The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
I think the reason music sales are in massive decline is:
Old 6th September 2012
  #301
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
what law would that be exactly? because there's no new law needed to do that... which is why you follow the money... and put the BUSINESSES operating illegally behind bars.
Great news. Hundreds, even thousands of tech companies and websites were forced to shut down in the past 10 years as a result of litigation from content companies. Content companies have the power to literally force a well funded company out of existence with a single, relatively cheap lawsuit.

Even better! Sometimes, the authorities will shut down a company and ask questions later. Actually convicting someone of a crime is just a minor unnecessary technicality. Who needs convictions when an accusation is just as good?

Hooray for the music business.
Old 6th September 2012
  #302
Quote:
Originally Posted by aroundtheworld View Post
It's difficult to understand how what you said relates to what I said. Kids love -- and lines form for -- video game releases because of network-based console digital restriction management (DRM) techniques? I don't think passion for video games exists because of digital restriction management methods.
yeah right, it's funny how a product actually sells and grows when it's not easy to steal it.
Old 6th September 2012
  #303
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Great news. Hundreds, even thousands of tech companies and websites were forced to shut down in the past 10 years as a result of litigation from content companies. Content companies have the power to literally force a well funded company out of existence with a single, relatively cheap lawsuit.
that's funny and great fiction at the same time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Even better! Sometimes, the authorities will shut down a company and ask questions later. Actually convicting someone of a crime is just a minor unnecessary technicality. Who needs convictions when an accusation is just as good?

Hooray for the music business.
hooray for the law and the protection of rights of individual creators. expect more.

it's about money. a lot of advertising money. follow the money. stop the money, stop the problem.

but tell me again how it's OK for these sites to profit illegally from Neil Young and Tom Waits work?
1
Share
Old 6th September 2012
  #304
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

That's the spirit rack_gear. But what about Emily White?

We must follow everyone. Follow their money. Follow everything they do. Because they might be doing things that hurt us.

We need to put cameras in people's homes and watch everything they do. If we know everything people do, we will know if they do anything to harm us. That is how we will stop the freehadists. This will stop the problem. I am sure of it.

I personally can't wait for this great utopia!
Old 6th September 2012
  #305
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Have any more of what you're smoking?
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
That's the spirit rack_gear. But what about Emily White?

We must follow everyone. Follow their money. Follow everything they do. Because they might be doing things that hurt us.

We need to put cameras in people's homes and watch everything they do. If we know everything people do, we will know if they do anything to harm us. That is how we will stop the freehadists. This will stop the problem. I am sure of it.

I personally can't wait for this great utopia!
Old 6th September 2012
  #306
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
That's the spirit rack_gear. But what about Emily White?
what about her?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
We must follow everyone. Follow their money. Follow everything they do. Because they might be doing things that hurt us.
no. just look at the illegally operating business and follow the money to/from the business. it's just RICO 101... you've heard of RICO, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
We need to put cameras in people's homes and watch everything they do. If we know everything people do, we will know if they do anything to harm us. That is how we will stop the freehadists. This will stop the problem. I am sure of it.
ahhh... if you say so... paranoid much?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
I personally can't wait for this great utopia!
good for you!

wow... just wow... you have a very active imagination and it appears you can't tell the difference between a Business and a Person... this is what happens when you have no defense for nonsense like this:

U2 Exploited by United Airlines, Jet Blue, HP, State Farm, Westin, Urban Outfitters, Sprint, AT&T, Amazon, Disney Resorts, Crate and Barrel | The Trichordist

I'd like to see these sites operating at a loss using their own money... ah yeah... don't hold your breath. when the money is gone, the business is gone. paypal is already cutting off payment processing, Visa, Mastercard and American Express are next. Then the banks... pretty soon it won't be hard to tell the white hats from the black hats... and many will see the light and come to the light (or face consequences).

and by the way, you know who'd bright idea it was to suggest "following the money"... it was Google... looks like the trichordist (and others) are taking them up on this...

Google and Rapidshare are about to throw the whole Free Culture / Internet Community under the buss to save their own Business Interests... but that really shouldn't surprise you, this is about money. Always has been.

Google: "follow the money" to fight piracy | News | PC Pro

RapidShare publishes privacy-bashing anti-piracy manifesto | Digital Trends

oh man... and you should see their IPEC letter! It's a classic!

