Home | Community | Message Board


Original Seeds Store - Cannabis Seeds
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop: The Doors

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,377
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 2 hours, 7 minutes
If the RIAA are serious.......
    #2652130 - 05/08/04 01:47 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

......about busting file sharers, why don't they sue the companies who sell high-speed internet hookups to people who don't "need" them?

You'd think going after the source of the problem would be the most advantageous thing to do.




--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Brass Toads - In The Back Of My Mind



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDigitalDuality
enthusiast

Registered: 04/29/04
Posts: 354
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2652157 - 05/08/04 01:54 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

what the hell are they going to sue them for? They aren't doing anything wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 9,857
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 8 hours, 17 minutes
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2652303 - 05/08/04 02:31 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

The source of the problem is the people who are stealing the music.


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,377
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 2 hours, 7 minutes
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #2652322 - 05/08/04 02:45 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

I agree that selling high-speed internet shouldn't be illegal, i'm just surprised that the RIAA doesn't go after those who are facilitating most of the file sharing.





--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Brass Toads - In The Back Of My Mind



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDigitalDuality
enthusiast

Registered: 04/29/04
Posts: 354
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2652329 - 05/08/04 02:49 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

They try but they cant.. they go after ISPs all the time. And the P2P program makers. They're not techically the problem either.

This isn't something the RIAA is going to win against either. Every service they close 5 will open, then you have your Instant Messengers and IRC. There's over 100 million people participating, they can't fight that.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAhronZombi
AhronZombi

Registered: 04/06/04
Posts: 1,265
Loc: NY
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2652548 - 05/08/04 04:32 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

its not stealling. the record industry will now suffer for what they have done. shutting artists up because of pollitics. clear channel ruleing the world. well bitch this is karma and isnt a damb thing the RIAA can do about it or the MPAA i say download and burn, its not steeling. support artists not the record industry. plus dont beleive the shit you see and hear on the radio and tv is the best it isnt. seek the good artists the industy holds back. recomendation Immortal Technique ( i may have spelt it wrong)


--------------------
[url=http://kratom.tcotu.net Low Priced, High Quality Kratom[/url]


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 22,844
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: AhronZombi]
    #2652554 - 05/08/04 04:38 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

Stop listening to RIAA artists if you don't like their business practices.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAhronZombi
AhronZombi

Registered: 04/06/04
Posts: 1,265
Loc: NY
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #2652563 - 05/08/04 04:43 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

im trieing my hardest. but like i said no one escape karma. they make you think you have no other choice but we do. fight them and clear channel. boycott all clearchannel stations products and venues. if you give them money guess who it goes to . hitler...........sorry i mean bush i get those guys confused


--------------------
[url=http://kratom.tcotu.net Low Priced, High Quality Kratom[/url]


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDigitalDuality
enthusiast

Registered: 04/29/04
Posts: 354
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2652567 - 05/08/04 04:45 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

^
Immortal Technique (and Viper records in general) are incredible.

That being said, i don't view downloading as a crime. I see it as retribution. Even copyrighted songs.

If i was allowed to pay the artists $1-2 per song i've downloaded, or even $20 bucks an album i would.

I have no quarells in stealing from the RIAA.

They were found guilty in a case suit for illegal price fixing for over 10 years, their pay back to consumers? Everty customer who registered on the government website for the case settlement got 15 bucks. In that 10 year period, I purchased over 500 cds/tapes/vinyl legitimately. Lemme figure that out for you.

say a $15 average due to 20-16 buck cds, 12-15 buck tapes (which was the majority of my purchases).. comes to around 7500 dollars. now the nonfixed prices avg 13 dollars. That total comes to $6,500. $1000 dollar difference. Where's my legit lawsuit?

Not to mention the recording company screws alot of these artists. To explain a process quoted directly from DMX..

Quote:

"Yes, I'm done with the music because I refuse to have something that I hold that dear to me be taken so lightly," he barked. "I'm being paid like a slave. All artists are. The record company advances you money. You pay for every aspect: promotion, distribution, recording, everything, everybody. Once your [album] comes out, they get their money back ? the product should be mine! It's like getting a loan from a bank to buy a house, and once you pay them back, they still own your house.

"Contractually I do owe them, but I ain't giving them sh--," he added, referring to Def Jam, his record label. "You know what these mutha----as do? I recorded 25 songs each album. You know how many songs actually go on the album? Sixteen. They keep the rest of those songs. Now they got songs to put on the greatest-hits album and soundtracks. They've given away some of my best songs for soundtracks and people don't even hear soundtracks. I'm dead serious about my music. They playing with it like it's a toy."




