The iTunes Hate Site

[IJ Reilly]

Well, it was bound to happen, right?

http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/

This guy is pretty confused. He seems to think it's fairer for the artists to get nothing from the file swappers, instead whatever they're paid per track from iTMS sales.

[mateft]

hmmmm...

[bitfactory]

the guy who created the site is a total tool... he even links to CD Baby (top nav), like its 'his little secret' - a great, small record label.

attention dork: CD Baby LOVES the iTMS, they are in the process of putting their whole catalog up there right now.

nice job! :D

[Totalshock]

If you buy music from iTMS while wearing a tinfoil hat, are you safe?

[IJ Reilly]

Originally posted by Totalshock
If you buy music from iTMS while wearing a tinfoil hat, are you safe?

As long as you fashion it into a pyramid, then yeah, probably.

[shadowfax]

nice domain name--downhillbattle.org.

lol! everything else is hardly worth comment.

[FattyMembrane]

i love that his solution to musicians getting screwed out of money is just to steal it with p2p (he recommends giFT, konspire2b, and freenet).

anyone who says "bandwidth is not expensive" should be barred from speaking on any matter involving the internet.

i agree: the system sucks, but i could have sworn that apple doesn't make 35% on each song, and the record companies are still the ones doing the major plundering.

the guy has a point, but he's a bit misguided.

[stoid]

Let's see, if apple makes 35 cents per song...

100 million songs from Pepsi, and say a high estimate of 100 million songs by the year end mark. That's *does math in head* 200 million songs times .35 per song. Grand total of 70 million dollars profit for Apple in the first year. I'm not sure how to estimate the costs Apple has to pay, but that would have to be at least 10 or 20 million at the very least, which when the company reports 45 million in a quarter, that's a 5 to 10 percent profit gain for the company.

I think that if it were THAT significant, Apple would be running the iTMS to make money, not sell iPods.

[Bear]

Originally posted by stoid
Let's see, if apple makes 35 cents per song...

100 million songs from Pepsi, and say a high estimate of 100 million songs by the year end mark. That's *does math in head* 200 million songs times .35 per song. Grand total of 70 million dollars profit for Apple in the first year. I'm not sure how to estimate the costs Apple has to pay, but that would have to be at least 10 or 20 million at the very least, which when the company reports 45 million in a quarter, that's a 5 to 10 percent profit gain for the company.

I think that if it were THAT significant, Apple would be running the iTMS to make money, not sell iPods. Out of the part that Apple keeps, Apple has to pay for the servers, the credit card costs, the people who manage/maintain iTMS, etc.

Apple does not make 35 cents per track after costs. People always forget the cost of doing business.

[Durandal7]

It amuses me that all the Kazaa users have suddenly decided, when faced with a viable alternative, that continuing to use Kazaa is somehow noble and valiant.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Durandal7
It amuses me that all the Kazaa users have suddenly decided, when faced with a viable alternative, that continuing to use Kazaa is somehow noble and valiant. "oh NO! it's not a viable idea! that would require me to spend MONEY! you know i use that only for porn!"

:rolleyes:

[cb911]

huh? people actually pay for porn? you know you can get that for free as well. :p :D

anyway, about that downhillbattle site... perhaps the artists could be getting more than they are now, assuming it's as low as that guy says.

Apple has a business to run, and costs it has to pay. the record label helps the artist with exposure and distribution, so i don't know what that guys on about.

perhaps the artist should be getting a higher percentage of the profits, but what do i know?

[scem0]

Originally posted by shadowfax
"oh NO! it's not a viable idea! that would require me to spend MONEY! you know i use that only for porn!"

:rolleyes:

are you purposefully targetting me?!??!

jk ;)......maybe:eek: :p :D.

scem0

[XnavxeMiyyep]

The majority of those people (the sensible ones) choose peer to peer filesharing programs like Kazaa or Acquisition to get their mp3s. Downloads are fast, there's a bigger selection, and peer to peer sharing doesn't prop up the music industry. Plus it's free. Hmm, so Kazaa, which usually gets around 15 k/sec is fast? It's definitely so much faster than iTunes(150k/s+), and it definitely doesn't steal from the musician the way iTunes does.

