The RIAA went down to Georgia ...
Coming down on the side of the devil.
oddly; I stopped using p2p networks about a year ago and now get all my music from mp3 blogs.
c'mon, d, i'm pretty sure there are less trollish ways to keep hits high over on 30th...
Not sure The Pirate Bay sees it quite that way 30f On a separate note I discover that 'singing fish' has been well n truly stuffed by AOL (it may have already been noted on the 'ville but I can find no reference) Dam their hide, their search engine is kack! Still it's probably supposed to be
Yeah, robo, I was never in with the cool kids anyway.
That Pirate Bay logo even features the Hollywood sign crumbling down. It is (of course) fun to rip on over-fed institutions like the movie/music/TV industry - but don't most people on the Ville have Hollywood dreams?
If there is no real profit to be made from any kind of creative endeavor because it is electronically "shared" the instant you complete it ...
Seems kind of self defeating to me, and I only like to be self-defeating with a nice single malt.
This is stupid. Stealing is always ok.
I posted a comment there that I hope you find insightful.
dudes feel that they have been robbed their whole life paying $16.99 or whatever for a cd, so now it's payback. no tears shed for tower records.
my friends also say that they support the artist by going to their shows.
Ok then, so what about music videos? They began as non-profit modes of advertisment for the bands. Now they are being sold via iTunes for 1.99. We at the SRO (and I suspect a few others out there) got hit up about hosting downloads of music videos, hence why we no longer offer them up as freely as in our infancy.
While videos are a creative work, they were never meant to be sold in the first place. Only now, with the advent of the video iPod, are they being turned into product. And we all know that the directors and such aren't getting shit in terms of payment (yes, big name directors for big name artists are the exception, but still, I doubt they rely on those gigs to carry them far into the future).
30f and Antville are music video oriented, however, no one on either site has asked this question or confronted this issue. Can we be liable or even called thieves when we download videos (for free) that were never out to be profitted by in the first place. Let alone works of art that rarely reward the true artists of the form, the directors. Yes the artist is whats for sale, and they should get a chunk of that sale (seeing how it's their song), but technically, the directors should get more than now, if not most, since they're normally responsible for important ingredients, such as ideas for videos, treatments and in the case of more indie directors/bands actual filming, editing, and effects work.
Lastly, if videos aren't making enough to warrant more money to one or more of the parties involved, then where is the worth in even selling them in the first place? I'm just sayin'...
P.S. - My bad for making this so long peeps. I'll repost this on 30f as well to push up those numbers there too!
some contrarian links:
- p2p is killing piracy
- jonathan lethem: "the ecstasy of influence"
- david byrne: "record companies: who needs them?"
thanks for those links progosk. I checked the links above and I read them all (well most of the loong but excellent Lenthem piece). The first one about the bootlegger dude read like the story of a buzzard, who has crawled out to feast on the flesh of a road-killed animal, getting crushed himself by the same vehicle on its return trip. Who cares? maybe a bit ironically funny for the friends of the original road-kill. Maybe those Pirate Bay guys will give him a job. The Lenthem piece was intriguing and philosophical. In the end, kind of "eh" - at least in regards to the point I was trying to make. And it IS always all about me. He is right in that "[We are all] a cork on the ocean of story, a leaf on a windy day. Pretty soon I'll be blown away." He addresses the spiritual and creative aspects of what it means to be (or imagine oneself) creative. Not sure how that applies to college students downloading every mp3 and mov they can find with OCD-like obsessiveness, but definitely a nice read. The David Byrne one is more of exactly what I was NOT on about. I know the music industry is changing. Music video is changing. Everything is changing. I was trying to (unsuccessfully it would seem) make the point that only once we realize that the problem is all about people taking stuff without paying that we will come to a new, workable place. It is too bad that "75"s friend feel jobbed by the price they have been confronted with at record stores - but I don't think there is any price point that competes with "Free - take as many as you want!" If every CD/record store had been charging $2.99, do you think no one would be Limewiring? The excuses are endless. I did not write that post to prop up the record industry, or cry over dead Towers. I was writing about the hypocrisy at the center of the issue. Stealing music is stealing and any solution that does not address that people have been and will continue to want shit without paying is not a solution at all.
i'd have thought the lethem piece (it's worth finishing) would get you a step beyond "once we realize that the problem is all about people taking stuff without paying"...
