I recently came across this article which referred to a DJ mix that was removed at the request of the record label Strictly Rhythm because it contained one of thier tracks. This surprised me not only because the massive amounts of DJ mixes posted across the internet on a daily basis, but also because for as long as I can remember, DJ culture has always used the mixtape as it's main tool for promotion of both the DJ and the artists who's tracks are featured in the mix.
I've personally been introduced to many tracks I've purchased by first hearing them on a mixtape. Back in the early 90's when I first began buying 12" singles, mixtapes were one of my only resources for finding out the artists/titles of the tracks I was hearing at the parties I was attending. I hadn't met many DJs yet and in a time where competition was fierce to get gigs, getting the freshest tracks and keeping your secret weapons a secret were two of your biggest advantages. I remember buying many mixtapes, and scanning the record shops for these illusive tracks which often times had been misprinted on the mixtapes j-card.
Fast forward a good 10-15 years and we're now at a point where the music is more accessible than it's ever been. Vinyl manufacturing is at it's most unstable point since it's resurrection by the post-disco club DJ, and digital music has revolutionized the way we buy, sell, and play music. At a time where the majors are struggling to catch up to a new business model, you've got a label that was one of the first independants to make it big back in the 90's and then folded, come back and start scouring the internet for filenames and mixes from thier catalog and sending out cease and desist letters for what boils down to basically promoting thier releases to a bigger audience. Any mixes I post will contain a full tracklist and if available a direct link to purchase the track from a download site or record store online. So after hearing a track from a label who's music I've chosen, and then being able to purchase it with just a few mouse clicks, I can't see why anyone would oppose this type of free promotion??
I can understand a label not wanting to give away their product for free, and it's no secret that labels are making much more from compilations and "legal" DJ mixes (with all tracks licensed), but to argue that a DJ mix posted on the Internet (in any bitrate) is hurting sales in any way is absurd. I know quite a few people who aren't DJ's that are shopping digital music sites for tracks they've heard in mixes or at clubs and purchasing them. These are your same casual listeners that a few years ago were probably using p2p sites like Napster to download the latest top 40 songs. Know why they're paying for their music now? It's simple. For $1.99 you can have a full, clean, properly labeled/tagged MP3 downloaded to your computer or mp3 player within seconds. This kind of convenience and organization has turned your average dance music enthusiast toward browsing the digital sites for their music instead of the p2p programs. Take away the DJ mixes and you're taking away the average listeners main source of exposure to your product. Sure they'll hear the tracks in the clubs, but without tracklistings and contact information, they're left on their own trying to find your product.
It surprises me that a label who based much of thier early success off of 12" singles built around blatantly unlicensed samples would come back with such a different outlook on how thier product is used and promoted. Unfortunately thier choices may ultimately result in repeating the same fate they suffered 16 years ago after falling from the top. It's certainly an interesting time for dance music.
