This makes me laugh..

[Big Train]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/25/AR2005052501467_pf.html

This article highlights the IMMENSE difference in terms of influence and power the music industry has vs. the movie industry. We can't get anyone in the federal government to lend us a hand in what is CLEARLY theft, yet the movie business has gotten a law ON THE BOOKS and has cracked down on these people who were so untouchable for us.

Makes me laugh, but also very angry and sad when I think of how many close friends and associates have been hurt needlessly over the last five years in my business, losing wives and families, going bankrupt etc..just fucking sucks.

By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
Wednesday, May 25, 2005; 8:51 PM


WASHINGTON -- Federal raiders. Internet pirates. Intergalactic screen adventures. The government announced a crackdown Wednesday on the theft of movies and other copyright materials that has the elements of a film plot.

Federal agents shut down a Web site that they said allowed people to download the new Stars War movie even before it was shown in theaters.

The Elite Torrents site was engaging in high-tech piracy by letting people download copies of movies and other copyright material for free, authorities said.

The action was the first criminal enforcement against individuals who are using cutting-edge BitTorrent software to obtain pirated content online, Justice and Homeland Security Department officials said.

Elite Torrents had more than 133,000 members and offered 17,800 movies and software programs in the past four months, officials said. Among those titles was "Star Wars: Episode III _ Revenge of the Sith," which was available through Elite Torrents six hours before its first showing in theaters, the officials said.

The movie was downloaded more than 10,000 times in the first 24 hours.

Authorities served search warrants in 10 cities against computer users accused of being the first to offer copyright materials to other BitTorrent users on the Web site, Homeland Security's Customs and Immigration Enforcement agency said. The cities are: Austin, Texas; Erie, Pa.; Philadelphia; Wise, Va.; Clintonwood, Va.; Germantown, Wis.; Chicago; Berea, Ohio; Anthem, Ariz., and Leavenworth, Kan.

Authorities said the warrants were still under seal.

Investigators said many of the copyright movies were available through the Web site before their commercial release.

President Bush signed a new law last month setting tough penalties of up to 10 years in prison for anyone caught distributing a movie or song prior to its commercial release.

"Today's crackdown sends a clear and unmistakable message to anyone involved in the online theft of copyrighted works that they cannot hide behind new technology," said John C. Richter, acting assistant attorney general.

People trying to access the elitetorrents.org Web site on Wednesday were greeted with a warning about the penalties for copyright infringement, although officials said the investigation is focusing on those who originally offered the pirated materials.

The message also said: "This site has been permanently shut down by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Individuals involved in the operation and use of the Elite Torrents network are under investigation for criminal copyright infringement."

BitTorrent has become the file-sharing software of choice because of its speed and effectiveness, especially after the recording industry last year began cracking down on users of Kazaa, Morpheus, Grokster and other established software.

The peer-to-peer software works by using tracker files that are posted online. The tracker files point to users who are sharing a given file, be it a pirated feature film or a home movie. BitTorrent then assembles complete files from multiple chunks of data that it obtains from everyone who is sharing the file.

The Motion Picture Association of America assisted in the investigation that led to Wednesday's action against Elite Torrents, officials said.

"Shutting down illegal file swapping networks like Elite Torrents is an essential part of our fight to stop movie thieves from stealing copyrighted materials," said the group's president, Dan Glickman.

Hollywood movie studios last year sued many operators of computer servers that use BitTorrent technology to help relay digital movie files across the Internet. The group also sued six sites this month that focus on swapping television programs.

[Redballjets88]

teehee

[Big Train]

funny to you too?

great...

[FORD]

Originally posted by Big Train
funny to you too?

great...

Ignore him, he's only 16 and completely clueless.

Now, completely putting aside my own personal disgust for the Nazi tactics of BOTH the RIAA and the MPAA for a couple seconds, I believe the reason for the MPAA's success here where your industry's fascists have failed is obvious.

There was never a TV station which played movies before their release, or while they were in theaters. As far as I know, unless you were the President of the United States, or possibly some other really rich dude with connections in Hollywood like Bill Gates or Paul Allen, you saw the movie in the theater like anyone else. And then (at least for the last 20 years or so) you could buy it at a later date on VHS tape or DVD.

It's just not that simple with the music industry. You have radio, you have jukeboxes, you have people wanting to make their own personal copy for the car or for a walkman/I-pod/ whatever. Or mix tapes.

None of these things are illegal, nor should they be.

You guys neutered Napster, and turned it into a for profit corporate whore. I happen to know of at least two bit torrent sites which went down because they were alleged to have copyrighted material on them.

