I steal music.

[trashman]

The market will bear what the market will bear ... neo-luddite or not. The model may have changed ... again. When Mozart made music there was only one way to appreciate the music .... to hear it live and hopefully by the man himself! One could also get the sheet music and in a way own the music.

Perhaps the new model is closer to what fine art did after the invention of the camera.
Perhaps musical artists should issue fewer tangible releases and when they do, make them really expensive like a work of fine art ... i.e. an original francis bacon or a limited run kiki smith etc. make the release high quality and brand / status it. fine artists do this all the time. maybe music has to step it up!
And the merchandise, like the kid said ... play shows ... t-shirts .... If your music is hot enough for a bunch of downloads people are gonna pay to see the show and get an original shirt and other genuine merchandise etc.

I think the model has changed yet again and the industry hasn't had a real innovator .... a bill gates, a henry ford, a gutenberg. Trent reznor and radiohead are both ahead of the curve to some degree.

money isn't the only reason why people compose music. this idea that the incentive is money and that making music is driven by profit motive is kinda silly. it's nice to be able to monetize art and make a living at it. That's nice.

Perhaps a better way to think about music is to think about how fine art has evolved after the camera.

[trashman]

Is joe making money off the music he has downloaded? He never stated that. Your response, while very funny, isn't analogous. sorry.

It would be the same thing if you .....
copied his songs and listened to them.
were inspired by one of his hooks and wrote your own song (happens to me all of the time)
downloaded his photos and made them a screensaver on your own computer that maybe your cat or friends saw on occasion.

No one has any money anymore ....

Originally Posted by musicfool100

Thanks for your post Joe.
And, for the link to your MYSPACE page in your profile.

I copied some of your songs and will use two of them for a jingle I am producing.
One of your songs has a nice hook which I will use for a song I am writing for a hot new R&B singer.
I downloaded some of your excellent photography and will be giving one of the photos to my
girlfriend who is working on an advertisement for a fat-free antacid.

I don't have any money now because it's cold outside and the ATM is FAR away.

Kindest regards

[rack gear]

... or we could restore fair commerce and trade by enforcing the laws that value and protect copyright and IP.

if you are advocating for the end of copyright and IP, that is a stand you can make, but let's be clear about the discussion. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is probably not going to happen.

We're not just talking about music here, we're talking about any digitally distributable copyrighted works such as software, movies, photography, and of course music.

Old technologies are always replaced by new ones in on going and evolving life cycles - but copyright and compensation of labor is a part of each advancing model.

perhaps the closest to where we are now is the end of the golden age of hollywood brought about by the advent of television. content creators still got paid for creating AV works such as TV shows, and movies didn't die completely - but the dynamic changed dramatically.

the key point here is that market conditions changed, but not the laws - for example, TV had to create it's own content or fairly license the films for broadcast. The new TV medium could not broadcast the existing copyrighted works, for free, just because they had the ability to do so.

and the same w/ P2P - if the P2Ps were distributing their own content, or content created for Free distribution than Soundclick.com is the future of the music business. Problem is, people don't want the dreck on Soundclick.com - they want the highly invested hits created by highly skilled labor. That labor has a cost and is protected by Copyright.

Intellectual property - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Economists estimate that two-thirds of the value of large businesses in the U.S. can be traced to intangible assets. Industries which rely on IP protections are estimated to produce 72 percent more value per added employee than non-IP industries.[5] A joint research project of the WIPO and the United Nations University measuring the impact of IP systems on six Asian countries found "a positive correlation between the strengthening of the IP system and subsequent economic growth." [6]

Originally Posted by trashman

The market will bear what the market will bear ... neo-luddite or not. The model may have changed ... again. When Mozart made music there was only one way to appreciate the music .... to hear it live and hopefully by the man himself! One could also get the sheet music and in a way own the music.

Perhaps the new model is closer to what fine art did after the invention of the camera.

Perhaps musical artists should issue fewer tangible releases and when they do, make them really expensive like a work of fine art ... i.e. an original francis bacon or a limited run kiki smith etc. make the release high quality and brand / status it. fine artists do this all the time. maybe music has to step it up!

And the merchandise, like the kid said ... play shows ... t-shirts .... If your music is hot enough for a bunch of downloads people are gonna pay to see the show and get an original shirt and other genuine merchandise etc.

I think the model has changed yet again and the industry hasn't had a real innovator .... a bill gates, a henry ford, a gutenberg. Trent reznor and radiohead are both ahead of the curve to some degree.

money isn't the only reason why people compose music. this idea that the incentive is money and that making music is driven by profit motive is kinda silly. it's nice to be able to monetize art and make a living at it. That's nice.

Perhaps a better way to think about music is to think about how fine art has evolved after the camera.

[Louis Bernstone]

Originally Posted by Susceptor

Biggest bullshit ever.

I posted a link earlier on. Just look it up on the web dude.

[musicfool100]

Originally Posted by trashman

Is joe making money off the music he has downloaded?

