Wow, I never thought the music companies could get worse....

[beau99]

I hope that one day artists will be able to sell their stuff over the internet, thus taking away the need for the fools that is the RIAA along with record labels.

Many artists are now doing this.

Blindside has realized it. So have They Might Be Giants.

Hopefully more will follow.

[Shao Feng-Li]

$25 for a CD? Stop shopping at FYE... And artists aren't gonna make much money if their stuff if over priced. If it's $25 for a s CD set, that's fine.

So what about bands like Radiohead that put their album out for free download? heh.

But Mith is right. I think we can chill.

Maybe the right people will see this as a bad business move and not do it. They do like making money, heh.

CDs are a pain. They get scratched hold less than a gig... And when you can buy an iTune, you can't really justify Limewire. Though, there's the DRM issue, but I have no conscience against a converter or somethin'... Just saying.

[Kenshin17]

iTunes can crack its own DRM. iTunes DRM is a none issue. Just burn the songs you downloaded and reimport them. Thats how I get my songs onto my Zen *shrug*

[Shao Feng-Li]

Whatever works XD

[Kenshin17]

Indeed.

[GhostontheNet]

[quote="Mithrandir (post: 1188713)"]Why is anyone taking this seriously? According to the article, ONE lawyer for "the big four" has CLAIMED this is grounds for a lawsuit.

Prosecuting attorneys, as slimy as they may be, don't make the laws - that's congress' job.

] Its significant because if the charge is admitted, it sets a legal precendence for pre-existing laws being interpreted in this fashion if the charge is admitted, which in turn will encourage other judges to follow suit and give legal leverage to pressure programs like Itunes to remove the feature. As it stands, laws like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act already give groups like the RIAA a versatile toolkit to have a field day.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

[Tommy]

Many artists are now doing this.

Blindside has realized it. So have They Might Be Giants.

Hopefully more will follow.

That would be cool, but I can't listen to anything but literal CDs so I guess as long as I have a burner I'll be cool.
(I can't use headphones for anything due my hearing defect).

That's ridiculous though.
25$ for a CD!
I buy CDs at Newbury comics that range from 5 to 10$ maximum.

[Radical Dreamer]

OH MY GOSH.

IT'S HUGELY BLUE. XDD

/computer nostalgia.

That's hilarious, though. xD

[Dante]

The thought of lawyers and music industry men in black jumping teenagers and kids or anyone for that matter over listening to music ripped off the internet that they didn't buy seemed frankly disturbing and wrong to me... What kind of lousy low lifes would do something like that? you're completely ruining the kids life, even if its just the lawsuit itself! Darn you're ruining anyones life you do it to. And worse, what kind of filthy slime ball music artists would back their companies actions for doing it? They make themselves out to be freindly and kind but they're apparently no better. What a bunch of cheap human beings, they should be ashamed of themselves. I used to buy music on CDs, but I've gotten so sick of hearing things like this that I just stopped doing it, I don't listen to it either, I stick to free artists on the net... true muscians who create music because they enjoy making music and not just a bunch of money obsessed mobsters.

If this is legit, I'd like to start sueing Coca-Cola for stealing my buck and a quarter at their vending machines... I feel hurt and I believe they are liable enough to have to give a million dollars to me and every other CAAer whose been taken advantage by this heinous crime against humanity! Do you realize what its like to have your money stolen and not get a soda, then be out of money with a Pepsi machine right there, AND you've got a huge wad of wasabi in your mouth? I DEMAND DAMAGES!

Oh and I'd also like to sue Windows for installing itself with viruses... because there is just something plain wrong about finding 14 adaware programs and viruses when the only two pieces of software to touch your completely wiped hard drive and motherboard were a windows CD and a version of Norton Antivirus... of course, Norton isn't outside of the question too...