When it finally comes down to it, when their purpose has been served, like all good serf's the free culture movement is road kill on the highway to Google's quarterly profits... watch and learn.
Old 6th September 2012
  #307
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

We need to stop the Emily Whites of the world also. Personally rack_gear, I think you are just too soft.
Old 6th September 2012
  #308
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
We need to stop the Emily Whites of the world also. Personally rack_gear, I think you are just too soft.
That may be your opinion, but I'm focused on stopping the illegally operating businesses, exploiting artists for profit.

The hypocrisy of the free culture movement is just too funny. They attack the RIAA while stealing from artists themselves. At least the labels pay artists and develop their careers. There is no consent or compensation from the sites that illegal exploit artists for profit.
Old 6th September 2012
  #309
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
That may be your opinion, I'm focused on illegally operating businesses, exploiting artists for profit.
That's way too narrow a focus. Don't you support musicians?

Someone can share an iPod or external HDD with 100,000+ songs with another very quickly. This is a big deal. RIAA/IFPI even says offline sharing is the #1 issue. Emily White is just one example. Will this get any better by shuttering websites (which ICE thankfully is doing on a large scale without wasting time with pointless things like evidence)? We need to eliminate the issue or it will just shift to some other medium. The fact is SERIOUS problems need SERIOUS enforcement.
Old 6th September 2012
  #310
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
That's way too narrow a focus. Don't you support musicians?

Someone can share an iPod or external HDD with 100,000+ songs with another very quickly. This is a big deal. RIAA/IFPI even says offline sharing is the #1 issue. Emily White is just one example. Will this get any better by shuttering websites (which ICE thankfully doing on a large scale without wasting time with pointless things like evidence)? We need to eliminate the issue or it will just shift to some other medium. The fact is SERIOUS problems need SERIOUS enforcement.
Managing the illegal businesses, which ICE is doing, is a great start. Enterprise level, mass scale, exploitation for profit is the focus. Billions of dollars a year are being illegally laundered through ad networks.

like any crime the goal is to manage it, as stopping it is unrealistic... from speeding to murder, no law or enforcement ever stopped any crime. but we also haven't decided to live in a world without laws or enforcement, nor do we live in a police state.
Old 6th September 2012
  #311
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
Managing the illegal businesses, which ICE is doing, is a great start. Enterprise level, mass scale, exploitation for profit is the focus. Billions of dollars a year are being illegally laundered through ad networks.

like any crime the goal is to manage it, as stopping it is unrealistic... from speeding to murder, no law or enforcement ever stopped any crime. but we also haven't decided to live in a world without laws or enforcement, nor do we live in a police state.
I don't think you understand the extent of the problem. This is the music industry we are talking about here. It's worth protecting.

I'm glad you think ICE is doing a good job. I also agree with ICE that copyright holders should be able to take down websites without providing any evidence of wrongdoing. A copyright holder is by nature moral and always tells the truth, and would have a very good eye about who is stealing his hard work. When it comes to protecting music, an accusation is evidence enough. No additional evidence should ever be needed. Those Congresspeople questioning ICE's authority here hate music and musicians.
Old 6th September 2012
  #312
Lives for gear
 
O.F.F.'s Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
nonsense.

remember that each decade saw it's own added consumer competition...

the 70s saw the initial release of VCRs and Video Cassettes as well as video game consoles and cartridges,

the 80s saw home video boom as VHS matured, cable tv boomed, new types of youth sports took hold,

the 90s saw the introduction of DVDs, home computers became household items, people started paying for internet service, and cell phones began to be common place...

and yet through each one of those decades (without rampant online piracy) sales grew steadily until broadband reaches ubiquity at the turn of the century...

then, the sales plummet.
Here you go a chart showing where the money goes:

Music Sale Losses Due to Gaming, DVDs, Not P2P
Old 6th September 2012
  #313
Lives for gear
 
kennybro's Avatar
I think it's probably agreed that off-line file sharing is a huge part of the problem, and stopping that is simply not a possiblity. People will share their information with their friends.

These videos of FBI attacking bootleg distribution centers has nothing to do with music file sharing. This is about hitting organizations that distribute fake hard media and merchandise, like bootleg feature film copies, and phony Levis and Gucci.

File sharing is the real thing that is killing music sales across the board. Why pay for something when you can get it free, especially since the reality of digitization itself has severly devalued the song, monitarity. When you bought vinyl, each song was literally worth about a buck. An iPod with 10,000songs in it devalues each song to nearly $0 for the owner. Human nature.

