Downloading Music

[Slyfox696]

You know what? Im just gonna take your arguments for why you should spend a shitload of money on CDs and support major corporations to be BS.

Because seriously. If Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails - One of the most popular industrial bands ever - Who himself is an artist and has way more experience in dealing with records companies, MAKING and SELLING music, then what you ever will have - Completely shits on major corporations that screw over both the fans and the artists, I really don't think your opinion holds any more firm ground.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2007/05/14/trent_reznor_speaks_out_about_music_piracy

As the climate grows more and more desperate for record labels, their answer to their mostly self-inflicted wounds seems to be to screw the consumer over even more. A couple of examples that quickly come to mind:

* The ABSURD retail pricing of Year Zero in Australia. Shame on you, UMG. Year Zero is selling for $34.99 Australian dollars ($29.10 US). No wonder people steal music. Avril Lavigne's record in the same store was $21.99 ($18.21 US).
By the way, when I asked a label rep about this his response was: "It's because we know you have a real core audience that will pay whatever it costs when you put something out - you know, true fans. It's the pop stuff we have to discount to get people to buy."
So... I guess as a reward for being a "true fan" you get ripped off.

Being a law-abiding citizen as you seem to be promoting doesn't really get you anywhere but screwed over. Because the laws are anything but perfect, and a lot of them are created to make sure that the greedy people without a conscience get it better then anyone else.

You gotta wonder if they are paying you to say shit like that.

How is that different than any other product? The people who produce it sell it for what they can get people to buy for. When you go to McDonalds, you pay your $1 for a small french fry, because McDonalds has determined that is where they will make the most profit. It's Economics 101.

If people would quit buying those CDs as the really high prices, then the CD prices would come down. But notice I'm saying "not buy", not "steal".

Oh, and as far as your Nine Inch Nails guy goes...you'll have to excuse me if one member of one band not liking their record label doesn't mean anything to me. Hardly something to be surprised about.

No, but you can bet that what is inside it. The same old shit about doing illegal stuff like bootlegging, hacking, "foul" language and the usual things that gets you in trouble. I don't know if such a thing exists in record contract signings.

I'm sure there are plenty of lawyers who do, especially I would guess most record labels have fairly standard contracts.

Not a good excuse

I'm not doing the society any harm as it is and I'm living very comfortable so why make a change? Oh and if you consider downloading a few albums "harm" then I assure you, those I have enjoyed am I going to buy in the future when I live off my own cash.

Then just wait until you get the money, and buy the albums then.

I don't consider ANY human being superior or inferior to another. I treat everyone equally and unless they do something that makes me lose respect, it remains that way.

Of course you do. That's why you're calling the RIAA "greedy assholes". By making them seem unworthy in your mind, it's much easier to steal from them. If it was someone who looked like a sweet old lady, maybe someone with the same mannerisms as a favorite grandmother of yours, and maybe that old lady barely could afford a loaf of bread for a meal, then your conscience would kick in and you wouldn't steal from poor little old grandma.

You call them greedy assholes, so you can de-humanize them and make yourself feel okay for stealing. It's the same thing countries do in time of war, so their soldiers don't feel guilt for killing other human beings.

They do most of the promotion and pressing, but in the end, it's the artists work that counts for buyers. They wanna hear the vocals, the production in the background and all of that. They do deserve some of the cash from the record sales but I believe the majority belongs to the artist since the buyer pays for the artist's name being associated with it, not because of the label it comes from. And besides, with internet in this day and age, artists can promote their music themselves anyways.

Then artists SHOULD promote their music themselves. But they're not. They NEED the record companies.

The music artists rely on the record companies. There is no way to deny it. And when you steal music, you ARE stealing from the creators of the music.

Yeah totally, I forgot the fact that right now I'm swimming in money. I haven't steal anything from anyone. I insist, there are out there things that are more important that does affect society as a whole.

What does having money have to do with stealing?

Exactly, that's why downloading music doesn't hurt at all. You insist that I'm doing something "illegal" yet no one gets hurt, people still buy the T shirts, but the posters and most improtantly, people are going to the concerts. No one is unemployed, no is actually suffering from the downloads. Sly prove me, besides the fact that I am "stealing", how does anyone in the whole music business is affected.

