Musicians Demand Records of Music Used for Torture at GITMO

soulsinging

cincybearcat wrote:

I guess I'm not all that bothered at all. Just more of the same. But it always strikes me as holier than thou to SELL something and then get pissed off when someone you don't like either a) mentions liking it or b) uses it in some manner.

You're the lawyer, is it breaking any copyright laws to use music in a manner that isn't making you any money? Like campaigns, or in this case? I can't recall.

I agree with a). Like the whole Muse reaction to Glenn Beck saying he liked their album... that was pointless. But this is different. Nobody's saying they like the music. They're using it in a manner they don't have a right to. You can't play a song on radio without permission. You have to license songs for commercials or major events (yes, including campaigns). They sell their music, but what you buy is limited basically to personal listening. You cannot use their music for private gain... a bar can't play tunes on a jukebox to help their liquor sales without an ascap license. Things get weird with the government, they have a lot of immunities and powers a bar doesn't. But if you're not comfortable with your music being used for such purposes, I don't think it's holier than thou to ask it to be stopped. Would you be saying the same thing if Ticketmaster started playing PJ songs in their commercials without any permission or licensing and then told the band they had no say in what happened to their music once it was sold? Of course not. It's a cornerstone of the entire concept copyrighting something... that your expression is protected from exploitation by others. Without it, there is no way any artist could ever make any money on anything.

cincybearcat

soulsinging wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I guess I'm not all that bothered at all. Just more of the same. But it always strikes me as holier than thou to SELL something and then get pissed off when someone you don't like either a) mentions liking it or b) uses it in some manner.

You're the lawyer, is it breaking any copyright laws to use music in a manner that isn't making you any money? Like campaigns, or in this case? I can't recall.

I agree with a). Like the whole Muse reaction to Glenn Beck saying he liked their album... that was pointless. But this is different. Nobody's saying they like the music. They're using it in a manner they don't have a right to. You can't play a song on radio without permission. You have to license songs for commercials or major events (yes, including campaigns). They sell their music, but what you buy is limited basically to personal listening. You cannot use their music for private gain... a bar can't play tunes on a jukebox to help their liquor sales without an ascap license. Things get weird with the government, they have a lot of immunities and powers a bar doesn't. But if you're not comfortable with your music being used for such purposes, I don't think it's holier than thou to ask it to be stopped. Would you be saying the same thing if Ticketmaster started playing PJ songs in their commercials without any permission or licensing and then told the band they had no say in what happened to their music once it was sold? Of course not. It's a cornerstone of the entire concept copyrighting something... that your expression is protected from exploitation by others. Without it, there is no way any artist could ever make any money on anything.

As far as Muse and Glenn Beck, that's exactly the situation I was thinking about.

Ticketmaster would be using it for a gain...ie $. The bar is using it for a gain...$. That's the difference I see and also why I would question if the artists had the right to tell them not to use their music. They aren't using them to make more $ without giving them a cut...and that's what copyright is about, isn't it? It's about the artists getting paid. Like I said, and it appears from your post, I might be wrong, but that's how I see it.

Byrnzie

On another note....I wonder if any of the Arab dudes in Gitmo are now Pearl Jam fans? :P

soulsinging

cincybearcat wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

I agree with a). Like the whole Muse reaction to Glenn Beck saying he liked their album... that was pointless. But this is different. Nobody's saying they like the music. They're using it in a manner they don't have a right to. You can't play a song on radio without permission. You have to license songs for commercials or major events (yes, including campaigns). They sell their music, but what you buy is limited basically to personal listening. You cannot use their music for private gain... a bar can't play tunes on a jukebox to help their liquor sales without an ascap license. Things get weird with the government, they have a lot of immunities and powers a bar doesn't. But if you're not comfortable with your music being used for such purposes, I don't think it's holier than thou to ask it to be stopped. Would you be saying the same thing if Ticketmaster started playing PJ songs in their commercials without any permission or licensing and then told the band they had no say in what happened to their music once it was sold? Of course not. It's a cornerstone of the entire concept copyrighting something... that your expression is protected from exploitation by others. Without it, there is no way any artist could ever make any money on anything.

As far as Muse and Glenn Beck, that's exactly the situation I was thinking about.