Not to mention the fact they think they own the rights to underground rap mixtapes, DJ promotion cds, or attempt to continue to profit off dead artists whose estate isn't recieving one red fucken cent. They copyright samples like a line in the sand that would be equivalent to copyrighting a two word phrase. And now they want to charge clubs, djs, which will filter down to the consumer.. merely for PLAYING SONGS AT A PARTY.

Guns n Roses latest "Greatest Hit Album".. well Axl, Slash, none of them are getting one penny from it. Pure record company profit.

I also don't like the fact they have developed a formula to hook me and anyone else, and hook us in.. then jack up the prices. So if the middle man wants to fuck me, and the middle man wants to fuck the artist... P2P is the only way to fuck em back.

Artists and musicians have been around before record labels, and they will be there when the labels dissappear.

I also have no sympathy for a group such as Metallica that's already rolling in money, who jack their concert prices up to 70-150 bucks a ticket... 50 bucks a shirt, etc.. then when they catch criticism, they make live shit available merely as a fucking marketing move. Again, public manipulation. A PR move.

I have no quarrel in downloading here today gone tomorrow corporate constructs. It might be fun, entertaining, etc.. There's something very human missing from it.. and i'll enjoy it as i please.. whether i record a song on a tape from the radio, copy a cd, or participate in P2P. I care not for their riches. I won't deny them the aspect of being "art", but at the same time i think they're worthless, even if i take some shameful enjoyment in it at times.

Quote:

"Five major record companies act together in unison as one corporation controlling the majority of music we listen to"
"One corporation owns the 5 major music video channels in the U.S."
"Is that OK?"
"The music 'industry' releases 100 songs per week,"
"Only 4 songs are added to the average radio 'playlist' each week"
"Hit songs on Top 40 are often repeated over 100 times per week."
"Is that all you want to hear?"
"Two radio conglomerates control 42% of listeners,"
"90% of all singles get to the 'hook' within 20 seconds"
"98 % of all #1 singles are less than 3 minutes and 30 seconds long"
"Does this seem like a formula to you?"




Monopolies are fun!

And don't get me going on music videoes. Stations that are "music tv" don't even play full videoes anymore. they play actual music videoes at 3am. they have a shorter playlist than most radio stations, and the only money the get off of them is advertisements reimbursing them. If i don't even get to see the full video, but i have to sit through a whole slew of advertisements and various VJ product promotions, why shouldn't i download it?

The RIAA is all for P2P... if you consider the new Napster or iTunes peer2peer. And if these P2P networks veered away from "illegal" trading, i don't think they'd bitch.

I see Napster and iTunes the same evil though. The artist gets jipped, the recording industry now takes a bit of a price cut, but they still get majority if not all the profit.

The sad thing, is that there are alot of exceptional mainstream artists across genres.. rap, metal, dance, etc.. Some care about the money, some don't. Some merely wish to have good distribution and get their music out to a wide audience. I don't see anything wrong with an artist wishing to "make it". I do have a problem with radio saturation, i do have a problem with advertisements being the driving force of their sales.

I also have no problem with the rich rockstar. I have problems with the greedy rock star, big difference. If the fans paid for your concerts, music, etc.. and you got rich, fine. But when you start intentionally jacking up the prices b/c you get on some ego trip about how great you and your band are.. you can bite my dick for all i care.

Personally i honestly long for the day where people make music for the sake of music, entertainment, and expression. Much like the roots of all our music... hip hop, america roots music, you name it. Africans, celts, nordic peoples, etc.. all created music for the sake of art and entertainment. or even enlightenment when you speak of the greeks and some other cultures.

The sad truth is, we'll never go back to that again i do not believe. capitalism has settled in, and there'll be a great number of artists and musicians who will make music/art for the sake of it in itself, but it will never be the majority.

Especially in america where we have this sociological pressure to maintain a certain quality of life (keeping up with the jones). Most artists see it not only as expression and entertainment, but as a way out of poverty. And we all know the lives most artists live, especially those who don't make it or haven't yet.

I'm assuming here (otherwise these companies wouldn't be so huge)
that they take a loss on quite a few artists.. but the gains they recieve from say.. Britney, Eminem, 50 Cent.. etc.. can more than make up for that loss.

Not to mention when they own the rights to someone else's songs, and get to throw them into commericals, backgrounds in blockbuster movies, etc..

Just think of how much money Elvis has made Epic.. or how much the Beatles made Sony? Michael Jackson made motown and Epic quite rich too.

But its their want to only have these types of artists signed that's biting them in the ass. Their narrowing their selection, increasing airplay, and not giving anyone else a chance to possibly explode b/c "chances" are they won't do so well in the future to their "formula" or historical reference. And music and art doesn't always react like that. So the destroy the amount of "choice" to increase their profit margin, focus more on hit singles than good artists with longevity.. and voila.. the consumer base reacts and finds another means of getting what they want.

