Turn on thread page Beta

RIAA, Kazza, Napster, the law & you - views of an artist with a BA Mus & PSCI watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thefish_uk)
    If the music is decent and not the mega-marketed over-hyped "popular" music that nobody I know really likes, I'll buy it.

    The record companies spend their money holding auditions for the next over-hyped pop star. Then they spend money teaching them to sing and dance. Then they have to pay for songwriting and backing vocals, as well as musicians because many of these popstars have very little musical talent. Finally they need to pay to get the songs on just about every radio station's playlist and loads of marketing just to make sure people will buy the song.

    That's why the playlists of a lot of radio stations I know of are so crap, they only play the stuff they've been paid to play.

    Decent bands write their own music, record some demo tapes and hope to get signed so they can use good recording facilities and get their music put on a CD in the stores, and then they make real money from gigs which they enjoy playing. Sorry if I got carried away. Is this correct?

    What's the point of paying for recordings of music? It's like paying through the nose for prints of artwork.
    A lot of that makes a lot of good sense but also you have to remember that even with proper bands that already have tallent the record company still takes a massive risk on promotion etc if the band never takes off.

    You will be quite suprised just how many millions record companies loose on risking promotion of new bands.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The radio stations do NOT have permission to play music on the radio, they have to pay royalties for every song. Groups like ASCAP in the United States, and SOCAN in Canada are responsible for collecting those royalties and redistribulting the wealth to the artists. However, keeping track of what gets played when has become spotty - in improvement from the former impossible reality, thanks to automated radio monitoring which allowscomputers to recognize segments of songs and tally the results of what got played where and when, but cutting songs short or talking over intros can falsify a hit by these monitoring algorhythms, thus those instances go unrecorded, thus no royalty is paid. Further, royalties collected are only collectible when the value of said royalties surpass a predefined threshold, for example, until the total owed to you outweighs $200 a year, you get nothing.

    AND - when you buy a CD, you do not BORROW anything. You are a liscensed owner of a copy of that music. You can play it at a party, at a dance, on your MP3 player, or discman, or walkman, or computer, or what have you, and you may make as many damn copies as you like - so long as you are not selling those copies for profit (and presumably those copies are for your personal use, ex. back-up in case your CD gets scratched). You may, in some places, need a union card to play them at a dance if you are DJ'ing (yes, there are DJ unions).



    And hey fish, you are totally on the right track, dude. Don't forget distribution fees - that's a monster. And recording costs.... I myself aim for building my own studio.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks for so much input my thread is now on page two
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So what if a label loses money on an act that didn't fly. The act ends up with the tab in the end, and often never makes a dime even if they are succesful because there are all these inflated expenditures written into the recording costs. Take it from an audio engineer who has recorded for a label, as an independant artist, and as a hired gun purely on console duty for another band at a privately funded session. Budget does not equal quality, and more time is lost with poor engineers getting paid $1600 an hour to perform a function he knows little about and essentially has the job because of a relitive record executive put him there. I've made ECMA nominated albums on $200 budgets in my life.

    It's almost like you are asking us to feel sorry for (in an analogy) those poor politicians who have to pay as much as $600 just for a meal, or for NASA having to pay for a $20 hammer. You think these saints in the record labels aren't polishing the books as trained profiteers? Wake up.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    for instance

    most of the time when a labels claims to lose money on an act, they report the figure that represents how much they originally anticipated profitting, but hadn't in the end at all,

    or

    the figure they originally intended to hit, minus the profit margin they did hit.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't for anybody. I am a multimedia and internet technology student. It just seems to be people that download music all the time and don't pay for it are just freeloaders that want somthing for nothing.

    Well you can have your viruses etc, I personaly find it much more fun hunting for that rare record in a record shop.

    A lot of these heavy downloaders also seem to do anything to justify why its legal, just like ilegal drug users do. They spend all their time justifiying why canibis is legal etc when its clearly not.