I've already answered this, a couple of different times.

FYI these record companies technically "own" happy birthday and each and every single time we sing that stupid song they are in their "right" to sue us.

This is false.

Yes, AOL/Time Warner (or at least what used to be AOL/Time Warner), owns the rights to the song, but that doesn't mean they can sue your for singing it at home. You need to understand you are wrong. They can sue for a public performance however, but then again, just because something is popular, doesn't mean ownership cannot be had.

Who I don't respect is the big record labels that try to limit the artist and their art.

That is none of your concern. You can't justify theft for something that doesn't concern you.

Please, you are clearly the small minded one since you forget the fact that there is artists who are in favor of downloading music. It's convenient how you quoted one line of my post forgetting the example I gave of the Foo Fighters.

It doesn't matter what the artist wants. If the artist wants to do like Radiohead did a few years ago, produce their own music, and then give it away for free, then they certainly can. But they don't matter in this conversation because we're talking about musicians/record companies who DON'T want you stealing their music.

I know a man who is a drummer in a small-time local band. If he is in favor of free downloads of music, so what? What does he matter in this conversation, since it's not his music we're talking about.

On the other hand, you are forgetting something really important. You are only having a one sided point of view, to be specific a "first world country" thinking. For you it's easy go to the store and buy a record for what 10,11,12 dollars? Have you EVER considered how it is on "third world countries"? It's obvious you didn't. When people live under two dollars per day, do you think that buying a record for 10 dollars is an option?

I'm sorry, but that's a stupid excuse.

If I have $8, and a record album costs $10, then you know what I do? I don't fucking get to listen to the album!

Good God, what makes you think you are entitled to the music? You're not entitled to the music. It's a good, not a right. You have to earn the right to listen, it's not something you have a right to the moment you were born. That's a stupid excuse.

 

[Sinister Shadows]

Oh, and as far as your Nine Inch Nails guy goes...you'll have to excuse me if one member of one band not liking their record label doesn't mean anything to me. Hardly something to be surprised about.

Hank Williams Jr.
Hank Williams III
Leanne Rimes
Tim McGraw

The four names that comes to mind right off without thinking about it, have all had to fight with their label to put out music for the fans to enjoy. I don't see where you get this idea that the record labels to all that much for bands, other than loan them some money, they don't really do shit.

Tim McGraw is suing his record label because they refuse to release his new cd, instead they are trying to make him write another cd instead of releasing the one he has already finished. This is is last cd on his deal with his label, so really all they are trying to do is get an extra cd out of him to make money on.

A while back Leann Rimes went as far as telling people not to buy cd that was released by her, because she said the record label took it, and ruined it in production and then released it against her wishes.

Hank Williams Jr left his label because they would not provide promotional, or creative support after he had been on the label for 25 years, then they restricted him everytime he turned around.

Hank Williams III, he signed to the label that he left at the end of last year because of his life situation, it was basically sign with them so that he could pay the bills, or go to jail. on his debut cd they only let him write one song... an artist that isn't allowed to create anything. His second he was a little more involved in... but the label insisted that he try to duplicate what his grand daddy done. He had to take the label to court and sue them to release his third. He went so far as to have a "Fuck Curb" campaign at all of his shows and on his website. what was he making off a cd? he got ten cents of every cd sold. hell he went so far has to make his own bootlegs and sold them of the material that he wrote that curb wouldn't distribute.

On the cd Straight to Hell (the one that he had to sue to release) He wrote, recorded, and mixed it all himself at home, Curb records literally only stamped their name on it, and made 17.00 or so dollars off of every one sold, while Hank made 10 cents. Curb went so far as to release a cd of his from 10 years ago at the same time that it was rumored that he would release his first cd post-curb. When asked about it, Hank III replied by saying "Don't buy, obtain a copy some other way, burn the hell out of it, and give it to everyone you know"

I have downloaded and burned copies of every cd that Hank III has ever released, but when his 4 new independent cd's come out in september i will go and buy them all, i have at least 100 dollars of merch bought directly from him, i have seen him in concert three times (and I am going back friday, and next friday) and i feel i have more than adequately supported my fave artist for what he has given to us as fans. With how onesided the record deals are today, i don't feel that i am supporting anyone that is actually doing the work on the music i enjoy, that's why i pay to see bands i like in concert and/or buy merch.

