Pirating Sucks

[Music_Producer]

Very True. I remember when mp3 players first came out, the only way to get mp3's was from napster. Ripping was not as easy then. If you look at it that way, all players unsponsered by a music downloading service (a legal one), are just aiding the piracy.

Well not really musiclover.. you could use that argument for CD-burners and DVD-burners too then. I mean, because of these devices, piracy has become so rampant.. the way it is right now.

Hundreds of pirated CDs are being sold on ebay (pirated music, software and movies) or on the streets in China, India and other countries.. but one can't blame hardware for that. Thats simply not a reasonable argument.. technology is always evolving.. and people will always take advantage of it to pirate. Its how you can stop these pirates from operating.

Unfortunately, with downloading.. everyone, effectively, acts as a pirate.. without wanting to accept that fact.

 

[montom]

I wish more artists had donation buttons on their site. I would rather donate them $10 bucks to compensate for some downloaded songs than pay $15 for a CD which would return them barely anything in profit. If both record companies and audiences are screwing over artists, this might be one way to shift the balance. And instead of iTunes, I would rather pay for songs sold directly by the artists through their own site. Of course that might violate some contract between them and the record company, but hopefully as time goes on more artists will learn to do things more independently and use the net to their advantage.

 

[quigleybc]

I wish more artists had donation buttons on their site. I would rather donate them $10 bucks to compensate for some downloaded songs than pay $15 for a CD which would return them barely anything in profit. If both record companies and audiences are screwing over artists, this might be one way to shift the balance. And instead of iTunes, I would rather pay for songs sold directly by the artists through their own site. Of course that might violate some contract between them and the record company, but hopefully as time goes on more artists will learn to do things more independently and use the net to their advantage.

Another good post, i like that idea

This is turning into a great thread.

 

[SC68Cal]

A lot of the music that I listen to, was offered by the artist on their website, and that made me want to go out and buy their albums.

That, and I also go to local shows to support the band if I don't legally purchase their album. The only way I would have gone to the concert is if I had listened to their music. I think that the artist makes a lot more from ticket sales and merch rather than music sales

 

[Music_Producer]

I wish more artists had donation buttons on their site. I would rather donate them $10 bucks to compensate for some downloaded songs than pay $15 for a CD which would return them barely anything in profit. If both record companies and audiences are screwing over artists, this might be one way to shift the balance. And instead of iTunes, I would rather pay for songs sold directly by the artists through their own site. Of course that might violate some contract between them and the record company, but hopefully as time goes on more artists will learn to do things more independently and use the net to their advantage.

I had that idea too, in fact.. I tried it, but it didn't work. The reason being, without adequate exposure, no one even knows you exist. I am talking about relatively new artists, or unsigned artists with great potential.

I think iTunes should open up and provide artists with the ability to sell their music, and be compensated directly, instead of having to go through record labels. Its too much work for a musician to build a website, enable e-commerce, have an mp3 playback function, etc. An artist should be simply able to submit his/her track with the appropriate copyright information, to iTunes.. and iTunes would share some of the profit.

This would effectively make iTunes into a record label (a 'nicer' version), and would be a great boost for all musicians.

 

[EricNau]

I think iTunes should open up and provide artists with the ability to sell their music, and be compensated directly, instead of having to go through record labels. Its too much work for a musician to build a website, enable e-commerce, have an mp3 playback function, etc. An artist should be simply able to submit his/her track with the appropriate copyright information, to iTunes.. and iTunes would share some of the profit.

This would effectively make iTunes into a record label (a 'nicer' version), and would be a great boost for all musicians.

That would be nice, and great for some musicians, but then iTunes would be full of a lot of crap also.

 

[Music_Producer]

That would be nice, and great for some musicians, but then iTunes would be full of a lot of crap also.