in any case, nice to know you took the time.
i am a stubborn bastard
not defending one perspective or another. but that is what a lot of people think, that's all....is the real issue stealing? i'm just saying. because then when your friend made you a mix tape or you recorded that michael jackson song off the radio when you were 9 years old - wasn't that stealing? if you rip it from bitorrent and listen to it once and trash it is it that much different from walking over to virgin, putting on a pair of headphones and listening to an album (that you ultimately end up not buying)? what is the point exactly? that stealing is wrong? that falls on deaf ears. nobody cares. you're right - people want free shit. it makes them feel strong. doesn't it? btw i think you are right - there are endless excuses - my point is they don't care.
also, I think it's worth mentioning that when the new arcade fire leaks two months before it's offically released dudes need to get that ish! it's as much about being up on it as it is about not paying for it. the red queen principle.
"you heard neon bible?" "you have it?" "torrent dude, i'm addicted." "can i get that off you?" "dude, you have to get on the torrent" "guess so."
i've had these conversations. it's high school all over again.
more, briefly: "how i became a music pirate"
A friend of mine was saying that the only sustainable system going forward is for music and video to be made absolutely free but then anyone with a computer (and internet) should be obligated to pay a license fee (like us brits do for the BBC) and that bands should get paid per click... Thanks to myspace, blogs, hype machine etc... Streaming is the new downloading.
That would be a welcome addition to the system, imo, though I think the 'information wants to be free' geek squad may have a problem with that. Not that there's anything wrong with utopi-cizing information, but information doesn't really get the last word, does it?
plus some viewing: "steal this film"
What about mentioning that the two biggest (indie) releases of year so far; Arcade Fire & The Shins, both leaked months before their release and were downloaded the shit out of. Surprisingly though, they landed number 2 on the billboard sales chart when they dropped. So despite being stolen for months prior to their release, they still managed to be the biggest selling indie records in forever.
Are we saying that if they didn't leak then they would have sold more, or is it because of the leak, word got out and more people bought the album.
(coming back from the other post)
"the long-arm of downloaders has reached into the budgets (and profits) of music video directors"
yes the digital era has upset the music industry's set-up, and that's changed the landscape for music videos and their directors. but to suggest that free downloads/p2p file-sharing are the fundamental reason that labels find themselves less bathed in cash is demonstratedly false. the fundamental problem is that the industry have dragged their hypergreedy arses in finding new distribution models that music lovers will willingly adopt (itunes, amie street, emusic), thus creating a black market that's now pulling the carpet out from under their feet. to try to pin the responsibility on the user/consumer in this situation is akin to blaming heroin addicts for the drug market/problem. no wonder the riaa has chosen to launch their "war on pirates" - they're headed thunderingly down the same paradigmatic cul de sac.
"I believe that if the music industry doesn’t solve the theft problem (and that starts by recognizing it IS theft and not some more palatable euphemism) – then there will be less and less money in music and therefore music videos."
no, there won't be less money in music. (it's not as though anybody is consuming/listening to less music - if anything the opposite is true. it's simply a distribution problem. solve that and the cash will bountiful, as it always has and will be for worthy products.) however: yes, it will be less concentrated in the hands of a few. and that will very likely mean no more huge single budgets, but lots more smaller ones. sure, there'll be some maximized models with their kingpin accolytes left - but plenty less than in the mtv heyday. sure, that's probably not a comfy situation for someone in your position (if i've managed to understand what your position is) - however it is great for music, and likely, in the long run, good for the rhyzome of visual creativity going into music videos too.
as regards the actual point you were trying to make: "getting worked up about some minor director [...] biting a thing [...] generates some serious shock while this tectonic shift in the industry [...] is not a big deal?" - i think you answered that yourself: folks ('villers included) just don't know what the answer to the big picture is going to be - so they stick to their pet peeves (myopically so, in my & lethem's opinion).
which is, perhaps, typically antville - but then so is this.
now even the architect of the dmca sez the riaa fucked up...
the riaa from the perspective of a record shop owner.
"DRM, lock-ins, and piracy: all red herrings for a music industry in trouble."
for what it's worth, you can sign a petition here (pandora, for one, is appealing you to).
NB: whistling is safe, for now - unless you do it in public.
"truth vs. riaa" linkfest.
DivX follows Veoh's lead
More Hollywood insiders back Veoh