Stop Online Piracy Bill

[Shaun Ponsonby]

On the flip side.

Online allows them an avenue that would otherwise be shut off. The landscape has changed so much that you have to be viral to get some form of popularity.

Where are they going to get their music played? Clear Channel has neutered radio to a pathetic point. MTV? 4 am music videos and they've just now woken up to the significant amount of electronic fans and given them their own block. Best Buy has taken over record stores and their selection is limited, and the rec. execs? Ain't signing you. if you ain't a tween/forumalic pop band or have a certain sound it's not worth it.

The Internet? there's no real limitations. It allows you to get out the word to a lot of people and get their attentiion where as normally people would go "meh". "Hey I really like this groups album I torrented, I think I'll go see their show, I think I'll go buy merchandise, hell, I'll buy their album because I like the art". There's ways to make money that don't involve selling albums.

I have no idea what a "Best Buy" is.

People always say this...but how many bands are there on the internet? Hundreds of thousands. How many of them can you be arsed listening to? I know I can't be arsed going through all of those bands to find, what? Maybe a handful that I like. It always seems people use this as rationalisation for piracy. I don't think the internet does open as many avenues as many believe, because to stand out amongst a seriously high number of artists literally from all over the world enough to make a living from what you're doing you still need to have some kind of professional representation in the business. Unless you have built the audience over a long period of time you still can't emancipate yourself and be a 100% free agent. It's all well and good for someone like Prince to break away and do everything himself, he spent 1978-1996 on a major record label who invested big bucks in him and, consequently, he built up an audience, had countless hits, sold 80 million albums and everybody knows his name. [Insert name of band you've never heard of] can't do that because nobody knows, and most don't care, who they are.

[Blaze]

You do not need pirate site to give away (or sell) music on the web.

[knuckleboner]

You do not need pirate site to give away (or sell) music on the web.

amen.

if a band choose to sell or give away their music on the internet, great. but its their music. it should be their choice. if it's not, then it's theft.

[Nickdfresh]

I dunno...it doesn't feel like I'm reading a book if I'm reading it online. I'll always rather have the book in my hand.

Similarly, I'll always rather have the CD/vinyl/DVD.

Yeppers.

[Nickdfresh]

Pete Townshend did a lecture about piracy for the BBC's Radio Festival. He was against it, naturally. Not from the point of view of a millionaire rock star, but he said he was thinking of younger artists who have nowhere near the money he has. Young bands who are struggling to survive and will always struggle to survive if people keep illegally downloading their music. People are always complaining about a lack of great bands these days. Maybe you should consider piracy as a reason none of the ones with potential are given a chance to flourish.

He has a point, but the vast majority of money being made isn't from record nor Apple download sales. The money's in the touring and live shows...

I have no idea what a "Best Buy" is.
...

Best Buy is a North American electronics chain that is one of only two major brick-and-mortar est. where one can find music...

[Kristy]

People are always complaining about a lack of great bands these days. Maybe you should consider piracy as a reason none of the ones with potential are given a chance to flourish.

Piss-poor argument you have there, monkey boy. Bands today no matter how good or bad are given the same amount of equality to flourish as that limey cocksucking hypocrite Townshend did in his day. Difference today being if a band like The Who were starting out not one commercialized radio market going would play them. Besides, who listens to the radio anymore? It's all satellite or MP3 who do play up and coming and hopefully talented pop acts. And since Townshend has so much money maybe he should give some of it back as refunds for those dismal albums he put out in the 90's.

[Unchainme]

He has a point, but the vast majority of money being made isn't from record nor Apple download sales. The money's in the touring and live shows...

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100524/0032549541.shtml

it's what gaga said. and she's one of the bigger earners in the world right now.

I believe the dude that preformed at my school got paid around 40k to come here. again, without torrenting or youtube, dude's not making that money because that's strictly where his popularity came from.

[FORD]

Here's my take on this whole goddamn mess.....