    Anyway the 1gb per day cap is still there and ISps are getting tougher on that all the time.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ------------------------------
    Amazing Trade wrote:

    I don't for anybody. I am a multimedia and internet technology student. It just seems to be people that download music all the time and don't pay for it are just freeloaders that want somthing for nothing.

    Well you can have your viruses etc, I personaly find it much more fun hunting for that rare record in a record shop.

    A lot of these heavy downloaders also seem to do anything to justify why its legal, just like ilegal drug users do. They spend all their time justifiying why canibis is legal etc when its clearly not.

    Anyway the 1gb per day cap is still there and ISps are getting tougher on that all the time.

    -------------------------------


    I'm a busy guy. I'm a 27 year old composer, arranger, writer, poet, musician, and teacher - that's my musical life. I collect CD's. I'm passionate about my collection. I can't have one Miles Davis CD, or one John Coltrane, or even just one Metallica, Incubis, Rancid, Danzig, Big Wreck, Bjork... I need complete discograhies. Currently, for instasnce, I have every recording on this earth of Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Thelonius Monk, and Bill Evans. Those are my major complete collections. And you know what, I had to do a lot of little record shop hunting too - even some custom orders in the end. I once worked for a company called Ocean's Cases - they build hardshell cases for musical equipment - flight cases. I proudly designed and bought a flight case to house my now 857 CD collection - to make it more portable - to move when I move.

    I've been performing for 20 years now, recording for 12, teaching for 9 - been writing forever. I do my part to add to the lifeblood of this business. I completed a Jazz degree after 2 years studying classical privately. I grew up playing mostly metal, blues, funk, and latin music. I've made amplifiers after taking an electrical engineering course from the town's community college during what I consider a hiatus between my highschool and university years. I've proteged as an apprentice under Don Stellard and the late Don Mallory - two very large figures in audio engineering - if you follow that sort of thing. My grade 12 year I was pulled from my music classes to teach a grade 7 music class - I was even given a staff parking spot and a 95 for the report card - they just dupliucated my previous years mark. I've performed for countless charities and fundraisers, co-op projects - and ya, I've smoked a joint or two in my time.

    I build custom computers on the side. I'm currently on one I built my aunt who is disabled. It's a 3.2Ghz P4 watercooled demon with 1GB of DDR433 Ram and 370GB of hard drive space on 2 drives. I'm currently working on putting all my CD's on here so I have a backup - at least in mp3 form.

    I'm also aspiring to become a lawyer. I have an advanced major in Political Science that was a joint major in my Jazz program. I also have an honours in Philosophy. I've published a thesis on Liberalism as a Defense of Native Self-Government. It's enjoyed widespread success.



    So excuse me if I take a little offense to you writing me up as a slakjawed drug addict freeloader because I support filesharing. Who are you?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    There is obviously great debate over filesharing, especially applied to media. Dr. Harrison of St FXU's Political Science Faculty was right to point out that there is no such thing as a law in reality if it cannot be practically enforced or if a populace cannot be coerced into obedience, thus is the extent that we as the populace still dictate ultimately not what becomes law, but what remains law. Many people think that laws dictate what is right or wrong behaviour in a moral sense, when in function it merely describes WHO is allowed to do WHAT - not WHAT things are allowed to be done.

    Now as for record companies, Eric Idle was right to point out how these companies inherently leech off of the brilliance of artist when he said "if they paid the artists, how would they ever afford the executives?"