Links

Saving Country Music Article
SCM Article II
SCM Article III

 

[TheNewStyle]

I'm sure there are plenty of lawyers who do, especially I would guess most record labels have fairly standard contracts.

Not a good excuse

I don't even remember what it was about, but the contract signing thing is not my concern anyways, so we'll skip this.

Then just wait until you get the money, and buy the albums then.

Why make things complicated? If I am able to try the product out, I'll do that before putting my cash on it cause that way I am guaranteed satisfaction. And I don't care if the sample is legal or illegal. I am not gonna hold myself back from assuring my choice just for some stupid law. And lastly, there are some albums that are out of print now and not sold anywhere except on eBay and such sites for extreme prices. Is it not enough reason to download them? Specially since the $150 that I pay for it goes to the seller and not the artist? (who are already paid from the moment the seller picked it up for however many years ago it was)

Of course you do. That's why you're calling the RIAA "greedy assholes". By making them seem unworthy in your mind, it's much easier to steal from them. If it was someone who looked like a sweet old lady, maybe someone with the same mannerisms as a favorite grandmother of yours, and maybe that old lady barely could afford a loaf of bread for a meal, then your conscience would kick in and you wouldn't steal from poor little old grandma.

You call them greedy assholes, so you can de-humanize them and make yourself feel okay for stealing. It's the same thing countries do in time of war, so their soldiers don't feel guilt for killing other human beings.

Oh, look what we've got here! Now you're gonna tell me how I feel on this situation and what I meant by my first comment here? I didn't know people from a forum can tell my feelings on a subject better than myself. You also must have missed that I called myself an "asshole by nature", was I dehumanizing myself as well? You tell me.

Then artists SHOULD promote their music themselves. But they're not. They NEED the record companies.

The music artists rely on the record companies. There is no way to deny it. And when you steal music, you ARE stealing from the creators of the music.

Guess what, the artists ARE promoting their music. There's something called social networking sites which they use to promote their music. That way if you are on twitter for instance, you can follow their account and get updates from them about when their album is coming out or get to hear a sample of their latest single. In this day and age with internet around, it's much easier to successfully do some self-promotion compared to the past. And I tell you what, most of the music I like has come out from the slums of various American cities where the creators of the music have relied on word of mouth and now the internet to be heard. Most of it would I have never been familiar with by just relying on CD stores.

Also very clever of you skipping the very good points made by Trent Reznor. He basically suggests downloading over buying his music because the record company tries to rip off the fans by selling it for extreme prices. I guess one person is not enough, but guess what, there are tons of artists that I can name who have had their careers potentially killed by a record label and stupid A&Rs. And I guess that is not enough for you either, "enough" is when even record label heads themselves have something to complain about, or?

 

[TSG]

I guess the counter-argument to that would be: If it's shit, and you don't care about it, why bother stealing it? Because you can? Do you really get no value out of your download?

Or is that just a convenient excuse, to say it's shit so you feel better about ripping off the people who provide it to you in the first place. Not even really talking about the artist, but the producers, etc. If it really was shit, and not one really cares about it, why break the law to acquire it?

Because it's the law? Because the people who created it did so for a return on their investment?


It's the law? Is that a good enough reason?



Don't get me wrong, CD prices are ridiculously high for what it costs them to produce, the artists get screwed on the CD deal, and a lot of CDs come with 2 or 3 good songs and everything else sucks, I get that. But just don't get the music. I think paying for a General Motors Hummer is a ripoff, but you don't see me going to steal one, now do you? No, I just decide it's not worth paying for and do without. The argument "it's not worth paying for, so I'm going to steal it instead" just doesn't cut the mustard.

Furthermore, who says you have to pay for an entire CD? I can't speak for across the ocean, but at least here in America, there are a TON of resources where you can just buy individual songs. Don't want to buy the entire CD? Just pay for one song. It's not that difficult.


I'm sorry, but in this day and age, stealing music is a morally bankrupt thing to do, since there are alternatives to the "every song except two on the CD is crap" argument. Either go without the music at all, or deal with the price.

