haha cool

^^ Not really. TPB is probably the best torrent site out there.

I was referencing that he's fighting the fine

and it's not the best, btjunkie.org sources from every torrent site on the net This Message Edited On 04.17.09

this is terrible. Fuck the corporate world.

These guys have balls of steel. I love the Pirate Bay, so this kind of sucks, but one gets taken down, 10 will take it's place.

btw the site's still up
getting a massive VSTi library : )This Message Edited On 04.17.09

yeah, don't feel bad that those companies were "losing money" at all. honestly, artists, film makers and musicians don't need those labels and should completely avoid them.

It's his own damn fault. It might suck that shit can't be downloaded for free from that site anymore, but it was going to happen. If you were selling something and some dude was sneaking in through your backdoor and just giving it away you'd be pissed too. The "corporate world" is what keeps everything going.

I agree with that. I'm just not surprised that they're busted.

What?

Saw this on Gizmodo, almost cried.

god forbid people actually pay for music anymore...

they were accused for "providing a website with sophisticated search functions, simple download and storage capabilities"..lol sounds like google

god forbid people actually pay for music anymore...

i download near enough everything on my itunes but i always buy albums when i go into town and order the odd one over the internet

I found a great site that lets me buy albums for about 2 bucks. It has a pretty decent selection too.

Is it one of those Russian sites? I've read about those. The problem is that I'm not too sure the artists ever see any money from those types of places.

No, I have no idea what it is, its called mp3panda. Sometimes that flashes through my mind, but hell, at least I'm paying.

I'm pretty sure the only reason I joined is so I could get an extremely rare wolfchant demo that they had. As it turns out they have a whole bunch of underground treasures.This Message Edited On 04.17.09

gomusic.ru ..legalsounds.com......they definitely don't pay the artist ..

It is one of those Russian sites. I went to their legal area and found this:

All music files, downloadable from mp3panda.com may be distributed via internet digital networks in accordance with License No LS-8M-P-O6-94 for Proprietary and Allied rights issued by Russian Organization on Collective Management of Rights of Authors and Other Rightholders in Multimedia, Digital Networks & Visual Arts (ROMS).

This Message Edited On 04.17.09

well fuck, thanks for raining on my parade.

well fuck, thanks for raining on my parade.

I always feel bad when a horrifically unpopular band goes unpaid for their efforts, so I always buy hardcopies of their albums, so even if I'm feeding a fat russian pirate 90 percent of the time, I'm doing at least a little bit of good.

In a way the record companies brought it on themselves with their greed and resistance to change, but it sucks because the artists are the only ones really suffering from it.

sales are declining across the board.

The issue is that a large chunk of the consumer population has always been kids like you, but it didn't dent the profits. Back in the day (Tuesday) you would just buy the albums from your favorite artists and maybe something random if you had extra cash and that was good enough. Now people want music for free, movies for free, software for free as if it's their right to have anything they can get their hands on.

Exactly. I hate the fucking American sense of entitlement to everything, seeing as how American kids are obviously some of the worst torrent-abusers. No one seems to care that somewhere 3-6 people just worked their asses off and spent a whole lot of money to produce that sick album that they just stole of of Utorrent.
America
Fuck yeah?
Fuck no.
Fuck you.

TPB is life

well this is bad news, but I prefer blogspots anyway, so it doesn't really matter to me. But it sucks though, pirate bay rules.

Yeah, blogs are where it's at. Rapidshare > torrent speeds.

mediafire > rapidshare

Burn2Burn > fireaboveicebelow

shit just got real.

oh man :[

sorry :'(

I just wanted to rec you a faster medium!!!!

This is so ridiculous. This Message Edited On 04.17.09

I buy 20% of my albums, but torrents are essential because I don't (and never have had) have a job. Sad news.

Zippermouth you have been committing one of the biggest failures I've ever seen on the internet.

Paying for music that doesn't even benefit the musician, that's just sad.

4shared=mediafire>rapidshare

although rapid has a bigger music library it's sometimes slow as shit dudes!

been waiting for this day for a LONG time
about time.

This seriously is a fight that cannot afford people saying "oh maybe it's time we started being pussies."

Music should be cheaper than it currently is, end of discussion. Until it is, these forms of access to the medium are justified by way of protest. Give it 2 more years of this method of listening and record labels won't exist. Maybe some of them will realise in time that they need to re-consider what they charge for 45 minutes of audio media.

mediafire > megaupload > rapidshare

megaupload is the shittiest i think

mediafire ftw

Music should be cheaper than it currently is, end of discussion. Until it is, these forms of access to the medium are justified by way of protest. Give it 2 more years of this method of listening and record labels won't exist. Maybe some of them will realise in time that they need to re-consider what they charge for 45 minutes of audio media.

It can easily be considered protest if the majority of pirates treated it like a movement as opposed to just another outlet. Most people don't know how to use the internet correctly, though.