    I mention these examples only as context for my argument I would like to see developed here, folks. Here is my stance:
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    The record companies essentially fear filesharing as they see it as something they do not control. They can't know exactly who has what in any meaningful way, nor can they make money from who has what file. Not having control over something you think involves you triggers fear on an instinctual level, and the record companies certainly believe filesharing concerns them.
    When Napster was at it's prime, there were 4 million people logged in at any given time (on average), and CD sales WENT UP!! 1999 sales records show a 17% increase from 1998's. What does this mean? It means Napster was the ultimate form of advertising in a venue where people could decide what they liked on their own and go get it "if" (and by "if" I mean that it usually meant "when") they wanted to, whether the reason be to support the artist, to have higher quality playback, or for enhanced features on a retail copy that mp3's simply don't provide. So why did the record companies recoil? Revenue. But sales went up, you ask? Well the effectiveness of their marketting went down. The money they poured into Top 40 POP acts that they want you to like and buy did not enjoy the proportion of return on investment that they were accustomed to. They are used to interaction of media they can make money directly from, and trace for marketting. They are used to telling you what you like. Record sales went up - a lot, but their influence in deciding for you what was being sold went down - a lot.
    Nothing about the Millenium Digital Copyrights Act protects buyers or artists. Measures have only been made to protect those accustomed to profiteering off of the genius of the artist combined with the gullability of the audience.
    But wait, Dragon_Amor, are you calling us the public at large stupid brainwashed cows? No, of course not. I'm merely illustrating their attitude toward the general public in the higher offices. PR is a big business in a label designed to function as an effective exploit of the human condition as studied by the humane sciences such as Sociology, Psychology, Psychiatry, and so on. Every logo, the repition in ads, the choice of color, the shot of Britney Spears crotch in her debut album, how hard or soft a font reads, the packaging and delivery - all are designed to exploit the human condition from the ground up. I myself took courses in Music Therapy, Psychology, Anthropology, Philosophy, Marketing, and Statistics - believe anyone who tells you that the industry follows a formula. I should know. I make a living in this industry.

    I say **** their crying over losing their ability to tell you what you want. I say **** them aiming for more money that does not benefit the artists. I say **** them for trying to scare you into obediance of publically unsupported "laws" by making large media events of their random lotto law-suits. If everyone decided they were going to speed tomorrow, and the next day, and so on, the government would have no recourse but to raise the speed limit (I'm not endorsing unsafe driving here, but exactly this has happened in my home town just three years ago).



    Consider this: IF Napster had charged $1 per user per year for unlimited access to the service as it was before it was shut down, and IF that money was given to the RIAA, their net profit for 2001 would have increased 36%. Imagine how that kind of money would benefit artists if downloads were tracked in such a way as to not indicate who downloaded what, but rather how many times an artists name was on a file going through Napster servers. If at the end of the year those figures were tabulated and the subscription money was divided into proportions dictated by the results of the count - why not pay directly to the artists in proportion to their popularity on the network? I find most artists that make public commercial statements against filesharing demonstrate very little understanding of computers and very little knowledge of the facts. People are not at fault for this, but they are easier to sway into taking a stance against filesharing. Metallica ring a bell. They always knew they were control freaks, but believe me, Lars Ulrich is no IT Tech, nor is he a swaavy economist.

    The facts are not simple, the details are numerous, but the bottom line is simple:

    THE ARTISTS AND THE AUDIENCE BOTH BENEFIT FROM FILESHARING.







    I wanna see some debate here and if anyone has any info on the rumors of the RIAA hiring hackers to track and sabotage p2p networks, bring it up, alright. I'll end this as I began it, with a great quote from another great human being and very good friend of mine, Lee Rogers:

    Turn it on, Turn it up, and get Nasty!

    Brian.
    Woah. Did anyone actually read all that?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    LOL
    thanx
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hehe. It's funny how some people already (on the poll) have chosen option 9!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    ------------------------------
    Amazing Trade wrote:

    I don't for anybody. I am a multimedia and internet technology student. It just seems to be people that download music all the time and don't pay for it are just freeloaders that want somthing for nothing.

    Well you can have your viruses etc, I personaly find it much more fun hunting for that rare record in a record shop.

    A lot of these heavy downloaders also seem to do anything to justify why its legal, just like ilegal drug users do. They spend all their time justifiying why canibis is legal etc when its clearly not.

    Anyway the 1gb per day cap is still there and ISps are getting tougher on that all the time.

    -------------------------------


    I'm a busy guy. I'm a 27 year old composer, arranger, writer, poet, musician, and teacher - that's my musical life. I collect CD's. I'm passionate about my collection. I can't have one Miles Davis CD, or one John Coltrane, or even just one Metallica, Incubis, Rancid, Danzig, Big Wreck, Bjork... I need complete discograhies. Currently, for instasnce, I have every recording on this earth of Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Thelonius Monk, and Bill Evans. Those are my major complete collections. And you know what, I had to do a lot of little record shop hunting too - even some custom orders in the end. I once worked for a company called Ocean's Cases - they build hardshell cases for musical equipment - flight cases. I proudly designed and bought a flight case to house my now 857 CD collection - to make it more portable - to move when I move.

    I've been performing for 20 years now, recording for 12, teaching for 9 - been writing forever. I do my part to add to the lifeblood of this business. I completed a Jazz degree after 2 years studying classical privately. I grew up playing mostly metal, blues, funk, and latin music. I've made amplifiers after taking an electrical engineering course from the town's community college during what I consider a hiatus between my highschool and university years. I've proteged as an apprentice under Don Stellard and the late Don Mallory - two very large figures in audio engineering - if you follow that sort of thing. My grade 12 year I was pulled from my music classes to teach a grade 7 music class - I was even given a staff parking spot and a 95 for the report card - they just dupliucated my previous years mark. I've performed for countless charities and fundraisers, co-op projects - and ya, I've smoked a joint or two in my time.

    I build custom computers on the side. I'm currently on one I built my aunt who is disabled. It's a 3.2Ghz P4 watercooled demon with 1GB of DDR433 Ram and 370GB of hard drive space on 2 drives. I'm currently working on putting all my CD's on here so I have a backup - at least in mp3 form.

    I'm also aspiring to become a lawyer. I have an advanced major in Political Science that was a joint major in my Jazz program. I also have an honours in Philosophy. I've published a thesis on Liberalism as a Defense of Native Self-Government. It's enjoyed widespread success.



    So excuse me if I take a little offense to you writing me up as a slakjawed drug addict freeloader because I support filesharing. Who are you?
    I never said you took drugs I was just saying you were using the same kind of arguments. I never said you specificly were a freeloader either, I said people that downloaded that stuff. If you don't have time to go to the shops why can't you just buy ti from amazon or somthing?

    Also if you have built your own amps and stuff you must want your music to sound good, have you not noticed that MP3 files tend to sound quite flat and uninspiring compared to vynil or even CD?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Amazing Trade - I'm really glad you asked that question

    OK now
    Here is how you make inspiring sounding MP3's
    My own cookbook

    1)Download and install EAC (Exact Audio Copy). It has options that disable the "guessing" algorhythms used in conventional playback of CD's, and instead re-read's every little 1 and 0 until each have been confirmed as such, then creates a WAV file that is indeed an Eaxct Audio Copy of your CD. I've saved many disks that won't even play properly due to damage (scratches, and the like) by letting this program spend litterally hours scrutinizing them. Usually, though, a disk in good shape takes 5 to 10 minutes. Make sure you use secure mode, and that the drive is set to spin up before being read, and make sure you set it to over-read the begining and end of files so to compensate for your drives offset.

    2) Download Lame 3.93 and RazorLAME 1.1.5, and use the following settings where it gives you the option to "use custom settings only" under RazorLAME's LAME options: "-b 320 -m s -h --resample 48 -k". Encoding to MP3 at 48hz rather than 44.1 allows greater retention of harmonics that may otherwise be lost in the conversion (or lost to a greater degree). Many people can't hear this, but hey, some people don't know they are colorblind or tone-deaf, too.

    3) If you have managed to maintain a tightly regulated naming convention, then you can use MP3Tag to generate ID3 tags from said naming convention. Unlike the other programs mentioned here, this one is only free for 30 days, but it does do batch processing. While I recomend paying the nominal fee to register, if you can't, don't install this program until the rest of your work is done. It can do batch processing, so you can do all your ID3's in one foul swoop once all the rest is finished.


    And voila - you have CD quality sounding mp3's that really do sound as good as the CD - at one fifth the file size.

    write if you want more details, as this is heavily generalized. C'mon, it's early AM here.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I still think the waveform of a CD must be much better quality but I guess if the bit rate is good enough it will be ok. The only audio advantage I can see you get from MP3 is the fact there is will be much less jitter from the transport as its reading from RAM (these days I would imagine any MP3 file is loaded straight into RAM from the hard disk) so its basicaly solid state.

    I find vinyl sounds better than all them though but CD is better for convenince.

    Here is my system.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    one credit where its due:

    most people make lousy sounding mp3's
    and they are the majority in filesharing communities
    so you are right, Amazing Trade, to point out that mp3's usually sound dismal - but there is a right way to do it. Most people are not audio engineers, they don't understand the math, and what exactly is being done, so they inadvertently botch it - and don't mind because it sounds good enough to most.

    But I love my pristine audio - I do.
    I love to hear it
    I love to achieve it when I'm at the board myself
    I respect a good mix as an engineer
    A good mix almost has a copyright-like value of it's own, especially when you hear re-mastered works. There is usually different compromises and gains sought by good engineers when you compare their work, and it's easier to see when two engineers master the same source material - such is the case when one listens to remastered work.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Vinyl has it's merit in retaining trueform bass frequencies - but harmonics suffer, and each time it is played the vinyl suffers a certain amount of audio degradation. The same can be said of degradation regarding magnetic tape recordings.

    Vinyl and tape strive to capture real analog curves, whereas digital copies contain mapped curves on a grid - in essence, that can be reconverted to analog for playback. Howeverm digital music would need infinite resolution to achieve ACTUAL curves in a wholistic sense, and analog recording HAVE THE ACTUAL CURVE ALREADY. Digital music's advantage is in it's long term storage, and consequenceless playback. As long as a medium containing digital music is functional, it will always sound as good as it did on day one. Analog storage degrades a bit on each playback, and degrades over time regardless of usage due to oxidization.

    The challenge, especially early on in the adoption of the industry to CD's, was to find engineers with good ears AND a solid understanding of digital music theory - how it maps curves, how its stored, why you can ride red levels with analog but to do so on digital equipment is a "do not pass GO, do not collect $200, go directly to jail" affair. Since the 08's, even software venders such as Sonic Foundry (a moment of silence for their recently being acquired by Sony) have tended to exagerate levels in digital meters to help deter un-tech savvy old-skool engineers from riding the reds in a digital environment.

    But, we have the technology. Vinyl and cassette quality are easily surpassable with current digital recording technology, thus vinyl's prime bass response can be captured on CD - even at 16-bit 44.1hz standard Red-book CD resolution. Any shortcomings on consumer CD's compared to the vinyl counterpart have the digital mastering engineer to blame solely.

    I guess I'm saying don't hate the game, hate that particular player.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "Since the 08's, even software venders such as Sonic Foundry (a moment of silence for their recently being acquired by Sony) have tended to exagerate levels in digital meters to help deter un-tech savvy old-skool engineers from riding the reds in a digital environment. "

    should read "Since the 80's" not "Since the 08's"

    my bad
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    anyone know who is at IP 67.9.22.53 [53-22.9-67.tampabay.rr.com]?
    this guys been trying to hack me all morning...
    gonna have to exact revenge soon if it keeps up
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    Here is my stance:
    Isn't that the point?

