Tori Amos Songwriting Map

Great! Now that you’ve copied the map and posted it, I can download the MP3s and I’ll be able to tell where they were written.

Seriously, I’m surprised that you praise the design so highly and yet show so little respect for the designer that you post a copy of the work.

Bits are bits man - get over it.

It's not like it was a super hi-res version of the image - or even aligned right. Hell, I don't buy many CDs, but now that I know that something like that map is included I probably will get it.

I'm disrespecting the designer by scanning a lo-res, barely readable copy of a map from the liner notes? Perhaps you should also send a pseudo-anonymous comment to Amazon.com or CD-NOW and gripe to them about all that illegal, disrespectful cover art THEY are featuring. And by the way, if you can't provide a real email address, don't bother posting here.

I'm really quite impressed with the whole idea of the color coded map. It's a wonderful supplement to Ms. Amos's already engaging music. I absolutely love that concept!

I’m a fan of Tori Amos and have been for a while. I’m kind of put off by the hard sell of the site, though. I would appreciate access to all of the site’s bells and whistles without having to buy the album. The idea that the extras are there and I can’t see them without dropping some cash isn’t at all exciting, it’s annoying, almost insulting. Had the additional content been approached as it was on the Jeff Buckley album Sketches (For My Sweetheart the Drunk), I might bite. That album has the interactive piece directly on the CD. It’s mine. Forever. As long as the OS on the computer I’m using can handle it. It’s like a tangable archive, not some ephemeral thing on the web that might disappear by the time the next album is released. But it’s her art and their (whoever they are) enterprise. And then again, in the long run, it’s my money.

It's worth noting that there is a special limited edition version of the CD which comes w/ a DVD.

I have no idea what is on the DVD, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was the same stuff as on the unlocked part of the website.

Also, for the record, I have yet to access the special content on the site. Thus far doesn't work in OSX or 9, thought they say it works in 9. Another problem with these things, for sure.

Look I really enjoy reading What Do I Know and from what I've seen I really enjoy your design work, Todd. But it is my opinion that making digital reproduction is not only a disservice to the designer of the work but to Tori Amos as well.

I am very wary of where I leave my email address; and unfortunately instead of answering my criticism with a thoughtful, pointed answer you misdirected your response and criticized the the fact that I didn't leave my email address (which is scottATcrossmediaservices.com).

I'm not certain what kind of arrangement Amazon has with publishers, record companies, and manufacturers to manage the rights of the images presented on that site. In the print publishing world (in my experience with catalogs, FSIs, and ROP ads) reproduction rights are taken very seriously.

Low-res, high-res -- it's infringement. That designers' work was meant to be held in the hand, seen in high resolution. At least, that was my thought, as a designer. I also thought that your praise and opinion (which I've learned to trust) might have convinced me to at least pick up the CD in store and maybe purchase it. But you showed me the goods! The experience of opening up the CD and discovering the liner notes and experiencing the "magic" you speak of is somewhat diminished now. By removing the design from its context (the juxtaposition of the songs and where they were written) the care taken in developing this, as you say, multi-pronged campaign, has been somewhat foiled -- no?

well actually I´d have to agree with Scott. Just today I had a discussion about what musicians can do to make money on their cd, now that downloading mp3´s has become so easy. And what T. Amos has done is one good way of coping : creating a cover that is so cool that you have to own the cd. And thats rather hard to do. And now you went and spoiled a perfectly nice experience for som folks...its allmost like telling the ending of a film to someone on their way to seeing it.

On the other hand; your posting of the cover doesnt diminish the fact that the idea is marvelous. But then again it seems a little silly to post it here on your site. Tht piece of art belongs with T. Amos´s music , not in your blog. Its allmost like you weant in on the coolness of the cover. Why not just suffice with praising it? Describing it? Why MUST you even include a picture, to cut it out in stone for the dimwitted.