The 'crap' might be iTunes trying to cover its own a$$ in the event, that some musicians give them material that might include sampled music from other artists. If this happens, iTunes gets sued..and they would have to pay millions in damages. Hence, iTunes does not want to take on the role of a record label (my assumption)

Remember mp3.com? I thought they were pretty cool.. artists could upload their music, sign a waiver claiming that to the best of their knowledge, their music did not infringe any copyright.. and then people could buy these tracks, a fair share of the profits going to the artists.

99 cents per song.. Apple could pay the artist 25 cents or something like that. They could also have marketing rates.. for e.g. if I am an artist and I've uploaded my track to iTunes.. but well, no one can find it. So I pay $500.. for the track to show up on the front page for a day. Or it could be for a few minutes, whatever.. you get the idea.

That would be most cost effective and would be a win-win situation, for both Apple and the artist.

 

[savar]

Or creating music.

AMEN

 

[Music_Producer]

Thanks, posts like yours are what people need to see. Someone that actually was affected by piracy. Forget about the ***** RIAA and the big business, guys like you and the work you put in is why Music Piracy sucks.

Hope you get another contract, do you have a site to hear a clip/sample of your tunes?

Not yet quigley, but am working on it.. hopefully it will be up soon!

 

[savar]

While all this was happening, I had finalized a deal with BMG to release an album.. and of course, that track was the number one reason to produce that album. It was supposed to be heavily promoted ..with a music video, etc. Everything was in place, I was supposed to get an advance of $125,000 with royalties following the release of the album. In fact, they gave me a check for $25,000 before the advance..

Well, so for your 'economic analysis'.. the deal was dropped when they got to know that everyone already had the track, and it was out in the open. No album, no advance, no royalties.. nothing. Nada. The logic was simple, since everyone could already access the track online, why go through the hassle of releasing it, marketing it?=

You had a deal "finalized" but they backed out of it? Maybe you're a naive business person, but thats not what final means.

I refuse to believe that an artist with tons of street buzz would fail to spark a record label's interest -- especially if the deal had already been "finalized". It sounds to me like you're saying you had one awesome song which everybody started listening to, and the label thought the rest of the CD wasn't good enough to carry itself and wouldn't sell.

I mean, Jay-Z, Camron, and Mike Jones all still have jobs and their music is the most heavily downloaded out there. Your logic just doesn't hold together.

BTW, I wasn't trying to diss your music earlier. I'm not even into dance music or whatever it is -- I was dissing your attitude. Maybe your music displays preternatural genius, but I can promise you I will never enjoy a moment of it knowing that you're sour about not making 125 grand. A lukewarm Moby.

Sure, I download music. I also buy CDs at the used record store when I can. That screws the artist too doesn't it? Sometimes I go to their houses and steal food out of their children's mouths and then giggle manically. But when I find an artist that's really solid, and really cares about the music itself -- not the money -- I go for broke. I literally spent every spare buck in high school going to $10 punk shows where you see 5 bands in 2 hours.

And if I was walking down the street and just once heard some random person playing a single I wrote, I'd die a happy person.

 

[Music_Producer]

Or creating music.

Oh ok, why don't you provide for my family, while I spend days and nights working on music, and simply have it downloaded for free?

So I graduated from medical school.. why don't I practice medicine? I could make tons of money right? But I don't want to.. I love making music, what amazes me is that people refuse the fact that musicians should be paid. Or that music should be for free.. yes I do make music for free too.. but who's gonna pay my bills?

Are you still stuck with the image of musicians being hippies.. doing drugs 24/7 and making music? There are professional musicians, who 'work' beyond 9-5.. they support themselves, their families or whoever. It costs money to make music.. I don't exactly beat my chest to make a couple of beats you know.

Every music project that makes me money, I use that money to buy more instruments, more gear, maybe another FW hard drive or more ram for my Macbook. And buy the wife her anniversary present, pay taxes.. etc etc.

And NO, I love music so much that I really don't have time to get a full time 'job' to make money. Music is my passion, my inspiration, my life.. and you're telling me that I shouldn't be paid for it, when I am doing it full time? I am not asking for friggin millions or thousands or whatever, but reasonable compensation.

