Does anyone else think this is awful? [RIAA suit vs. girl]

El Banana · Post by **El Banana** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:12 am

Not if you make a relevant, well thought-out post with at least coherent spelling and grammar. :\

danielwang · Post by **danielwang** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:13 am

El Banana wrote:Not if you make a relevant, well thought-out post with at least coherent spelling and grammar. :\

SS5_Majin_Bebi · Post by **SS5_Majin_Bebi** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:48 am

Recording industries worldwide are trying to get a stranglehold on music and listeners by literally FORCING them to buy whole CDs full of absolute SHIT if they only want to hear ONE SONG. Just like Fyrt said. I'm guilty of buying a whole CD for only one song, but I'm sick of being short of cash because of it.

Like I said before, the industry obviously hasn't cottoned onto the fact that file sharing helps them, not hinders them. They're eventually going to get so uptight about it the industry will bottom out, and NO-ONE will want to buy anything anymore. I'm in a band, and I wouldn't care if people were sharing our music around the internet and downloading it for free. Shit, we actually ENCOURAGE our music to be distributed. It's the best way to get it out therem its the best way for a band to GET RECOGNITION!! But you get music industry "veterans" like James Hetfield and Lars from Metallica (Sorry guys, love your music, but hate your attitude on music sharing) who get all cut up when one of there songs or albums is distributed and they don't make a profit. But they already have millions of dollars, why are they complaining? THE INDUSTRY IS NOT MAKING A LOSS, no matter how they look at it. Sure, they're making LESS PROFIT, but it is still profit, no matter how small.

danielwang · Post by **danielwang** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:40 am

Why bother rearguing the same point brought up by countless others? They're not going to change their ways - it's actually quite simple and called greed!.

HEY RIAA!

TaranT · Post by **TaranT** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:24 am

Here's how filetrading actually helps the music producers:

Wired.com wrote:Joe Fleischer twists restlessly in his Aeron chair and nods at the voice on the other end of the telephone. Tapping his fingers on his computer's mouse, he stares out the window of his Beverly Hills office at the new BMWs and battered Celicas inching down Wilshire Boulevard. "Uh-huh, uh-huh," he says. "Got it." Fleischer is talking to a client, an executive at one of the major labels who's working a band he's sure could go platinum, if only radio would give the group a chance. The band's first two albums earned it a fervent fan base, but to get bigger, its new single needs airplay, the all-important spark of sales. "Give me a story I can take to radio," the executive on the other end of the line tells him.

Fleischer hangs up, turns to his computer, and clicks through an online database. On his screen, he can see in astonishing detail when, where, and what Internet users are sharing on peer-to-peer file-swapping services like Kazaa, Morpheus, and Grokster. He searches for cities where downloads of the band's single are outpacing its exposure on radio. He likes what he sees. In Atlanta, sharing of the group's new album is up more than 1,200 percent over the previous week; in Houston and New York, 300 percent. So Fleischer checks to see how much airplay the track is getting on alternative rock stations in those markets. Very little, it turns out - less than five spins per week in each city. "Jesus," he whispers. In Houston, "KTBZ only spun it once, and it still got into the top 15 downloads. This is hot."

Fleischer is VP of sales and marketing for a company called BigChampagne, which has a better window into consumer demand. By matching partial IP addresses to zip codes, the firm's software creates a real-time map of music downloading. The company sells subscriptions to its database that let a user track one album for $7,500; bigger labels have annual deals for up to $40,000 per month....

He calls his client and gets voicemail. "Dude, you're gonna be stoked," he says. "I'll shoot you an email in a few minutes." In the office, Fleischer seems 39 going on 18, a Valley Boy with a baby face and a sly grin. He has music in his blood - his father was a studio musician who played with Frank Sinatra and Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass, and Fleischer himself is a band manager in his spare time. I ask how the label executive will use the data. "He'll give this to promotions," he tells me. "They'll call these stations and say, 'You need to bang this shit. You're barely playing it, and it's already in the top 15 among alt-rock downloaders in your market. You need to step on this at least 20 more times a week, and not while people are sleeping.'"...

The entire article is here:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.10/fileshare.html

Farlo · Post by **Farlo** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:39 am

rabble rabble rabble...

the RIAA can burn in hell...

get "artists" to make a cd that is more than just a single with tracks that kiddies want...

i'm sure piracy deviates from genre to genre meaning...
real musicians are more likely to sell their albums than some pop-commodity.

i admit to downloading songs, but the thing is i purchase the albums if they have more than a few good songs.

/minimally sensical rant

SS5_Majin_Bebi · Post by **SS5_Majin_Bebi** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:47 am

I would say this to the RIAA and all its international affiliates:

私はあなたの頭脳に真剣に切り刻み, フォーマットc をタイプする:

But I'm not sure how....

El Banana · Post by **El Banana** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:21 am

Show-off.

Translation Dammit.

Jace Tsunami · Post by **Jace Tsunami** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:03 pm

SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:Recording industries worldwide are trying to get a stranglehold on music and listeners by literally FORCING them to buy whole CDs full of absolute SHIT if they only want to hear ONE SONG. Just like Fyrt said. I'm guilty of buying a whole CD for only one song, but I'm sick of being short of cash because of it.

Like I said before, the industry obviously hasn't cottoned onto the fact that file sharing helps them, not hinders them. They're eventually going to get so uptight about it the industry will bottom out, and NO-ONE will want to buy anything anymore. I'm in a band, and I wouldn't care if people were sharing our music around the internet and downloading it for free. Shit, we actually ENCOURAGE our music to be distributed. It's the best way to get it out therem its the best way for a band to GET RECOGNITION!! But you get music industry "veterans" like James Hetfield and Lars from Metallica (Sorry guys, love your music, but hate your attitude on music sharing) who get all cut up when one of there songs or albums is distributed and they don't make a profit. But they already have millions of dollars, why are they complaining? THE INDUSTRY IS NOT MAKING A LOSS, no matter how they look at it. Sure, they're making LESS PROFIT, but it is still profit, no matter how small.

The Artist DOESN'T matter, unless they fund themselves. Record Labels give artists the money they need to make their CD, so long as they agree to let the label have some of that profit. Naturally, since the Record Label doesn't do jack shit, but give money out, thy're going to be mad when they don't get paid. The only reason they do anyhting they do, is so they can make money off CD sales.

Not many bands are arguing against file sharing, msot of them support it. This is all the Record Label's doings. As for those artists that DO argue against file sharing, like metalica, I don't respect these people at all.

LightningCountX · Post by **LightningCountX** » Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:11 pm

its wack how these people try and crack down on file transfers cause retarded musical artists get pissed off. You made millions off you shit, go home, YOUR A WINNER