I downloaded the "bonus disc" from the Rolling Stones Some Girls remaster yesterday. I won't say where I got it from, because the RIAA trolls do watch this site (some of you may remember one of them openly admitted it). I downloaded it, because I was sick of waiting to hear it, and it's not in the store yet. Simple as that.

Am I going to buy it. Hell yes. In one form or another. I've bought every Rolling Stones album since the original Some Girls on or shortly after the day of release (and all the older ones too) so Mick and Keith ain't got nothing to worry about.

I also download a lot of TV shows from the net. It's more convenient than trying to figure out how to record two shows that are on at the same time or whatever. I watch them, and then I delete it. Anything worth keeping, I'll eventually buy it on a DVD anyway.

In other words, I'm doing exactly the same goddamn thing that I did in the 1980's when I recorded a "leaked" album played in its entirety on pre-corporate-bastardized FM radio, or recorded a TV show on my VCR. And I don't feel any more guilt for doing so now than I did then, nor should I. Nor should I have to pay for it. Unless you count the ridiculous amount of money I'm paying Comca$t every month to access it.

I am not the criminal. THEY are. Fuck 'em.

[Seshmeister]

http://boingboing.net/2010/05/14/mick-jagger-talks-do.html

This BBC News interview with [Sir] Mick Jagger on the 40th anniversary of the Rolling Stones' Exile on Main Street contains a few really choice grafs about the myth that the internet has robbed artists of their livelihoods. He seems pretty chill about the perceived threats of downloading, and explains that for a long time, the record labels did a fine job of robbing artists:

BBC: What's your feeling on technology and music?

Jagger: Technology and music have been together since the beginning of recording. [The internet is] just one facet of the technology of music. Music has been aligned with technology for a long time. The model of records and record selling is a very complex subject and quite boring, to be honest.

BBC: But your view is valid because you have a huge catalogue, which is worth a lot of money, and you've been in the business a long time, so you have perspective.

Jagger: Well, it's all changed in the last couple of years. We've gone through a period where everyone downloaded everything for nothing and we've gone into a grey period it's much easier to pay for things - assuming you've got any money.

BBC: Are you quite relaxed about it?

Jagger: I am quite relaxed about it. But, you know, it is a massive change and it does alter the fact that people don't make as much money out of records. But I have a take on that - people only made money out of records for a very, very small time. When The Rolling Stones started out, we didn't make any money out of records because record companies wouldn't pay you! They didn't pay anyone!

Then, there was a small period from 1970 to 1997, where people did get paid, and they got paid very handsomely and everyone made money. But now that period has gone. So if you look at the history of recorded music from 1900 to now, there was a 25 year period where artists did very well, but the rest of the time they didn't.

Here's the entire interview.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8681410.stm

[Shaun Ponsonby]

Piss-poor argument you have there, monkey boy. Bands today no matter how good or bad are given the same amount of equality to flourish as that limey cocksucking hypocrite Townshend did in his day. Difference today being if a band like The Who were starting out not one commercialized radio market going would play them. Besides, who listens to the radio anymore? It's all satellite or MP3 who do play up and coming and hopefully talented pop acts. And since Townshend has so much money maybe he should give some of it back as refunds for those dismal albums he put out in the 90's.

My arguments may be piss poor at times, but at least it's not an ill-researched snap judgement or illogical off-hand comment.

[Shaun Ponsonby]

He has a point, but the vast majority of money being made isn't from record nor Apple download sales. The money's in the touring and live shows...

Yeah, but for your tour to be a financial success people have to have heard of you...which usually means you need to have had a song or album that charted, which means enough people would have had to buy it legitimately.

Although, I think there's actually more money in merchandising and publishing than touring. Dunno if someone could answer that one...?

[Kristy]

I'm sorry. I'll be sure to get my PHd in MP3ology for you next time.

[Shaun Ponsonby]

I'm sorry. I'll be sure to get my PHd in MP3ology for you next time.

You do that.

[Kristy]

I just might.

[Sensible Shoes]

You Jimmy Chu girl you