Corps abusing artists? Since when is it my job to chase Ford for using an artsit's song? That's the artist's job. If they don't care, why should I?

True story. from 94 to 2002, I was Media Production Manager for a fortune 250. In 2001, my CEO and CFO both personally insisted that I use Pink Houses for our annual share holders video. I contacted Mellencamp and was told "forgetaboutit, at any payment!" They still insisted, and I declined, and it caused me much trouble. We didn't use it, but I ended up having to produce something that aped it.

The next guy would have used the original without calling JM, and probably gotten away clean; and if I would have known the trouble it was going to cause me, I might have reconsidered appeasing my CEO, instead of trying to educate him. I feel good about standing my ground ethically, but I wonder about the cost to me personally. I stood up for the rights of a multi-millionaire superstar, while my position, income, family security, insurance, etc... were all put in jeorpardy for it. JM didn't send me a note of thanks.
Old 6th September 2012
  #314
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf LeProducer View Post
Most of this music sucks ass. Plain and simple.

I would not buy anything from Adele, Justin Bibber, Lady Gag Gag, Taylor Swift, Reeyawna, Leetle Wayne, Goat e "yea." Etc, etc, etc...
Sorry but I don't see much difference between the artists you listed and the Backstreet Boys, Nsync, Britney Spears, Ricky Martin, Kid Rock, etc; all of whom were selling millions of records in 1999 when records sales for the industry were at a peak. Would anyone argue that the artists I listed were way better than the artists topping the charts today? It seems to me that the artists at the top charts now are pretty much analogous to those in '99. The fact that you don't like the music in the billboard top 40 really has nothing to do with the decline in sales of the music industry; it's just an excuse people want to use so they can ignore the massive effect that illegal downloads have on the industry.
Old 6th September 2012
  #315
Gear Head
 

What's sad is that young people who have grown up with the web seem to think that free movies and music are the way things should be because it is all they know. People are really good at coming up with excuses to justify their behavior, especially if it is something they've grown up with and accept as normal. (I've read that in the past people used to justify slavery by using Darwin's theory of evolution and saying it was survival of the fittest!)

Here is an interview with Jaron Lanier (who has professional experience in both the Tech industry and as a professional musician) from the Guardian that I think is relevant. He discusses the failure of web 2.0 aka "free culture".

Jaron Lanier talks about the failure of Web2.0 with Aleks Krotoski - YouTube
Old 6th September 2012
  #316
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.F.F. View Post
Here you go a chart showing where the money goes:

Music Sale Losses Due to Gaming, DVDs, Not P2P


good lord, you could show it going to converse sneakers as well as any other rival good that is not easily pirated... it's funny how when people don't have to pay for something they used to pay for, how it makes more money available for other products...
Old 6th September 2012
  #317
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
I don't think you understand the extent of the problem. This is the music industry we are talking about here. It's worth protecting.

I'm glad you think ICE is doing a good job. I also agree with ICE that copyright holders should be able to take down websites without providing any evidence of wrongdoing. A copyright holder is by nature moral and always tells the truth, and would have a very good eye about who is stealing his hard work. When it comes to protecting music, an accusation is evidence enough. No additional evidence should ever be needed. Those Congresspeople questioning ICE's authority here hate music and musicians.
it's not about the music business, it's about individual rights of individual creators and artists. it's also about all IP. maybe you heard about Apple Vs Samsung... see, here's the thing... Stealing is wrong and when a Jury keeps holding up that principle you might want to rethink your position here (tenenbaum/thomas/samsung).

I don't think copyright and IP laws are going to get any weaker anytime soon. But, the noose will get tighter on those exploiting other peoples work for profit.

Samsung just learned a $1 Billion Dollar Lesson, and that has nothing to do with the music business. Wake up bro...
Old 6th September 2012
  #318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh P View Post
What's sad is that young people who have grown up with the web seem to think that free movies and music are the way things should be because it is all they know. People are really good at coming up with excuses to justify their behavior, especially if it is something they've grown up with and accept as normal. (I've read that in the past people used to justify slavery by using Darwin's theory of evolution and saying it was survival of the fittest!)

Here is an interview with Jaron Lanier (who has professional experience in both the Tech industry and as a professional musician) from the Guardian that I think is relevant. He discusses the failure of web 2.0 aka "free culture".