I guess you guys could count those things as "success" if that's really what you want to focus on. Though putting out music that people actually want to buy, at a reasonable price point, might be an even better goal :)

[Redballjets88]

fuck you and your shirt

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Redballjets88
fuck you and your shirt

'Scuse me, but why are you here? And who are you talking too? This forum shouldn't exist, right? So let's no be a pissy little bitch....'kay?

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by FORD

I guess you guys could count those things as "success" if that's really what you want to focus on. Though putting out music that people actually want to buy, at a reasonable price point, might be an even better goal :)


And that is something the Major Labels are not concerned with.

No integrity.

If people would buy a cd of farting noises,, the labels would be all over it.

And, as I have mentioned before, the RIAA and MPAA continuously trumpet the lie that they have lost so many sales due to downloading, whereas many people who download stuff would never have bought it in the first place. So they are not "lost sales" at all.

That said, consumers are tired of being ripped off.

This is why itunes is such a huge success. Consumers no longer have to pay 15-20 bucks for albums with only one or 2 decent songs, and they certainly do not have to pay for the antiquated contractual "breakage" clauses, packaging and shipping costs and fat record comapny salaries and bonuses.

This is the modern world. The corporate behemoths are trying desperately to hold on to the old way of doing business.

As a result, they are starting to lose their ass instead of trying to move into the modern age.

Oh...record label executives losing their jobs, going bankrupt, etc.

My heart bleeds for those con artists.

What comes around goes around. The labels have been ripping people off for years. They are now getting their just reward.

The Internet Age is here.

The Labels and Movie Studios must learn to accept it.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by FORD
Ignore him, he's only 16 and completely clueless.

Now, completely putting aside my own personal disgust for the Nazi tactics of BOTH the RIAA and the MPAA for a couple seconds, I believe the reason for the MPAA's success here where your industry's fascists have failed is obvious.

There was never a TV station which played movies before their release, or while they were in theaters. As far as I know, unless you were the President of the United States, or possibly some other really rich dude with connections in Hollywood like Bill Gates or Paul Allen, you saw the movie in the theater like anyone else. And then (at least for the last 20 years or so) you could buy it at a later date on VHS tape or DVD.

It's just not that simple with the music industry. You have radio, you have jukeboxes, you have people wanting to make their own personal copy for the car or for a walkman/I-pod/ whatever. Or mix tapes.

None of these things are illegal, nor should they be.

You guys neutered Napster, and turned it into a for profit corporate whore. I happen to know of at least two bit torrent sites which went down because they were alleged to have copyrighted material on them.

I guess you guys could count those things as "success" if that's really what you want to focus on. Though putting out music that people actually want to buy, at a reasonable price point, might be an even better goal :)

Exactly! The last album I "illegally" downloaded, I went out and bought the deluxe edition the day it was released, and had also purchased several legal downloads indirectly or directly related to the origin.

Again, studies regarding the music industry have shown that the artists that are the most illegally downloaded are also the ones most legally downloaded, and they are the leaders in CD sales. And most bittorrent sites I've ever seen have only traded bootlegs, not copyrighted studio releases. Most use downloaded MP3', which sound sort of crappy anyways, as a preview to a music purchase. If the record industry is destroying bootleg sites in their quest of unachievable absolute control, they're not winning any friends here.


I think I've bought twelve (of six) Van Halen albums now....And would buy a studio pro-engineered "live" CD release or pro-shot DVD in a second of the numerous bootlegs I own.

Why is it that when other industries are in trouble (such as FordMC and GM), it's competition or the economy, but when it's the music industry, it's those damn downloaders? Just asking....

[Big Train]

Whatever guys, recycle your tired bullshit about "two good songs" and being "trapped" into only purchasing them one way, which justifies stealing the material yuo actually DO want.

The point I'm trying to make here is how quickly things got done when it was movies as opposed to music.

No integrity...fuck off, seriously..

[lucky wilbury]

ford did you know your farvorite riaa spokesperson hillary rosen now works for the democratic party?

[Big Train]

Of course he does...he wants someone who knows how to "lie" to the people, selling Dean as a "credible leader"...

[Dr. Love]

Guess the movie industry has more clout/power than the music industry.

In any event, I don't buy new CDs or DVDs. If I want to hear new music, I listen to it on the radio. If I want to see a movie, I watch it when it hits a movie channel.

Both industries feel very justified to go after people that are pirating their products with lawsuits. But they won't be doing it with my money.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by FORD
. Though putting out music that people actually want to buy, at a reasonable price point, might be an even better goal :)

That's the problem dude. I'll fucking throw money at you guys if you'd ever put out anything worth buying.

