Well this is good: Mininova deletes all infringing torrents...

[DS Speed-Freak]

Funny how they made millions from offering a platform to illegally distribute copyrighted material.....

I hope this trend continues:

Mininova Deletes All Infringing Torrents and Goes ‘Legal’ | TorrentFreak

[redvelvetstudios]

the wave is coming ashore (finally)

WIPO - World Intellectual Property Organization

Global Congress Combatting Counterfeiting & Piracy

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) | Office of the United States Trade Representative

IFPI

Music piracy - ten inconvenient truths

[top] Music piracy - ten inconvenient truths

London, 31st May 2007

1. Pirate Bay, one of the flagships of the anti-copyright movement, makes thousands of euros from advertising on its site, while maintaining its anti-establishment “free music” rhetoric.



2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.



3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.



4. Illegal file-sharers don’t care whether the copyright infringing work they distribute is from a major or independent label.



5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.



6. ISPs often advertise music as a benefit of signing up to their service, but facilitate the illegal swapping on copyright infringing music on a grand scale.



7. The anti-copyright movement does not create jobs, exports, tax revenues and economic growth – it largely consists of people pontificating on a commercial world about which they know little.



8. Piracy is not caused by poverty. Professor Zhang of Nanjing University found the Chinese citizens who bought pirate products were mainly middle or higher income earners.



9. Most people know it is wrong to file-share copyright infringing material but won't stop till the law makes them, according to a recent study by the Australian anti-piracy group MIPI.



10. P2P networks are not hotbeds for discovering new music. It is popular music that is illegally file-shared most frequently.

[lagavulin16]

Good that you listed the link here.

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

[top]Piracy - 10 Inconvenient Truths

London, 31st May 2007

1. Pirate Bay, one of the flagships of the anti-copyright movement, makes thousands of euros from advertising on its site, while maintaining its anti-establishment “free music” rhetoric.

What's your point? That they were leading everyone on to believe they were providing the bandwidth out of the goodness of their hearts? They were providing content, granted most of it illegally, but like any other site they have to pay for bandwidth, server hosting, etc. The only way to do that is ads or subscriptions.

2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.

I remember reading about them. I knew no one with IP ever supported them, but I thought what they were doing was technically legal in Russia due to a loophole. I guess the law changed? What happened?

3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.

Your point being... that once it becomes harder to download music for free, the organized criminal gangs will make even MORE money by selling counterfeit CDs to people who can no longer download them for free? That organized criminal gangs and terrorist groups will do anything illegal to make money? I'm not sure why this is even in this list.

4. Illegal file-sharers don’t care whether the copyright infringing work they distribute is from a major or independent label.

Some do, and some don't. At least, assuming you're talking about the end users and not the hosting sites. But I'll agree that most could care less.

5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.

It means less money in general. The record companies were never in it for anything but the money, at least as far as the major labels go. They will sign and sell whoever they think will make the most money.

They didn't have a 10% slush fund for vanity acts that they considered a tithe to the arts.

6. ISPs often advertise music as a benefit of signing up to their service, but facilitate the illegal swapping on copyright infringing music on a grand scale.

ISPs also often advertise downloading software and videos as a benefit of signing up for their service. Yes, some people are downloading hacked copies of Photoshop but others are downloading GPL copies of the Gimp, Firefox, and other open source software. Same with videos. Lots of stuff on youtube doesn't violate anyone's copyright, but people still want to watch a video of a pug skateboarding even if NBC didn't produce it.

7. The anti-copyright movement does not create jobs, exports, tax revenues and economic growth – it largely consists of people pontificating on a commercial world about which they know little.

This isn't an inconvenient truth, it's an empty opinion not backed up by any empirical data whatsoever.

8. Piracy is not caused by poverty. Professor Zhang of Nanjing University found the Chinese citizens who bought pirate products were mainly middle or higher income earners.

Really? You mean someone who is actually considered "poor" in China is more concerned with spending a week's wages on food than a pirated copy of the new Britney Spears CD? You mean people who can afford to own computers are more likely than a farmer without electricity to buy a pirated copy of MS Office 2003?

9. Most people know it is wrong to file-share copyright infringing material but won't stop till the law makes them, according to a recent study by the Australian anti-piracy group MIPI.

Same goes with people who jay walk or speed.

10. P2P networks are not hotbeds for discovering new music. It is popular music that is illegally file-shared most frequently.

This is an extension of the Chinese farmer argument listed above. Were you expecting anyone to think that the more obscure and unknown the artist is, the more popular they are on torrent sites? Any statistician can tell you that the volume of pirate bandwidth should be equivalent to the volume of sales/popularity of any artist.

