Interesting article: RIAA Scores $105M USD from Limewire, Gives Nothing to Artists

[rack gear]

just more big tech, pro-piracy propaganda... paying a $105m must sting a little... How much money was Limewire paying artists again? Oh wait...

[Matt Allison]

Funny, DailyTech never seemed to whine about Limewire not paying artists.

Hypocritical douchenozzles.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by Matt Allison

Funny, DailyTech never seemed to whine about Limewire not paying artists.

Hypocritical douchenozzles.

Funny, that you never seem to whine about labels not paying artists.

[Matt Allison]

I work for labels every day. I get paid well and on time.

So spare me that bullshit canard.

Thanks.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Neenja

Funny, that you never seem to whine about labels not paying artists.

Funny that artists get paid by labels before the labels even make a dollar...

[terryhart]

Originally Posted by rack gear

just more big tech, pro-piracy propaganda... paying a $105m must sting a little... How much money was Limewire paying artists again? Oh wait...

Bingo. And Limewire was pulling in quite a haul -- 8 figures a year before it was shut down.

[Matt Allison]

Originally Posted by deepthoughts

The artists are suffering as a result of piracy. Why shouldn't the money go to them??

Do you have any proof they won't see any of the money, or are you just blindly lapping up whatever the tech sites feed you?

Perhaps you should think up a way something like this could be done.

At this point, it's not even clear how the money will be split up by the labels.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by Matt Allison

Do you have any proof they won't see any of the money, or are you just blindly lapping up whatever the tech sites feed you?

Perhaps you should think up a way something like this could be done.

At this point, it's not even clear how the money will be split up by the labels.

They're not splitting it up. They're putting it towards further anti-piracy and lobbying. Makes sense to me.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Oh-no's

DailyTech - RIAA Scores $105M USD from Limewire, Gives Nothing to Artists

What a load of bollocks! I notice that the article prominently repeats the totally discredited bit of pro-pirate propaganda that pirates are the biggest purchasers of legal music.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by deepthoughts

Rather than making this into a political discussion, there is an interesting point to be made. I think they money should INDEED be paid back to artists. Somehow the people who are always complaining about the poor artists seem to be missing the point. The artists are suffering as a result of piracy. Why shouldn't the money go to them??

"Artists"...... Hmmmm.......

And how exactly would you determine how much money got paid to which artist? And what about the thousands of artists whose tracks were pirated but not featured by name in the suit for the same of expediency? Seems to me that the artists that would need it the most - low profit indies - would be least likely to get anything.

Better to fund increased anti-piracy efforts that benefit everyone!

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Neenja

Funny, that you never seem to whine about labels not paying artists.

Probably because they are paying what they legally have to and what they are contracted to.
Funny how we haven't seen a backlash from musicians on this decision to invest the money in fighting piracy.
The only backlash is from the piracy apologists!!!

The idea that the majority of musicians are against the major labels and against the RIAA is pure fantasy. A total silence, a lack of lobbying politicians by musicians, or even blogging by professional musicians against this action should tell you all you need to know.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by deepthoughts

Rather than making this into a political discussion, there is an interesting point to be made. I think they money should INDEED be paid back to artists. Somehow the people who are always complaining about the poor artists seem to be missing the point. The artists are suffering as a result of piracy. Why shouldn't the money go to them??

Maybe we should ask the signed artists and not people like you.
Oh wait, there is no protest from 'the artists'.
It seems they agree with the decision, or artists lobby groups such as FAC and the various worldwide musicians unions would be screaming loudly.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

"Artists"...... Hmmmm.......

And how exactly would you determine how much money got paid to which artist? And what about the thousands of artists whose tracks were pirated but not featured by name in the suit for the same of expediency? Seems to me that the artists that would need it the most - low profit indies - would be least likely to get anything.

Better to fund increased anti-piracy efforts that benefit everyone!

How much of the RIAA's music was pirated? For that matter, how much of your music was pirated?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Neenja

Funny, that you never seem to whine about labels not paying artists.

That's because that in 99.999% of all cases labels DON'T "not pay artists". Sometimes the artists are too dumb or stoned to understand that the advance they received was not a gift. Occasionally the artist doesn't get their advance because they were ripped off by an unscrupulous manager or lawyer, but that's not the label's fault, now is it? For example Jimi Hendrix is reported to have died broke - not because of his label, but because of Mike Jeffries, his manager. That sort of thing is MUCH more common than artists getting ripped off by labels.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

That's because that in 99.999% of all cases labels DON'T "not pay artists". Sometimes the artists are too dumb or stoned to understand that the advance they received was not a gift. Occasionally the artist doesn't get their advance because they were ripped off by an unscrupulous manager or lawyer, but that's not the label's fault, now is it? For example Jimi Hendrix is reported to have died broke - not because of his label, but because of Mike Jeffries, his manager. That sort of thing is MUCH more common than artists getting ripped off by labels.

Everyone I know (and I know a lot) are owed money they are having problems getting, can't get or would be too much money to get from the labels. This is money they are contractually owed. Henry Rollins says he never gets money from Blag Flag albums and there is no way that they are not payed for in 2011.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Neenja

Everyone I know (and I know a lot) are owed money they are having problems getting

Most of the people I know owe their labels money.
I thought that was you and Psalad's usual tack, no one makes money from a major deal. Now you're saying they do, they just find it hard to actual get the money owing.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by deepthoughts

Maybe we should.

When you find one, let me know.

No, when you can prove most signed musicians are protesting against the funding of anti piracy actions get back to us.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Neenja

How much of the RIAA's music was pirated? For that matter, how much of your music was pirated?

Ahem......

It would appear that after all these months you still don't understand what the RIAA is.

The RIAA isn't a company. It doesn't "have music". It doesn't make a profit. That's not what it's for.

the RIAA is a TRADE ASSOCIATION, like the AMA or the National Association of Realtors, whose function is to represent and set standards for the record industry. As such it represents all the labels, or at least all the labels that join the organization.

And it would appear to be using this settlement for the good of all its members, and all artists.

How much of my music (personally) was pirated? Probably not much. How much of my guitar player's music was pirated? Quite a bit. Yep. Just did a Google search. Quite a bit. With at least two different bands.

Edit: Did a bit more searching. Yes, some of my music is in fact being pirated.

Next question?

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Most of the people I know owe their labels money.
I thought that was you and Psalad's usual tack, no one makes money from a major deal. Now you're saying they do, they just find it hard to actual get the money owing.

Just because one owes the label money doesn't mean that there isn't money owed to artist. You know this but are completely immune to having an honest discussion.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Ahem......

It would appear that after all these months you still don't understand what the RIAA is.

The RIAA isn't a company. It doesn't "have music". It doesn't make a profit. That's not what it's for.

the RIAA is a TRADE ASSOCIATION, like the AMA or the National Association of Realtors, whose function is to represent and set standards for the record industry. As such it represents all the labels, or at least all the labels that join the organization.

How much of my music (personally) was pirated? Probably not much. How much of my guitar player's music was pirated? Quite a bit. Yep. Just did a Google search. Quite a bit. With at least two different bands.

Next question?

You are the one here complaining, not him. If one can't criticize labels if they aren't signed, why can you and others complain about piracy when you aren't an artist and aren't being pirated?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Neenja

Everyone I know (and I know a lot) are owed money they are having problems getting, can't get or would be too much money to get from the labels. This is money they are contractually owed. Henry Rollins says he never gets money from Blag Flag albums and there is no way that they are not payed for in 2011.

You know Henry?

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Neenja

completely immune to having an honest discussion.

Talking of which -
You cite Rollins and Black Flag, but their albums came out on an independent label (SST) owned and run by the band members themselves (Greg Ginn).
The label (hardly a major) had a chequered history from the start, with dodgy practices, Ginn going to jail right at the start of the band etc... and other well known bands like Sonic Youth and Husker Du falling out over accounting practices and lack of enthusiasm from the label.
But this is somehow an example of labels across the board failing to pay artists properly.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Neenja

why can you and others complain about piracy when you aren't an artist and aren't being pirated?

So I'm allowed to complain about piracy then?
Great, thanks for your permission.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

You know Henry?

No, but I can read.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by chrisso

So I'm allowed to complain about piracy then?
Great, thanks for your permission.

I'd like to listen to one of your records. Where might I find one?

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Talking of which -
You cite Rollins and Black Flag, but their albums came out on an independent label (SST) owned and run by the band members themselves (Greg Ginn).
The label (hardly a major) had a chequered history from the start, with dodgy practices, Ginn going to jail right at the start of the band etc... and other well known bands like Sonic Youth and Husker Du falling out over accounting practices and lack of enthusiasm from the label.
But this is somehow an example of labels across the board failing to pay artists properly.

It is one of many. Though I suspect you will always have a defense.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Neenja

Just because one owes the label money doesn't mean that there isn't money owed to artist. You know this but are completely immune to having an honest discussion.

Say WHAT?

The way a standard contract reads is that the labels advances money for various expenses to the artist and provides other services such as promotion and distribution. Then the label deducts the expense of these things from the artist's royalties before the artist receives royalties from sales.

In other words, as long as the artist owes the label money, the label doesn't owe the artist, although the label MAY, AT THEIR DISCRETION advance the artist additional funding for promotion, recording, tour support, etc. - WHICH ALSO MUST BE REPAID before the artist receives royalties.

[Neenja]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Say WHAT?

The way a standard contract reads is that the labels advances money for various expenses to the artist and provides other services such as promotion and distribution. Then the label deducts the expense of these things from the artist's royalties before the artist receives royalties from sales.

In other words, as long as the artist owes the label money, the label doesn't owe the artist, although the label MAY, AT THEIR DISCRETION advance the artist additional funding for promotion, recording, tour support, etc. - WHICH ALSO MUST BE REPAID before the artist receives royalties.

I see you have never been a signed artist.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Neenja

You are the one here complaining, not him. If one can't criticize labels if they aren't signed, why can you and others complain about piracy when you aren't an artist and aren't being pirated?

I am an artist and I am being pirated. Please re-read the edited version of my post.