Of course, if we did this, we'd be getting CLOSER to their level... and we don't want to sink lower in our lives... But we'd still have a long ways to go before we were as evil as them... Looks back and forth. I guess the saying is true, all the music stars and their labels DO go to Hell, who knew though that it was for truly evil reasons ... (I really don't want anyone to go to Hell... I JUST WANT THEM TO REPENT AND CHANGE! I think that's what we all want in the end.)

[Tyrel]

Hmm.. Let's see.

You're not supporting the industry as much as you think. Your money is going to the record label, and they'll continue to bring out more CDs. But CDs are slowly dying out, just like Records and VHS has. Not to mention that record labels like to put a lot of limitations on the artist and what they can and can't do.

Since everything is now via internet and downloadable content, I soon hope that the need record companies diminishes. I hope that one day artists will be able to sell their stuff over the internet, thus taking away the need for the fools that is the RIAA along with record labels.

Take those "fools" away, if you really want to call them that, and you have no real funding for the band. Only the bands who are already good, and have the ability to get a good sound studio, and pay for good mixing, are ever going to be popular. Basically you deprive anyone of any real chance. The amount of bands there are today compared to how many there were decades ago is ridiculously higher. I can meet somebody on the street and ask if they know any of my top ten favorite bands, and they may only know 3 or 4 of them. There are a huge number of bands who have "made it". Why? Because of Record Labels and the way we have come to structure our modern music industry. If we try to tear that same structure down, the one which gives so many opportunities to so many bands, and the reason we have such good quality music, then expect to suffer the consequences. Bands will be harder to find. Most bands will stop making music altogether, or at least not be able to devote proper time towards it {resulting in not so great music}.

My point]Many artists are now doing this.

Blindside has realized it. So have They Might Be Giants.

Hopefully more will follow.[/QUOTE]

No, Blindside is just experimenting with the Black Rose. They plan to release their next CD on a label.

That kind of experimentation is not unheard of.

What a bunch of cheap human beings, they should be ashamed of themselves. I used to buy music on CDs, but I've gotten so sick of hearing things like this that I just stopped doing it, I don't listen to it either, I stick to free artists on the net... true muscians who create music because they enjoy making music and not just a bunch of money obsessed mobsters.

Well, with all due respect, I can't understand why you would say that those who are making money off of their music are not true musicians. I mean, most people here actually argued that the money should exclusively go to the artists who wrote the rough music, and are playing it on stage. People can enjoy making music and give it out for free, but those people can't make a living off of it. Those bands who want to dedicate themselves to making music really need to work at it, and because they put so much more time into it, they certainly need monetary compensation to stay alive economically.


As for the people who are buying these $10 CD's.. where do you shop again?

[beau99]

No, Blindside is just experimenting with the Black Rose. They plan to release their next CD on a label.

That kind of experimentation is not unheard of.

But it went very well, and they have realized that they have no need for a label because the real fans will support them by downloading straight from them.

They're only going to release their next CD on a label because they don't have the money to do otherwise.

[Tenshi no Ai]

About CDs being expensive... It's really interesting.

At work, (in CAD, mind you, since we dont' have everything at USD prices yet) CDs are usually $14-17. BUT, like DVDs, they fluxuate. Not sure if it's just my store (since they like to up and down their prices) but I'm certain I've seen it at Walmart etc too. A CD will jump from $14-21 when we get the forms in to change prices. DVDs here (mainly Disney branded ones will do this) are regular $25, and we'll have to change it to like, $29. It eventually goes down, but it's just dumb :/ Kinda how the 'Disney Vault' works, really, since some of the movies DO return at higher prices... This one Canadian music store (which is now bringing in games to compensate) ALWAYS seem to have fairly high prices on their media :/ I hate it :/ Stuff like this, does NOT help the situation.

Still, with the whole music/money thing it's hard times yeah, but all it is is money money money. What ever happened to when it used to be a great form of artistic expression :/

[Stephen]

The RIAA has done more damage to album sales then pirates or kids burning friends CDs ever will.

[Tyrel]

But it went very well, and they have realized that they have no need for a label because the real fans will support them by downloading straight from them.

They're only going to release their next CD on a label because they don't have the money to do otherwise.

That's the point.

[blkmage]

The argument here is that the record labels are necessary to the musician making money and that musicians are only so successful today because of what the labels have done for them. So, apparently, if the labels in the RIAA were to collapse, then there would be no good music.

The argument has a few flaws. One is that the labels in the RIAA actually produce any good music. That is, of course, a matter of personal taste. Let's just say that I wouldn't be sad if I didn't get to hear any more music from the RIAA.

The other thing that may not have been conveyed as well as it should have is that not every label is a part of the RIAA, and so not every label is evil. There are labels out there that do not need to resort to the sort of shady business tactics and politician buyouts that the RIAA resorts to. For example, here in Canada, we have Nettwerk, who has openly opposed the RIAA and the Canadian equivalent, the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA).

That is, there are artists and labels that don't agree with the RIAA's argument that P2P is costing billions and billions of dollars. In fact, year after year, the figures have been telling a different story.

The reason why there is so much ill-will towards the RIAA is because of their less than laudable actions. They sue their customers, they influence politicians, and they use their virtual monopoly over the music market to grab as much money as they can from the consumer. And all of these actions are because the RIAA is trying to protect the old distribution channels and retain control of the near-monopoly that they are enjoying now.

I think that the confusion is over the fact that in order for musicians to be considered successful, they have to be nationally recognized and sell a million albums. This isn't true. There are artists who only distribute over the Internet and they have a large enough following that they make money. You don't have to be a superstar to make money as a musician, just as you don't have to be a superstar to make money doing any other mundane job.

As for the death of the album, I would argue that that is the RIAA's doing. Consider everywhere that isn't North America. They sell still sell singles. Here, all of our albums are just a collection of singles and random filler. I would hardly consider the majority of the albums that are released today to be any sort of work that's meant to be taken as a whole.

[Tyrel]

The argument here is that the record labels are necessary to the musician making money and that musicians are only so successful today because of what the labels have done for them. So, apparently, if the labels in the RIAA were to collapse, then there would be no good music.

The argument has a few flaws. One is that the labels in the RIAA actually produce any good music. That is, of course, a matter of personal taste. Let's just say that I wouldn't be sad if I didn't get to hear any more music from the RIAA.

Yeah, perhaps a matter of taste. I mean, I listen to Yes, Genesis, Pink Floyd and I love a substancial amount of "older music". However, I find that an undeniable trend in music is that it has gotten better over time. I don't, here, mean artistically. I mean that the recordings are better mixed, the music is taken more seriously, etc. Yes, of course this varies, I am simply pointing out that I have found that to be a trend. Where the 90's perhaps took away from some of the "really good recordings" thing, I still find it to be a trend overall. I am quite pleased with a great deal of the music coming out today, and I think the Label deserves some recognition beyond depraved rats hunting for your money, which is how I envision them often when people speak of them.

Also, let me be clear, I don't think for an instant that if RIAA dies, {or any.. or all others} that there would be no more good music. Bands and artists have always had the ability to be artistic on their own, and I imagine that people would continue making music, just as we, as the human species, always have. I simply think that the RIAA and other such necessary elements for the modern Music Industry's structure, are good things, rather than evil things. I think they do more good than harm. At least, in principle. I'm not defending their mistakes, I'm simply pointing out that I think we wouldn't be where we are today without them, and I recognize where we are today to be better than where we have ever been before.

The other thing that may not have been conveyed as well as it should have is that not every label is a part of the RIAA, and so not every label is evil. There are labels out there that do not need to resort to the sort of shady business tactics and politician buyouts that the RIAA resorts to. For example, here in Canada, we have Nettwerk, who has openly opposed the RIAA and the Canadian equivalent, the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA).

Thank you!!!

I was trying not to single out the RIAA throughout my posts, as I don't really care about or for them. My point is that Labels in general, and how they work both in the industry, and with the bands, and in relation to the music, are a positive force.