They're fighting supply and demand. And there's not a force on this earth that can win against that.

But that's the thing. For instance.. Tool or Manson.. Tom Petty, or even say The Doors are all great bands on major labels that make great music. In reference to their illegal price fixing all cds is where i was coming from with my "fight back" rhetoric.

And due to my references to their illegal price fixing.. Here's some links to back that up:
http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-30-cd-settlement_x.htm
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2002/sep/sep30b_02.html


From Wikipedia
Quote:

There are persistent allegations that the record industry engages in price fixing as a standard business practice. Athough illegal, one example of the possible reasoning runs as follows:
price fixing keeps CDs in the United States artificially expensive to the tune of $480 million since 1997 (source: [1])
the states sue
the record companies settle the lawsuit for a fine of $67.4 million and distribute $75.7 million in CDs (source: as above)
$480m - ($67.4m + $75.7m) = $336.9m profit!





http://www.baratunde.com/sproj/PriceFixins.html This is a financial break down on them "paying back" the public.

Concert Prices Continue to Soar
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4601934/

Europe's leading independent record labels on Wednesday accused MTV, the music channel owned by Viacom, of market abuse and price gouging in a bitter war of words over licensing rights for music videos
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/11166

Oh and i forgot to mention the number of times the RIAA has and is being brought to court for illegal searches and invasion of privacy. Not to mention the way they've tried to lay blame on ISPs for "allowing it". Yeah, I'm sure AOL can keep track of all 100 million of their users.. 8)


And i can understand these artists, or at least what i think of them.. Some will chose.. do i want major distribution? Or do i want keep to my roots and stay on an indie label? I have no problem with the artists who want the distribution, i do despise those who make music solely for money and contractual purposes. Actually i feel sympathy for an artist who HAS to fullfill a contract and pump out another album depending on the situation.

The music industry has done nothing but decline severly in profits since Napster acquired 20 million + users. Check their profit/loss in the 70s, 80s, even the majority of the 90s. Yeah it waxed and waned, but overall it was a profitable business, very profitable.

It just so happened that the conglomerates got bigger, radio saturation increased, the sheer number of new artists per year decreased.. all started happening approximately at the same time as P2P exploded.

And to clear up confusion about my references to finances and recording artists, there's several main categories.
Quote:


1- the largest by far, the ones that never make it and are always poor. Normally they tried to "make it" and failed, or make music for the sake of music, their message, their feelings/expression, or entertainment.

2- ones that do make it, and the record companies fuck them (mainly alot of rappers, but not limited to rappers. Check out how bad TLC got fucked over. 2 Plat. Albums, and they were bankrupt. And not b/c they blew their money on stupid shit)

3- The recording artist who makes it, gets a good fair financial agreement, but still makes music because its something they enjoy.

4- The recording artist who not only makes it, but who's image and sound is a corporate construct in itself through exterior songwriters, producers, marketing, etc..

5- Recording artist that makes it big, but the only reason they continue to make music, is to make more money. (Metallica, most rap stars, pop stars)

and these categories can intertwine or change throughout an artist's career, and it doesn't encompass all artists either.





That's another thing.. the industry really isn't adapting to well to the technology and advancement. They're fighting it. Napster and Itunes i guess is a suitable embracement, but its not on the level that it should be on-- if i was to approach the situation on their terms anyhow.

Sheryl Crow and many other well known musicians actually have formed a pretty larger labor union to protect themselves from the recording industry and the government. Here's just a few of the people on it.

Quote:



Recording Artists Coalition (RAC) is Stevie Nicks, Carole King, John Fogerty, Matchbox Twenty's Paul Doucette, Rage Against The Machine's Tom Morello, Ray Parker Jr., Don Henley, Sheryl Crow, Beck, and the Offspring's Dexter Holland as well as several labor union representatives





unfortunately, the have fought some causes i disagree with that support the mindstate of a rockstar being able to get richer and richer and richer. I disagree with them, but i guess i can't fault them either, not business-wise anyways.


Let me rephrase my wording. Majority of mainstream music. I guess what i'm really asking for, is when is the recording industry going to pick up on the the amazing artists out there? NOt just the pop get rich quick shit.

Kinda like the 60s and early 70s. I'm not saying there wasn't disposable pop then either. But i mean, look at how many amazing, worthwhile, quality, artists with longevity came out of there. That was well treated by the recording industry and well recieved by mainstream society.