Jaron Lanier talks about the failure of Web2.0 with Aleks Krotoski - YouTube
Old 6th September 2012
  #319
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
it's not about the music business, it's about individual rights of individual creators and artists. it's also about all IP. maybe you heard about Apple Vs Samsung... see, here's the thing... Stealing is wrong and when a Jury keeps holding up that principle you might want to rethink your position here (tenenbaum/thomas/samsung).

I don't think copyright and IP laws are going to get any weaker anytime soon. But, the noose will get tighter on those exploiting other peoples work for profit.

Samsung just learned a $1 Billion Dollar Lesson, and that has nothing to do with the music business. Wake up bro...
Agreed 100%. The fact is, we need harsh measures to show these theives who is boss. We should be putting cameras in people's houses. If they have nothing to hide, why would they care? How else can we stop offline filesharing?

We must suspend privacy, due process and free expression rights to protect the music business and individual creators. ICE is doing good work, but they need to do more to advance our cause.

The noose will tighten until the consumers know by force who their boss is. Let that noose tighten until every accused filesharer is rotting in jail. For the music!
Old 6th September 2012
  #320
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamon View Post
The popular showcased music doesn't seem any worse than ever. But the part about you not buying it is key, because even many of the people who like it won't buy it.

The word "piracy" is incorrect I think, and should be replaced with "internet", or "digital global information distribution network". Things would change with or without piracy.

It used to be that a magazine was a treat of tantalizing tidbits of info. People would pay for a magazine, because of that package of reward, that tickles the brain.

But the packaging was only necessary because, the info needs to be delivered somehow, and how else could it be done? Today, it can be done online.

Instead of paying for a physical package of info, you can see it for free on any internet-capable device, many of which fit in your shirt pocket. That's not piracy.

It's a new model. When is the last time you've used a physical dictionary, or phonebook? Maybe you do and are left out of this new way, but most don't anymore.

Why would you? Why pay for a dictionary, magazine, or use a phonebook when it's all available faster, cheaper, and with the added bonus of social comments?

It's ad-supported now. Even this forum. We're not in a bar, or trade show, where people pay some kind of entrance fee. There's a banner ad ^ for "stereo impulse shaper".

Is that piracy? It's business, but one where the time and place for payment has changed, because the internet lowered costs, and it's not worth it to pay pennies 24/7.

Instead of micropayments, which all of this is worth, we shift it over to the advertisers, who handle it for the masses, and it is how all of this works, from Google to Gearslutz.

But you know what? I still keep getting phonebooks! They go right in the recycle bin, but they keep coming. Some people just refuse to let go of their replaced ways.

Do you want to be one of those people? Do you want to complain about people stealing info that used to only come from your high-priced package of dead tree print?

I would pay someone to take records away from me. I would pay for all my CDs to disappear, because they take up space, and become burden I must deal with someday.

I don't want to buy music in a packaged form like a book. I still want music, but I also do not want to pay $1 for a single song packaged in compressed lossy MP3 format.

Music, like all information, is very cheap now, because much of the cost in the past was in the production, packaging, distribution, and marketing of all kinds of information.

All of those things have dropped extraordinarily in cost, not because of piracy, but because of global electronic distribution channels becoming commonplace.

If you think music sucks today, you're still just looking to those old magazine stands. If you're wondering why no one is paying, while looking there, your conclusion makes sense.

But the real reason is because most people don't need magazine stands anymore. Any existing magazine shop full of them is a relic from decades ago. Things change.

There's so many of these old perspectives still trying to thrive in this forum. Strange, considering this is the internet, and we are talking for free, without pirating.

Even if no one ever pirated a single song, all of this would be happening. It'd just be like the free online dictionary you use, or the free TV show you watch on FOX.com.

Music is cheap. Anyone with the potential can produce it for very cheap in their bedroom during spare time. Then deliver it to the world, for free, instantly.

People aren't buying, because packages of information are like paper maps and phonebooks; no one needs them anymore, and it's actually burden to deal with them.

I can load up a website, and listen to music, for free, without pirating. But the costs are so low, pirating mp3s covers the costs in exchange for promotion and distribution.

Pirating music is a service. Just like, urbandict.com is to dictionaries. People are sharing information, and most people will go there instead of buying some dumb slang dictionary.

