Music should be free. If you don't want it 'stolen' then don't record it.

[nigel saunders]

Originally Posted by EFF

sad but true for 25 and under... working on a project w/ a bunch of up and coming YouTube "kids" I said to them, "make sure you're driving people to itunes to buy the music" they looked at me, laughed and said "what? - no one is going to buy music from itunes you'd have to be a chump".

then we sat down for a little "old guy speaks" time...

In a nice way- thats all I was saying

Thats just the way it is! - it doesn't make it right

[elginchris]

Originally Posted by EFF

sad but true for 25 and under... working on a project w/ a bunch of up and coming YouTube "kids" I said to them, "make sure you're driving people to itunes to buy the music" they looked at me, laughed and said "what? - no one is going to buy music from itunes you'd have to be a chump".

then we sat down for a little "old guy speaks" time...

I'm not saying this to be facetious, but isn't this proof that the writings on the wall? Maybe its time the "old guys" should start to listen to the young guys.

If the artist is even laughing at the though of selling their work then the entire industry, like it or not, will be forced to change.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I'm saying this not to be facetious, but isn't this proof that the writings on the wall?

If the artist is even laughing at the though of selling their work then the entire industry, like it or not, will be forced to change.

everything changes.

there was a change when everyone got digitally free everything - illegally and without consequence.

so far, that's lasted about a decade.

I believe it will change again.

I just don't see a future of "digitally free everything" it would be such a fundamental disruption to the economy (and our principles as a society) that I do not believe it will be allowed to exist as such.

the turn of the century marked the "awkward" transition period for the internet.

only 15 years ago many saw the internet as a novel "fad", so this type of historical transition may take a couple decades to fully mature, like radio, film, telephone and television did...

I can not sign on for a future of absolute online lawlessness - copyright will be protected, however the transition to get there effectively may be difficult and have many set backs and false starts.

one thing about technology is that it really doesn't stay the same for too long.

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I'm not saying this to be facetious, but isn't this proof that the writings on the wall? Maybe its time the "old guys" should start to listen to the young guys.

If the artist is even laughing at the though of selling their work then the entire industry, like it or not, will be forced to change.

It's interesting how you take "right now" as proof of truth.

You have a real eye-opener in store for you tomorrow!

100% guaranteed.

-Andrews

(Btw, also interesting whom you ASSume is the "old" versus the "new" ... do you know me?)


P.S. Read this, if you haven't already and talk to me after... http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/25/t...t-be-free.html

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by bilbobaggins

prohibition? marijuana? that was all you.....
anyways no beef here. Best of luck with it all

And of course you TOTALLY IGNORED MY POINT and twisted my words.

My point was that prohibition and the anti pot laws were both attempts to oppose the popular will by top down force.

Such attempts ALWAYS FAIL, sooner or later.

The underground infrastructure that springs up to take advantage of the popular will is UTTERLY BESIDE THE POINT - it's the PRODUCT of the problem, not the cause.

Trying to treat it as the cause is going at the problem ass backwards.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I'm not saying this to be facetious, but isn't this proof that the writings on the wall? Maybe its time the "old guys" should start to listen to the young guys.

If the artist is even laughing at the though of selling their work then the entire industry, like it or not, will be forced to change.

Originally Posted by EFF

everything changes.

there was a change when everyone got digitally free everything - illegally and without consequence.

so far, that's lasted about a decade.

I believe it will change again.

I just don't see a future of "digitally free everything" it would be such a fundamental disruption to the economy (and our principles as a society) that I do not believe it will be allowed to exist as such.

the turn of the century marked the "awkward" transition period for the internet.

only 15 years ago many saw the internet as a novel "fad", so this type of historical transition may take a couple decades to fully mature, like radio, film, telephone and television did...

I can not sign on for a future of absolute online lawlessness - copyright will be protected, however the transition to get there effectively may be difficult and have many set backs and false starts.

one thing about technology is that it really doesn't stay the same for too long.

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

It's interesting how you take "right now" as proof of truth.

You have a real eye-opener in store for you tomorrow!

100% guaranteed.

-Andrews

(Btw, also interesting whom you ASSume is the "old" versus the "new" ... do you know me?)


P.S. Read this, if you haven't already and talk to me after... My Turn: The iPad, Kindle, and Free Content - Newsweek

That's why I believe the model for the future is "free" distribution to the end user that is actually paid for "invisibly" at the distribution layer.

The "Wild West" period of the internet is coming to a close. It's inevitable. What remains now is to work out solutions that are in the interests of the majority of the parties involved.

In the Old West a lot of the gunslingers became law men when they saw the writing on the wall.

[MoBeach]

Music is private property. Period.

[elginchris]

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

It's interesting how you take "right now" as proof of truth.

You have a real eye-opener in store for you tomorrow!

100% guaranteed.

-Andrews

(Btw, also interesting whom you ASSume is the "old" versus the "new" ... do you know me?)


P.S. Read this, if you haven't already and talk to me after... My Turn: The iPad, Kindle, and Free Content - Newsweek

I read the article and I dont think it equates to the digital media issue.

Hackers will always be ahead of DRM and if they cant crack it someone will record it into a format thats not DRMed and put it online.

First it was message boards, then irc rooms, P2p, then torrent. The industry cant keep up with pirates.

The only way to stop it is to filter the internet the ISPs send out. Even if that happend im sure there will be a hack to get around it.

So now what do we do?

Net neutrality is keeping the internet in "the wild west" and free. once we lose that, the internet as we know it is doomed and maybe then you might see your $14.95 being bought again. But is that really the solution?

I started this thread to challenge the dinosaurs into thinking in a new way. instead, most of it has been the same ol bitching and moaning.

[Suda Badri]

YEah no matter what "security" anyone has, audio hi-jack will take the audio and output a new file, if audio hi-jack cant do it... people will take the line outs or digital outs of the computers and record as wav or mp3 for the world to share... You cant stop someone taking the optical out of their computer and re-recording that file onto a DAW of somekind... if the digital outs are taken the fidelity loss wont be noticable (but people love mp3's)...

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I read the article and I dont think it equates to the digital media issue.

Hackers will always be ahead of DRM and if they cant crack it someone will record it into a format thats not DRMed and put it online.

First it was message boards, then irc rooms, P2p, then torrent. The industry cant keep up with pirates.

The only way to stop it is to filter the internet the ISPs send out. Even if that happend im sure there will be a hack to get around it.

So now what do we do?

and that's the point - it's not about STOPPING piracy - it's about managing it within acceptable levels like any crime.

there is no law or enforcement that I know of that has effectively stopped 100% of any crime.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I started this thread to challenge the dinosaurs into thinking in a new way. instead, most of it has been the same ol bitching and moaning.

That's not true at all.
The fact is, at the moment there is no 'new way' that has any hope of working.
I'm fully prepared to explore new ways, but the other side of the debate are more interested in hanging on to the current way - where they get their music for free and don't have to worry about any other factors.
That way wont work if you want to keep a broad and interesting music community together.
You've kind of decided yourself the people who want to protect their work are dinosaurs. But are you, or anyone else offering a truly viable alternative?
Let's talk about that.

[Bob Olhsson]

The OLD way in fact is not getting paid. The new way is the post 1960s record business where people actually do get paid.

Returning to the old way of the 1920s is NOT progress as much as it appeals to the robber baron Wall Street types who are trying to jam the idea down everybody's throats.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

T
Returning to the old way of the 1920s is NOT progress

I totally agree.

For me this is all about short term vs long term.

Currently, through filesharing etc, the customer is enjoying the short term benefit of consuming product without having to pay for it.
As the cliche goes, if something is too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.
As such, I think if the current free for all prevails the availability of extremely diverse and good quality music will shrink.
You can see similar situations like this in all areas of life.
In shopping locations where price is the determining factor, you will see limited choice and largely low quality. In areas where discretionary income is available, you'll see some of the cheaper choices, plus life style choices, farmer markets etc......
Do you want your music scene to become downtown Bismark North Dakota, or downtown Manhattan?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

The OLD way in fact is not getting paid. The new way is the post 1960s record business where people actually do get paid.

Returning to the old way of the 1920s is NOT progress as much as it appeals to the robber baron Wall Street types who are trying to jam the idea down everybody's throats.

Well, "old" is relative, of course.

Can we stipulate that "old" for the purposes of this discussion refers to post-1960, pre-Napster? And that anything before 1960 may be defined as "prehistoric" or something similar?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by EFF

and that's the point - it's not about STOPPING piracy - it's about managing it within acceptable levels like any crime.

there is no law or enforcement that I know of that has effectively stopped 100% of any crime.

I would say that the point is to offer an alternative to the public that will be sufficiently attractive to draw them away from pirate sites.

To do this the following things are needed:

1. it must be no more difficult to use than the current generation of pirate sites.
2. it must give the illusion of offering free content, at least at the basic level of service
3. it must include a mechanism for the generation of revenue to cover royalty payments.

In addition the following attributes are desirable:

1. a means of providing enhanced services which the pirate competition lacks
2. a means of fostering a sense of community among users

I propose that we do the following:

1. Attempt to bring the operators of hobbyist operated, private, bittorrent sites into the industry, collecting revenue to meet royalty payments but otherwise operating as they see fit
2. Establish our own industry sponsored bittorrent tracker or trackers as a non-profit, employing advertising revenue and sales of enhanced services to generate revenue. This tracker would operate as a private site and would employ the inherent security features of the protocol to prevent sharing of content with non-members.

[rack gear]

john - you should really attend the next SF Music Tech Summit - see what you can do... not much is gonna happen here on GS.

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

I would say that the point is to offer an alternative to the public that will be sufficiently attractive to draw them away from pirate sites.

To do this the following things are needed:

1. it must be no more difficult to use than the current generation of pirate sites.
2. it must give the illusion of offering free content, at least at the basic level of service
3. it must include a mechanism for the generation of revenue to cover royalty payments.

In addition the following attributes are desirable:

1. a means of providing enhanced services which the pirate competition lacks
2. a means of fostering a sense of community among users

I propose that we do the following:

1. Attempt to bring the operators of hobbyist operated, private, bittorrent sites into the industry, collecting revenue to meet royalty payments but otherwise operating as they see fit
2. Establish our own industry sponsored bittorrent tracker or trackers as a non-profit, employing advertising revenue and sales of enhanced services to generate revenue. This tracker would operate as a private site and would employ the inherent security features of the protocol to prevent sharing of content with non-members.

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

I would say that the point is to offer an alternative to the public that will be sufficiently attractive to draw them away from pirate sites.

To do this the following things are needed:

1. it must be no more difficult to use than the current generation of pirate sites.
2. it must give the illusion of offering free content, at least at the basic level of service
3. it must include a mechanism for the generation of revenue to cover royalty payments.

In addition the following attributes are desirable:

1. a means of providing enhanced services which the pirate competition lacks
2. a means of fostering a sense of community among users

I propose that we do the following:

1. Attempt to bring the operators of hobbyist operated, private, bittorrent sites into the industry, collecting revenue to meet royalty payments but otherwise operating as they see fit
2. Establish our own industry sponsored bittorrent tracker or trackers as a non-profit, employing advertising revenue and sales of enhanced services to generate revenue. This tracker would operate as a private site and would employ the inherent security features of the protocol to prevent sharing of content with non-members.

Originally Posted by EFF

john - you should really attend the next SF Music Tech Summit - see what you can do... not much is gonna happen here on GS.

... THIS is productive, at the very least, the will and the thinking (contrary to the charge of the OP who seems more concerned with keeping things free and calling it progress . Ironic.)

It's funny that those same people counter with the idea that whatever we do, someone will find a new way to pirate music. As if the act of piracy was new! The EXACT same charge was made when blank cassette tapes came out and it never happened.

The act of piracy is nothing new.
The means of piracy is nothing new.

But the devaluation of music IS new.

You claim we're dinosaurs for debating piracy? I say you can't move forward until you understand piracy.

-Andrews

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by EFF

john - you should really attend the next SF Music Tech Summit - see what you can do... not much is gonna happen here on GS.

I would love to. - except that the admission cost prices me out of the market. If you have a code for participation without the damn fee please PM me.

As far as I'm concerned this is yet another case of the fossilized vested interests pricing real innovative thought out of participation. Again.

As usual the "industry" isn't serious about finding a workable solution.

[Bob Olhsson]

"New business models" are feeble attempts at putting lipstick on a pig.

The REAL issue is a bunch of massive technology corporations who don't want individual, non-employee "content creators" to have enough power to play them off against each other financially for exclusive access to large audiences.

[elginchris]

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

... THIS is productive, at the very least, the will and the thinking (contrary to the charge of the OP who seems more concerned with keeping things free and calling it progress . Ironic.)

It's funny that those same people counter with the idea that whatever we do, someone will find a new way to pirate music. As if the act of piracy was new! The EXACT same charge was made when blank cassette tapes came out and it never happened.

The act of piracy is nothing new.
The means of piracy is nothing new.

But the devaluation of music IS new.

You claim we're dinosaurs for debating piracy? I say you can't move forward until you understand piracy.

-Andrews

I only said free to the end user (fans). I still believe in creator rights. If a song gets radio play the artist should get paid etc..

What I dont understand is why the industry doesn't profit-ize (not a word i know) giving away free music. All they need to do is set up a web site, sell some ads, bring on the fans.

I don't see why thats so hard.. Oh wait, i guess when you've been raping fans for their money for years its hard to do it any other way.

[EddySeven]

this post is bull****.

If you make a product and put you heart, soul, mind and time into producng it, then why should you give it away for free or have it stolen from you?

If you made a a physical product, out of materials and someone stole it, you could call the police and if someone wanted it and said they wouldn't pay you, then you simply woudln't give it to them for free.

So why should much be any different?

I rest my case

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

I would love to. - except that the admission cost prices me out of the market. If you have a code for participation without the damn fee please PM me.

As far as I'm concerned this is yet another case of the fossilized vested interests pricing real innovative thought out of participation. Again.

As usual the "industry" isn't serious about finding a workable solution.

really? it's a hundred bucks.
SF MusicTech Summit #7 - Sfmusictech - Zisk- Eventbrite

seriously John - a hundred bucks doesn't sound like a lot of money to get access to these people for a whole day - most conferences of this type are at least 300-500 for a day, and into over a thousand for a multi day conference.

I don't think organizers charging hundred dollars is representative that the "industry" isn't serious about finding a workable solution. To the contrary, the barrier to entry is absolutely minimal from a biz dev point of view.

a decent lawyer alone is $300 an hour.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I only said free to the end user (fans). I still believe in creator rights. If a song gets radio play the artist should get paid etc..

What I dont understand is why the industry doesn't profit-ize (not a word i know) giving away free music. All they need to do is set up a web site, sell some ads, bring on the fans.

I don't see why thats so hard.. Oh wait, i guess when you've been raping fans for their money for years its hard to do it any other way.

if it's so easy, why don't you do it? I mean - you could be making millions showing all the industry clowns how smart you are?

or maybe it's that none of those models are working... like spotify...

pandora is, but the revenue is still minimal overall, and it's in addition to not instead of ... why do I get the sense you've never run a business or done a P/L in your life?

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

"New business models" are feeble attempts at putting lipstick on a pig.

The REAL issue is a bunch of massive technology corporations who don't want individual, non-employee "content creators" to have enough power to play them off against each other financially for exclusive access to large audiences.

isn't that what youtube does though?

YouTube - sxephil's Channel
YouTube - ijustine's Channel
YouTube - realannoyingorange's Channel
YouTube - TheStation's Channel
YouTube - WHATTHEBUCKSHOW's Channel
YouTube - davedays's Channel

?

[elginchris]

Originally Posted by EFF

if it's so easy, why don't you do it? I mean - you could be making millions showing all the industry clowns how smart you are?

or maybe it's that none of those models are working... like spotify...

pandora is, but the revenue is still minimal overall, and it's in addition to not instead of ... why do I get the sense you've never run a business or done a P/L in your life?

I've thought about it and i I would if i had the time and resources. Maybe i will one day.

2nd, I apologies up front for not knowing already but what is your solution?

3rd, Are you associated with the EFF? If so, which one are you here Board of Directors | Electronic Frontier Foundation

thanks

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I've thought about it and i I would if i had the time and resources. Maybe i will one day.

cool - keep us posted.

Originally Posted by elginchris

2nd, I apologies up front for not knowing already but what is your solution?

better legislation and enforcement of the existing laws - I don't think there is another solution. It's the pro-pirates and apologists who seem to think there is, but as yet they've been unable to present one that is viable...

so yeah, legislation and enforcement.

Originally Posted by elginchris

3rd, Are you associated with the EFF? If so, which one are you here Board of Directors | Electronic Frontier Foundation

thanks

I am on the board of directors of Electronic Freedom Fighters, a Musicians Advocacy Group. Who is the Electronic Frontier Foundation? That's funny we both have the same three letters...

[elginchris]

Originally Posted by EFF

cool - keep us posted.



better legislation and enforcement of the existing laws - I don't think there is another solution. It's the pro-pirates and apologists who seem to think there is, but as yet they've been unable to present one that is viable...

so yeah, legislation and enforcement.



I am on the board of directors of Electronic Freedom Fighters, a Musicians Advocacy Group. Who is the Electronic Frontier Foundation? That's funny we both have the same three letters...

I thought you were with the other EFF
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending Freedom in the Digital World

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I only said free to the end user (fans). I still believe in creator rights. If a song gets radio play the artist should get paid etc..

What I dont understand is why the industry doesn't profit-ize (not a word i know) giving away free music. All they need to do is set up a web site, sell some ads, bring on the fans.

I don't see why thats so hard.. Oh wait, i guess when you've been raping fans for their money for years its hard to do it any other way.

So wait, music should be free for fans to steal, but radio should pay for it? Why? Because they sell advertising off that content? Sounds great for the moment...

All us musicians need to do is attach our free music to advertising. Brilliant I'll go tell Marilyn Manson that Disney should be calling any moment now

What happens when Coke Cola doesn't like a line in your lyrics?
What happens when "Drive My Car" gets changed to "Drive my Honda?"
What happens to ANY artist who doesn't fit into the sanitary world of Procter & Gamble?

THAT is the reality of your solution. And I have VAST experience in that world. Happy to supply ample credits to prove it.

So... next!

Ok, on to the "Music should be free because we've been 'raping' fans for so long." Gee, if I had known about the "Forced to buy music" program, I would have signed up YEARS ago!

Justifications. Excuses. Positions wrapped in self-righteous pseudo-dogma... sound familiar?

-Andrews

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by elginchris

I thought you were with the other EFF
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending Freedom in the Digital World

nah, unlike them we're actually for protecting artists rights.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

So wait, music should be free for fans to steal, but radio should pay for it? Why? Because they sell advertising off that content? Sounds great for the moment...

All us musicians need to do is attach our free music to advertising. Brilliant I'll go tell Marilyn Manson that Disney should be calling any moment now

What happens when Coke Cola doesn't like a line in your lyrics?
What happens when "Drive My Car" gets changed to "Drive my Honda?"
What happens to ANY artist who doesn't fit into the sanitary world of Procter & Gamble?

THAT is the reality of your solution. And I have VAST experience in that world. Happy to supply ample credits to prove it.

So... next!

Ok, on to the "Music should be free because we've been 'raping' fans for so long." Gee, if I had known about the "Forced to buy music" program, I would have signed up YEARS ago!

Justifications. Excuses. Positions wrapped in self-righteous pseudo-dogma... sound familiar?

-Andrews

exactly...

Everything Will Be Corp Sponsored Funding...