Ticketmaster would be using it for a gain...ie $. The bar is using it for a gain...$. That's the difference I see and also why I would question if the artists had the right to tell them not to use their music. They aren't using them to make more $ without giving them a cut...and that's what copyright is about, isn't it? It's about the artists getting paid. Like I said, and it appears from your post, I might be wrong, but that's how I see it.

I'm not sure it's ever been addressed like this before. My understanding is the bar is on public performance or display of another's work without their permission, and that the $ motive is secondary. I am trying to think of the whole Heart/Palin/Barracuda thing... I believe they stopped using it upon request, but that they had also licensed it prior to using it, which would indicate to me that it's about public performance (since a campaign is not really a for-profit venture). In either case, the fact that it's unclear is plenty of reason to pursue it, especially if you have issues with the morality of what it's being used for. I'd say the same thing if a Christian rock group complained of someone using their song in a pro-choice ad without permission.

gimmesometruth27

here is more on this. apparently it was not just at gitmo, but at other "black site prisons" maintained by the cia. it seems Keep America Safe, Cheney's daughter's group, is against closing gitmo. what a surprise...

http://new.music.yahoo.com/various-arti ... --61995482

Musicians crank up the volume on Guantanamo debate
AP, Oct 21, 2009 11:00 pm PDT

A coalition of mega-bands and singers outraged that music — including theirs — was cranked up to help break uncooperative detainees at Guantanamo Bay is joining retired military officers and liberal activists to rally support for President Barack Obama's push to shutter the Navy-run prison for terrorist suspects in Cuba.Pearl Jam, R.E.M., and Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails are among the musicians who have joined the National Campaign to Close Guantanamo, which launched Tuesday.

On behalf of the campaign, the National Security Archive in Washington is filing a Freedom of Information Act request seeking classified records that detail the use of loud music as an interrogation device.
"At Guantanamo, the U.S. government turned a jukebox into an instrument of torture," said Thomas Blanton, executive director of the archive, an independent, nongovernmental research institute.

Based on documents that already have been made public and interviews with former detainees, the archive says the playlist featured cuts from AC/DC, Britney Spears, the Bee Gees, Marilyn Manson and many other groups. The Meow mix cat food jingle, the Barney theme song and an assortment of Sesame Street tunes also were pumped into detainee cells.

A November 2008 report by the Senate Armed Services Committee into the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody makes several references to the use of loud music as an interrogation tool.
In one case interrogators played music to "stress" Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a citizen of Mauritania who has been at Guantanamo for more than seven years, because he believed music is forbidden, the report says.
Over a 10-day period in July 2003, Slahi was questioned by an interrogator called "Mr. X" while being "exposed to variable lighting patterns" and repeated playing of a song called "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor" by the band Drowning Pool, according to the committee's report.

Maj. Diana Haynie, a spokeswoman for Joint Task Force Guantanamo, said loud music has not been used with detainees since the fall of 2003.

Jayne Huckerby, research director at New York University's Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, said high-decibel music was also used against detainees at clandestine prisons run by the CIA.
As part of an earlier FOIA request for information about these "black sites," Huckerby received a top secret CIA document dated December 2005 in which the agency explains that the use of loud music or white noise is needed "to mask sound and prevent communication among detainees."

If decibel levels are kept at 79 or lower — roughly equivalent to a garbage disposal — detainee hearing won't be damaged, the agency said.

Huckerby says that music was not used as a "benign security tool," but as a way "to humiliate, terrify, punish, disorient and deprive detainees of sleep, in violation of international law."

CIA spokesman George Little said the CIA used music only for security, "not for punitive purposes — and at levels far below a live rock band."

Founders launched National Campaign to Close Guantanamo with ads on cable television urging Congress to reject the "failed Bush-Cheney policies."

Obama pledged to close the jail by January, but logistical snags and Republican opposition on Capitol Hill have made fulfilling that promise less likely. Former Vice President Dick Cheney, who warns that closing the prison would endanger national security, has fueled the resistance.