Well we can all make bad moves. A friend of mine once said : "you´ll learn more from one mistake, than you do from ten succes´s"

I have to say that I am split on this too.

The original post was a great comment on the collaboration between design and an artist, and how well that can work; however, I was surprised that you never mentioned who the designer was by name. Since much of what you praise was probably born out of their hard work, it seems only appropriate to at least copy their name from the liner notes.

I did appreciate that you scanned the artwork, since I would have never seen it and it does back up your argument. When I was in school teachers used to bring in slides of peoples work that they liked, and I am sure that they did not contact them all of the time for permission.

Finally, on a completely different tangent, I do think that the Amazon comment sort of skirts the issue. What would happen if I took a screenshot of the Winterfresh site (designed by Evolution Bureau and Dominey) and posted it on my site to show a friend something that I thought was a nice design.....now what if I was showing it to 4,000 people a day? I am not trying to pick a fight, I just think that there are some ethical issues that Scott is right to bring up, although, in the end, I am glad that you did post the scan.

uhm.

Wouldn’t the posting of this be considered for ‘review purposes’ and then generally accepted as “OK”, if not legal?

Well, that’s what *I* though.
[drewATcinderful.com]

I'm quite dissapointed that the original intent of this post has turned into a debate over the ethics of posting a lo-res scan of a printed piece solely for illustrative, educational purposes. I didn't write about this to promote Tori, or whoever designed the piece - that wasn't the point. It was to illustrate ways that information design can lift raw data beyond a static nature and into something quite beautiful, yet still informative.

Because people seem so bent out of shape over the whole matter, for reasons beyond my comprehension (I can't count how many design sites I have visited where authors posted scans of print ads, sections of typography, images, whatever - for educational purposes), I'll remove them.

I'm a designer too, and the idea that posting an image of a piece of design to illustrate a point (or praise it, in this case) is somewhow inappropriate is beyond me. It's called fair use, people. When you write an article about a book, you need no permission to post an image of its cover. When you review a CD, same thing. And when you have an online publication (like this blog) about design, showing people examples of design is perfectly acceptable, both morally and legally, just as it would be in a lecture or book or magazine or television show. It would be nice if the designer had been credited, but again it's not required. If you had removed a piece of design or illustration or photography from its context and used as a part of your own design or advertising, that's not OK. But editorial usage like this is fine.

Todd, you posted while I was typing. Don't be silly. Put the scans back up if you want to.

So let's get this straight ... anyone who posts a low-res version of any artwork (including album covers) is doing a dis-service to the artists? Bullshit. If anything it is promoting the artist. Todd is only encouraging anyone who reads to check out the album and artwork. I say put it back up, you have sparked my interest in this album after losing my interest in Tori a few years ago.

I apologize for stiring things up; we disagree over whether this encourages people to pick the album up or not. And that's okay. I'm sorry if I didn't post an appropriate comment. Some of the other weblogs I frequent encourage frank discussions as a way of building community.

Fair Use is such a tricky thing to define in this day and age. I don't really want to continue the argument, but .. isn't showing the album cover different from showing the liner notes? Especially in this case, it would seem, since the liner notes are integral to the experience -- an experience reserved for people who pay?

Here's some info on Fair Use from the EFF site. It's pretty interesting -- and I think highlights reason we're having this argument -- it's just really hard to tell what is or is not Fair Use. This will be last post.

*Factor #1: Purpose and character of use. The courts are most likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes, such as a book review.

*Factor #2: Nature of the copyrighted work. The courts are most likely to find fair use where the copied work is a factual work rather than a creative one.

*Factor #3: Amount and substantiality of the portion used. The courts are most likely to find fair use where what is used is a tiny amount of the protected work. If what is used is small in amount but substantial in terms of importance, a finding of fair use is unlikely.

*Factor #4: Effect on the potential market for or value of the protected work. The courts are most likely to find fair use where the new work is not a substitute for the copyrighted work.