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    The record companies essentially fear filesharing as they see it as something they do not control. They can't know exactly who has what in any meaningful way, nor can they make money from who has what file. Not having control over something you think involves you triggers fear on an instinctual level, and the record companies certainly believe filesharing concerns them.
    Well duh.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    When Napster was at it's prime, there were 4 million people logged in at any given time (on average), and CD sales WENT UP!! 1999 sales records show a 17% increase from 1998's. What does this mean? It means Napster was the ultimate form of advertising in a venue where people could decide what they liked on their own and go get it "if" (and by "if" I mean that it usually meant "when") they wanted to, whether the reason be to support the artist, to have higher quality playback, or for enhanced features on a retail copy that mp3's simply don't provide.
    Yes, unfortunately your theory makes no sense, seeing as how they feared clone systems, bigger and better file-sharing software and techniques, larger archives, more users, and a world-wide revolution of music downloading. What you failed to realize in your ignorance of trying to justify a seemingly unjustifiable act is that this revolution is still continuing. This is the revolution, it did not end with Napster. Sales have in fact gone down, very much so, and continue to do so year-by-year.

    File-sharing has gone on to include programs, piracy, movies, entire T.V. episode and season archives, and one of society's most respected angles, the porn industry. What leaves me in wonder is why there seems to be an overwhelming lack of still-image pornography in a network of over 3 million people...and, oh yes, even I admit to the occasional search for the, and I quote, "shot of Britney Spears crotch". But why then would there be such lack of images? Perhaps this is because it is so very easy to obtain these images by simply searching for them on the Internet, for free. While all the copywrited and pricey material seems to be much harder to come across, especially in an underage network of masturbating sluts...but then it's not really too hard anymore, now is it?

    Likewise all the unpopular and free music can be downloaded from such sites as mp3.com, and file-sharing allows us to share the things we do not want to purchase.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    So why did the record companies recoil? Revenue.
    No they recoiled because they're a human industry, used to being rich, used to being powerful, used to being the center of attention, and like all lifeforms they fight til they finally die off.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    But sales went up, you ask?
    No, I don't ask, because I'm living in the present, and I can see sales in fact are dropping dramatically. This so-called "mass-marketing" ******** is nothing more than an excuse. If this were the case, all songs would be stripped to album-by-album, song by song, one of each, and simply a mere sample. It would not be the complete sharing of every single sound you could ever want. It would not be person to person.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    Well the effectiveness of their marketting went down. The money they poured into Top 40 POP acts that they want you to like and buy did not enjoy the proportion of return on investment that they were accustomed to.
    In other words, they didn't make as much money as they used to. Please come back down to earth.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    They are used to interaction of media they can make money directly from, and trace for marketting. They are used to telling you what you like. Record sales went up - a lot, but their influence in deciding for you what was being sold went down - a lot.
    They are not necessarily "used" to it, they just simply need it to survive. Any marketing involving the senses can be recreated via the tools used to display it. It is a fuzzy industry, and they need to be able to trace it. Not to mention they are not getting paid for this distribution, therefore even if they did trace it, it serves no purpose other than to fill their EGO with who's "shot of [artist's] crotch" is being more looked for.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    Nothing about the Millenium Digital Copyrights Act protects buyers or artists. Measures have only been made to protect those accustomed to profiteering off of the genius of the artist combined with the gullability of the audience.
    In fact there have been law-suits made to those sharing files. I really don't understand what your sentence was getting at, as again you ramble off in a "peculiar combination of numerous details and speculations that leave us the readers and audience in magnificent wonder and rouse!"

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    But wait, Dragon_Amor, are you calling us the public at large stupid brainwashed cows? No, of course not.
    Why are you refering to yourself in third-person? You could have just said, "no, I'm not calling us stupid and brainwashed." Seriously, where did you come from...?