As soon as you can realize that, the sooner you stop trying to spread your dead trees to people's driveways, and join the world as it flourishes today, with new distribution.

If music sucks, make it better, and package it in a form where people don't have to pay the cost of having to pull out their wallet, while still making it worth it to you.

It's not enough to just have great music. You need to understand, even if you made the most amazing music ever, it's not worth the burdens involved with paying for it.

One reason is because it's work to make the payment, and there's fees involved. PayPal minimizes some of that, but it's not worth it to type my password for a <=$1 sale.

It's also too much to think about. If you had to think if you wanted to pay some fee to read every thread on this forum, you wouldn't bother to read, and the forum would die.

It also requires layers of complication built into the information, to try to control it and protect it from being freely exchanged, which increases the costs to use it legitly too.

I do not want to have to think to pay something, type in my password, go through the confirmation process, just to get something that is locked up needing more work to use.

It's too much! No music is worth that, because I don't just listen to 1 artist, I listen to 10s to 100s. I also don't know what music I like until I have it and gave it a chance.

There's just no reason to pay. Even if you did love Lady GaGa. Is she really worth the efforts involved with buying a CD or whatever, getting tangled up in restriction?

Just pulling out a CD and inserting it into your car stereo player is too much cost nowadays. The same can be done without thought or action, with auto-MP3 play.

But yeah, there are lots of free legal listening channels, and there are still lots of opportunities, and yeah, you should still hope for better music to be produced.

You just should be sure to recognize the rest of the picture so you don't focus purely on making better stuff, without realizing that it doesn't matter how good it is...

People still won't buy.

Thanks for the opportunity to respond. Thanks for reading. There might've been some words that interested you, but I know you wouldn't have paid for them. Instead I produce and share this text from within the new information distribution models, where I don't get paid directly. Yet we still do it, we still write and share. It's worth it, just like it's worth trying to produce better music, even if no one pays for it directly. There's ways to make this work, and it's exciting times to be alive for people who love info.
You are obviously young and I admire you for embracing & attempting to adapt to the "new model". What you fail to address is that why would artist "bother" to go beyond themselves or even sacrifice some part of their well being ("being an artist") to make something timeless that changes peoples lives if inserting a cd or turning a knob or whatever is too much hassle for the 21st century human? Quality of "albums" suffer in the new model as it stands. Your listening experience, while exciting and full of variety, seems to me like it must be shallow & much less meaningful then when music was a cultural force 50's-90's. Back in the "olden days" when a great record came out, those in the know would listen to it over and over. It became part of the fabric of ones life not just consumable "information". It was potentially worth more than a few bucks, but often priceless.
Old 6th September 2012
  #321
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

mello,

That's true, not having much makes the stuff you have seem more valuable. When all you have when stranded in a remote island is a volleyball, you might eventually befriend it and call it Wilson.

Poor Wilson. :( He never hurt anyone.
Old 6th September 2012
  #322
Gear Addict
 

"those in the know" still buy music. It's the casual consumer that has moved on to other things.
Old 6th September 2012
  #323
Lives for gear
 
O.F.F.'s Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post


good lord, you could show it going to converse sneakers as well as any other rival good that is not easily pirated... it's funny how when people don't have to pay for something they used to pay for, how it makes more money available for other products...
If you really believe that music sales would recover to previous levels by stopping piracy, which can only be done by handing control of the internet to governments and/or corporations, you are truly naive and pretty much completely clueless regarding the greater scheme behind it all.
A voluntary tool in the bag of big brother. You scare me.

Sadly delving deeper into this would make this very political indeed which unfortunately has been banned on this forum some time ago.
Old 6th September 2012
  #324
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.F.F. View Post
If you really believe that music sales would recover to previous levels by stopping piracy, which can only be done by handing control of the internet to governments and/or corporations, you are truly naive and pretty much completely clueless regarding the greater scheme behind it all.
A voluntary tool in the bag of big brother. You scare me.

Sadly delving deeper into this would make this very political indeed which unfortunately has been banned on this forum some time ago.

You scare me. People who talk like you are the blind tool of tech corporations and you can't even see that you're a pawn in their scheme. "What scheme? The only scheming is done by evil record companies, their lawyers and their evil pawns in government."

Oh, you all think there's no scheming coming from the executives running the trillion dollar internet information business that is your damn nipple?