[Big Train]

If that were true on a macro level, we would not have ANY downloading at all. It's complete bullshit that is pedaled to make people feel ok about stealing.

Anyone who downloads ANYTHING inherently wanted it. Otherwise why would you waste the time and effort? What your willing to pay you can debate, but the fact that it was downloaded means someone wanted it. Pure and simple. 3-4 BILLION downloads a month....some people want this stuff even if you personally do not.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Big Train
If that were true on a macro level, we would not have ANY downloading at all. It's complete bullshit that is pedaled to make people feel ok about stealing.

Anyone who downloads ANYTHING inherently wanted it. Otherwise why would you waste the time and effort? What your willing to pay you can debate, but the fact that it was downloaded means someone wanted it. Pure and simple. 3-4 BILLION downloads a month....some people want this stuff even if you personally do not.

It's as simple as this:

Most stores don't carry CD singles. Some alleged "singles" (i.e. songs on top 40 radio) aren't actually released at all in a tangible format.

Unless the song IS a corporate cookie cutter "artist" (READ:no talent plastic slut -male or female) then corporate radio probably isn't playing them either.

So, by what means can someone hear a song before they decide whether or not they want to buy it?

Downloading. It's the only way possible, under a corporate dominated music & radio industry.

And nobody should have to pay to listen to a song. And I would never pay for an Mp3, or any other lossy format.

As I have said before, Napster, at its pre-corporate neutering peak, was the equivalent of late 70's - early 80's FM radio.

A lot of people taped songs, and entire albums off the radio back then. Most bought the record later. The ones who didn't are always going to exist no matter what the format. If they are willing to settle for music in a lossy format without the artwork, lyrics, and whatever computer/video "bonuses" might be on the CD, then that's what they're gonna do. 1985 or 2005, not a lot of difference in the methods, regardless of technology. The difference is that the corporatization of both record companies and radio has resulted in bland, boring, processed shit music that nobody over 14 wants to hear, much less spend 18 bucks for.

[The Scatologist]

You guys brought us Good Charlotte, Simple Plan, Nelly, Yellowcard, and the Best of Both Worlds with those 3 shit Van Hagar songs lately.


You should be fucking glad that people even BUY that shit cause I can't fuckin imagine myself paying 2 dollars for all that shit put together.

[The Scatologist]

Now a new VAN HALEN album.... and we'll talk.

[DLR'sCock]

No love lost over record execs and record companies that stole from the artists over the last century....

[Big Train]

Originally posted by FORD
It's as simple as this:

Most stores don't carry CD singles. Some alleged "singles" (i.e. songs on top 40 radio) aren't actually released at all in a tangible format.

Unless the song IS a corporate cookie cutter "artist" (READ:no talent plastic slut -male or female) then corporate radio probably isn't playing them either.

So, by what means can someone hear a song before they decide whether or not they want to buy it?

Downloading. It's the only way possible, under a corporate dominated music & radio industry.

And nobody should have to pay to listen to a song. And I would never pay for an Mp3, or any other lossy format.

As I have said before, Napster, at its pre-corporate neutering peak, was the equivalent of late 70's - early 80's FM radio.



Some points Ford, for at least thinking about the issue.

1. You can sample 30 seconds on any of the major download sites, at amazon, tower etc...30 seconds into a 3 minute tune and you CAN"T decide if you like it? C,mon..don't make me think less of your taste or ability to make a decision. BTW, exactly NONE of these outlets charges you to listen to a sample.

2. CD singles have been tried as both an argument and a format push and both have failed to gain traction.

3. Your Napster promo point is circumstancial at best. NO new star ever came out of the Internet, so there was not much to find, other than what they want to steal. Look at Big Champagne (www.bigchampagne.com), look at their top 10, 20, 100. Where are the great undiscovered or underpromoted artists you speak of? People are stealing what they know, not looking for what they don't.

[Hardrock69]

Haha people are ripping you off....hows it feel to be treated like a consumer or a signed artist for a change, hmmmm?

:D

[The Scatologist]

so Big Train, tell us what CDs YOU bought these past 15 years eh?

That's assuming you don't get a lot of CDs for free. If you do, then ASSUME that you didn't.

[academic punk]

"Laughing" at BT and his industry's plight isn't going to solve anything. It is an issue, and all the points he makes, though, I fundamentally ultimately disagree and see the precedent as sharing is legal, are valid. (especially #3 in his last post).

What I do want to ask you directly BT is this: EVERY entertainment industry has had to adapt in the wake of the internet. Many have suffered as bad as the recording industry. Publishing, news-media, film (which is what kicked off this thread), they are ALL in free-fall.