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    I'm merely illustrating their attitude toward the general public in the higher offices. PR is a big business in a label designed to function as an effective exploit of the human condition as studied by the humane sciences such as Sociology, Psychology, Psychiatry, and so on. Every logo, the repition in ads, the choice of color, the shot of Britney Spears crotch in her debut album, how hard or soft a font reads, the packaging and delivery - all are designed to exploit the human condition from the ground up. I myself took courses in Music Therapy, Psychology, Anthropology, Philosophy, Marketing, and Statistics - believe anyone who tells you that the industry follows a formula.
    Of course they follow a formula. Every man alive follows a formula. We all affect other people, whether it be one person or fifty. Our mere presence asks that we wakeup and tune into society, and its demands. If I grew a beard, had lice, didn't bathe for a month, and walked around in a bikini I'm sure people would be appauled. If I was completely oridinary I would go unnoticed. Likewise if I was, and I'll be cliche, "stunningly beautiful" and smelled like cologne, people would probably want to be near me. Being ordinary isn't good enough.

    They are trying to make money, you know...just as we all attempt to make friends.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    I should know. I make a living in this industry.
    No, you should know because if you didn't, you'd be an idiot.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    I say **** their crying over losing their ability to tell you what you want. I say **** them aiming for more money that does not benefit the artists. I say **** them for trying to scare you into obediance of publically unsupported "laws" by making large media events of their random lotto law-suits.
    Again, all life must fight to survive. If you no longer fight, you die quickly.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    If everyone decided they were going to speed tomorrow, and the next day, and so on, the government would have no recourse but to raise the speed limit
    If everyone killed their self there would be world peace. Unfortunately, society is made up of people, and each person is individual. Again, the industry must fight to survive, or else give up.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    I'm not endorsing unsafe driving here
    Why would you be?

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    Consider this: IF Napster had charged $1 per user per year for unlimited access to the service as it was before it was shut down, and IF that money was given to the RIAA, their net profit for 2001 would have increased 36%. Imagine how that kind of money would benefit artists if downloads were tracked in such a way as to not indicate who downloaded what, but rather how many times an artists name was on a file going through Napster servers. If at the end of the year those figures were tabulated and the subscription money was divided into proportions dictated by the results of the count - why not pay directly to the artists in proportion to their popularity on the network?
    Wow, money does grow on trees.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    I find most artists that make public commercial statements against filesharing demonstrate very little understanding of computers and very little knowledge of the facts. People are not at fault for this, but they are easier to sway into taking a stance against filesharing. Metallica ring a bell. They always knew they were control freaks, but believe me, Lars Ulrich is no IT Tech, nor is he a swaavy economist.
    Yes, and to understand the mass distribution world-wide of free material that was once obtained soley through purchasing it in stores means less money, you have to be "IT Tech" or a "swaavy economist." Give me a break, a 10 year old could figure this out.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    The facts are not simple, the details are numerous, but the bottom line is simple:
    Can facts be simple or complex? I thought facts were facts...and details usually are numerous, this is why people don't normally go into detail...and, also, I'd hope the bottom line is simple as it is meant to be.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    THE ARTISTS AND THE AUDIENCE BOTH BENEFIT FROM FILESHARING.
    Well there's no doubt the audience benefits. However, the artists lose much more than they gain. In fact in a couple of years they will most likely gain very little.

    I actually am in favor of file-sharing, as my goals are watching a freer society. But your justification is very much wrong.

    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    I wanna see some debate here and if anyone has any info on the rumors of the RIAA hiring hackers to track and sabotage p2p networks, bring it up, alright. I'll end this as I began it, with a great quote from another great human being and very good friend of mine, Lee Rogers:

    Turn it on, Turn it up, and get Nasty!
    That was actually a very gay quote. And, remember, all people are great, and just because you've seen them on T.V., heard them on the radio, or seen them in court while being issued a restraining order, that doesn't mean they're your good friend. Let alone "very good".
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragon_Amor)
    ------------------------------
    I'm also aspiring to become a lawyer. I have an advanced major in Political Science that was a joint major in my Jazz program. I also have an honours in Philosophy. I've published a thesis on Liberalism as a Defense of Native Self-Government. It's enjoyed widespread success.
    Do you have an online copy of your thesis, it sounded interesting.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 20, 2004
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.