for mapping to business opportunities.

So I entered the sleeping bedroom not knowing what to do next. I knew I had to power down, but I also knew I probably wouldn’t get to sleep for another two hours or so.

Thus the issue became:

• Do I enter the bedroom with laptop and continue to surf and educate myself about these technologies (yes, I have headphones, wireless keyboards, and illuminated keyboards so as to cut down on audio / video noise thus respect sleeping wife);
• Do I leave laptop in office and flip the TV channels to find something fun to watch and relax (the TV was already on with low volume set to the Food Network);
• Or, do I turn the TV off and pick up one of the many books that I have open and can’t wait to finish reading but need to turn the lights up to read ..??..

While tempted to continue computing with the wireless laptop, I opted to leave it in the office and first try the TV option via halfhearted attempt of channel surfing knowing I could dive into one of the books as fail safe option.

So I flipped and flipped and nothing exciting appeared on TV that I haven’t already seen on some of my favorite channels (e.g., history, travel, and discovery). But then the cosmos inspired me to flip to the PBS channel (channel 13) just in time to see Charlie Rose interview Professor Lawrence Lessig.

WOW! What a TV surprise - two of my favorite people, neither of whom know me but both of whom I respectfully honor.

Below is a video clip of that interview hosted on Google - enjoy!

I should also note that the reason I love this interview and these two people is partly due to their content sensibilities - e.g., Professor Lessig has been (and continues to be) instrumental in shaping the Creative Commons and argued CopyLefts (vs CopyRights) before the Supreme Court; Charlie Rose has been (and continues to be) inspiring with his objective and truthful coverage of multilateral thinkers, do-ers, movers-n-shakers, et al.

But back to the video clip. It is a dialogue between Charlie and Larry about many things including why Congress failed on copyright issues (simple issues), why Congress continues to fail on the big issues (e.g., global warming), and why Congress needs to change (e.g., upgrade to Congress 2.02b) in order to survive by serving the greatest good (a good thing) which is us (i.e., we the people - everyday people who vote, pay taxes, do our best to add to the system, get along, play by the rules, groove with the flow, just get by, hang on, etc.).

The big idea (as I understand it in this video interview) is that Congress needs to move from money focus to idea focus.

In the old days, I believe they called this Statesmanship - vs today’s vulgar political hack who sells out to special interests even though all parties involved are mostly in denial.

So the good news is that what once was old is new again - yippee - e.g., for best examples of Statesmanship see Founding Fathers.

And as they used to say in Brooklyn, “Go You Guys! Just You Go!”

In AlwaysCreative, I argue that property rights as currently advocated in North America are a human tragedy in their current state.

Balancing cultural needs with artists' and inventors' rights has been an ancient issue and one that our Founding Fathers spent a great deal of time in drafting a suitable framework, which as time has moved forth, has been all but lost.

U.S. property rights seem to resonate the greatest with those rooted in greed, stinginess, insecurity, and/or paranoia. Often found hiding behind soulless bureaucracies, these Darwinian life forms continue to advocate tinkering with a system mostly for their own profits while failing to consider the overall culture's needs (e.g., Fair Use, Public Domain).

Why is it the man most responsible for cementing the democratic framework has been so ignored in this department?

Thomas Jefferson realized that a balance between cultural need and artistic need could be solved by offering the artist limited rights for a period of time. The U.S. Constitution states:

Article 1, Section 8 - "The Congress shall have Power…To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries… Amendment I - Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…"

Even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights via the United Nations (1948) places cultural needs above artists' rights:

"Article 27 - 1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits."

Michael Hart's Project Gutenberg newsletter, March 1997, states:

"Copyright in the US was originally proposed by Jefferson to be 14 years - which was extended to 28 years immediately, then 56 years to defeat the first steam and electric powered printing presses of a century ago, and to 75 years to defeat the Xerox machine. Now they are trying for 95 years to defeat text made available via computer networks."

Hmmm.