[Sol]

iTunes Hate Site indeed! What is the argument of the site's writer, that Apple's cure (iTMS) is worse than the disease (P2P)? At best Apple will sell a lot of music that would not have been sold via any other format, at worst Apple will take away from CD sales. Either way I do not see how artists are done wrong by this.

The arguments about AAC files being lossy and CDs being ideal do not convince me at all. The iTMS AAC files are created from master tapes and encoded better than any CD-ripping solution. Audio quality is not an issue here. Besides, when artists like Massive Attack and Radiohead release copy-protected disks we do not have the option to rip this music using our own hardware and software.

Overall my impression of the above linked page was that somebody had a lot of time in their hands. It is as if there is a culture of hostility towards Apple by a small but vocal portion of Windows users. What I find ironic is that Apple is not even selling iTunes to these people; it is freeware and they still complain about it.

[IJ Reilly]

Originally posted by Sol
The arguments about AAC files being lossy and CDs being ideal do not convince me at all.

Of course that's the other major laugh-riot on this site. I wonder where he's finding CD-quality audio on the P2P servers. I'll bet so long as he can get it for free, he doesn't care if the music sounds like an old 78 RPM record played with a ten-penny nail.

I'm truly amazed by the number of people who've become righteously indignant over the prospect of people actually paying for their music. I mean, the utter gall of them! Maybe they're worried about all that honesty rubbing off on them. Contagious honesty could be very inconvenient!

[VIREBEL661]

There's gotta be some legal issues with using Apple graphics, and also the pictures of the people from Apple's ads. From a musician, this is total BS. As everyone here has already pointed out, it's a foward thinking and workable business model.

Slightly Off Topic - I went to school throughout the 80's, programmed Apple II's! Mac's were the bomb when they came out. About this (misinformed) vocal part of the windoze community that automatically hate Mac's and Apple for whatever reason and no matter what - when the hell did this happen in culture? Was it around win95? Just weird...

[Docrjm]

I think he forgot his meds today...adnd yesterday and the day before that!

[alset]

Originally posted by VIREBEL661
There's gotta be some legal issues with using Apple graphics, and also the pictures of the people from Apple's ads.

The same was said of anti-buymusic sites. The answer is that sites of this nature are a satire.

This site has been around for several months. Didn't anyone notice it?

Dan

[solvs]

Ok...

Assuming artists only get $0.11 (or even $0.01) per track sold, isn't that still better than $0.00 per song by using P2P or buying a used CD as he is arguing? Sure it's not as good as just sending the artist a buck, but it's better than nothing. If you're going to have complaints, at least make legit ones like BuyMusicSucks (http://www.buymusicsucks.com).

Oh, wait... you can't. Ok then.

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by alset
The same was said of anti-buymusic sites. The answer is that sites of this nature are a satire.

This site has been around for several months. Didn't anyone notice it?

Dan

I was about to mention that it's been around for a while, but you beat me to it.

I think the new Windows release just makes him scream louder. ;)

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
I was about to mention that it's been around for a while, but you beat me to it.

I think the new Windows release just makes him scream louder. ;) Nah, don't think so.

I think the free computer and software Microsoft will be sending him to update his site will have him in an orgasmic coma.

[jonapete2001]

the creator of that itunes hate site, needs to think of teh total value of all the music apple has sold. I think i heard today that apple has sold about 14 million songs since the itunes came out in the spring. that would be (at 11 cents per song) 1,540,000 dollars given directly to the artists. That is a whole lot better than $0.
About the record labels cut, i know it is large but they are the ones making all the investment into the artists. people have to think of the investment into artists that go nowhere. And its not like these popular artists are starving in the street!!