If you want my opinion.. Ani Difranco is nothing more than a feminist Bob Dylan. Tool is the next Led Zepplin. I could go on and on and on.. making subjective comparrisons, but i think you get my drift. We're moving away from that and more into appeasing the short attention span and Hollywood soap operas, and impressiveness on organizational and technical superiority in manners of choreography, production, lip syncing, and a catchy overplayed hook that'll burn itself out in a few weeks.

Why not have the customers have something worth coming back to for years? Why not focus on having loyal customers? Oh.. b/c when in reference to mainstream, there is no where else for them to go.
even in the early 90s there were loads of major record labels that provided healthy competition for each other.

Sure you still have Island Records, Geffin Records, Bad Boy Records, Def Jam Records, Epic Records, etc.. but they're all owned by larger entities.. they're all one in the same company now.

And when they act in unison as the RIAA, now wher'es your choice? Now where's your competition?

There is none.

Don't get me wrong, i go the indie route, and the self produced and marketed via the web route quite frequently. I'd say 40% of the time. But i'm not veering away from mainstream music, just b/c i hate their employer, especially when they're employer over charges me, tries to manipulate me, and would fuck over the artist if they could.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAhronZombi
AhronZombi

Registered: 04/06/04
Posts: 1,265
Loc: NY
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: DigitalDuality]
    #2652577 - 05/08/04 04:48 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

awsome. anyone who loves Immortal Technique is good peeps. i hope to get to know you better dawg


--------------------
[url=http://kratom.tcotu.net Low Priced, High Quality Kratom[/url]


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBleaK
paradox
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 1,583
Last seen: 4 years, 5 days
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: AhronZombi]
    #2652661 - 05/08/04 06:28 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

moneys only paper.


--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: DigitalDuality]
    #2652706 - 05/08/04 07:32 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

DigitalDuality writes:

That being said, i don't view downloading as a crime. I see it as retribution. Even copyrighted songs.

Oh, well that makes it alright then. Let me guess. You rip off software too, right?

If i was allowed to pay the artists $1-2 per song i've downloaded, or even $20 bucks an album i would.

You are allowed to do that. At Apple's iTunes download site. They have an online music catalog of over 700,000 songs from five major music companies and over 450 independent music labels. They sell 2.7 million songs a week at a buck apiece.

I have no quarells in stealing from the RIAA.

Or from the artists the RIAA pays royalties too either, apparently.

I also don't like the fact they have developed a formula to hook me and anyone else, and hook us in.. then jack up the prices.

And this forumula would be....? Do they embed irresistable hypnotic subliminal messages in the soundtrack of the CDs they release?

So if the middle man wants to fuck me, and the middle man wants to fuck the artist... P2P is the only way to fuck em back.

By "fucking them back" you ensure that the creator of the music gets even less money than he gets now. Correct me if I've mistaken you for someone else, but aren't you the same guy who was moaning about starving artists in other thread we each posted in? Explain to me please how stealing the royalties of these artists through P2P puts food in their mouths.

Artists and musicians have been around before record labels, and they will be there when the labels dissappear.

Correct. So why does it bother you that some artists sign with the RIAA? Is the RIAA rounding up these guys at gunpoint and forcing them to sign or what? Is the RIAA the only recording company out there who pays royalties to the artists they sign?

I also have no sympathy for a group such as Metallica that's already rolling in money, who jack their concert prices up to 70-150 bucks a ticket... 50 bucks a shirt, etc..

Then register you disapproval ethically. Refuse to attend their performances. Don't buy their T-shirts. Send them an e-mail telling them what you think. Don't rip off their stuff. Ignore it.

I have no quarrel in downloading here today gone tomorrow corporate constructs.

Maybe the reason the bands to whom you refer are here today and gone tomorrow is because thieves like you steal their work rather than buying it.

It might be fun, entertaining, etc.. There's something very human missing from it.. and i'll enjoy it as i please.. whether i record a song on a tape from the radio, copy a cd, or participate in P2P. I care not for their riches.

So you enjoy their effort. You just don't want to have to compensate them for that effort. Interesting admission.

I won't deny them the aspect of being "art", but at the same time i think they're worthless, even if i take some shameful enjoyment in it at times.

So since you think their product is not worth the price they charge, you steal it rather than doing without.

Monopolies are fun!

The RIAA is a monopoly? News to me. Please back this up with fact from a credible source. If the RIAA are a monopoly, how did Apple find 450 more companies willing to sell their music through the iTunes store? If the RIAA were in fact a monopoly, Apple couldn't have found 45 other companies, let alone 450.

Or is this yet another Marxist redefinition of a commonly used word? As an aside, what does Marx have to say about the theft not of the means of production, but of that which has been produced?

I see Napster and iTunes the same evil though. The artist gets jipped, the recording industry now takes a bit of a price cut, but they still get majority if not all the profit.