One certain company has everyone's email, business paperwork, files, address books, pictures and records every seach everyone on the planet does. And you think that all of a sudden the artists (the arch enemy of big brother) who want to get paid for their hard work and sacrifice are aligned with big brother?!?"

Here's all your free candy little boys and girls!! Come in and get it!

You all better examine yourself. YOU'RE the voluntary tool in the bag of big brother. You scare me.
Old 6th September 2012
  #325
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
mello,

That's true, not having much makes the stuff you have seem more valuable. When all you have when stranded in a remote island is a volleyball, you might eventually befriend it and call it Wilson.

Poor Wilson. :( He never hurt anyone.
That's not even close to what I was saying. I'm not referring to the size of your library, depth of knowledge or experience, but yes, it's a matter of quality over quantity. Why would someone bother to blow minds now? I'm not saying they still don't, lot's do, but what will continue to be the incentive? How does it get paid for? Why should a 3rd party advertiser get the $$ instead of the artist? Inevitable or not, a short attention span is not something to be proud of, especially as a prized trait of the current era.
Old 6th September 2012
  #326
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

It's great that you bring up quality vs quantity. But lets not make quantitative arguments using quality and/or qualititive arguments using quantity. That just leads to unavailing and unfalsifiable arguments.
Old 6th September 2012
  #327
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mellotronic View Post
That's not even close to what I was saying. I'm not referring to the size of your library, depth of knowledge or experience, but yes, it's a matter of quality over quantity. Why would someone bother to blow minds now? I'm not saying they still don't, lot's do, but what will continue to be the incentive? How does it get paid for? Why should a 3rd party advertiser get the $$ instead of the artist? Inevitable or not, a short attention span is not something to be proud of, especially as a prized trait of the current era.
The people making mind blowing music were never making much money. If anything, they're more likely to reach their audience today.
Old 6th September 2012
  #328
Gear Addict
 

For me, I think part of the problem is people who work in some of the record chains and radio have no clue about music out side of 10 songs on the "Top 40" for that month. These days some of those chains don't even sell music and if you are in a rural area where they are the only legal choices you are stuck with either iTunes for a lossy album (and being locked into FruitDevices/software), or online order. Most of the online stores only take credit cards something that the demographic with the highest disposable income (teenagers) are too young to have.
So what other choice is there besides Pirating a lossless file and promising themselves that they will buy the album later?

Good thing local independent record stores are not quite dead in my city, if only I had the cash to support them. :(

Not every illegal download is theft either - I've downloaded a lot of albums after my whole CD collection got stolen, I bought some of them twice already, bought the t-shirts, they have my money all ready.
And the ones I didn't own all ready, I have bought a lot of them now . I've even gotten into a whole genre of music via that. Some bands I even went out and bought their whole discography.
I'll admit that there are a few artists/bands I feel that I owe money to, despite me no longer having those files.
Old 6th September 2012
  #329
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.F.F. View Post
If you really believe that music sales would recover to previous levels by stopping piracy, which can only be done by handing control of the internet to governments and/or corporations, you are truly naive and pretty much completely clueless regarding the greater scheme behind it all.
A voluntary tool in the bag of big brother. You scare me.

Sadly delving deeper into this would make this very political indeed which unfortunately has been banned on this forum some time ago.


are you really this naive and out of touch?

government and corporations already have control of the internet... ever heard of Google? If any one corporation has control of the internet as we know it, it's Google... and they know more about you than your mother, and sell that info to other corporations for profit. wow, just wow...

Court Upholds Google-NSA Relationship Secrecy | Threat Level | Wired.com

How about we acknowledge this fact and start respecting the rights of individual artists and creators to fair compensation for the consumption of their work?

Artists, Know Thy Enemy – Who’s Ripping You Off and How… | The Trichordist

U2 Exploited by United Airlines, Jet Blue, HP, State Farm, Westin, Urban Outfitters, Sprint, AT&T, Amazon, Disney Resorts, Crate and Barrel | The Trichordist

Google and Rapid Share are going to throw the whole free culture movement under the buss to save their own businesses.

here's some sound principals which no doubt will be adopted:
http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/...able-internet/
Old 6th September 2012
  #330
Quote:
Originally Posted by grawk View Post
The people making mind blowing music were never making much money. If anything, they're more likely to reach their audience today.
yeah... poor frank zappa, never made a penny from record sales...
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump