You've got lawsuit

[Jolly Rogers]

That's right folks, it finally happened:

Link to CNN News Article

I am surprised they didn't sue more people.

[zeta]

One, I am sickened by this!

Two, Music sharing is actually great if you ask me. It allows you to hear music, then (if you like the band) buy the album. They say that CD-R's with mp3s burned on them are a threat. BULL! CD-R's degrade FAST! And buying the album its self is the best way to hear the music...

Ok on a p2p 1 uploads whole album, 2,3,4,5, and 6 D/L the 2 most radio friendly tracks and some people dl those from them... The rest of the album sits dormant! So maybe 20% of the d/lers buy the album. And the other 80% burn them to a cd-r which degrades to crap in 5 years or less and is forgotten. Its free advertising basically!

[Agent ONE]

So is anyone going to offer themselves up for the amnesty program?

[JsARCLIGHT]

I have no reaction to this. Being a person who never did any music sharing I have no ill will towards the swappers... but at the same time I understand the plight of the music industry. But the draconian tactics they are engaging in now are just stupid. They need to address the reason why people swap music online: cost and availability. CD prices need to come down, big time... and at the same time MP3 swapping should be encouraged and supported, provided there is an infrastructure that allows the music people to make some money off of it.

This is not a case of "personal freedoms" being infringed upon like some folks want to make it out to be, this is a case of the bloated music industry not catching on to the trends and capitalizing on them... thus they are losing money and their only recourse seems to be to lash out.

This can go nowhere but into the trenches for a long battle that will cost the music industry more money than they lost to those people's copying in the end...

[Jolly Rogers]

Didn't Universal drop the price on their CDs to $10.99 recently? From what I hear, it hasn't exactly boosted sales as they've hoped for, because people are so used to getting their music for free, even low prices won't change their behavior now.

[rocco_77]

Man, the music industry is really screwing themselves by doing this. Lawsuits are not the answer... Can you say another "War on Drugs" scenario?? You will never stop it all, you will never catch everyone. So I don't understand why the music industry doesn't stop wasting time and money trying to stop these people.

Instead, they should be working on a way to make SERIOUS CASH by making file swapping legal with a small fee per song... Of course, I don't see how this could be done, but I'm not a programmer.

[Max Jenius]

Food for thought -

A CD costs less than $2 to manufacture.

CDs cost up to and exceeding $20 a piece.

RIAA gets approximately 70-90% of the profits from a CD.

The final 10-30% gets divided up between the artists and others involved.

The artists make their money by going on tour, not selling CDs.

The RIAA is suing people to scare people into buying cds again.

The digital underground will always find a way to do what it wants... with computers... there's a way around everything.

They can't sue every mp3 trader out there... they'll get burned in the long run.

[Jolly Rogers]

Double post.

Edited September 8, 2003 by Jolly Rogers

[Max Jenius]

Double post.

Everyone I know that pirates music would gladly pay a fee to download music. Its too late for CDs.

We are living in a digital world. And I am a digital girl... er guy.

[Hoptimus]

From what I read the amount of people downloading music dropped 25% or 35% and it was directly proportional to the CD sales in the last month also. Interesting I would say.

[zeta]

No, I'm a digital girl!

Seriously though they need to drop the price of CD's by, ALOT! $8 seems fair for a one disc album, $10 - $11 for imports. Sell singles for $3 -$4.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Max is right. This is another case of "the world must change" and everyone except the people who need to change it see it that way.

Are we sure that the RIAA isn't somehow affiliated with Phillip Morris?

[rocco_77]

A CD costs less than $2 to manufacture.

CDs cost up to and exceeding $20 a piece.

RIAA gets approximately 70-90% of the profits from a CD.

The final 10-30% gets divided up between the artists and others involved.

The artists make their money by going on tour, not selling CDs.

The RIAA is suing people to scare people into buying cds again.

The digital underground will always find a way to do what it wants... with computers... there's a way around everything.

They can't sue every mp3 trader out there... they'll get burned in the long run.

This sums it up pretty good....

It is true that the artists don't make their millions with CD purchases...

They make their money on tour.

I think record companies may just fade away in the relatively near future.... What good are they really?

The only thing record labels have to their advantage right now is capital (money), and connections. Labels just seem to be a hub and support center for the artists that make them rich... The labels can book the tours and get the great venues because of who their are and who they know, not what they provide. This IMO is the single most valuable thing a record label has. The connections with venues to book tours, and the money to back the artist while they gain momentum... In the simple of it, the label is just an investment company.

For instance... I have been in a band now for five years... We are not signed, and we are not too poplular... The reason for our lack of popularity IMO is not because we suck (we are pretty good actually), but because we don't have the money to quit our jobs and go on tour... We lack the connections to book big venues with bigger bands, and we lack the money to get our CD we are currently working on to market.

We could get any private investor with the willingness to give us money to record and duplicate our album, distribute it... Would could get money to buy better equipment, and money to live on while we tour... We could hire a PR firm to promote us on TV, radio, music publications... Have parties to promote us and get connections going....

The only thing we would lack is the networking connections with bigger established bands to tour with.

Maybe eventually there could be some kind on network to connects bands with one another on a larger scale than is done now.... It doesn't take a big shot to put together a GREAT rock concert.

Am I making any sense to anyone here, or am I idealizing too much?

I just think that the music industry needs to be retaken by the artists that make the music. The Hip Hop scene has is right... Example: Dr. Dre.... He started his own label when he became a success, and it seems to me that the labels ran by some artists themselves actually keep the artists pretty happy, and from what I see damn rich too.

What do you guys think of what I said here, or am I full of it.

[Jemstone]

Double post.   

Everyone I know that pirates music would gladly pay a fee to download music. Its too late for CDs.

We are living in a digital world. And I am a digital girl... er guy.

That's why I'm really liking that deal Apple has going these days.

[tom64ss]

There are still lots of other ways to pirate corporate music. Any idiot can still record off the radio or burn a CD copy so this lawsuit is just plain dumb. Back in the 70's and 80's, they tried to campaign against people copying the records and CD they bought onto tapes. That didn't work either. For seveal years now, I've always tried to either buy major label releases out of "used" bins or copy them from a friend.

I said it once and I'll say it again. Screw corporate owned music, but don't forget to support independent labels (they don't treat their artists like crap).

Oh, and as far as bands like Metallica are concerned, their slump in sales is due to a crappy new album, not music sharing. It's quite possibly one of the worst sounding albums ever. You'd think with all that money they could've at least got a decent production.

Anyways, the reason they don't like music sharing because:

BEFORE:

-Metallica puts out a crappy album.

-No music sharing so people would have to buy the album or hear a copy someone else bought before they realized it sucks.

NOW:

-Metallica puts out a crappy album.

-Now people can download it for free, listen to it, realize it blows, and save their money for a decent album.

Don't they realize that if their album was any good, people would've shelled out the cash for it anyways? People who don't want to pay for music, never will, and people who don't mind, would pay for music sharing. The RIAA are just a bunch of money grubbing a-holes.

[the white drew carey]

No, I'm a digital girl!

Seriously though they need to drop the price of CD's by, ALOT! $8 seems fair for a one disc album, $10 - $11 for imports. Sell singles for $3 -$4.

That's the pricing that most indie labels have. But then again, the artists on indie labels get A LOT more out of their album sales.

One wrong part of your equation is the Import pricing. The pricing on imports shoudl acurately reflect the cost of getting it into YOUR market from somewhere else.

One of my favorite bands, The Wedding Present, had imports in the late-eighties that ran $25-$30 a CD, because only one copy would make it over at a time. Once they became semi-popular (but before their CDs started being released domestically) the price of the imports dropped down to about $15-$18 in an Indie record shop.

Simply put, though, downloading music is illegal unless it is gotten through a legitmate service or by the artist/label themselves.

People just like to use the "Sticking it to the man/RIAA!" excuse to justify thievery.

[NSJ23]

They are treating file sharers like Bootleggers. If your not selling the music it's no different than going to your friends house and dubbing a tape from him/her. Just in this case due to the internet your friend could be on the other half of the Country. Could you imagine if they went after anyone who dubbed a tape or taped a song from the radio? This Is just plain stupid! go after the bootleggers who get the album a month before it is released. Not the Guy/Gal who wants the two good songs off a terrible 22 songs album that cost $17 - $20.

[Agent ONE]

...

They can't sue every mp3 trader out there... they'll get burned in the long run.

Extreemly important statement. Look throughout the history of corporations... no one has ever succeded in suing their consumer base. It will just drive the file sharing underworld to work harder at beating the system.

[tom64ss]

The only thing we would lack is the networking connections with bigger established bands to tour with.

Maybe eventually there could be some kind on network to connects bands with one another on a larger scale than is done now.... It doesn't take a big shot to put together a GREAT rock concert.

rocco-77

You're right about most of what you're saying, except the "touring with the big boys" thing. All the people I know that have toured with major label band at big venues have gotten $100/show for the whole band for their trouble, while the headliner makes about $10,000-$17,000 per show (I know first hand, that Social Distortion, who you'd imagine are decent people, are one of these bands that screw their opening bands like that. In fact, even newer members of the band get screwed over when it comes to money.) $100 A NIGHT???!!! That's chicken feed in my book. So, yes, the major labels have the hook-up, but it still might no be in your best interest.

If you really want to take control and DIY it, there's a book/magazine called "Book Your own F*cking Life" put out by Maximum Rock'n Roll every year. Inside you'll find Band, Clubs, Promoters, and Radio Stations broken down by City, State, and Country (yes, it has listings for outside of the U.S.) It's a lot of work, but not impossible. Link: http://www.byofl.org/

The other way to do it is to hire a booking agent. They can be found independant of record labels and are the ones that do the real work anyways.

[Wes]

The "police" force is total @$$. Case in point, my ISP server at school emailed me, forwarding this email from MediaSentry, Inc., on behalf of Warner Bros. They directly "requested" that they cut me off because I had an "illegal" copy of Matrix Reloaded, when all it was was the MTV Movie Awards parody opening they did of it. Of course it had the movie name in the filename, but they could have just looked at it and found out they weren't one in the same:

>Infringement Detail:

>Infringing Work: Matrix: Reloaded, The

>Filename: Matrix Reloaded Spoof - MTV Movie Awards 2003.mpg

And these are the idiots who are saying how much access our computers have?!? I explained it to my ISP server, they droped it, and I also sent an email to MediaSentry asking for an explination. Let you know if it ever comes in. <_<

[fulcy]

Simply put, though, downloading music is illegal unless it is gotten through a legitmate service or by the artist/label themselves.

People just like to use the "Sticking it to the man/RIAA!" excuse to justify thievery.

I really don't like using the whole blanket statement 'downloading music is illegal' crap that the record industry puts out. Half of the albums I own, are live sets and concerts that have never been released onto CD - is the music industry going to come after me because of this?!?! I would love to sign up for some of those music services - like apples' - if they can guarantee me that the live albums I have (Radio 1 releases and such) would be available for download.

Edited September 8, 2003 by fulcy

[zeta]

The "police" force is total @$$. Case in point, my ISP server at school emailed me, forwarding this email from MediaSentry, Inc., on behalf of Warner Bros. They directly "requested" that they cut me off because I had an "illegal" copy of Matrix Reloaded, when all it was was the MTV Movie Awards parody opening they did of it. Of course it had the movie name in the filename, but they could have just looked at it and found out they weren't one in the same:

>Infringement Detail:

>Infringing Work: Matrix: Reloaded, The

>Filename: Matrix Reloaded Spoof - MTV Movie Awards 2003.mpg

And these are the idiots who are saying how much access our computers have?!? I explained it to my ISP server, they droped it, and I also sent an email to MediaSentry asking for an explination. Let you know if it ever comes in.