Did the networks have the right to sue after the rise of cable? The networks have lost billions in revenue since. Does the NY Times have the right to sue CNN or the internet because newspaper subscriptions are down 62% since 1980? Media and technology have changed. What was the status quo has changed. It's sink or swim for all of us.

uh oh...breakfast is ready...

[The Scatologist]

Heres how to save the music industry.



Fire 99% of the current label execs.

[Big Train]

Hard rock, just go fuck yourself for starters. I can only wish your industry (whatever that is) experiences this kind of problem.

Scat, I have purchased to many to list (my collection is somewhere in the 10's of thousands). While it is true I get a lot for free, mostly of bands being hyped or things on the label, I still BUY the majority of what I have. Firing 99% of label execs does what? Replace them with "Hungry, young, tasteful" people such as yourself who don't know shit about running the business? Sure...

[Big Train]

Originally posted by academic punk
"Laughing" at BT and his industry's plight isn't going to solve anything. It is an issue, and all the points he makes, though, I fundamentally ultimately disagree and see the precedent as sharing is legal, are valid. (especially #3 in his last post).

What I do want to ask you directly BT is this: EVERY entertainment industry has had to adapt in the wake of the internet. Many have suffered as bad as the recording industry. Publishing, news-media, film (which is what kicked off this thread), they are ALL in free-fall.

Did the networks have the right to sue after the rise of cable? The networks have lost billions in revenue since. Does the NY Times have the right to sue CNN or the internet because newspaper subscriptions are down 62% since 1980? Media and technology have changed. What was the status quo has changed. It's sink or swim for all of us.

uh oh...breakfast is ready...

Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Competition is one thing and I can understand that. Theft, I don't. Did CNN and cable networks rise to prominence by showing "Friends" or "CSI"? Obviously they do now in re-runs, re-runs that NBC gets P-A-I-D mightily for.

The point is they had to adapt for new challenges, yes. However, they did not have to adapt to other entities literally lifting and using their content. Then making ridicoulous demands about how it's "Not going to stop unless you cut us in".

Like VHS vs. Betamax, a favorite horse to flog in these arguments, it is a flawed concept.

[academic punk]

Fair enough, though I maintain print news media could probably make a similar argument....

Any and all comparisons will always have holes in them, and, hey, it is sunday morning, memorial day weekend.

My point is - and, again, this is a comparison - this is yet another "Home taping is killing the recording industry" campaign. And yet, here the industry is, 25 years later, still existant.

Would you ba able to find info on what were historicallythe most fertile periods in the industry, both artistically and financially? I'm don't know if there is any correlation between quality and quantity sold...but this is a "down" period artistically - can't think of anything that will be referred to in 20 years - and in the 60s you did have the whole youth movement believing that absolutely everything - especialy artistic expression (music) - was free.

I'm babbling, but as I said, it's sunday morning memorial day weekend.

[Big Train]

I understand what your saying punk and I hope I'm not coming down too harshly, just is a personal issue for me.

It is confusing the issue to mix the ideas of quality/quantity vs. Theft. No matter how you feel about the music , er product for practical purposes, being sold, the bottom line is that it is still being stolen. Like I said before, if it were something that people on a macro level did not want, why are there 3 billion downloads a month, which is orders of magnitude higher than physical sales? If it were so bad, wouldn't demand go DOWN? It is grand larceny and it is being allowed to go on.

Even in a down market, in bad non-creative years, we have a right to profit from those who do buy our wares. To allow those customers to steal from us on a huge level is just wrong.

I do find it funny that those "free the music" types of the 60's, grew up to charge for everything in the 80's..

[The Scatologist]

Like I said Big Train, NAME the CDs you would have bought in the last 10 years or so.

Now name the CDs that CAME OUT within that time, and that you would have bought.


You wanna know my list?

and with ratings from 1-20 as well, with 20 being CDs like Appetite, SFV or the 6 pack etc

CDs that came out in the last 10 year that I bought:

VR: Contraband - 12 - it sucks


JP Angel of Retribution - 17- it's great. FUNNY HOW YOU GUYS WORKED SOO DAMN HARD TO PUSH IT (sarcasm mode on)

The Darkness Permission to Land -15 - it's good

Aerosmith Honkin on Bobo - 14-It's ok

Iron Maiden - A Brave New World -16- It's great

TMG Vol 1 -16-it's great

B'z Survive - 19-great

B'z Big Machine - 18- Great, but maybe a tiny step down from Survive and Brotherhood and other CDs

B'z - Brotherhood - 20 - This CD came ot in 2000 and yet it's a Appetite / VH1 class CD

Tak Matsumoto - Hana- 20- Beautiful

Testament- First Strike Still Deadly -17- Would be higher if it wasn't just a bunch of rerecorded Testament songs.