A group opposing the closure of the prison, Keep America Safe, said in a statement Tuesday that those held at Guantanamo are dedicated to killing Americans.

decides2dream

soulsinging wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

I agree with a). Like the whole Muse reaction to Glenn Beck saying he liked their album... that was pointless. But this is different. Nobody's saying they like the music. They're using it in a manner they don't have a right to. You can't play a song on radio without permission. You have to license songs for commercials or major events (yes, including campaigns). They sell their music, but what you buy is limited basically to personal listening. You cannot use their music for private gain... a bar can't play tunes on a jukebox to help their liquor sales without an ascap license. Things get weird with the government, they have a lot of immunities and powers a bar doesn't. But if you're not comfortable with your music being used for such purposes, I don't think it's holier than thou to ask it to be stopped. Would you be saying the same thing if Ticketmaster started playing PJ songs in their commercials without any permission or licensing and then told the band they had no say in what happened to their music once it was sold? Of course not. It's a cornerstone of the entire concept copyrighting something... that your expression is protected from exploitation by others. Without it, there is no way any artist could ever make any money on anything.

As far as Muse and Glenn Beck, that's exactly the situation I was thinking about.

Ticketmaster would be using it for a gain...ie $. The bar is using it for a gain...$. That's the difference I see and also why I would question if the artists had the right to tell them not to use their music. They aren't using them to make more $ without giving them a cut...and that's what copyright is about, isn't it? It's about the artists getting paid. Like I said, and it appears from your post, I might be wrong, but that's how I see it.

I'm not sure it's ever been addressed like this before. My understanding is the bar is on public performance or display of another's work without their permission, and that the $ motive is secondary. I am trying to think of the whole Heart/Palin/Barracuda thing... I believe they stopped using it upon request, but that they had also licensed it prior to using it, which would indicate to me that it's about public performance (since a campaign is not really a for-profit venture). In either case, the fact that it's unclear is plenty of reason to pursue it, especially if you have issues with the morality of what it's being used for. I'd say the same thing if a Christian rock group complained of someone using their song in a pro-choice ad without permission.

also, if one needs a motive for the usage, to be equivilient to profit, well....what is the purpose of torture? isn't that - the benefit - the profit of said torture? torturing prisioners using someone else's artistic/intellectual property to garner information, the possible information IS the profit in this instance. i believe the only rights we have when purchasing music is the right as individuals to listen to said music, not to rebroadcast in any way, and not to be misused. beyond all that, i agree, it is merely a means to draw more attention to the great desires to close gitmo. kudos to that.


and this:

Huckerby says that music was not used as a "benign security tool," but as a way "to humiliate, terrify, punish, disorient and deprive detainees of sleep, in violation of international law."



seems pretty good reason to bring attention to it, directly...and to also press to the broader issue of closing gitmo.

DeLukin

Jeanwah wrote:

So you're both going to just be indifferent, and just pass the entire issue off. Indifference is the essence of inhumanity. Yeah, I posted that before and I'll post it again, because obviously there's too many of you that simply just don't want to talk (let alone think) about the shit going down there.

I'm not so sure it's indifference as much as it is the realization that if this place that is so obviously wrong hasn't been shut down yet, there must be reasons for it. I won't even pretend to know what those reasons could be, but lets not be naive - I have no love for politicans, but if Obama can't fix it something tells me that Michael Stipe won't either.

Jeanwah

DeLukin wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

So you're both going to just be indifferent, and just pass the entire issue off. Indifference is the essence of inhumanity. Yeah, I posted that before and I'll post it again, because obviously there's too many of you that simply just don't want to talk (let alone think) about the shit going down there.

I'm not so sure it's indifference as much as it is the realization that if this place that is so obviously wrong hasn't been shut down yet, there must be reasons for it. I won't even pretend to know what those reasons could be, but lets not be naive - I have no love for politicans, but if Obama can't fix it something tells me that Michael Stipe won't either.

Do you really think it's as easy as that? That if the place had bad practices it would automatically shut down? That's naive thinking. We have plenty of corrupt governments in this world, including our own, using inhumane practices for punishment. To rely on our corrupt leaders to make sane and humane decisions, because it's the right thing to do, is incredibly naive also. If we don't speak up, if musicians and arists don't speak up, if everyone keeps silent, no one wins. No one but those operating and keeping the facility up and running win. Silence IS the enemy.