Is it against the law? Yeah. But there is a huge difference between stealing a car and illegally downloading a song. It's still stealing, yes, but on a much lower scale. Bands will still make money from touring and merchandise, where as car dealers/companies don't. And there is a huge price difference. But that isn't the main point here.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that it's stealing, it's clearly stealing. But the thing about it is: the bands and record labels are still making money. People are still buying the music on CD's and iTunes, and always will. Bands are still touring, they are still selling merchandise. That will always happen and it will never change. Which is why the argument stealing money from bands doesn't matter to me. They are still going to make money whether I pay for their CD's or not, so I have no guilt on my conscience.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

You know what? Im just gonna take your arguments for why you should spend a shitload of money on CDs and support major corporations to be BS.

Because seriously. If Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails - One of the most popular industrial bands ever - Who himself is an artist and has way more experience in dealing with records companies, MAKING and SELLING music, then what you ever will have - Completely shits on major corporations that screw over both the fans and the artists, I really don't think your opinion holds any more firm ground.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2007/05/14/trent_reznor_speaks_out_about_music_piracy

As the climate grows more and more desperate for record labels, their answer to their mostly self-inflicted wounds seems to be to screw the consumer over even more. A couple of examples that quickly come to mind:

* The ABSURD retail pricing of Year Zero in Australia. Shame on you, UMG. Year Zero is selling for $34.99 Australian dollars ($29.10 US). No wonder people steal music. Avril Lavigne's record in the same store was $21.99 ($18.21 US).
By the way, when I asked a label rep about this his response was: "It's because we know you have a real core audience that will pay whatever it costs when you put something out - you know, true fans. It's the pop stuff we have to discount to get people to buy."
So... I guess as a reward for being a "true fan" you get ripped off.

Being a law-abiding citizen as you seem to be promoting doesn't really get you anywhere but screwed over. Because the laws are anything but perfect, and a lot of them are created to make sure that the greedy people without a conscience get it better then anyone else.

You gotta wonder if they are paying you to say shit like that.

I read that NIN article, the whole thing not just the first half, and I really don't think you can use that to justify downloading music for free when that's not the point Trent was getting at. Here's the 2nd part -

* The dreaded EURO Maxi-single. Nothing but a consumer rip-off that I've been talked into my whole career. No more.

The point is, I am trying my best to make sure the music and items NIN puts in the marketplace have value, substance and are worth you considering purchasing. I am not allowing Capital G to be repackaged into several configurations that result in you getting ripped off.

We are planning a full-length remix collection of substance that will be announced soon.

What Trent is speaking of is the fans getting value for money, not that they should steal his album.
Speaking of which, even System of a Down, a band fond of being the voice of counterculture had an issue with people downloading Toxicity II but did find a way to fight back as it were -

Last year was a banner year for the band, but also a controversial one. With its' second album riding high on the charts, System made headlines after discovering songs from its recording vaults had been copied and leaked to music pirates and were being downloaded on a variety of Internet file-sharing services. It didn't take long for homemade CD-Rs of the stolen songs to end up for sale at eBay. "It's not about the money, really, it's that the songs being downloaded weren't finished. It was so frustrating; we had lost control of our own songs. On some of the songs my vocals or guitar overdubs hadn't been added or the best version of Serj's vocals hadn't been used or the drum and bass tracks weren't all there, so we had to do something to get the right versions to our fans."

The band's course of action was unheard of. They decided to release the stolen songs in their finished form and beat the bootleggers at their own game. That CD, entitled appropriately enough, "Steal This Album!" was released last Thanksgiving to critical acclaim and fan approval. "Does it bother me that some people are burning their own System CDs and taking money out of my pocket? Not really. This has always been about putting the best possible version of the songs in the fans' hands. It was like selling an artist's painting before he had finished it."
source - http://www.glendalehigh.com/malakian.html

Now while he may say he doesn't have an issue with people downloading his music, here are the first few lines of the interview -

Daron Malakian is nothing like you might expect him to be. Living in the lap of luxury in a just-purchased home in the posh hills above Glendale, his is a view to die for. "I think this is the only house on the block with such a spectacular view," Daron says, in awe of the panoramic sight from his living room window. "I am the only one on this side of the street who can see downtown Los Angeles."

How could he have afforded the luxury if he wasn't selling music and people were just downloading the music he made for free?