Musician uploads album to P2P networks, blames music industry for increasing piracy

Hes speaking sense, but , this is a blatant PR stunt for this band.

i hope a lot of people see this. while i agree its a PR stunt, it is very true also.

Well, since the world is turning digital, wireless, no one is willing to pay for something that they can get for free. Everyone is using Mp3 players instead of CD players, even car has AUX plugs now or harddrive. CD's are slowing to go away, just like the time when we had Vinyl Records. He is right, that now is the time that the company have to think of something new then putting out cds.

the RIAA treated there Slaves (musicians) like dirt. now the slaves want there food.

Good i hope all the artists revolt. there are so many ways to get your music out there. there is no more need to sign a major label.

heck there are people that sit at there house and are capable of Profisional Audio editing given the right equipment.

Excellent, my thoughts on the issue exactly. :)

Download the album, donate to the band directly, been doing it for years.

I long for the day when I can hook up a 4TB hard drive to my car stereo.

@windsong
Same here... but hdd should be sdd so you dont get to experience the good feeling you get when you loose 4TB of data. Even 500Gb hdd space you can get now for 100€ is a pain to loose.

I grew up with CDs and so I love them. The transition from crappy tape to CD was awesome. I will only pay for lossless music, whether it comes from a CD or digital file. Anything less should be free. We now have a generation growing up listening to inferior audio, never knowing how good music can sound. Todays consumer is just as backwards as the music industry.

Perhaps it's a publicity stunt, but it's a smart move. I have an album out on Nimbit (Pat Sheridan Jr.)...my own publicity...anyway, I refuse to release it on CD for the same reasons. This is the digital age. Why should I expect people to go out and use their car's fuel to buy something that will eventually end up in a landfill when they can simply download it to their computer. Once they download it, they are free to put it on a CD or mp3 player or just leave it on their computer hard drive. The Compact Disc was introduced in 1985!!! It's obsolete. I strongly urge all musicians to go strictly digital.

Grr...well at least somethings being done.
It may be a publicity stunt but that's kinda what we need dontcha think...? It could get a little bit more public and it could start a chain..and that could really f*ck with the RIAAs minds. Even everybody else thats gettin 2cents commission for the retarded cds...

Yea, it is the digital age, there is nothing anyone can do about it, the people they sue, so what, I bet EVERY SINGLE human being would have at least one burned cd somewhere. Except the really really poor countries (no offense). I listen to Taiwanese pop and any other asian music, some of them such CDs from Japan cost like 30 dollars for a cd, and the single cost 15. I never buy them, way too expensive. I buy my Taiwanese cds because I can't really donate anything through USA to Taiwan so I support Musician's by collecting their albums, and I enjoy it. I "LOVE" music and I compose my own, therefore I'm a collector, but still I download music first to see if they are worth buying. No one can stop billion's of people from downloading. The CD age is wearing down.

When the RIAA try to bypass payments for digital downloads and now want writers royalties lowered its time to say "F U guys, i'm going home!"



RIAA Wants Songwriter Royalty Lowered

Originally posted by link:

---

"Lest there be anyone left who believes the RIAA's propaganda that its litigation campaign is intended to benefit the 'creators' of the music, Hollywood Reporter reports that the RIAA is asking the Copyright Royalty Board to lower songwriter royalties on song file downloads, from the present rate of 9 cents per song — about 13% of the wholesale price — down to 8% of wholesale. Meanwhile, the big digital music companies, such as Apple, want the royalty rate lowered even more, to something like 4% of wholesale. So any representations by any of these companies that they are concerned for the 'creators' of the music must henceforth be taken with a boxcar-load of salt."

---

Radiohead: Artists often screwed by digital downloads

Originally posted by link:

---

You might think, if you didn't work in the music business, that famous artists stand to make mad cash from popular albums on iTunes and other digital storefronts. Sadly, that's not the case, and Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke has spent the last week calling out the labels for it. He recently told BBC Radio 4 that "the big infrastructure of the music business has not addressed the way artists communicate directly with their fans. In fact, they seem to basically get in the way. Not only do they get in the way, but they take all the cash."

Yorke said the same thing in a widely-quoted recent interview with David Byrne. His advice to young artists in that piece was, "Don't sign a huge record contract that strips you of all your digital rights, so that when you do sell something on iTunes you get absolutely zero.

---

and its the same with the television/movie writers!

Hollywood writers abandon Hollywood for web

Originally posted by link:

---

Unhappy with the way they've been treated by Hollywood's old school film and television producers, more than a few big name American movie and TV writers are bootstrapping startups in an effort to distribute their own material. And naturally, they plan on distributing via the web.

---

I'm sorry, but the RIAA have to stop living with their heads up their... assets, and start listening to everyone else.