[Edot]

I bet the RIAA would love to find out who this guy is flaunting himself about screaming about how he steals music and it is a much better way to "support" the artists.:rolleyes: Apple has done more for the music industry than just $$$. They have helped industry in other ways by getting people more interested in music, music ownership, and it's integration with technology. The music industry was hurting because of computers. Apple and other proponents of legal online music have revived the industry in some sense. I don't see the point of the website. If it is an attack against the RIAA and the Labels why is it targeted at Apple? Aren't they loosening the RIAA's grip on music, and the Labels?:confused:

[etoiles]

I think he raises some valid points. The artist still lives at the bottom of the corporate food chain, iTMS doesn't change much there. Plus yes, it is still pricey compared to a full CD, especially if you consider the quality difference (I just bought a few Zero7 songs and there is some noise/crackling here and there).

But where the ******* does this tie in with P2P ? Yeah, right, artists are going to make more money if they switch to donations...and we live in a nice world of shiny happy people. Riiiiiiiiight.

[pepeleuepe]

As stated above, this person makes a valid point: The internet COULD be a way for artists to make a larger share of the money from the sales of their records.

There's one major problem though, if I record an album, make a website that says "Buy my album, now" and wait. I will most likely sell one copy to my mom and one to my grandma, yeah I made more off of each album, but I only sold two copies and made a total of $10.

If I get this album picked up by a label and promoted, I get between 1-2 cents per copy plus 8 cents per copy for writing the songs minus some deductions. Now that my album is being actively promoted, I sell about 100,000 copies at 10 cents per copy and make $10,000.

My point is, despite that fact that the internet exists and artists can widely distribute their music on their own that doesn't mean a single consumer is ever going to see it. Musicians still require promotion, no matter how you look at it.

Consumers don't browse the web looking to buy albums off of random websites, they look in places their comfortable with: iTunes Music Store, Amazon, etc... In order for a musician to get noticed in any way, he will need some kind of promotional backing.

Some might say that this promotion could be done by the artist himself, but I doubt anyone has the time and energy to do all of this on their own, so once again, record companies are needed.

I think I'm finished, sorry for the long post.

[maka]

I think that this guy may be a bit confused focusing his "anger" at Apple, but his points are quite right. At the end of the page he actually says that iTunes is good for Independent Artists. I think It's not Apple's fault how the Major Labels treat their artists, Apple is already giving a fair share of the sales to them. What each label does with it's share it's their problem... altough the artist's cut colum in itunes could be fun :) I'm sure independent artists' sales would rocket up...

And the idea that people can pay artists directly is nice, have anybody checked the musiclink.com site? I think is't a good way of rewarding artists that have crappy contrats with labels that give them 10% of the sales... or for the mayority of the bands that don't even have contracts...

(BTW, I like the iTunes store, I just won't be buying music from Majors from it when it comes to Europe... just as I do now with real CDs...)

Note: Just a thought... CDBaby (which this guy likes) takes a 9% cut off what the artist gets on downloaded music, so an artist with CDBaby would get 58 cents from each iTunes download. Not bad at all :)

[toughboy]

Originally posted by Totalshock
If you buy music from iTMS while wearing a tinfoil hat, are you safe?

:D

[skijoc]

As a lawyer, I can tell you that it is a matter before this site is down in its current incarnation. It is illegal and, contrary to the web site's author, not a parody site and not-for-profit. It uses Apple's commercial photographs, its web-site layout (which Apple may or may not have a copyright to), and most of all, links itself to commercial websites. I give it a month before this site is down. He's entitled to his pulpit but not in this way.

[jywv8]

Originally posted by Totalshock
If you buy music from iTMS while wearing a tinfoil hat, are you safe?

Originally posted by IJ Reilly
As long as you fashion it into a pyramid, then yeah, probably.

Ha ha ha. That's the funniest thing I've heard/read all week.

Just wanted to share.

[Flowbee]

Originally posted by skijoc
As a lawyer, I can tell you that it is a matter before this site is down in its current incarnation. It is illegal and, contrary to the web site's author, not a parody site and not-for-profit. It uses Apple's commercial photographs, its web-site layout (which Apple may or may not have a copyright to), and most of all, links itself to commercial websites.