And when you steal a cut, how much does the artist receive?

I don't see anything wrong with an artist wishing to "make it".

You just make it that much harder for him to make it by stealing his work.

I do have a problem with radio saturation, i do have a problem with advertisements being the driving force of their sales.

And your method of handling this problem which you seem to have but which I, for example, don't, is to steal? Interesting take on ethical behavior.

But when you start intentionally jacking up the prices b/c you get on some ego trip about how great you and your band are.. you can bite my dick for all i care.

So the artist is not allowed to set the price under which he sells his artwork? Or rather, he is allowed to but instead of doing without it if you feel the price has climbed too high, you prefer to steal it.

Personally i honestly long for the day where people make music for the sake of music, entertainment, and expression.

People still do that. I do it. I won't charge you for listening to me sing in the shower. I'll even let you record me if you want.

Much like the roots of all our music... hip hop, america roots music, you name it. Africans, celts, nordic peoples, etc.. all created music for the sake of art and entertainment. or even enlightenment when you speak of the greeks and some other cultures.

Your point being?

capitalism has settled in, and there'll be a great number of artists and musicians who will make music/art for the sake of it in itself, but it will never be the majority.

Right. It's all the fault of those rotten Capitalists. How dare they allow people to actually make a living from their artistic passion! It would be ever so much better if people were allowed only to sing for free, in their spare time after coming home from the office.

Most artists see it not only as expression and entertainment, but as a way out of poverty.

Well, here's a newsflash, thiefboy. They sure ain't gonna make it out of poverty if greedy little sketchweasels like yourself keep stealing their work.

And we all know the lives most artists live, especially those who don't make it or haven't yet.

Yet even knowing this, you feel just fine with dismissing their art as being "worthless" and lacking "humanity" but stealing it anyway, thus making it harder or even impossible for them to EVER make it.

I'm assuming here (otherwise these companies wouldn't be so huge)
that they take a loss on quite a few artists..


No shit, Sherlock.

....but the gains they recieve from say.. Britney, Eminem, 50 Cent.. etc.. can more than make up for that loss.

And this makes it right to steal because....?

But its their want to only have these types of artists signed that's biting them in the ass.

Yeah. Shame on them for not recognizing the artistic worth of the worthless and lacking-humanity greedy wannabes whose music is only worth stealing!

They're fighting supply and demand. And there's not a force on this earth that can win against that.

I can't believe you wrote that. I read your paper in the other thread. I critiqued it, remember? What do you know about supply and demand?

But that's the thing. For instance.. Tool or Manson.. Tom Petty, or even say The Doors are all great bands on major labels that make great music. In reference to their illegal price fixing all cds is where i was coming from with my "fight back" rhetoric.

Okay. Let me get this straight. It's not enough that the companies voluntarily pay out money to people who believe they paid more than they should have, but as additional punishment they are to stand by doing nothing while shithead thieves jack their property?

And due to my references to their illegal price fixing.. Here's some links to back that up:

Here's a tip. No one was found guilty of "price-fixing". No one was convicted of breaking any law, real or imaginary. Do you actually read the stuff you post here?

Oh and i forgot to mention the number of times the RIAA has and is being brought to court for illegal searches and invasion of privacy.

So RIAA agents have been convicted of breaking and entering people's homes now? Source please.

And i can understand these artists, or at least what i think of them.. Some will chose.. do i want major distribution? Or do i want keep to my roots and stay on an indie label? I have no problem with the artists who want the distribution...

No, no problem at all. Becuase your solution is to steal their work.

... i do despise those who make music solely for money...

And I despise thieves. By the way, weren't you the one crying about starving artists never getting a break? How are they supposed to keep from starving if slimy little sneak thieves steal their work?

... and contractual purposes.

So you despise people who actually deliver what they contract to deliver? Oh yeah... you'll do real well as an economist. People will be lining up to hire you when you graduate.

Actually i feel sympathy for an artist who HAS to fullfill a contract and pump out another album depending on the situation.

But not enough sympathy, apparently, to refrain from stealing from him.

The music industry has done nothing but decline severly in profits since Napster acquired 20 million + users.

Gee, ya figure? Let me ask you something, mister economics student. If your professor were to ask you if you thought a company with less profit would tend to take more chances on an untried, non-formula type artist than a company which was more profitable, what would your answer be?

Check their profit/loss in the 70s, 80s, even the majority of the 90s. Yeah it waxed and waned, but overall it was a profitable business, very profitable.

Right. That's because back then, to steal musical works you actually had to spend some time and money. Now any little trust-funder thief with a used Dell he picked up on eBay for a hundred bucks and a stack of CDROMs he bought for less than a buck apiece can steal all he wants in no time at all.