I've heard intellectual property experts argue that patents are the highest form of absolute protection under U.S. law; they are above trademarks which are above copyrights. The U.S. Patent Office, created in 1836, legislated in 1790, offers patent recipients only seventeen (17) years of free reign. This is only three more years than originally proposed by the great frameworker, Thomas Jefferson, son of the Republic, for copyrights! What's more is that many patent attorneys will confess most patents don't make money. So why the stranglehold on copyrights - greed hidden behind the soulless!

Consider the Grateful Dead, Dave Matthews Band, and The Black Rat's approach to intellectual property rights.

Both bands allow their customers to tape the live concerts and share those tapes with friends and family. During an interview with Charlie Rose, Dave Matthews even went so far as to suggest this sharing strategy was a huge part in their growing popularity. And during another interview, Grateful Dead lead guitarist, Jerry Garcia commented, "My responsibility is to the notes. Once they leave my guitar, they have a life of their own."

Yet, The Brothers Grimm who a century before Walt Disney came on the scene, wrote about folklore and fairytales, many of which became the basis for Disney motion pictures. The reason we have the Sony Bono Copyright Act which extended copyright protection another twenty years on average, is chiefly because the Disney corporation's home turf was in Sony Bono's district when he was serving as a Congressman.

So even though the Disney organization (aka The Black Rat) has enjoyed so many cultural heritages leveraged from the likes of the Grimm Brothers, the Disney position can only be viewed as being about money and greed. Apparently, then Disney Rat Pack CEO called Congressman Bono and said, "We're going to loose Mickey if you don't do something. Under current copyright law, Mickey is about to expire and enter the Public Domain."

So here we are with yet another round of unnecessary copyright extensions that prohibit all of us from truly participating with our contemporary cultural heritage for the balance of our foreseeable lives.

But there is a bright spot and a reason for hope despite the misguided government action and corporate one-sidedness, and that is with the work being championed by the Creative Commons.

Viva the intellectual property rights' rock stars among us!

And here's hoping a new breed of government leaders will emerge in the near future and help course correct back to Jeffersonian wisdom.

PS - Here is link to Cathedrals and Open Source: Bazaars of Rights - a chapter from AlwaysCreative that further explains why copyrights are out of control

Wally Amos, aka Famous Amos as in the Famous Amos Chocolate Chip Cookie founder, was perhaps the most colorful entrepreneur I’ve met to date.

I remember him on stage at the Academy of Distinguished Entrepreneurs beaming with tons of energy, flashing a huge warm smile, and wearing this outrageously colored, fully embroidered, denim-jacket glittering with patterns of sequins that were all things cookies and chocolate chip cookies at that. It was one of those jackets that you’d expect to find in a Broadway play like Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat, and not your typical three piece navy or gray pinstriped suit jacket worn by most panelists.

Before Wally started to give his presentation, he turned to the audience and explained the honor and joy he had in wearing his embroidered cookie jacket — because his wife had made it for him.

Wally went on to explain how important it is to have family support when embarking on entrepreneurial paths and his jacket clearly indicated his family’s enthusiastic support.

Before starting his cookie business, Wally was in the music business out in California as an A&R guy. At the time, he could not read or write and had less than a skyrocketing career, although he did represent some famous talents - e.g., Helen Reddy.

Apparently, whenever Wally called on clients and prospects, he would always bring along some homemade chocolate chip cookies to leave behind with his appointments. It was his grandmother’s recipe and Wally loved to share the cookies he baked with everybody in the business.

Prospects would teasingly say, “Hey Wally. Sorry I can’t use your services, but those cookies - they’re awesome. You should really think about opening a business selling them. They’re incredible and any chance I can get some more next time you swing through the area? And, I’ll pay!”

And so with the support of family and friends (e.g., Helen Reddy as early financial investor), Wally launched into the cookie business.

The one sad note about Wally’s story was with respect to intellectual property rights. Turns out when Wally sold his business, unwittingly to him, he also lost the right to use his own surname to promote any new food products. I recall a court battle and being appalled that his counsel did not give him better advice when he signed the sell agreement but I digress.

In the end, Wally conveyed encouragement to follow one’s passions, gain the trust of family stakeholders and friends, then go for it. And if lucky enough to collect any awards along the way, not to hesitate to wear true colors - on sleeves, back, front pockets, chest, etc. - viva the Chocolate Chip Cookie DreamCoats!