Pepe Silvia

Jeanwah wrote:

DeLukin wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

So you're both going to just be indifferent, and just pass the entire issue off. Indifference is the essence of inhumanity. Yeah, I posted that before and I'll post it again, because obviously there's too many of you that simply just don't want to talk (let alone think) about the shit going down there.

I'm not so sure it's indifference as much as it is the realization that if this place that is so obviously wrong hasn't been shut down yet, there must be reasons for it. I won't even pretend to know what those reasons could be, but lets not be naive - I have no love for politicans, but if Obama can't fix it something tells me that Michael Stipe won't either.

Do you really think it's as easy as that? That if the place had bad practices it would automatically shut down? That's naive thinking. We have plenty of corrupt governments in this world, including our own, using inhumane practices for punishment. To rely on our corrupt leaders to make sane and humane decisions, because it's the right thing to do, is incredibly naive also. If we don't speak up, if musicians and arists don't speak up, if everyone keeps silent, no one wins. No one but those operating and keeping the facility up and running win. Silence IS the enemy.

"'cause silence is violence in women and poor people
if more people were screaming then i could relax
but a good brain ain't diddley if you don't have the facts"

AvocadoLady

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

http://new.music.yahoo.com/various-arti ... --61995482

...

A November 2008 report by the Senate Armed Services Committee into the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody makes several references to the use of loud music as an interrogation tool.
In one case interrogators played music to "stress" Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a citizen of Mauritania who has been at Guantanamo for more than seven years, because he believed music is forbidden, the report says.
Over a 10-day period in July 2003, Slahi was questioned by an interrogator called "Mr. X" while being "exposed to variable lighting patterns" and repeated playing of a song called "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor" by the band Drowning Pool, according to the committee's report.

Jeez. :shock: I'd probably confess to anything after ten days of that.

Commy

The Jeagler wrote:

Commy wrote:

gitmo is like a auschwitz with better doctors. its just as shitty but they can keep you alive longer to torture you even more.

please. that's an insult to everyone who died in the holocaust. gitmo is a bad place...but c'mon man

does it matter what kind of torture it is?


torture is torture, which is what i was referring to in the analogy. it had nothing to do with the millions of people killed. that was horrible, but irrelevant here.

aerial

AvocadoLady wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

http://new.music.yahoo.com/various-arti ... --61995482

...

A November 2008 report by the Senate Armed Services Committee into the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody makes several references to the use of loud music as an interrogation tool.
In one case interrogators played music to "stress" Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a citizen of Mauritania who has been at Guantanamo for more than seven years, because he believed music is forbidden, the report says.
Over a 10-day period in July 2003, Slahi was questioned by an interrogator called "Mr. X" while being "exposed to variable lighting patterns" and repeated playing of a song called "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor" by the band Drowning Pool, according to the committee's report.

:

Jeez. :shock: I'd probably confess to anything after ten days of that.

Do you guys think War is fair? From what I heard they did did get life threating information from some of the prisoners (AND IT HAS BEEN DEBATED). Could it be American lives were save because they played the music to loud or to long? Maybe the musicians should be proud that there music may have saved American lives. You know like Americans working in a high rise just trying to feed there kids. They may have saved your mom.

TriumphantAngel

aerial wrote:

Do you guys think War is fair? From what I heard they did did get life threating information from some of the prisoners (AND IT HAS BEEN DEBATED). Could it be American lives were save because they played the music to loud or to long? Maybe the musicians should be proud that there music may have saved American lives. You know like Americans working in a high rise just trying to feed there kids. They may have saved your mom.

what life threatening information did they get from the prisoners? can you back that up? even if you can, it's still a bullshit excuse to condone torture.

and fair? don't talk to me about fair. when I see the fundamental values of this nation being assaulted and when I see our moral authority slipping away, i refuse to stay silent.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

yahamita

Byrnzie wrote:

On another note....I wonder if any of the Arab dudes in Gitmo are now Pearl Jam fans? :P

OK. that was some funny shit..Not to make light of a bad situation, but this just made my day!

norm

sweet adeline wrote:

The list includes Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine, R.E.M., Pearl Jam, Jackson Browne, Rise Against, Rosanne Cash, Billy Bragg and the Roots, all of whom are joining the broader National Campaign to Close Guantanamo which was launched earlier in the week.

didn't those people vote for nobel PEACE prize winner, president barak obama? :?