Sure he is. He is absorbing the music for FREE.

His life as a potentially profitable musician goes like this . . .

Imitation (He doesn't pay for this opportunity according to his post)

Assimilation (He doesn't need to pay for this one, it's an amalgam of everything he apparently never pays for)

Innovation (His output which people like him will absorb for free)

[clorax hurd]

Originally Posted by memphisindie

So, you just stated that the only band you heard out of 20-30 that you liked had label support?

You just disproved your own point.

Then you made a supposition to excuse that.

sorry, i'm not native english speaker, so i maybe written it in a wrong way.
i meant i heard 20-30 albums which i all liked, and only 1 of these albums was made by a band which was a part of the music industry machinery. that's what i meant. the rest was music by artists who either sell their music themselves, or have it release on very small labels, which i don't consider to be part of this (if you don't know why, i can explain)

apologise my poor english, but i don't understand much the rest of what you written / what you tried to say. i'm sorry, my english is not good enough to understand such metaphores...

Originally Posted by memphisindie

There "used to be" loads of crap fairly recently produced by labels and though quite a bit of what labels do produce now may be safety related drek, only labels and rich folks have the wear with all (musical education, money, friends, prod team, etc) to produce the great stuff.
Is that what you want to happen again, greedy bourgoisie in charge again? Money more important than anything? Including supporting a child molester because they have the dough to make records?
No thanks, people think that fame is like a footprint in the sand on a beach, but, it's more like walking through wet concrete. It has an effect on everyone who sees it but the most effect is on the guy wearing the messed up shoes.

[clorax hurd]

Originally Posted by belolab

some background information......

News24 - Error

maybe i'm wrong, but to me it looks like a bullshit propaganda by RIAA lobby... because piracy is not earning much (if any) money. the torrent sites (we talk about here) are free, so i don't understand where would they get money. they earn little money from advertisment on the sites and invest little money to pay for the server and maintenance.
or maybe this was not regarding the torrent sites? "pirated CDs, DVDs, computer software, and counterfeit clothing and cigarettes."
music industry? pirate bay? cigarettes?

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by clorax hurd

sorry, i'm not native english speaker, so i maybe written it in a wrong way.
i meant i heard 20-30 albums which i all liked, and only 1 of these albums was made by a band which was a part of the music industry machinery. that's what i meant. the rest was music by artists who either sell their music themselves, or have it release on very small labels, which i don't consider to be part of this (if you don't know why, i can explain)

I get it, and I'm going to guess that "music industry machinery" = lawyers, bands, label's lawyers, A&R, Promo, publicity, publishing, accounting, production, packaging, distribution, Rights assocs, royalty collection agencies, band's accountants, personal managers, band managers, tour managers, tour production, transportation, Lighting and audio, any live recording trucks and staff, rinse and repeat.

Originally Posted by memphisindie

Originally Posted by memphisindie
There "used to be" loads of crap fairly recently produced by labels and though quite a bit of what labels do produce now may be safety related drek, only labels and rich folks have the wear with all (musical education, money, friends, prod team, etc) to produce the great stuff.
Is that what you want to happen again, greedy bourgoisie in charge again? Money more important than anything? Including supporting a child molester because they have the dough to make records?
No thanks, people think that fame is like a footprint in the sand on a beach, but, it's more like walking through wet concrete. It has an effect on everyone who sees it but the most effect is on the guy wearing the messed up shoes.

apologise my poor english, but i don't understand much the rest of what you written / what you tried to say. i'm sorry, my english is not good enough to understand such metaphores...

Ever hear the story of the "naked king"? The king had a guy , the tailor, make him some clothes and tell him how fantastic they were, but, he didn't really make any clothes. The tailor told the king that if he couldn't see the invisible clothes he made, that he was not worthy of wearing them. He was being punked by the tailor, and only one guy would have the balls to tell the king that he was being punked.
The entire industry is built on punking someone. That's what hype is all about.
In our industry, if you have the balls to tell the king he is being punked, you get tied to a car by your balls and dragged til there's nothing but balls on a string behind the car left of you.

[clorax hurd]

Originally Posted by memphisindie

Ever hear the story of the "naked king"? The king had a guy , the tailor, make him some clothes and tell him how fantastic they were, but, he didn't really make any clothes. The tailor told the king that if he couldn't see the invisible clothes he made, that he was not worthy of wearing them. He was being punked by the tailor, and only one guy would have the balls to tell the king that he was being punked.
The entire industry is built on punking someone. That's what hype is all about.
In our industry, if you have the balls to tell the king he is being punked, you get tied to a car by your balls and dragged til there's nothing but balls on a string behind the car left of you.

