The SoundCloud Purge of 2015

I recently saw a Vice article about how SoundCloud was beginning a major purge of music on their website which was suspected of copyright infringement. In the article the author even alleges that the whole thing has to do with the fact that SoundCloud wants to monetize. While that may be true they want to monetize anyone with a basic knowledge of copyright law pertaining to music understands why they would need to do this purge either way, and it's quite simple - any music the website hosts which infringes on copyright could lead to a massive lawsuit for SoundCloud. In fact it's quite surprising it has taken this long for something to happen and it seems to be a quick response as the major labels threatened to sue SoundCloud in June of this year, just two months ago.

In the comments of the article on facebook I saw what amounted to a lot of people showing their absolute ignorance in music law, copyright law, and general intellectual property rights. Even more they seemed to ignore the fact that these laws exist to protect musicians and artists from having their works pirated. While I hate to be that guy who says "Well, it's the law", it is the law and it is there to protect musicians and their intellectual property. The most surprising thing was how some of the users tried to justify it by saying they were promoting the music they were using so it should be fine.

"How about the idea that DJ's are promoting that music. It's no different to it being played on the radio. Single tracks sure, but mixes of tracks? Mix tapes are the way most of us discovered music but in the digital era that's being policed with sledgehammer tactics. If I buy a track, why shouldn't I be able to post a mix containing it?"

I think one of the reasons people seem so arrogant about pirating music is it is seemingly a victimless crime and the few victims who are publicly seen are usually big-name rockstars who are extremely rich, so people brush it off without thinking about all the unknown musicians who rely on their royalty checks to live. Something I found interesting was how many people didn't understand that radio, venues, festivals, podcasts, and even restaurants had to pay licensing fees to play music or allow bands to cover songs at their establishment. One guy argued -

"That licensing model doesn't work for DJs, small radio stations, podcasts or events (all sizes of nightclub, festival, concert, etc.). It also doesn't accept that without these people and events much of this music would have little to no audience." 

It's kind of mind-boggling to know that a seemingly majority of DJs and Producers, who sample more than almost anyone else in the music industry, have such little knowledge of the law which pertains to their field of work. I can understand some naivety in the laws but to not understand the basic idea that you can't use someone else's intellectual property in a publicly presented work without getting proper licensing is crazy. I think in the end it really comes down to the fact that many people, including many musicians, DJs, and producers, don't truly see music as a business as well as an art form - they see them as completely separate.