aerial

TriumphantAngel wrote:

aerial wrote:

Do you guys think War is fair? From what I heard they did did get life threating information from some of the prisoners (AND IT HAS BEEN DEBATED). Could it be American lives were save because they played the music to loud or to long? Maybe the musicians should be proud that there music may have saved American lives. You know like Americans working in a high rise just trying to feed there kids. They may have saved your mom.

what life threatening information did they get from the prisoners? can you back that up? even if you can, it's still a bullshit excuse to condone torture.

and fair? don't talk to me about fair. when I see the fundamental values of this nation being assaulted and when I see our moral authority slipping away, i refuse to stay silent.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Do you understand WAR? Would you be willing to go over and solve everything for us. PLease?

gimmesometruth27

aerial wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

aerial wrote:

Do you guys think War is fair? From what I heard they did did get life threating information from some of the prisoners (AND IT HAS BEEN DEBATED). Could it be American lives were save because they played the music to loud or to long? Maybe the musicians should be proud that there music may have saved American lives. You know like Americans working in a high rise just trying to feed there kids. They may have saved your mom.

what life threatening information did they get from the prisoners? can you back that up? even if you can, it's still a bullshit excuse to condone torture.

and fair? don't talk to me about fair. when I see the fundamental values of this nation being assaulted and when I see our moral authority slipping away, i refuse to stay silent.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Do you understand WAR? Would you be willing to go over and solve everything for us. PLease?

i am sure that she understands war. the question is do you understand reality?

aerial it seems you are trying to justify torture and say that is saved american lives. there is no proof that this torture yielded any useful info from these inmates. this is not "24" and jack bauer does not exist. the days of government sponsored, anything goes, and violate human rights as a means to an end US foreign policy are over. policy is changing whether you, or hannity, or beck, or oreilly likes it or not. the war on terror as we have known it for the last 8 years, with black prisons, extraordinary rendition, and torture is coming to an end. i am sure that triumphantangel would be more than willing to "go over there and solve everything for us", but you know that that is what diplomats are for.

Commy

aerial wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

aerial wrote:

Do you guys think War is fair? From what I heard they did did get life threating information from some of the prisoners (AND IT HAS BEEN DEBATED). Could it be American lives were save because they played the music to loud or to long? Maybe the musicians should be proud that there music may have saved American lives. You know like Americans working in a high rise just trying to feed there kids. They may have saved your mom.

what life threatening information did they get from the prisoners? can you back that up? even if you can, it's still a bullshit excuse to condone torture.

and fair? don't talk to me about fair. when I see the fundamental values of this nation being assaulted and when I see our moral authority slipping away, i refuse to stay silent.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Do you understand WAR? Would you be willing to go over and solve everything for us. PLease?

can you refresh my memory, what problems are these wars solving?

gimmesometruth27

Commy wrote:

aerial wrote:

Do you understand WAR? Would you be willing to go over and solve everything for us. PLease?

can you refresh my memory, what problems are these wars solving?

yeah, also, what problems is this torture solving, other than denying muslims, guilty or otherwise, their human rights?

TriumphantAngel

aerial wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

aerial wrote:

Do you guys think War is fair? From what I heard they did did get life threating information from some of the prisoners (AND IT HAS BEEN DEBATED). Could it be American lives were save because they played the music to loud or to long? Maybe the musicians should be proud that there music may have saved American lives. You know like Americans working in a high rise just trying to feed there kids. They may have saved your mom.

what life threatening information did they get from the prisoners? can you back that up? even if you can, it's still a bullshit excuse to condone torture.

and fair? don't talk to me about fair. when I see the fundamental values of this nation being assaulted and when I see our moral authority slipping away, i refuse to stay silent.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Do you understand WAR? Would you be willing to go over and solve everything for us. PLease?

and exactly what problems are being solved aerial?

there's always a war.

war on terrorism
war on cummunism
war on drugs

the stated objectives seem to change but the outcome rarely does.

war is the scum of the earth getting paid for with tax dollars. people who work for companies like haliburton and blackwater, they get paid. people die. a country is destroyed. its resources stolen, and they call it progess, thats' what i know about war.

wars will only stop when citizens wake up and realize we're being manipulated.