However, the argument suggests that people don't discover new music on these sites. That isn't true. I've never heard of a site that will only allow you to pirate music if it's been featured on MTV 100 times in a week.

[author]

Originally Posted by DS Speed-Freak

Mininova Deletes All Infringing Torrents and Goes ‘Legal’ | TorrentFreak

This has indeed been a good year.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by author

This has indeed been a good year.

The major labels(especially Universal & Sony) are using their influences/lobbying all over the globe to get things sorted out because next year they will go on a full court press on digital download sales. They've accepted that this is the future and will start to distribute their music themselves in this format. They are making sure that they have control of all of their revenue streams across the internet and that their are no leaks anywhere.

[Kyle S]

well they can keep it if its not a cd. i refuse to spend money on a download or stream. ill just do without thank you. not like i really hear anything i want to buy anyway. and no i dont download music.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by Kyle S

well they can keep it if its not a cd. i refuse to spend money on a download or stream. ill just do without thank you. not like i really hear anything i want to buy anyway. and no i dont download music.

Well than you better start because they will start to phase out the CD's next year.

Once they do that manufacturers will stop making them.

The last real big retailer for CD's is Walmart and the major labels have been trying for the longest to squeeze them out of the picture. They've gone as far as have new acts put in their contracts that they can't sell CD's through Walmart. The same will happen eventually to Itunes and Amazon.

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Well than you better start because they will start to phase out the CD's next year.

Once they do that manufacturers will stop making them.

The last real big retailer for CD's is Walmart and the major labels have been trying for the longest to squeeze them out of the picture. They've gone as far as have new acts put in their contracts that they can't sell CD's through Walmart. The same will happen eventually to Itunes and Amazon.

with all do respect, I think there's some confusion and misinformation in this post.

first off, the majors love walmart as it is the last stand of physical product and often make sweetheart deals with walmart to increase profits on volume even with reduced margins.

even as CDs are phased out - physical product will be a hits business for huge acts and key catalog - and walmart will remain the front runner in that (physical) side of the business

two, I can't imagine any scenario where a major label would put into a bands contract a clause that specifically states the major label is opposed to selling the new bands CDs to walmart - makes no sense at all.

a major may ALLOW bands to sell product directly to mom & pop stores as those stores are too small for the labels to deal with - but that's a different issue.

no doubt the majors are strategizing an all digital future, they have no choice.

it should also be noted, in the world of the majors things are preffered just as they were a decade plus ago - no digital distribution, and no mp3s... but the genie is out of the bottle and where are where we are...

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

I've never heard of a site that will only allow you to pirate music if it's been featured on MTV 100 times in a week.

I've also never heard of an unknown band who has become successful just because their music was stolen from pirate sites... how many bands did the pirate bay break again? Oh, none.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

with all do respect, I think there's some confusion and misinformation in this post.

first off, the majors love walmart as it is the last stand of physical product and often make sweetheart deals with walmart to increase profits on volume even with reduced margins.

even as CDs are phased out - physical product will be a hits business for huge acts and key catalog - and walmart will remain the front runner in that (physical) side of the business

two, I can't imagine any scenario where a major label would put into a bands contract a clause that specifically states the major label is opposed to selling the new bands CDs to walmart - makes no sense at all.

Walmart is a different distributor than anyone before and they are not stupid either. They ask for a bigger cut for distributing product in their stores which the major labels as the middle men do not like. They also will only sell certain types or artists.

Labels are used to calling the shots and determine who gets what. It gotten so bad to the point that Walmart started going to the artists themselves and offering them a better cut(Walmart wanted $5-$6 for every CD) than they could get from the label themselves, in essence freezing the labels totally out which i can tell you is a fact they didn't like at all. Some artists went for this and cashed out/did well. After this the labels basically have been putting the squeeze on Walmart and their artists. And yes they can include any clause they choose because you as an artist are asking to be represented by them and they will protect themselves as they see fit.

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

no doubt the majors are strategizing an all digital future, they have no choice.

This has been in the works non stop the last 2 years. The IT guys at the labels are actually more important now than the A&R's. They are the point men in all of this. Also the amount of cooperation between the major 4 is unprecedented. I've never seen the guys this united on one thing.

Here in NYC this year secretly they have been setting up specific smaller digital media stations/mini studios that will monitor all future activity on the street level. This way everything is not tied up just to one system, but with the ear to the ground they can act quickly. Basically in one of these stations you can sign an artist with some street buzz, write the songs, record it, mix it, master it, up load it to the site all within a week and it will be distributed and promoted immediately while the buzz is still there. In the past it would take months to put something like this together but the majors see how acting faster this way will not only be cheaper for them but they can capitalize on the buzz right there and now. Also its less of a loss and if its hits big they can cash in.