to me it seems that the whole music industry is sick now. it doesn't serve a purpose. i mean, the purpose should be to create some great music and sell it to customers, but the industry fails more and more in the first thing (creating some great music), because what the industry focus on, is profit and not the music. people of most professions in this industry became *****s and i think that even many sound engineers bitching in here about how the industry is dying, many of them are probably also guilty, for example because they submited themselves to became soldiers in the loudness war, which also contributed to the fact, that the industry is producing shit and not music.
to me the music industry seems sick. the music industry was going against themselves for decades, and now the cancer of the industry is soo big...well, i think that it gone so far that it will be less effort just to watch it fall and die, and have something different grow, than to try to heal/transform it (with uncertain results) in this phase

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by clorax hurd

to me it seems that the whole music industry is sick now. it doesn't serve a purpose. i mean, the purpose should be to create some great music and sell it to customers, but the industry fails more and more in the first thing (creating some great music), because what the industry focus on, is profit and not the music. people of most professions in this industry became *****s and i think that even many sound engineers bitching in here about how the industry is dying, many of them are probably also guilty, for example because they submited themselves to became soldiers in the loudness war, which also contributed to the fact, that the industry is producing shit and not music.
to me the music industry seems sick. the music industry was going against themselves for decades, and now the cancer of the industry is soo big...well, i think that it gone so far that it will be less effort just to watch it fall and die, and have something different grow, than to try to heal/transform it (with uncertain results) in this phase

Well, you may be right about all that.
To me, the point is that we have to rebuild it in some fashion someday. The reason people promote crap music is as you say, but, there are even deeper core issues why good music can't be found by labels. The people in charge of selecting which bands will go up have no way of telling whether a band is good or drek because they have no musical talent themselves. THEY DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. but, I suspect that on their application and interview for employment at "said major label", they alluded to the fallacy that hey did know the difference and did have some musical background. They may have and it may have been absolute shite.
I met an A&R guy in NY working for BMG, he was looking for people to join his band, I looked into it because it seemed a little weird to me. He had absolutely no talent, his music was absolute unfathomably bad shite, and his strategy was based solely on schtick, not music. (plus he was weirder than all hell and flaming out constantly).
He wasn't a bad guy, he was very nice, his flame outs were funny, but, I would NEVER employ this guy to pick talent for a major label. TV acts? Maybe for the "Gong Show".
I don't know how BMG is doing these days, but, if that guy is still there, I suspect not too good. I know an A&R person has to go through a whole process of people to get a group signed, but, it seems to me that it isn't based on talent, catalogue, material, ability, or anything that would promote a future music business. It's been that way increasingly since the late eighties and the entire biz started falling apart right then too. I saw it with my own two eyes.
I mean really, look at it, it gotten soooo bad that we now use software to disguize the absolute fact that major label artists have no ability to deliver the product without it.
That is very very telling. It's like a ventilator at a hospital, the patient is dead and no longer breathing, they hook them up to a heart lung machine till organ harvest if there is to be one.
DEAD.

[rack gear]

No matter what you think of the current state of the output from the labels, one thing is clear - Piracy does not help to develop better music.

The argument that if there was better music people would pay for it - doesn't hold water, people are downloading as much Led Zeppelin as they are Flo-Rida. Also if it's wanted enough to steal, it's wanted enough to buy. There's plenty of Free Legal Music to Download available at Soundclick, but I'll get to that in a minute.

Artist development takes time and money which piracy completely undermines. I think artist development has shifted from the majors to the indies - who have smaller margins and less of a buffer from dwindling sales.

There are so many indies developing artists for the love of music and craft it's just unfair to say it's not happening. Once artists are developed than they crossover to the majors who have more resources to build them to a larger base.

I'd like to think that w/ the barrier to entry being much lower with home recording technology we would not be so dependent on labels for the discovery or development of new artists - but one look around Soundclick proves this is not the case. Like it or not, it takes a labels investment to develop artists - exceptions may exist, but they are just that, exceptions.

Whatever measure anyone is using it's clear that the music on Soundclick is inferior to the music on Itunes. This in the same way that guys shooting hoops down the block are not the NBA. Proffesionals practice and develop their craft full time, this takes a financial investment. Remove the return on investment (Priracy) and it's just a race to the bottom.

Theoritically between home recording PCs (Production) and an outlet like Soundclick (Distribution) there should be amazing unsigned artists on Soundclick. I'm just not finding them.

Labels provide a service, of filtering, marketing, promotion and financing that is essential to the development of artists, even if those artists are not of your tastes.

Times have changed, Consumer tastes have changed, and labes have changed.

I work in film music with a lot of people young and old - I'm somewhere in the middle. The older folks say, "you kids don't understand great music" and the younger kids say, "you don't understand our music"... and then I remember my youth and think, that sounds familure...

the more things change, the more they stay the same...

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

No matter what you think of the current state of the output from the labels, one thing is clear - Piracy does not help to develop better music.

The argument that if there was better music people would pay for it - doesn't hold water, people are downloading as much Led Zeppelin as they are Flo-Rida. Also if it's wanted enough to steal, it's wanted enough to buy. There's plenty of Free Legal Music to Download available at Soundclick, but I'll get to that in a minute.