You could say the same about photographers.. why are there digital copyrights? Why do you have to purchase stock photos? Why should you have to pay a fee for that? Its just a damn picture, anyone can take it.. so they should be for free, right?

For some people, their hobby IS their job. If you can't understand that, then you won't understand a lot of other issues.

 

[Music_Producer]

You had a deal "finalized" but they backed out of it? Maybe you're a naive business person, but thats not what final means.

I refuse to believe that an artist with tons of street buzz would fail to spark a record label's interest -- especially if the deal had already been "finalized". It sounds to me like you're saying you had one awesome song which everybody started listening to, and the label thought the rest of the CD wasn't good enough to carry itself and wouldn't sell.

I mean, Jay-Z, Camron, and Mike Jones all still have jobs and their music is the most heavily downloaded out there. Your logic just doesn't hold together.

Oh ok, maybe when you feel like flying to Bombay some time, let me know.. I'll come with you. And I'll introduce you to the execs at BMG, or Times Music.

Since you don't know much about business.. I'll enlighten you. Companies can cancel anything, anytime. They just found out that you got busted for doing drugs? Cancel the contract. That simple.

If you 'refuse to believe' then refuse to believe..that makes two of us. Its not that the rest of the songs were crap, but they just didn't want to spend so much money, invest everything into that one track when it was already out there. Yes, I didn't believe it either.

Uh.. and am I Jay Z? Or LA Reid? Here we go again.. you're comparing me to the top notch musicians out there.. if I was one of them, I wouldn't be out here posting. I am telling you how downloading affected me personally, when I was a poor amateur musician.. when that album deal could have in fact led to many more things. Musically.

Seriously, stop posting idiotic comments when you don't know what the hell I've been through.. you don't see me posting whatever I could assume about you.

 

[Music_Producer]

Sure, I download music. I also buy CDs at the used record store when I can. That screws the artist too doesn't it? Sometimes I go to their houses and steal food out of their children's mouths and then giggle manically. But when I find an artist that's really solid, and really cares about the music itself -- not the money -- I go for broke. I literally spent every spare buck in high school going to $10 punk shows where you see 5 bands in 2 hours.

And if I was walking down the street and just once heard some random person playing a single I wrote, I'd die a happy person.

Of course I was proud that everyone loved my music. Nothing makes a musician happier than hearing compliments about their stuff.

Does this mean I should be giving my music for free? When thats my sole profession? I've done a lot of things for free.. like I said earlier, you pay my bills.. and I'll be glad to make music for free.

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

If you were a music label what would you do: press criminal charges against a individual who pirated your music (and get nothing) or squeeze several thousand dollars out of them?

Well, considering that I have no ground for criminal charges ...

By downloading a song you are taking their property without legal right.

You should look up penal codes instead of dictionary terms.

 

[wmmk]

I think that everyone that I know that download a lot of music also own a lot of albums. The only ones that don't are the 12 year olds who can't afford to buy albums anyway.

whoa, whoa, whoa! who said 12 year olds don't legitamitely buy albums? i LIVE at dr. wax, the local record (and now cd) store.

 

[Music_Producer]

But when I find an artist that's really solid, and really cares about the music itself -- not the money -- I go for broke. I literally spent every spare buck in high school going to $10 punk shows where you see 5 bands in 2 hours.

And if I was walking down the street and just once heard some random person playing a single I wrote, I'd die a happy person.

Every artist cares about the music. There are stages though, when I was a teen, yes it was all about the music. I didn't have a wife, didn't have to support myself.. nothing. I was in school.. I would study, and make music all day. And play at concerts in school and all that.

After a few years, you get married, settle down.. and you can't afford to make music for free. Why did you pay $10 to see those punk shows? You should have demanded to see them for free.

 

[Music_Producer]

Oh, and Savar.. whenever I sit down to make music.. I don't say to myself "Now lets see, what type of song should I compose to make a million bucks from record sales?"