It just so happened that the conglomerates got bigger, radio saturation increased, the sheer number of new artists per year decreased.. all started happening approximately at the same time as P2P exploded.

Duh! See my above question re risking signing new talent when business is bad versus sticking with tested product.

1- the largest by far, the ones that never make it and are always poor. Normally they tried to "make it" and failed, or make music for the sake of music, their message, their feelings/expression, or entertainment.

And stealing the work of this category helps them out by....?

2- ones that do make it, and the record companies fuck them (mainly alot of rappers, but not limited to rappers. Check out how bad TLC got fucked over. 2 Plat. Albums, and they were bankrupt. And not b/c they blew their money on stupid shit)

And stealing the work of those in this category helps them out by.....?

3- The recording artist who makes it, gets a good fair financial agreement, but still makes music because its something they enjoy.

And it is okay to steal the work of those in this category because.....?

4- The recording artist who not only makes it, but who's image and sound is a corporate construct in itself through exterior songwriters, producers, marketing, etc..

And it is correct to steal from the people (songwriters, session musicians, sound engineers, etc.) who actually produced the art that this puppet fronts for because....?

5- Recording artist that makes it big, but the only reason they continue to make music, is to make more money. (Metallica, most rap stars, pop stars)

And you know that this is the reason they continue to produce their art because....? And it is better to punish them from stealing their greed-based art rather than boycotting it because.....?

...and these categories can intertwine or change throughout an artist's career, and it doesn't encompass all artists either.

So, which categories is it all right to steal from?

That's another thing.. the industry really isn't adapting to well to the technology and advancement. They're fighting it. Napster and Itunes i guess is a suitable embracement, but its not on the level that it should be on-- if i was to approach the situation on their terms anyhow.

Why on earth whould you approach the situation on their terms? You're a thief. Why should you give a shit if they make money or not? Hell, you even steal stuff you hold in contempt.

unfortunately, the have fought some causes i disagree with that support the mindstate of a rockstar being able to get richer and richer and richer. I disagree with them, but i guess i can't fault them either, not business-wise anyways.

So let me guess. The way you will express your disagreement with them is to steal their work. Am I close?

Let me rephrase my wording. Majority of mainstream music. I guess what i'm really asking for, is when is the recording industry going to pick up on the the amazing artists out there? NOt just the pop get rich quick shit.

Maybe when people like you stop stealing from them so they have enough spare cash lying around to risk signing and promoting heavily some of the less mainstream stuff?

Kinda like the 60s and early 70s. I'm not saying there wasn't disposable pop then either. But i mean, look at how many amazing, worthwhile, quality, artists with longevity came out of there.

Maybe because back then it was next to impossible to produce any kind of decent replica of their work -- i.e. steal it.

That was well treated by the recording industry and well recieved by mainstream society.

It's also because it was music that was actually worth listening to

By the way, just so you know, the biggest hits of the 60s and 70s were pretty much all under four minutes, too. Some of them were not much over two minutes.

We're moving away from that and more into appeasing the short attention span and Hollywood soap operas, and impressiveness on organizational and technical superiority in manners of choreography, production, lip syncing, and a catchy overplayed hook that'll burn itself out in a few weeks.

And the way to reverse this trend is to steal stuff. Got it.

even in the early 90s there were loads of major record labels that provided healthy competition for each other.

So let's entice more record labels to start up by convincing them what a wise investment it is to produce something that any twelve year old can steal.

Sure you still have Island Records, Geffin Records, Bad Boy Records, Def Jam Records, Epic Records, etc.. but they're all owned by larger entities.. they're all one in the same company now.

And therefore they deserve to be stolen from.

And when they act in unison as the RIAA, now wher'es your choice? Now where's your competition?

Probably waiting to see if the RIAA can actually put thieves like you in jail for stealing their stuff before they take the chance of entering a field where going bankrupt due to theft is a very real possibility. They're probably investing their capital in speculative gold stocks instead. Less chance of losing their money.

There is none.

And this surprises you because...?

Don't get me wrong...

Oh no. We'd hate to get the wrong idea about your larcenous behavior. That would never do.

... i go the indie route...

What, you're an "equal opportunity" thief?

...and the self produced and marketed via the web route quite frequently. I'd say 40% of the time. But i'm not veering away from mainstream music...

Hell, why veer away from it? Just steal it, right? Then you can have your cake and eat it too. Listen to Britney Speers ins secret and sneer at her in public. Why not? Didn't cost you anything.

...just b/c i hate their employer, especially when they're employer over charges me, tries to manipulate me, and would fuck over the artist if they could.

So to get back at all these evil people, you'll make sure the artist never sees a cent in royalties from you.