Personally, I agree with the EFF's (Electronic Frontier Foundation) solution to all this B$. They suggested that instead of the RIAA and MPAA going after ISP's like they're some type of terrorist-enabling organization, they should strike deals providing the end-user with "Premium media service plans" enabling access to an extensive library of publicly-licensed DRM-free music for a small addition to the usual monthly service fee (say, an additional $5-$10 a month). This additional revenue would be divided up between the ISP, and then the respective artists/record companies/movie studios based on media popularity.

(this is all at the end of the report they filed showing that the RIAA lawsuits have failed. read it [URL=http://w2.eff.org/IP/P2P/riaa_at_four.pdf]HERE.[/url]

This would enable corporate competition, and competition is the lifeblood of progress.

devils advocate here if he is all for this method how does he expect to make any money from this.

Originally posted by BludRayne:

---

I grew up with CDs and so I love them. The transition from crappy tape to CD was awesome. I will only pay for lossless music, whether it comes from a CD or digital file. Anything less should be free. We now have a generation growing up listening to inferior audio, never knowing how good music can sound. Todays consumer is just as backwards as the music industry.

---

I agree with you, 100%. I also grew up with CDs, and made the transition from tape. I remember recording music off the radio, and making my own mix tapes, to listen to in the car, or where ever. And I *still* bought music at the store.

The RIAA still made money off of me, in the fact that they got/get a piece of every blank tape/CD that is sold in this country (US). I didn't have a problem with that, as back then, the RIAA didn't stand for enforcement, but more for engineering recording standards. Back then, I would support their efforts 100%, as eventually I would benefit by getting music that was more "true to life", or had high fidelity.

Today, the RIAA is a different entity. It is run by corporate types that only see the bottom line. They employ lawyers to enforce their policies. If you give a child a hammer, then everything becomes a nail, and all problems can be solved by hammering it. Same with lawyers. Instead of trying to change the perception of theft. all problems can be solved with a law suit. They treat all their consumers like criminals and seek to place limits on how music can be used. They want a piece of every format that music can be used in. The RIAA has been getting a free ride for years, as other companies have spent the research time and dollars on developing portable devices, with the RIAA getting a cut of any device sold.

Originally posted by phobet:

---

Originally posted by BludRayne:

---

I grew up with CDs and so I love them. The transition from crappy tape to CD was awesome. I will only pay for lossless music, whether it comes from a CD or digital file. Anything less should be free. We now have a generation growing up listening to inferior audio, never knowing how good music can sound. Todays consumer is just as backwards as the music industry.

---

I agree with you, 100%. I also grew up with CDs, and made the transition from tape. I remember recording music off the radio, and making my own mix tapes, to listen to in the car, or where ever. And I *still* bought music at the store.

Quote:

---

The RIAA still made money off of me, in the fact that they got/get a piece of every blank tape/CD that is sold in this country (US). I didn't have a problem with that, as back then, the RIAA didn't stand for enforcement, but more for engineering recording standards. Back then, I would support their efforts 100%, as eventually I would benefit by getting music that was more "true to life", or had high fidelity.

---

True

Quote:

---

Today, the RIAA is a different entity. It is run by corporate types that only see the bottom line. They employ lawyers to enforce their policies. If you give a child a hammer, then everything becomes a nail, and all problems can be solved by hammering it. Same with lawyers. Instead of trying to change the perception of theft. all problems can be solved with a law suit. They treat all their consumers like criminals and seek to place limits on how music can be used. They want a piece of every format that music can be used in. The RIAA has been getting a free ride for years, as other companies have spent the research time and dollars on developing portable devices, with the RIAA getting a cut of any device sold

---

.

---

Now the RIAA has metamorphosed into a bunch of greedy bloodsuckers.

Originally posted by iluvendo:

---

Now the RIAA has metamorphosed into a bunch of greedy bloodsuckers.

---

How true that is. The only ones gaining an advantage in this are the lawyers pursuing these "rabid file sharers". The consumer does not see any benefit in this, and the recording artists definitely don't see any benefit.

The RIAA needs get their lawyers to release the steering wheel of company, and give it back to the engineers and forward-thinking people in their employ. Only by developing compelling content, and changing the perception of theft, can they succeed in their "war on file sharing".

Until then, they will only be seen as a "repressionist" regime. And we all know that when under such a regime, the human spirit causes people to do things they ordinarily would not do. While their actions may be illegal, in their minds it is morally correct. While the amount of money the RIAA can divert to this failing policy is finite, the human spirit is not.

The RIAA is going to need some more Maalox>

Never heard of the guy. *shrugs*

I agree this seems like a PR stunt so people like me (who've never heard of him) begin to get curious.