Big Brother loves you, so he rapes you in the ass!

[rocco_77]

All the people I know that have toured with major label band at big venues have gotten $100/show for the whole band for their trouble, while the headliner makes about $10,000-$17,000 per show (I know first hand, that Social Distortion, who you'd imagine are decent people, are one of these bands that screw their opening bands like that. In fact, even newer members of the band get screwed over when it comes to money.) $100 A NIGHT???!!! That's chicken feed in my book. So, yes, the major labels have the hook-up, but it still might no be in your best interest.

$100 bucks! Pfft... We've made way more than that playing one private party.... The "big boys" probably think it's worth it for the exposure if nothing else... which is true to some degree, but come on. I would probably play with a couple "big bands" for $100 just to get the crowd though.

Thanks for the extra info. (the book suggestion and the web link). I will check those out.

You are in a band right Tom? Where are you located? What type of music? Do you play out a lot?

I'm still trying to get our web site done, but I have so much other crap to do, I just can't seem to get to it.

[the white drew carey]

I really don't like using the whole blanket statement 'downloading music is illegal' crap that the record industry puts out.  Half of the albums I own, are live sets and concerts that have never been released onto CD - is the music industry going to come after me because of this?!?!  I would love to sign up for some of those music services - like apples' - if they can guarantee me that the live albums I have (Radio 1 releases and such) would be available for download.

Well, that's part of the question. Are the tracks you have legally recorded from a live concert? Technically, you can't record live music unless the band/label/venue/promoter says you can. Otherwise, those are bootlegs as well.

But will they go after you? No. Because they're assuming you bought the legit albums when they were released.

Look at the Grateful Dead. The bootleg tapes you could find of that band outnumbers their actual releases about 1000 to 1!!! But the fanbase, for the most part, would still buy the studio albums when they were released.

But still, the music industry is really just pointing out the law. Music is copyrighted and, by buying the album, your just buying the privilege to listen to the music that they own. This goes beyond what the record industry says and is based in U.S. Law and concurrent laws in other countries.

Does the record industry need a wakeup call to their arcane business practices? Yes.

Is the RIAA taking the completely wrong route with it's current course of action? Yes.

Is downloading music that is not officially available on the web illegal? Yes.

Have I ever downloaded music? Yes

Was it officially available by the band or their label? All of it.

Does any of this effect me? Not really. For the most part, I listen to bands on smaller "indie" labels that treat one of their bands with more respect than a Large Multi-Corporate Label treats their whole catalog.

Edited September 8, 2003 by the white drew carey

[niomosy]

I really don't want CD's anymore. I want digital music that I can download.

I don't want Apple's solution, either. I want digital music I can play wherever, whenever I feel like it without someone telling me that I can only play it on 3 devices.

Let fall the RIAA says I

[BYG-DAMN]

Proscuiting a few hundred people, hell even a few thousand won't stop teh millions out there. I mean, I met a guy once playing Xbox at TRU who causally boasted of having an archive of well over 10 thosand MP3s, thats one guy. They can't stop the river now, a lot people I know are going to lay low and wait for new software to appear that can't be tracked.

Besides, with all their legal action that is big publicity, there are still bootlegs on the streets of albums and DVDs...

[do not disturb]

HURIN IS A FAG!

Edited June 13, 2005 by haterist

[Effect]

I can't remember the last time I bought a CD. Usually I only like one or three songs on an album. Why would I spend close to $20 on an entire cd? The deal Apple has is pretty good. Do I download songs? Sometimes but every once in a while and I don't feel sorry about it. Most music today is crap anyway imo. Maybe that's the reason I no longer watch music channels or listen to the radio anymore. The music while sometimes good just isn't good enough for me to spend my hard earned money on. Anyway the major artist(which seemed to be the ones complaining) seem make far more money on tours anyway.

I'd much rather pay and download what songs I want instead of getting a CD.