Interesting that he uses the Apple iTunes layout to go after Napster, too.

http://www.downhillbattle.org/napster/

[eclipse525]

First off, I agree with the ACC format not being the best BUT that goes for MP3, WMA and others as well. They all dicard vital frequency's that are important to the listening experience.

Now, I think that he's not really looking at it from the business end of things. Not to mention the long term plan that Apple might have for iTMS. Most Artist's contract run out eventually and that would be a perfect time to make one on one deals with these artists. This way they get paid what they should for the music they create. Eventually getting rid of the middle(fat rat) man. Ofcourse, this is just my opine.


~e

[mrjamin]

ok, that guy's a nutbar.

11c per song, right? well, to my knowledge, the highest ever percentage to the artist from a cd album released by a major record label was alanis morrissette's (yeah yeah, sp) "jagged little pill" where she was getting just over $1 per cd. So, what does a CD cost in the USA? about $15? thats LESS than 10%. iTMS? 11c per song to the artist? 99c per song? thats around 11% right? sounds pretty good if you ask me....

edit: whats more, apple could sue that guys ass for using all their images!

[bousozoku]

I was thinking that 6 to 7 percent is an average artist's cut for quite a while now.

I just hope the dude with the website gets his notice about "fair use" and has to create his own style. I was laughing about his Napster-related bits as the iTunes bits were crossed out and struck through. :D Indeed, he is a class act.

[Sol]

Originally posted by eclipse525
First off, I agree with the ACC format not being the best BUT that goes for MP3, WMA and others as well. They all dicard vital frequency's that are important to the listening experience.

So what format would you recommend for the best listening experience? Uncompressed 24 bit 96 kHz AIFF perhaps? Good luck trying to download that from the iTunes Music Store.

My point is, AAC is the best format for the iTunes Music Store because it sounds good, contains liberal copy protection and produces small file sizes. Any format that fits these criteria would be ideal for a portable music player like the ideal portable music player, the iPod.

There are many options for audio-philes who want all the frequencies and the full listening experience, namely LP, Audio CD, DAT, MiniDisc, Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio.

[eclipse525]

Originally posted by Sol
So what format would you recommend for the best listening experience? Uncompressed 24 bit 96 kHz AIFF perhaps? Good luck trying to download that from the iTunes Music Store.

My point is, AAC is the best format for the iTunes Music Store because it sounds good, contains liberal copy protection and produces small file sizes. Any format that fits these criteria would be ideal for a portable music player like the ideal portable music player, the iPod.

There are many options for audio-philes who want all the frequencies and the full listening experience, namely LP, Audio CD, DAT, MiniDisc, Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio.

I wasn't recommending "uncompressed 24bit 96kHz" is what I think it should be the choice for downloads. ACC is fine for what it is but if I were to pick one it would be "FLAC". It seems like the most promising of the all the formats.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/


~e

[Fukui]

A revolution in music will be when people stop buying music and start living it: when 25 cent donations support more musicians than CDs ever did, when payola's dead and radio is commercial-free all day long, when every American highschool has a recording studio just cause they're that cheap to set up. This can all happen right now.
Donations?
Radio is commercial free?
Every American HS has a recording studio?

What planet is he from?
Firstly, artitsts don't need donations...cause probably they wont get them.
2nd, Commercials pay for the free radio!!
3rd, why recoding studio when there are so many more imporant things to add to a HS, like clean bathrooms!!

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by Fukui
Donations?
Radio is commercial free?
Every American HS has a recording studio?

What planet is he from?
Firstly, artitsts don't need donations...cause probably they wont get them.
2nd, Commercials pay for the free radio!!
3rd, why recoding studio when there are so many more imporant things to add to a HS, like clean bathrooms!!

It sounds to me as if someone has been watching too much Star Trek: The Next Generation. :D

[Dahl]

Talk about barking up the wrong tree.
Pretty clueless dude, if you ask me.