Artist development takes time and money which piracy completely undermines. I think artist development has shifted from the majors to the indies - who have smaller margins and less of a buffer from dwindling sales.

There are so many indies developing artists for the love of music and craft it's just unfair to say it's not happening. Once artists are developed than they crossover to the majors who have more resources to build them to a larger base.

I'd like to think that w/ the barrier to entry being much lower with home recording technology we would not be so dependent on labels for the discovery or development of new artists - but one look around Soundclick proves this is not the case. Like it or not, it takes a labels investment to develop artists - exceptions may exist, but they are just that, exceptions.

Whatever measure anyone is using it's clear that the music on Soundclick is inferior to the music on Itunes. This in the same way that guys shooting hoops down the block are not the NBA. Proffesionals practice and develop their craft full time, this takes a financial investment. Remove the return on investment (Priracy) and it's just a race to the bottom.

Theoritically between home recording PCs (Production) and an outlet like Soundclick (Distribution) there should be amazing unsigned artists on Soundclick. I'm just not finding them.

Labels provide a service, of filtering, marketing, promotion and financing that is essential to the development of artists, even if those artists are not of your tastes.

Times have changed, Consumer tastes have changed, and labes have changed.

I work in film music with a lot of people young and old - I'm somewhere in the middle. The older folks say, "you kids don't understand great music" and the younger kids say, "you don't understand our music"... and then I remember my youth and think, that sounds familure...

the more things change, the more they stay the same...

I agree with 99.999% of this.
I don't agree with consumer tastes have changed, they crave quality, when it isn't being served, they aren't paying.
Indies are not developing artists, they too are milking them.
I think the big diff between older folks music and todays kid's music is the older stuff made money and todays music, well, it's debatable.

[rack gear]

memphis -

I really respect you a lot man, and we've been together philosophically in a number of threads on a number of issues, but here I have to respectfully disagree. Please take this response with the respect that is intended, despite our differences in opinion.

The single greatest issue for declining sales is rampant piracy and the ability for consumers to share massive amounts of music very easily via harddrives.

Neither of these phenomena occurred prior to year 2000 in any real mass consumer way. A minority of early adopter perhaps, but nothing like the Moore's Law curve of it's increase since then, essentially doubling every 18 months at like half the cost. My first 1gig harddive was $1,200 - I just bought an 8gb flash stick for $19.99...

If you look at average household bandwidth/connectivity, and price per gigabyte of storage it's a no brainer. People can argue the correlation, but really it's pretty obvious.

To say that declining sales are due to a lower quality in music I believe is misleading. Again, my soundclick versus itunes argument - the same stuff being purchased on itunes is the same stuff being stolen en mass via P2P.

If there were a real, and suddent end to P2P, all P2P, I'd expect to see a 20-30% per year increase in sales until the industry were to surpass it's previous high water mark.

No industry can compete w/ Free. This is the undeniable heart of the problem. Anything good enough to steal, is good enough to purchase. And if I'm lying I'd expect to see every iPod filled with the druck from Soundclick and not the Top 40.

The truth is, music is more integrated into peoples lives today, and is more a part of their daily experience than every before, music consumption is in fact at an all time high - but the same technology that allows for these experiences also allows for the mass scale looting of the industry and the complete disregard to copyright and IP that the recording industry (not the music business) has been built on.

It should also be noted, the single largest earning year in the music business was 1999... driven by Britney Spears, N*Sync, The Backstreet Boys and the like - I don't think this is what you are referring to as "money making quality music".

Britney is as much a pop phenom as any female superstar that has preceeded her, whether we like her or not.

I'm not sure what's driving your perspective, because from your posts I would assume that you are engaged in making quality music - and surely, you can not be the only one.

Originally Posted by memphisindie

I agree with 99.999% of this.
I don't agree with consumer tastes have changed, they crave quality, when it isn't being served, they aren't paying.
Indies are not developing artists, they too are milking them.
I think the big diff between older folks music and todays kid's music is the older stuff made money and todays music, well, it's debatable.

[clorax hurd]

I strongly disagree with this:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

There are so many indies developing artists for the love of music and craft it's just unfair to say it's not happening. Once artists are developed than they crossover to the majors who have more resources to build them to a larger base.

it's not like this. major labels doesn't offer anything meaningful to the bands i listen to.
for example, major labels are limiting creativity of lot of artists.
they want profit. they don't care about music. why would any musician want to crossover to major label? give up music for money? what's the point? i'd rather start having sex for money than giving up music. for most of the bands, being signed to small or no label is not some temporary phase of their career - they are happy to have freedom to create some awesome music.

also something to think about - do you know Extraordinary Machine album by Fiona Apple? if not, then take a listen to it. It's brilliant.
that album was recorded in 2003, but the major label to which Fiona Apple was signed (EPIC) refused to release it becasue they thought that it wouldn't be commercially successful (but still they owned it, and she couldn't release it even anywhere else). and this is thing that happens quite often, but fortunately this is not the end of this story. the recorded album leaked to public and thanks to piracy it got spread between her fans, who started to flood the label with messages asking them to release it officially, so they finally did in 2005 - which is two years after the album was finished, almost ready to be released.
isn't this crazy? and it's not something uncommon. such things happen and usually without this kind of happy end (never bought the album from them while i don't want to support label doing such machinations)

[Sid Viscous]

Originally Posted by JustinAiken

Yeah they do; sometimes I'll use them when I suddenly feel like starting a book at night and the library/bookstores are closed...