If I were a rich person with a self sustainable income, I would gladly give away my music for free. I would love for people to listen to it, comment and criticise. Its kinda hard to do that, circa 1996.. when you're all into making music.. with the lights off.. headphones on.. you're making this stunning composition and all of a sudden *BAM!*

Mom walks in the room and yells "Stop making music and start making money instead!"

Wouldn't it be nice if we artists could do both?

 

[Music_Producer]

whoa, whoa, whoa! who said 12 year olds don't legitamitely buy albums? i LIVE at dr. wax, the local record (and now cd) store.

Yeh.. I've been buying albums since I was a baby..

I have more respect for my 13 year old neice who has so many cds which she buys with her pocket money.. and zero respect for her dad (a loser anyway) who does nothing but download (music, movies, software.. you name it)

Ok I've posted too much.. I'm outta here!

 

[someguy]

Oh ok, why don't you provide for my family, while I spend days and nights working on music, and simply have it downloaded for free?

*blah blah blah* <skipping ahead>

For some people, their hobby IS their job. If you can't understand that, then you won't understand a lot of other issues.

Um. You entirely missed my point - which was:

People who have nothing but their paycheck in mind when they make music should not be making music at all. It should be about expressing one's self and being heard by the public, not about getting paid.

I never said musicians shouldn't be paid, of course everyone should be paid for what they do, but what you see bands like Metallica who have more money than they can possibly spend become outraged at the thought of someone downloading their music instead of buying it, I become outraged. Outraged at the thought that rich musicians who make millions don't seem to understand that we can't all afford to spend $20 a piece for their music. Some of us aren't millionaires., unfortunately.

 

[Music_Producer]

Um. You entirely missed my point - which was:

People who have nothing but their paycheck in mind when they make music should not be making music at all. It should be about expressing one's self and being heard by the public, not about getting paid.

I never said musicians shouldn't be paid, of course everyone should be paid for what they do, but what you see bands like Metallica who have more money than they can possibly spend become outraged at the thought of someone downloading their music instead of buying it, I become outraged. Outraged at the thought that rich musicians who make millions don't seem to understand that we can't all afford to spend $20 a piece for their music. Some of us aren't millionaires., unfortunately.

Oh absolutely..I agree with you on that.. however, most people who download music automatically assume that all musicians are millionaires! Like the idiot who posted that retarded comment "You are sour about losing 125k?" Of course I'm sour! That was the only chance I had to actually show people that "Look! I CAN make money with my music.. I don't have to be just a doctor or engineer to make money and live a life"

The reason I was pissed at downloading was because I was a broke teenager, and I was under constant pressure to find a job or make money.. and 'stop wasting my time making music'. And when I composed that track, I did it without any money in mind.. its only after it became so popular that I thought "Hey, this track has a lot of potential.. maybe i should show it to a record company"

And when the deal got cancelled, everything just collapsed.. and it was all because of downloading. So yes, downloading hurts artists.. but the established artists hardly get fazed.. while the small ones can get wiped out.

And, you can't make music if you have a paycheck in mind. Well, atleast I find it personally impossible if someone 'pays' me to make music.. I can't! I need to be stress-free to make music, with my ideas, my creativity, etc. There are so many things which inspire me to make music, and money is not one of them at all. Its just that, hey.. a few tracks are so good that they might fetch me some money, so I can buy some more gear or pay the bills.

 

[Stridder44]

i personally, as a musician (and very low paid one at that! ) think piracy is totally terrible!

a jerk at school who uses limewire on his peecee says that he can't get caught for downloading copyrighted stuff 'cause he's not on the web and his external ip can't be traced. he also says "nobody" gets sued for using limewire, and that music from a CD won't work with his iPod.
after i got him scared about the RIAA, he asked if he'd be ok if he stopped downloading and uploading, then deleted all of his illegit music.

can he actually be traced?
do many people get sued by the RIAA for piracy?
is he legit if he stops pirating?

You think Piracy is bad?? And that's stealing??