Dream Theater- A Change of Seasons - 12- What was a hook again?


Well those are the main ones not counting reissues and such that I bought.

Funny how the only truely great Top Notch CDs came from JAPAN!
Showing how you guys don't know shit about nurturing or finding good artists.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by The Scatologist

Showing how you guys don't know shit about nurturing or finding good artists.


This proves...what?

The recording industry, like any media, has always been about 90% crap. But the other 10% is GOOD.

Was Pat Benatar considered a serious artist in her day? Fuck, no! What about Madonna when she first emerged? Nope! Not even the Beatles, the Stones, the Beach Boys, whatever. Labels chose to sign bands based on THEIR COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL! Yes, Hendrix turned his Marshalss up to "stun", but labels weren't taken aback by his artistic potential - but rather his COMMERCIAL potential (it just happened to coincide that so many people were blown away by his ability that they would buy the album, and thus everyone was 'satisfied").

Now it is true that labels no longer "nurture" bands, or sign them to multiple albuim deals. Why? Because it was once in the labels interest to do so, and it isn't anymore.

WB used to keep Van Dyke Parks on their roster. Sometimes his albums would sell, sometimes they wouldn't. The music was always interesting. Same with Randy Newman. the fact that this environment doesn't exist anymore is what bugs me the most in the new world order of the music industry. also, as we've all harped on, the price. i used to buy casstees by the armload. now at an average price of 14.99 or whatever, buying music is a treat, and one that I have to consider, espeically in terms of "are the three good songs on this thing worth this much money?"

I'm babbling.

[Dr. Love]

Originally posted by Big Train
Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Competition is one thing and I can understand that. Theft, I don't. Did CNN and cable networks rise to prominence by showing "Friends" or "CSI"? Obviously they do now in re-runs, re-runs that NBC gets P-A-I-D mightily for.

The point is they had to adapt for new challenges, yes. However, they did not have to adapt to other entities literally lifting and using their content. Then making ridicoulous demands about how it's "Not going to stop unless you cut us in".

Like VHS vs. Betamax, a favorite horse to flog in these arguments, it is a flawed concept.

Adapt... that's all I can say. Your industry really has no other option. Here's an example:

I saw an interested commerical for a music service called Rhapsody. Some guys at work use it and I'm thinking about researching it some more and giving the free trial a go.

Your industry can't continue suing people -- it's not going to work and it's going to alienate people. For whatever reason, most people don't see music downloading as theft. I don't know why. You have to adapt. I suggest going for a digital media that can't be copied (until someone hacks it, of course).

[The Scatologist]

Originally posted by academic punk
This proves...what?

The recording industry, like any media, has always been about 90% crap. But the other 10% is GOOD.

Was Pat Benatar considered a serious artist in her day? Fuck, no! What about Madonna when she first emerged? Nope! Not even the Beatles, the Stones, the Beach Boys, whatever. Labels chose to sign bands based on THEIR COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL! Yes, Hendrix turned his Marshalss up to "stun", but labels weren't taken aback by his artistic potential - but rather his COMMERCIAL potential (it just happened to coincide that so many people were blown away by his ability that they would buy the album, and thus everyone was 'satisfied").

Now it is true that labels no longer "nurture" bands, or sign them to multiple albuim deals. Why? Because it was once in the labels interest to do so, and it isn't anymore.

WB used to keep Van Dyke Parks on their roster. Sometimes his albums would sell, sometimes they wouldn't. The music was always interesting. Same with Randy Newman. the fact that this environment doesn't exist anymore is what bugs me the most in the new world order of the music industry. also, as we've all harped on, the price. i used to buy casstees by the armload. now at an average price of 14.99 or whatever, buying music is a treat, and one that I have to consider, espeically in terms of "are the three good songs on this thing worth this much money?"

I'm babbling.



OH YES WOW LIKE SIMPLE PLAN HAD ANY FUCKING COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL! You could have just fucking gotten a bunch of retards off the street, with that level of marketing. Oh wait! That's exactly what happened!

[Dr. Love]

This thread is looking more like House of Music material. :)

[FORD]

Originally posted by Dr. Love
This thread is looking more like House of Music material. :)

After reviewing the entire thread again, I can't find much political content, aside from the side issue of the Bush Fraudministration encouraging this environment of corporate fascist bullying of consumers.

So, to the House of Music it goes........