Let me ask you something, thiefboy. Would you still express your outrage at what you perceive to be injustice by stealing actual vinyl or cassette or eight track tapes from a record store? Or does your noble stance of stealing from artists only occur because you can do it from the safety of your keyboard?

Come on, answer me. I dare you. How many songs have you stolen so far? A few hundred? A few thousand? Would you risk stealing dozens or hundreds of vinyl LPs from a store in the mall to express your "problems" and "disagreements" with the greedy fucks like Metallica and the companies who produce and distribute their art?

No?

Why not? No balls?

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Phred]
    #2652757 - 05/08/04 08:28 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

Yay pinky!


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Phred]
    #2652876 - 05/08/04 10:59 AM (13 years, 7 months ago)

That was one vicious beating. oh, the humanity.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 9,857
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 8 hours, 17 minutes
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Phred]
    #2653002 - 05/08/04 12:12 PM (13 years, 7 months ago)

It amazes me (humorously at least) that the exact same people who claimed the Bush adminstration lied and should be taking the moral high ground in dealing with terrrorists, that he should apologize for failing the American people, and that a vast majority of what he does is illegal, not only by our standards but the world as well, but somehow it becomes OK to break the law when it doesn't suit their purposes.

Bush steals the oil, they steal the music. It all makes sense now.


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinebaraka
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/16/00
Posts: 10,729
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 36 minutes, 46 seconds
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2653368 - 05/08/04 02:20 PM (13 years, 7 months ago)

Lol they shouldnt worry about kazaa. I can pull 10 gig of data night from newsgroups.


--------------------
This is the only time I really feel alive.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineFrankieJustTrypt
and fell

Registered: 01/27/04
Posts: 537
Loc: MI
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Learyfan]
    #2653441 - 05/08/04 02:49 PM (13 years, 7 months ago)

Even though none of these comments are directed at me, I'd like to reply to a few of them, as that is easier than constructing a whole new post. Thanks.


Oh well that makes it alright then. Let me guess. You rip off software too, right?

Ok you are going to love this, basically the only software I rip off is software used to rip off artists' work. If you want the highest quality software as possible you need to buy it, as crack writers and whoever else can't possibly do a flawless job. My most used software is bought and thats because, like pot, I'll gladly pay a higher price for better quality. But I do have a few $99 DVD-burning software and a 300 dollar music program... I am actually planning on buying the music software once i get to paying 300 dollars for a music program on my list of priorities, until then I will gladly and without remorse use it free of charge.



Or from the artists the RIAA pays royalties too either, apparently.

Nope, I didn't force them to expect money for music that is easily available for free.


By "fucking them back" you ensure that the creator of the music gets even less money than he gets now.

Yes, see above.


Then register you disapproval ethically. Refuse to attend their performances. Don't buy their T-shirts. Send them an e-mail telling them what you think. Don't rip off their stuff. Ignore it.

Heres a better idea, download their music or copy from someone else, burn more copies, distribute for free or cheap or whatever you want to people that want to listen to the music but dont want to pay for it. Don't waste time with email. You can even send a small cut of your earnings to metallica if you choose...

Maybe the reason the bands to whom you refer are here today and gone tomorrow is because thieves like you steal their work rather than buying it.

Theres always a maybe, but I think its probably more due to the fact that these bands realized they were not talented enough to exist in the current recording industry system and make a profit, what I wonder is, are they still making music?

You just make it that much harder for him to make it by stealing his work.

I'd suggest a re-evalution of whether or not "making it" via music is worth the extra work.

So the artist is not allowed to set the price under which he sells his artwork? Or rather, he is allowed to but instead of doing without it if you feel the price has climbed too high, you prefer to steal it.

The artist can do whatever they'd like. And yes, if one doesn't want to pay for something that they still want, stealing is the obvious answer.

People still do that. I do it. I won't charge you for listening to me sing in the shower. I'll even let you record me if you want.

Audio or video??


Well, here's a newsflash, thiefboy. They sure ain't gonna make it out of poverty if greedy little sketchweasels like yourself keep stealing their work.

10 points for style. Art/Music isn't a great way out of poverty, unless you are just trying to forget about it.


And this makes it right to steal because....?

Right? thats a tough concept to pinpoint.

But not enough sympathy, apparently, to refrain from stealing from him.

Someday he'll thank me :wink:



And therefore they deserve to be stolen from.

If thats how you feel about it...

Probably waiting to see if the RIAA can actually put thieves like you in jail for stealing their stuff before they take the chance of entering a field where going bankrupt due to theft is a very real possibility.

They can dream.


And it is better to punish them from stealing their greed-based art rather than boycotting it because

Because if you steal it and give it away to people who actually want it, they fade even quicker... If thats your goal.