As for the death of the album, I would argue that that is the RIAA's doing. Consider everywhere that isn't North America. They sell still sell singles. Here, all of our albums are just a collection of singles and random filler. I would hardly consider the majority of the albums that are released today to be any sort of work that's meant to be taken as a whole.

Well, I might disagree with you there. I mean, I find just the very opposite to be true. I know as a fan of POD that their albums are at least structured intelligently, meaning the album is supposed to flow with a continuity in mood and direction of music. This isn't unique or rare at all, and I find that most Albums do this, or have some other factor of continuity. Concept albums are far from nowhere to be found. In fact, most albums today come out taking a concept and simply expressing it from song to song, having a subject continuity throughout the Album, like, for instance, Underoath's "Define the Great line" and Killswitch Engages "As Daylight Dies", along with As I Lay Dying's "Shadows are security", Emery's "I'm only a Man" {to name only some more recent ones offhand} and a great many others. They play on themes intelligently. Other Albums tell stories of sorts, or tell a story. Zao's "The Funeral of God", Showbread's new CD coming out "Anorexia Dislexia", Protest the Hero's "Kezia". I think to posit that albums are simply a compilation of songs, in our day, is simply inaccurate. In fact, I find that most albums are works meant to be taken as a whole. Everything from Haste the Day's "Pressure the Hinges" to Inhale Exhale's "The Lost. The Sick. The Sacred.". I think most albums have quite an impressive level of continuity these days.

With that in mind, I don't think I would even agree that we can't appreciate Albums as full works, regardless of the what kind of continuity it has, whether musical or conceptual. I would argue that to listen to things like Thrice's Alchemy index is quite another thing from listening to one or two songs off of any of the four disks. I think most albums actually deserve to be listened to as one whole work.

[Righteousss]

I don't think God wanted us to "sell music" in the first place. Think about it. I doubt economy is supposed to exist in the first place :\

[Mithrandir]

I might consider questioning the merits of the arguments there, but I cannot find any.

[beau99]

Here, all of our albums are just a collection of singles and random filler. I would hardly consider the majority of the albums that are released today to be any sort of work that's meant to be taken as a whole.

Well, there are your occasional concept albums.

And my own opinion, every U2 album ever released need to be played straight through without skipping a track.

Every single one of them tells a story.

[Nate]

I don't think God wanted us to "sell music" in the first place. Think about it. I doubt economy is supposed to exist in the first place :\

[Stephen]

[rocklobster]

I don't think God wanted us to "sell music" in the first place. Think about it. I doubt economy is supposed to exist in the first place :\

I think you misinterpreted the line about giving to Caesar what is Caesar's there. I think the ecomony is supposed to exist. Every society needs some kind of commerce.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I don't think God wanted us to "sell music" in the first place. Think about it. I doubt economy is supposed to exist in the first place :\

Don't start baseless arguments and then ask us the think about it. Do you have any proof as to why God would not want us to sell music, let alone even have an economy?

[Mithrandir]

...every U2 album ever released need to be played straight through without skipping a track.

Every single one of them tells a story.

Many artists wish this was said about their work. Not as many are able to convince the general population of it.

And nate... "I think that makes the baby Jesus cry."

[Eric]

This is why I don't buy music from bands/labels that support the RIAA. Use this to find out if they do.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

[Tyrel]

I don't think God wanted us to "sell music" in the first place. Think about it. I doubt economy is supposed to exist in the first place :\

.... Think about it? Is that what you did?

Economy exists. That's how we operate. Joseph interpreted Pharoah's dream, and as a result did the economical thing, to avoid famine throughout the land. Was that wise, or unwise?


Music is a good product. It's worth selling. Do you believe the Immaterial or conceptual should never be sold? If that's the case, then should not books also be free? Should not computer software and program source code be free? Why shouldn't a band wish to make money doing what they love? If your argument is that Art should not be sold, then my argument is that you are practically stopping painters in their tracks... pulling the bread right out of their hands.


Perhaps... Just a suggestion... perhaps this all might require a tad more though, eh?