Edited September 8, 2003 by Effect

[Zentrandude]

The "police" force is total @$$. Case in point, my ISP server at school emailed me, forwarding this email from MediaSentry, Inc., on behalf of Warner Bros. They directly "requested" that they cut me off because I had an "illegal" copy of Matrix Reloaded, when all it was was the MTV Movie Awards parody opening they did of it. Of course it had the movie name in the filename, but they could have just looked at it and found out they weren't one in the same:

>Infringement Detail:

>Infringing Work: Matrix: Reloaded, The

>Filename: Matrix Reloaded Spoof - MTV Movie Awards 2003.mpg

And these are the idiots who are saying how much access our computers have?!? I explained it to my ISP server, they droped it, and I also sent an email to MediaSentry asking for an explination. Let you know if it ever comes in.

did you download it or recorded it (if you have a tv tuner on your comp)? If its the other which i hope be cool if they get sued for looking in your hard drive without your knowing or permission.

I used to buy music cds till my friend showed me how much better the small time bands that have no music corp ties. I rather spend my money to go to a bar or small concert that have the unknown bands thats way better than buy a cd off a descent but not that good band. Besides i can just turn on my radio to listen to them. they play those billboard songs over and over and over and over and over and over and over......

[the white drew carey]

What's even better is a lot of bands on indie labels will sell CDs on tour for a lot less, because many indie labels will give them a box and just make them pay for manufacturing, so the band reels in all of the profit.

[Lightning]

where's that link to the site that told u if u were in danger of bein investigated?

[Max Jenius]

Yes.... the new Metallica album does suck. How arrogant of them to blame slumping sales on pirates.

When pay MP3 sites become as competitive as cell phone services... then we'll see some serious crap.

[CAG]

Wow.....by the numbers:

1.Rocco

Posted: Sep 8 2003, 01:42 PM

Man, the music industry is really screwing themselves by doing this. Lawsuits are not the answer... Can you say another "War on Drugs" scenario?? You will never stop it all, you will never catch everyone. So I don't understand why the music industry doesn't stop wasting time and money trying to stop these people.

While I understand to a point the analogy you're making, I hope you're not suggesting that we don't even try to enforce drug laws. What's lacking in the MP3 case is a serious social evil. (Sorry for nit-picking, but I'm a philosophy minor and strongly considering DEA).

2. White Drew

Posted: Sep 8 2003, 02:25 PM

Simply put, though, downloading music is illegal unless it is gotten through a legitmate service or by the artist/label themselves.

People just like to use the "Sticking it to the man/RIAA!" excuse to justify thievery.

True, but you're missing another point. MP3 piracy is exactly what's supposed to happen in capitalism. As far as I'm concerned, when the RIAA makes competitive MP3 services available, then d/l-ing illegally is morally wrong.

3. The RIAA is trying to fight capitalism. They're sticking their hands in their ears and saying "La,la, la....i can't hear you market forces !"

CD and DVD prices have not fallen the way other tech has. Music is more mass manufactured and just generally sucks more than ever. The majority of the non radio songs on most albums are crap (with a few happy exceptions). But the Record companies stopped making singles so you're forced to buy a whole album, for a whole album's price.

4. People always like to have the album. Established bands will always sell well. I bought St Anger despite its dubious quality. I'm gonna go buy the new Iron Maiden tommorrow, and probably would if there was even one song I knew I liked on it (I haven't heard any of it), because I like the band and I like actually owning the merchandise.

I don't think this lawsuit nonsense will continue much longer. Just ask the USSR, they found out what happens when you ignore basic economics

[0Coota0]

I really like how they're going to target college students, because we all know how much money college students have

[tom64ss]

People who don't want to pay for music still won't pay for music. They can burn copies from their friends.

Those who downloaded and still bought CD's will still buy the same number of CDs.

This doesn't stop anyone, just makes it more difficult. The music industry is really dating itself by not embracing new technologies. They're on the ropes, swinging at anything by this point. The end is near.