Let me ask you something, thiefboy. Would you still express your outrage at what you perceive to be injustice by stealing actual vinyl or cassette or eight track tapes from a record store? Or does your noble stance of stealing from artists only occur because you can do it from the safety of your keyboard?

Lets keep nobility out of this. And yes, it is not practical at all to go into a store and steal with a good chance of being busted when you can download it with maybe a 1 in a million chance of being busted. I figured this was common sense.

Come on, answer me. I dare you. How many songs have you stolen so far? A few hundred? A few thousand? Would you risk stealing dozens or hundreds of vinyl LPs from a store in the mall to express your "problems" and "disagreements" with the greedy fucks like Metallica and the companies who produce and distribute their art?

I've got a couple thousand various MP3's and a number of bootleg DVD's. Again its ridiculous to to steal actual media from a store, especially vinyl(they are huge), when digital data is easily and safely attained. Its a matter of cost/benefit.


Why not? No balls?

KICK ME IN THE JIMMY! I CAN TAKE IT!


----------------


But really if "stealing" this stuff causes the fall of these industries and the bankruptcies of some artists, so be it. Everything will work out in the end.

And I wish people would approach this (and everything) in a more adult manner and adapt, rather than the childish kicking and screaming, "Its just not fair!"


--------------------
If you want a free lunch, you need to learn how to eat good advice.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDigitalDuality
enthusiast

Registered: 04/29/04
Posts: 354
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: Phred]
    #2653537 - 05/08/04 03:44 PM (13 years, 7 months ago)

I'm not going to defend my actions because i know damned well their adolescent and vengeful. I'm sorry it hurts the artist, but i don't see any other way. I dually support indie labels too.

I have no problem in labels that don't rip off artists or the consumer, i have no problem with a direct relationship with the artist via the web or other means. The RIAA alienated and fucken over their consumer base, they're getting what they deserve. And i really don't care if it's ethical, i don't care if it's rational. So you got me, pats on the back to you. w00t!

Also can you really say i'm stealing if i download something i would never buy in a million years to listen to it for 5-10 minutes and delete it? I do that quite often.

And yes, the RIAA is a monopoly. Each seperate company is not, but when all act in unison, yes, it is.

The RIAA was ordered to give compensation to their consumers for illegal price fixing over a ten year period. My collection through multiple mediums, is only matched by djs, for the most part and all i got back was $15 bucks? Yeah right. The government might not do anything else, i might stand a chance in hell in a court room, but i will get my money back. Like i said, childish.. and i don't give a shit.

I'm not applying my studies into political theory into this discussion, nice to see you're wish to bash people and name call though, also nice to see you twist words around. I actually enjoy debating with you, and believe it or not i've learned a thing or two. But lets keep the attacks out of it, ok?

Music has always been very emotional to me and very personal and i am irrational about it. So yeah, right or wrong. I stand where i stand.


Edited by DigitalDuality (05/08/04 04:07 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: FrankieJustTrypt]
    #2653651 - 05/08/04 04:18 PM (13 years, 7 months ago)

The sense of entitlement you thieves have is mind-numbing. Your rationale for not stealing media from stores is that you might get caught and it is easier to do it on-line. You're still a thief. End of discussion. Now, if you have no problem with being a thief, that's fine. Just don't bother making any jive ass justification for your actions. Be an unapologetic thief, accept your inner scumbag, and don't cry if you get caught and burned


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: If the RIAA are serious....... [Re: zappaisgod]
    #2653681 - 05/08/04 04:26 PM (13 years, 7 months ago)

:thumbup:


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop: The Doors

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* RIAA takes student's life savings ($12,000) Edame 374 1 06/09/03 04:31 PM
by Phluck
* RIAA sue 12 year old girl
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Edame 2,314 71 09/12/03 11:14 PM
by username
* RIAA wins first-ever file-sharing case to go to trial, awarded $222,000
( 1 2 all )
kotik 2,604 25 10/11/07 08:18 PM
by afoaf
* inquiry into RIAA's piracy crackdown wingnutx 351 2 07/31/03 06:22 PM
by wingnutx
* Microsoft, RIAA, and non-ownership of media DoctorJ 392 5 07/25/03 09:07 PM
by Anonymous
* Political Metallica lyrics Learyfan 618 2 04/16/03 10:33 AM
by trev
* Artists Phluck 733 15 11/18/02 11:21 PM
by jahfeelirie
* Swedish artist threatened by Al Qaeda Luddite 324 1 09/19/07 09:57 PM
by Luddite

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
3,069 topic views. 1 members, 0 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Mushrooms.com
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.054 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 21 queries.