Most of the people i've spoken to that are heading up these "stations" are established producers/engineers/songwriters that have hits & track records to their names. Its really an interesting concept that should generate new music/ideas in the future.

Now there is no guarantee that things from these products will sell but at least it will be a chance.

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

it should also be noted, in the world of the majors things are preffered just as they were a decade plus ago - no digital distribution, and no mp3s... but the genie is out of the bottle and where are where we are...

I don't know if you've noticed but this decade is up. The future is here. Now its up to us to see how we fit and how we can capitalize on it.

In terms of the future of the Cd's what i've been told is they will be sold in special box sets, kind of how they sell special vinyl box sets.

[author]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

They are making sure that they have control of all of their revenue streams across the internet and that their are no leaks anywhere.

And after that? This may reflect what they see as the next threat:

Universal Music Group Pairs With TuneCore For New Digital Distribution Model

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by author

And after that? This may reflect what they see as the next threat:

Universal Music Group Pairs With TuneCore For New Digital Distribution Model

Its not a threat at all.

Actually its a good way to find and discover new talent. What better way than to hear what people all over are doing without having to do it the old ways and waste money. They hire people to screen it for them and what ever looks promising they contact. I don't understand what all the problems are.

Actually i've been considering buying stock now in tune core because of this.

[author]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Its not a threat at all.

I think the majors are asking for trouble if they don't think of TuneCore as a threat.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by author

I think the majors are asking for trouble if they don't think of TuneCore as a threat.

Why?

Tunecore is just an internet middle man that brokers hand shake deals between a seller of their music and various internet distibutors. That's it.

The majors are setting up their own distribution channels. They want to be the next major music store, but not in a physical sense. By adding Tunecore as a middle man it will just be a resource to acquire talent(people selling music). If anyone has to watch out its Itunes and Amazon. When the labels start swinging their cocks and muscle around, promising potential customers promotion avenues that they've established for now over 35 years(plus their new VEVO music video website) their is no way that Itunes or Amazon will be able to compete(even though they have a bigger client base obviously). What you will see in the coming future though is an increase or decrease in single sales. Either people will have to charge more to make more because the labels will want a bigger cut or they will make more because Itunes, Amazon and whatever the labels come up with will be in a bidding war(like the digital book industry).

[author]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Why?

I don't think majors are attractive to the new generation.

Yes, artists want fast bling -- but they also want freedom. With TuneCore & declining piracy, they can have both.

[lagavulin16]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

I've also never heard of an unknown band who has become successful just because their music was stolen from pirate sites... how many bands did the pirate bay break again? Oh, none.

Colbie Calliat? She got big off of myspace.

Clap Your Hands Say Yeah? They and a hundred other bands got big because people were posting their MP3s to blogs.

It happens.

[XHipHop]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

I've also never heard of an unknown band who has become successful just because their music was stolen from pirate sites... how many bands did the pirate bay break again? Oh, none.

Several have. We've gone over this. Don't be dishonest.

[lagavulin16]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Well than you better start because they will start to phase out the CD's next year.

Once they do that manufacturers will stop making them.

The last real big retailer for CD's is Walmart and the major labels have been trying for the longest to squeeze them out of the picture. They've gone as far as have new acts put in their contracts that they can't sell CD's through Walmart. The same will happen eventually to Itunes and Amazon.

I won't pay for downloads or streams, at least as they're currently offered. I won't give up the control I have when I own a CD.

[XHipHop]

So labels used to spend millions in payola to get their songs heard and now when they are getting the same promotion FOR FREE they shut down?

Seems...stupid. They love to shoot themselves in the foot.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by author

I don't think majors are attractive to the new generation.

Yes, artists want fast bling -- but they also want freedom. With TuneCore & declining piracy, they can have both.

well - every artist that has broken through this year , in country, in RnB, in hip hop, in rock, in "indie" {oh misused term}, in dance etc etc.... has major liabel backing either directly or through sideline organsiation with venture capital {icebreaker until recently} and label money. the only thing that hasn't happened this last year or two is an independent breakthrough. Why? Money gone ......

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

Colbie Calliat? She got big off of myspace.

Clap Your Hands Say Yeah? They and a hundred other bands got big because people were posting their MP3s to blogs.

It happens.

Its' not quite that simple..... She got big USING myspace. With a nice viral promo team doing the legwork and spending a six figure budget. It's one of the oldest trick in the book! Let the "fans" think it's come out of THEIR support......