You should read up on the RIAA....they are like both of these, except alot worse.

 

[Stridder44]

People who have nothing but their paycheck in mind when they make music should not be making music at all.

Amen. Thread over. You win.


(note: not aimed at you Democrat622)

 

[Agathon]

To Music Producer et. al.

If you don't like the idea of people downloading music, then stop making it (as you say you have done). You have no absolute moral right to make money out of music, just as I have no absolute moral right to force people not to repeat jokes I tell them or to prevent them from repeating any ideas I tell them. The principle is the same: everyone creates ideational content and for the most part we are free to repeat it to whom we wish at no cost. The idea of owning an idea is repugnant. Most ideas are never truly original as it is.

You are free to find some other line of work: no-one forces anyone to become a musician, except maybe in North Korea.

Intellectual Property is a legal concept, not a moral concept. And laws are not always good laws. Martin Luther King broke the law, but he did nothing immoral. Similarly, music downloaders break the law, but they are not necessarily doing anything immoral.

Intellectual Property rights exist for one reason only, and that is to encourage people to make music that can be enjoyed by everyone. There is no reason other than that behind intellectual property legislation (please check out the US record on this – that understanding has been upheld by the courts every time, so if you disagree you basically don't know what you are talking about). If downloading kills the music industry, then we've made our bed and have to lie in it, but there is good reason to think that it will not.

People have always composed and performed music, long before copyright legislation and no doubt they will still do so. The cost of distributing music is now effectively nil due to the internet, so we don't have to worry about copyright protection on that account. Music will be distributed on a voluntary basis to whomever wishes to download it.

Perhaps people think that no-one will make music if they can't get paid for it. That is not true. The cost of producing good quality music is rapidly decreasing because of computer technology. Anyone who wants to make an album can do so for not much more than it costs people to make a small independent film (and there are no shortage of those because people like making them and are prepared to spend the few thousand dollars it takes to make them just for the fame they may gain). People can also distribute recordings as publicity for live shows (which they make a lot more from).

Perhaps people think that no-one will publicize music if they can't get paid for it. This is also not true. Every few weeks another meme sweeps the internet as users pass it on to other users in a viral manner. There's no reason to think that good music cannot be spread in exactly the same manner, because it is happening right now.

What you are asking for is protection for an obsolete industry. Information technology has lowered costs to such a great degree that it is getting to the point where copyright enforcement for music is becoming pointless. Music will continue to be produced and consumed on a voluntary basis, just like a lot of other internet trends. If some people don't want to do this, no one is forcing them, but there will always be enough fame junkies and enthusiasts to fill the gaps.

And file sharing is the absolutely best thing to happen to music since the invention of the long playing record. It revitalized my interest in popular music, and did the same for many people I know. Having a world music library instantly accessible increases the enjoyment of consumers immeasurably. More people are now enjoying more music than ever before.

So, please, spare us the moral tirades. Just as it would have been pointless to protect buggy makers when automobiles came around, so it is pointless to protect the music industry when technology renders it obsolete. It's not a moral issue: the issue is whether the government should still be protecting an industry for which there is a vanishing need.

 

[beatzfreak]

The logic was simple, since everyone could already access the track online, why go through the hassle of releasing it, marketing it?

But this stupid logic.
They had a track with a huge buzz on a dirty copy, half their work was already done. I'm sure people would have paid for a clean copy. Back in the days of Napster, if Sony found any of their artists on Napster, they would stop all marketing and promotion of that artist.

And Sony/BMG are so hypocritical.
They are so paranoid about illegal distribution they illegally put software on there CDs and turn around and illegally bribe DJs and program managers to get their artists on the radio.

Now some of their artists are bringing a class action suit against Sony for treating itunes downloads as record sales when they are actually licensing deals.

As far as downloading, I don't do it because it is illegal, but I find it ironic that these record labels are constantly engaging in illegal activities.

I try to support the artists I like by going to their concerts, this is where they make there money.