[kantide]

Chuck D from Public Enemy is coming this week to my university to lecture on free speech and music/file sharing. I'm really looking foward to hearing what he has to say, it's great to see these guys out doing what they can to benefit music fans. Anyway, what are your thoughts on file swapping?

[Tiger Eaten]

I am dead against file swapping. Why should I get something for free when I could pay for it?

[Awetopsy]

I definately believe in paying somebody for their hard work. If somebody took one of my images and was using it for something I didnt sanction, I would get pretty irritated too (as we've seen more than a few times on these boards)

[Sukhoi]

�f you get payed for your music, you can live off it, and thereby concentrate on becoming a better musician.

Or concentrate on becoming a better lemonsqueezer...

I'm just saying that it's not all that simple.

Sukhoi

Ghetto-pimp-booty-Assault shoutout too all and Balistic, though!!

[elam]

"....and now their empire is falling down around them."

Not really.
Congress got into bed with the major labels back in 96 and are rolling back progress by the day.
All the gains made with Naptser and it's ilk are being snuffed out by likes of the DMCAand this bullshit.

I finished reading Lawrence Lessig's 'the future of ideas' recently which touches on file sharing and a host of other legal gray areas with regard to the web. Interesting stuff.

And the issue is money and power, not quality of music, IMO. If the issue was quality, nobody would listen to it.
Most people use file-sharing to download all this terrible music. That's why Sisqo's livin' large. People buy his shit.

And for a majority of musicians, I think it is about the love of music. But a lot of them aren't 21 years old.
They got responsibilities and bills to pay.

I was at the Detroit Electronic Music fest. last summer and it was a who's who of coporate sponsors. Only a matter of time.

Hey Kantide, check these out. One of them is a debate with Chuck. D and Hilary Rosen and a bunch of other knuckleheads.

[ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: elam ]

[balistic]

"Congress got into bed with the major labels back in 96 and are rolling back progress by the day.
All the gains made with Naptser and it's ilk are being snuffed out by likes of the DMCAand this bullshit."

Within the past couple days the Napster judge has asked the labels involved to prove that they own the copyright to all the music they wanted removed. Now the musicians involved are going to have to either cede their copyrights to their labels, start their own seperate lawsuits, or find a better distribution model on their own.

I'm all for the latter.

Ultimately I'd like to see the music trade work a lot more like the art trade . . . look at it on your computer for free, send me some money if you want a print.

I have no delusions of the public suddenly developing good taste if the record industry implodes, but if you can get rid of the well-marketed chumps and toss a few more dollars to the guys out on the edge, then I think you've got a more cultured society.

[roundeye]

chuck D is a flat out racist. dont trust it!

[elam]

Yeah, I read the napster news here..

There was also the Supreme Court's decision to hear the 'Mickey Mouse Case', which involved The Congress' ability to keep extending the length of copyrights.

[Tiger Eaten]

Tiger Eaten <-------- Is hoping people realize how very, very, very sarcastic his first post in this thread was.....

[Atomic Urine]

lol Tiger, I was about to make fun of you.

[MoleculeMan]

I usually buy the cd if i like the band. Unfortunately, it really would be better to send the band 10 bucks or see a show than buy the cd (unless it is directly from the band). Any band is prolly only making a buck or two for each cd they sell. Its the label thats making all the cash, so buy the cd if you like the label! woo!

jake

[roundeye]

yeah but its the label thats making them all the cash! if labels did nothing but rape and steal then nobody would be with a label. BUT THEY ARE. why? because they make the band money. more money than theyd make without them. it aint a protitution ring! you can leave if you want, and try it on yer own. and you cant justify stealing MP3s or else you have no grounds to defend yourself on the inevidable day that your own work is thiefed.

[Lunatique]

If I'm a real fan of someone's music, I will go and buy the CD and help them out. But if I'm not a big fan, and just likes a few songs, I'll just do the mp3 shuffle.

[balistic]

Fuck the majors. They've strangled the art out of popular music for long enough, and now their empire is falling down around them. Now they want to give us CDs that are intentionally riddled with errors to prevent playback on computer CD drives. All for the sake of recouping the millions of dollars they spend bribing radio stations into playing the latest product as much as possible.

The real issue isn't copyright . . . what's been exposed is the failure of the music industry to promote anything worth paying for.

A groundbreaking techno record, one that's instantly labeled a classic, will probably sell about 4000 copies. That's a hit. You'll have global recognition and your record might be heard by hundreds of thousands of people in clubs . . . but you're not going to make any money from it.

So why the fuck does Sisqo get to live like a sultan for coming up with the thong song? The major labels don't put out music, they put out marketing . . . I have a crate full of ghetto booty house records that put "Tha Thong Song" to shame, but none of them had multi-million dollar marketing budgets. The guys who produced them have day jobs, or DJ for a living . . . they put out records because they love music (and titties) . . . they don't care if you hear their music for free, they just want you to hear their music. If you toss 'em a bone for it, hey, maybe you'll get a shout out on the B-side of their next 12".

That's what music ought to be about . . . if the only reason you put out records is to pay off the lease on your Bentley, how good is that music going to be?

Fuck the majors. Let 'em sweat a little. Maybe then I'll be able to turn on the radio without wanting to puke.

[empyrios]

If you like a band and download their music for free, send $5 or $6 to them. It's a higher percentage than they'd ever see from an album sale on a major label.

Anyway, find the band's contact address. If enough people send money, maybe bands will realize the profitability of independent distribution.

It's my personal opinion that music should be successful because of its appeal, not from the marketing of its investors.

Original bands that don't have to be formulaic copycats to get a record deal would be a Good Thing�. How many Top 40 bands are riding around on the shoulders of Pearl Jam now? How many Boy Bands would exist without Max Martin and Lou Pearlman? Record labels see these groups and remember their successful predecessors before they sign them. They know it'll work. All those in favor of the musical stagnation and inbreeding this causes, raise your hand so you can be shot.

I'm tired of beautiful, yet unoriginal con artists who have Pro Tools in one hand and a Platinum album in another, with a millionaire label executive smiling behind them.

Rant finished.

- Rich

[kantide]

Thanks for the links elam, I'll definately check 'em out!

quote:

---

Originally posted by roundeye:
and you cant justify stealing MP3s or else you have no grounds to defend yourself on the inevidable day that your own work is thiefed.

---

I don't "steal" mp3s, I "sample" them. If I like it, I'll usually end up buying the CD. I have actually bought more CDs than I ever have before, simple because I'm not going to shell out $20 on a CD that I've never heard, and worse yet, would probably end up in the trash bin.

And as balistic said, let 'em sweat a little bit.