Which brings up a great question. Who did you rip off by downloading the book? The publisher/writer? No you were going to get it from the library. The library? No, you actually saved them money by not borrowing the book from them.

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

memphis -

I really respect you a lot man, and we've been together philosophically in a number of threads on a number of issues, but here I have to respectfully disagree. Please take this response with the respect that is intended, despite our differences in opinion.

Thanks, I appreciate that.

The single greatest issue for declining sales is rampant piracy and the ability for consumers to share massive amounts of music very easily via harddrives.

I agree, it is.

Neither of these phenomena occurred prior to year 2000 in any real mass consumer way. A minority of early adopter perhaps, but nothing like the Moore's Law curve of it's increase since then, essentially doubling every 18 months at like half the cost. My first 1gig harddive was $1,200 - I just bought an 8gb flash stick for $19.99...

I also agree with this which is why I think this issue is as important, yet, supersedes in priority, the talent acquisition and development issue, however, BOTH MUST be addressed or any recovery will be shallow and short lived.

If you look at average household bandwidth/connectivity, and price per gigabyte of storage it's a no brainer. People can argue the correlation, but really it's pretty obvious.

To say that declining sales are due to a lower quality in music I believe is misleading. Again, my soundclick versus itunes argument - the same stuff being purchased on itunes is the same stuff being stolen en mass via P2P.

I also agree with this , it isn't the sole reason, it's a core reason, but, the facilitation of the response to it is definitely the P2P availability.

If there were a real, and suddent end to P2P, all P2P, I'd expect to see a 20-30% per year increase in sales until the industry were to surpass it's previous high water mark.

Probably so.

No industry can compete w/ Free. This is the undeniable heart of the problem. Anything good enough to steal, is good enough to purchase. And if I'm lying I'd expect to see every iPod filled with the druck from Soundclick and not the Top 40.

That's what I was saying when MTV and VH1 came out. How do you sell natural tomatoes with all their flaws when someone is giving away healthy looking GMO tomatoes 5 feet away? The answer: You can't.
Man did I get flamed for that, over and over and over.

The truth is, music is more integrated into peoples lives today, and is more a part of their daily experience than every before, music consumption is in fact at an all time high - but the same technology that allows for these experiences also allows for the mass scale looting of the industry and the complete disregard to copyright and IP that the recording industry (not the music business) has been built on.

It should also be noted, the single largest earning year in the music business was 1999... driven by Britney Spears, N*Sync, The Backstreet Boys and the like - I don't think this is what you are referring to as "money making quality music".

Ha ha ha. Yeah.
I wonder what the numbers were after returns. Of course, there was a HUGE influx of teen pregnancy and unwed mothers then, a lot of them have 16-18 year olds who have sever lack of education and couldn't find a job before the depression, now the crime rate is high and downloads are through the roof. So many reasons.

Britney is as much a pop phenom as any female superstar that has preceeded her, whether we like her or not.

I haven't met her so I couldn't say anything about her, Madonna I can say was very sweet to me, but, I only met her a couple of times for a second.

I'm not sure what's driving your perspective, because from your posts I would assume that you are engaged in making quality music - and surely, you can not be the only one.

Yeah, when I can find it and I don't have any problems making it happen/getting it together.

Originally Posted by clorax hurd

I strongly disagree with this:


it's not like this. major labels doesn't offer anything meaningful to the bands i listen to.
for example, major labels are limiting creativity of lot of artists.
they want profit. they don't care about music. why would any musician want to crossover to major label? give up music for money? what's the point? i'd rather start having sex for money than giving up music. for most of the bands, being signed to small or no label is not some temporary phase of their career - they are happy to have freedom to create some awesome music.

That 's that safety issue that all businesses have and the lower revenue gets the worse they are about it, the problem is that it's the opposite of the cure. It's a way to stagnate the sounds and remove real enjoyment from music. Every now and ten something will poke through, but not to the degree that generates lasting success. Not everyone needs or wants to have a 20 year career in music though.

also something to think about - do you know Extraordinary Machine album by Fiona Apple? if not, then take a listen to it. It's brilliant.
that album was recorded in 2003, but the major label to which Fiona Apple was signed (EPIC) refused to release it becasue they thought that it wouldn't be commercially successful (but still they owned it, and she couldn't release it even anywhere else). and this is thing that happens quite often, but fortunately this is not the end of this story. the recorded album leaked to public and thanks to piracy it got spread between her fans, who started to flood the label with messages asking them to release it officially, so they finally did in 2005 - which is two years after the album was finished, almost ready to be released.
isn't this crazy? and it's not something uncommon. such things happen and usually without this kind of happy end (never bought the album from them while i don't want to support label doing such machinations)

That's a great story, it's pretty telling of what's going wrong in addition to the P2P problem.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

mMy first 1gig harddive was $1,200 - I just bought an 8gb flash stick for $19.99...

Sorry for the OT, but I had to laugh. My first Digidesign HD was 650MB and cost $3400.00US. Yup, that's right.....

Now, back to your regularly programmed slagging.....

[Susceptor]

Originally Posted by charles maynes

do you have any hard evidence to back up your assertion?

They are mixing phishing with hackers, selling illegal CDs (containing music or software) and small level piracy.

Piracy is not funding terrorism per se; individuals or small groups of people still try to make business selling stuff to fools that don't realise they can download. That used to happen a lot in the 90s, when net was expensive. Small groups selling illigal software are not connected with terrorist...

...I can see the picture... Bin Laden at the corner of the block trying to sell the latest version of Vista so he can buy some nukes; not gonna happen.

Originally Posted by musicfool100

Thanks for your post Joe.
And, for the link to your MYSPACE page in your profile.

I copied some of your songs and will use two of them for a jingle I am producing.
One of your songs has a nice hook which I will use for a song I am writing for a hot new R&B singer.
I downloaded some of your excellent photography and will be giving one of the photos to my
girlfriend who is working on an advertisement for a fat-free antacid.

I don't have any money now because it's cold outside and the ATM is FAR away.

Kindest regards

You are actually stealing his stuff and pretending it is your own.
He is using audio material for recreational purpose without paying for it. He is not selling it or pretending it is his work. There's a different between actual theft and copyright infringement. Most people aren't aware of that.

Originally Posted by belolab

I posted a link earlier on. Just look it up on the web dude.

I did. That's why I said it's bullshit.
Teh internetz is serious bizniss.

[audioguynyc]

The RIAA is tracking your IP address right now buddy

[Arkitekt]

I often see people using the money excuse for downloading music, films or even software. Blame it on their low-paying job or their situation, student maybe? Doesn't matter, the problem with that excuse, that you have no money, you can't afford to buy something, is that these people seem to consider it their human right to have/own/get every album or film ever released.

Then worse, the people trying to justify their actions of stealing, there is no way you can justify not paying for all the work, time and money invested by an artist whether it's a musician(s) making an album or a crew/studio making a film. You're working your ass off trying to make a good product for your fans and it turns out, they actually like it, but still they won't pay for it? Why the **** should you be allowed or deserve to get that for free?

[NoEgo]

" Although I do buy music on occasion. This last month, I've bought two CD's. One being Frontier Ruckus's new album and Cursive's new album, both absolutely worth my $14."

Maybe we can ask the the OT....

Why do these guys get your money...?? And not all the other music you listen to?

I think I can speak for the other artists....don't listen to their shit..unless you want to pay just as you did for the Artists above. You abviously don't believe their worth it.

[CosmeLiccardo]

Hey guys, my case is pretty weird, here it goes.

I live in Venenzuela, this is currently the strangest country in the world, economically speaking. Our president is a leftist bastard filled with social resentment, so he knows very little about what it takes to build an industry. After many opposers tried to knock him down from the government, our international reserves plunged so he had to decree a "currency exchange control" to avoid further flee of capital from our nation. This meant that we would only have the right to change national currency (Bolivares) into foreign currency (Dollars, Euros...) under regulated parameters.

Little by little, the government started to take away the right to change currency to many companies that imported certain products. Eventually, it reached the record distribution companies.

So, while minimum wage is about 800Bs (373 $) a month in official exchange rate (2,15Bs per $), most products rose their prices according to what´s called a "black market" dollar, that´s currently about 6,5 Bs per $. This means that a 13$ record costs about 85Bs to import, so record stores sell them at about 120Bs. This means that ONE record can cost about 15% of a monthly minimum wage. This also means that a 40$ DVD can cost about 35% of a monthly minimum wage. Since almost 70% of Venezuela´s population earns minimum wage or less, buying original music is a bit hard, so they buy pirate copies for about 10Bs in the street.

The same thing happens with software. I make the effort to buy original plugins, but
it´s really hard. Another something to consider is the fact that our music industry is somewhat less than developed. Most of my clients are indie bands that pay their own recordings, so prices can never reach what they are in the US. In my city the average price per hour is about 70Bs, officially that´s about 33$, but in reality, that´s only about 11$ per hour, so...you get the picture.

I think it sucks that people in the US complain about how they are poor and can´t afford shit with their 5$ an hour wages, at least they have dollars to buy them with and not some shitty piece of paper that doesn´t even qualify as currency. However, most online radios and online music and video companies ban Latin American countries like Venezuela, because of our piracy rates, you think this is fair?

Piracy issues in our countries at least have very little to do with being cheap, yet most of the download sites where people get their free music here are American sites, so why do we get banned for piracy?

[NoEgo]

Originally Posted by CosmeLiccardo

Hey guys, my case is pretty weird, here it goes.

I live in Venenzuela, this is currently the strangest country in the world, economically speaking. Our president is a leftist bastard filled with social resentment, so he knows very little about what it takes to build an industry. After many opposers tried to knock him down from the government, our international reserves plunged so he had to decree a "currency exchange control" to avoid further flee of capital from our nation. This meant that we would only have the right to change national currency (Bolivares) into foreign currency (Dollars, Euros...) under regulated parameters.

Little by little, the government started to take away the right to change currency to many companies that imported certain products. Eventually, it reached the record distribution companies.

So, while minimum wage is about 800Bs (373 $) a month in official exchange rate (2,15Bs per $), most products rose their prices according to what´s called a "black market" dollar, that´s currently about 6,5 Bs per $. This means that a 13$ record costs about 85Bs to import, so record stores sell them at about 120Bs. This means that ONE record can cost about 15% of a monthly minimum wage. This also means that a 40$ DVD can cost about 35% of a monthly minimum wage. Since almost 70% of Venezuela´s population earns minimum wage or less, buying original music is a bit hard, so they buy pirate copies for about 10Bs in the street.

The same thing happens with software. I make the effort to buy original plugins, but
it´s really hard. Another something to consider is the fact that our music industry is somewhat less than developed. Most of my clients are indie bands that pay their own recordings, so prices can never reach what they are in the US. In my city the average price per hour is about 70Bs, officially that´s about 33$, but in reality, that´s only about 11$ per hour, so...you get the picture.

I think it sucks that people in the US complain about how they are poor and can´t afford shit with their 5$ an hour wages, at least they have dollars to buy them with and not some shitty piece of paper that doesn´t even qualify as currency. However, most online radios and online music and video companies ban Latin American countries like Venezuela, because of our piracy rates, you think this is fair?

Piracy issues in our countries at least have very little to do with being cheap, yet most of the download sites where people get their free music here are American sites, so why do we get banned for piracy?

I feel for you in some ways...but if they were to allow full pirating in Venenzuela then there are Americans and Europeans and Canadians...yes... who would capitalize on your black market and import them to the US.
Secondly very few Americans make only 5.00 an hour..
Thirdly Your government (and a little off topic) as seen to be nothing but a bully in power and yes a professing anti capitalist in the worse way.. Not because he believes the system works but because he is a defiant ass, and his cronies Castro and Putin and the like are more serious strong capitalists. This guy you have I am sorry to say is just a glory grabber and probably makes good money off your people. My opinion. I can't believe first that he was able to run again and second that he was voted in. But I don't have to live with it.

[CosmeLiccardo]

He's not only able to run again, but again and again, he can be re elected indefinately, it's pathetic, but hell WTF, we'll be rid of him soon, I know we will!.

On the other hand, I don't really think that full piracy must be allowed in Venezuela, I just don't think we have to pay fully for what American pirates do if our situation is different than theirs? This reffering to online music companies and web radios banning our country. It's the same as the drug traffic issue, the US government claims that Latin American countries do nothing to contain drug traffic to the US, but the US is the biggest drug consumer in the world! It's a bit hipocritical in some ways, I think.

[NoEgo]

Originally Posted by CosmeLiccardo

He's not only able to run again, but again and again, he can be re elected indefinately, it's pathetic, but hell WTF, we'll be rid of him soon, I know we will!.

On the other hand, I don't really think that full piracy must be allowed in Venezuela, I just don't think we have to pay fully for what American pirates do if our situation is different than theirs? This reffering to online music companies and web radios banning our country. It's the same as the drug traffic issue, the US government claims that Latin American countries do nothing to contain drug traffic to the US, but the US is the biggest drug consumer in the world! It's a bit hipocritical in some ways, I think.

I won't argue that one either... Those who make money off other people's backs just as the draw for drugs from Mexican cartel... In exchange the US exports the guns to kill Mexicans and Americans..some how it's right if there is a benefit to Americans..

From what I saw the cocoa leaf has been chewed for centruries..like coffee. The US draw for cocaine is what makes it a drug..So instead of addressing the usage they once again jump down in a country they have no right to be in and stop the growth of the leaf.
Just like Cuba...I have always been amazed at that one... Guantanomo (spelling) .. They have embargoes on Cuba but will take their land to build a prison so it's not on their own soil.

[CosmeLiccardo]

I think politics is the art of hypocracy, here our piece of shit president always condemns the embargo on Cuba, insults the governments of the right and blaims the north american empire for everything that's wrong with the world, but now he and his allies call Obama's government to take mesures in Honduras after they criticised international inherence for years, they're even supporting an economic embargo to Honduras, it's total BS, in the end this stupid political crap affect us deeply and affect the music industry, and that's where it's all flawed, this whole system. It's all about morals and being informed if we want to help this industry, not politics.