[lagavulin16]

Originally Posted by narcoman

Its' not quite that simple..... She got big USING myspace. With a nice viral promo team doing the legwork and spending a six figure budget. It's one of the oldest trick in the book! Let the "fans" think it's come out of THEIR support......

Colbie is a bad example because yes, it was her myspace account.

But it does show that giving away music for free can lead to a breakthrough.

Further, any artist who has risen from obscurity to success over the last 5 years no doubt owes a good chunk of their success to illegal file sharing, be it on torrent sites, blogs, mix CDs, etc.

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by XHipHop

Several have. We've gone over this. Don't be dishonest.

really? who?

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

Colbie Calliat? She got big off of myspace.

Clap Your Hands Say Yeah? They and a hundred other bands got big because people were posting their MP3s to blogs.

It happens.

you're kidding me right? she was completely marketed by universal records. her dad is a famous producer who worked with fleetwood mac. nothing about marketing her was an accident.

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Well than you better start because they will start to phase out the CD's next year.

Once they do that manufacturers will stop making them.

Great. I can see 'vintage' CDs fetching top dollar on e-bay in 2014.

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Labels are used to calling the shots and determine who gets what. It gotten so bad to the point that Walmart started going to the artists themselves and offering them a better cut(Walmart wanted $5-$6 for every CD) than they could get from the label themselves, in essence freezing the labels totally out which i can tell you is a fact they didn't like at all.

sure that was for the eagles and ac/dc, baby bands don't get approached by walmart for exclusive deals - I'm sorry man, but you seem misinformed on this issue.

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Some artists went for this and cashed out/did well.

Those artists were free and clear of their label deals, otherwise they could not have made the exclusive deal with walmart in the first place... the eagles, garth brooks, ac/dc, miley cyrus (via disney!), etc.

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

After this the labels basically have been putting the squeeze on Walmart and their artists. And yes they can include any clause they choose because you as an artist are asking to be represented by them and they will protect themselves as they see fit.

The labels are not cutting walmart out of the picture becuase major artists have been able to do exclusive deals. The artists doing exclusive deals with walmart had no label deal at the time of making the exclusive with walmart.

To further illustrate this, Disney has done it's own exclusive with Miley Cyrus - doesn't sound like they're cutting walmart out, but rather cutting out the other retailers.

I've been in negotiations with both walmart and target on exclusive deals for high profile soundtracks, and if those deals can be done, labels and/or artists will do them.

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

This has been in the works non stop the last 2 years. The IT guys at the labels are actually more important now than the A&R's. They are the point men in all of this. Also the amount of cooperation between the major 4 is unprecedented. I've never seen the guys this united on one thing.

Here in NYC this year secretly they have been setting up specific smaller digital media stations/mini studios that will monitor all future activity on the street level. This way everything is not tied up just to one system, but with the ear to the ground they can act quickly. Basically in one of these stations you can sign an artist with some street buzz, write the songs, record it, mix it, master it, up load it to the site all within a week and it will be distributed and promoted immediately while the buzz is still there. In the past it would take months to put something like this together but the majors see how acting faster this way will not only be cheaper for them but they can capitalize on the buzz right there and now. Also its less of a loss and if its hits big they can cash in.

atlantic lost a ton of money when "round round" leaked before the flo-rida album released - so the labels are getting smart about this type of thing. makes sense.

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by XHipHop

So labels used to spend millions in payola to get their songs heard and now when they are getting the same promotion FOR FREE they shut down?

Seems...stupid. They love to shoot themselves in the foot.

you are confusing promotion with piracy, again.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

Colbie is a bad example because yes, it was her myspace account.

But it does show that giving away music for free can lead to a breakthrough.

Further, any artist who has risen from obscurity to success over the last 5 years no doubt owes a good chunk of their success to illegal file sharing, be it on torrent sites, blogs, mix CDs, etc.

seeing as nearly all filesharing is established product I'm not sure your thought is right. The ones I've been involved with have been adverts or great sync placement.... I'm trying to think of one that's been through illegal filesharing....

[lagavulin16]

Originally Posted by narcoman

seeing as nearly all filesharing is established product I'm not sure your thought is right. The ones I've been involved with have been adverts or great sync placement.... I'm trying to think of one that's been through illegal filesharing....

I think it's all connected. It's a combo of adverts, buzz, placement, pirating, blog reviews, review websites, etc.

[redvelvetstudios]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

I think it's all connected. It's a combo of adverts, buzz, placement, pirating, blog reviews, review websites, etc.

it sure is, and if you take piracy out of the equation people can actually make some money.