[NoEgo]

Well said...but we are
a little off topic so I won't continue.

[Studio Addict]

Originally Posted by jihadjoe75

Now, dear recording industry, if you can give me an unlimited library with lossless songs... hell, I'd probably pay twenty-sum bucks a month for that.

Hey OP:

Are you going to school to be a lawyer? Great! For $20 bucks a month, I'll take your services on an unlimited basis.

Going to be a doctor? Even better -- for $10/month me and my family can have unlimited access to your office and expertise. All prescriptions are on you.

A mechanic? $5/month for unlimited car repairs -- oh, and you're responsible for providing the parts.

An accountant? I bet your starting to get the deal!

So, let us all know what you're going to school for, and we can all sign up to get your services -- unlimited -- for pennies on the dollar!

Jus keepin it real, MF-er!

[Torchlight]

Originally Posted by jihadjoe75

Work is slow right now and I feel like ranting...

I'm a college student who makes $8 an hour for my campuses IT support dept and quite frankly, I cannot afford to pay $10-$20 for a CD. Yep, I'm a pirate and I have been for a very long time. Although I do buy music on occasion. This last month, I've bought two CD's. One being Frontier Ruckus's new album and Cursive's new album, both absolutely worth my $14.

I remember living making less than $8 an hour, working part time so I could go to school full time and having less than no money. I STILL could afford to buy the one or two CDs I just HAD to have. I saved my money and when I had that baby in my hand, it was a beautiful thing.

Honestly this type of tired rhetoric about music needing to be free is so disrespectful to the people who have spend years of their lives learning how to play, learning how to read music, learning how to perform live and in a studio. It is disrespectful to the artist who worked their ass off at a $8 an hour job so they could scrap enough money together to go into a studio and record the songs they worked for years to create. Honestly, do you think it's free for artists to record? I lived on my line of credit so I could record my album, so it burns my ass to hear people whine and complain about how music should be free, how they don't have enough money to buy whatever they want. Boo hoo. Because you want something doesn't mean that it should be free. You don't expect your education to be free...nor do you want to work for free either.

Music is art, but without paying people to do it, what kind of quality do you think is going to result from that? If you expect everyone to simply make music because they "love to", basically you are getting people who can only do it in their spare time we all still have to pay for food and lodging and electricity...oh ya and all our gear. I suppose that is just supposed to come from our "love of music" as well. When you pay for art, you are making a statement. And that statement is "I value art". "I value music, I value musicians". Other art isn't free either. Do you walk into an art gallery and demand paintings on the wall as well? Musicians who play/record spend their days practicing, marketing, recording, writing. I think we will seriously dilute the quality of music if we start expecting people to work other jobs and give their music away for free.

In no other field are people asked to give away their talents and knowledge for free. To me, it's a very immature attitude. You have no right to steal music from other people. Just like you have no right to steal food from the grocery store (even if you were hungry and had no money for it). It's wrong, and you can justify it to yourself all you want, but it's stealing plain and simple. There is no excuse for it.

[NoEgo]

Originally Posted by Torchlight

I remember living making less than $8 an hour, working part time so I could go to school full time and having less than no money. I STILL could afford to buy the one or two CDs I just HAD to have. I saved my money and when I had that baby in my hand, it was a beautiful thing.

Honestly this type of tired rhetoric about music needing to be free is so disrespectful to the people who have spend years of their lives learning how to play, learning how to read music, learning how to perform live and in a studio. It is disrespectful to the artist who worked their ass off at a $8 an hour job so they could scrap enough money together to go into a studio and record the songs they worked for years to create. Honestly, do you think it's free for artists to record? I lived on my line of credit so I could record my album, so it burns my ass to hear people whine and complain about how music should be free, how they don't have enough money to buy whatever they want. Boo hoo. Because you want something doesn't mean that it should be free. You don't expect your education to be free...nor do you want to work for free either.

Music is art, but without paying people to do it, what kind of quality do you think is going to result from that? If you expect everyone to simply make music because they "love to", basically you are getting people who can only do it in their spare time we all still have to pay for food and lodging and electricity...oh ya and all our gear. I suppose that is just supposed to come from our "love of music" as well. When you pay for art, you are making a statement. And that statement is "I value art". "I value music, I value musicians". Other art isn't free either. Do you walk into an art gallery and demand paintings on the wall as well? Musicians who play/record spend their days practicing, marketing, recording, writing. I think we will seriously dilute the quality of music if we start expecting people to work other jobs and give their music away for free.

In no other field are people asked to give away their talents and knowledge for free. To me, it's a very immature attitude. You have no right to steal music from other people. Just like you have no right to steal food from the grocery store (even thumbsupif you were hungry and had no money for it). It's wrong, and you can justify it to yourself all you want, but it's stealing plain and simple. There is no excuse for it.

thumbsupthumbsupthumbsup