Protest doesn't allow sacrifice, but maybe protest was the wrong word anyway.

Bottom line is that the rapidly falling number of sales of music is forcing record labels charging £13 for an album to re-think their marketing and pricing strategies. The reason for the falling number of sales is not a decreased interest in music, it's an increase in downloads. The better-priced music becomes, the more likely people are to pay for it. I'm just looking forward to the day I can walk into WH Smith and pay £5 for the new Brand New album. Then I'll be happy, and then I'll pay for everything I listen to. Musical production costs are not as high as retail prices imply.

Belligerency can be a form of protest, but I don't see what that has to do with downloading. And thats what I meant - a movement, or a boycott, use the internet as the only outlet for music and stop providing overpaid individuals with luxuries they already have.

I'm speaking as an American, and illegality in this country can be overturned at the drop of a dime if enough people are behind the cause.

Those who lose their jobs are being laid-off because the way we obtain our media has evolved, and is adopting a more lenient outlet. Just like manual workers lost jobs when the assembly line was invented, or how mom and pop stores are being vanquished by Wal-Mart and Walgreens. Economic evolution, its a beautiful thing in some cases. Also, a big reason as to why people should go to college with more than one career in mind.

More like a remarkably constitutional view of it.

Je suis avec scyther.

Constitutionally, my people can overturn drug laws they disagree with (the majority of America does believe that the War on Drugs is a backwards effort causing more trouble than good). I don't look at any illegal thing with bias, because I can live without it even if it were legal. People need to understand that their dislikes are likes in other social groups.This Message Edited On 04.17.09This Message Edited On 04.17.09

It can easily be considered protest if the majority of pirates treated it like a movement as opposed to just another outlet.

Those who lose their jobs are being laid-off because the way we obtain our media has evolved, and is adopting a more lenient outlet. Just like manual workers lost jobs when the assembly line was invented, or how mom and pop stores are being vanquished by Wal-Mart and Walgreens.

The label is a thing of the past, its time to accept that. Free internet distribution is more effective, efficient, and convenient than traveling to a store to purchase your music, and being disappointed because mainstream record stores have pretty much demolished the independent scene whose major premise of distribution right now is the internet. I'm not saying I don't feel for the label employees, but their niche has been dissolved.

This is biased extremely, but in my opinion art is the default property of every living being in the Universe. But we can work things out with Congress. Perhaps we should remove the major industry and allow marketing for all kinds of music equally - then I would be MUCH more inclined to pay for it, because it wouldn't be overly expensive and there would be far more substance in the industry.

But we can work things out with Congress.

Perhaps we should remove the major industry and allow marketing for all kinds of music equally - then I would be MUCH more inclined to pay for it, because it wouldn't be overly expensive and there would be far more substance in the industry.

That "lol" is exactly why I'm watching this country from the hole at the top of a drain rather than someplace more fitting for a representative Democracy that actually works.

There would be no mainstream and underground, there would just be music. You pay for what you get, not for what makes record executives the most money.

That "lol" is exactly why I'm watching this country from the hole at the top of a drain rather than someplace more fitting for a representative Democracy that actually works.

There would be no mainstream and underground, there would just be music. You pay for what you get, not for what makes record executives the most money.

It's realistic to accept the fact that our Congress wouldn't budge no matter what we say? Thats disgustingly fascist.

Removing the spotlight from artists who are just as talented, and most of the time less talented than others who get less attention is not socialism. Our music market would have to change, thats really it, since music doesn't apply to politics outside of metaphors.

Well there's a neat symmetry between what makes executives the most money and what most people want to spend their money on.

Exactly, all the more reason to eliminate those record exec's and their dishonest, contrived media ploys.

The label is a thing of the past, its time to accept that. Free internet distribution is more effective, efficient, and convenient than traveling to a store to purchase your music, and being disappointed because mainstream record stores have pretty much demolished the independent scene whose major premise of distribution right now is the internet.

This is biased extremely, but in my opinion art is the default property of every living being in the Universe. But we can work things out with Congress. Perhaps we should remove the major industry and allow marketing for all kinds of music equally - then I would be MUCH more inclined to pay for it, because it wouldn't be overly expensive and there would be far more substance in the industry.

Fay as Guck.

everyone wants to be robin hood when they are high, then they sober up and remember how the real world works.

I download because I can't ever find the shit I want to listen to

and because my cash flow is more or less what I can find in my couch and what money is left from my paycheck after, you know, buying food and gas and my car payment

and, I mean, if I was an artist, I would rather people hear my music for free and like it and come see me play rather than not hear it because it's too expensive.

you know.

Why? Because they are dishonest, contrived, and do not cater to the listener who desires quality over sly business.

I'm sure a reasonable artist would be willing to sacrifice CD booklets for the sake of distribution, which they already have, by allowing their music to be purchased in mp3 and various other formats off the internet.

My desires don't show society as it is, and they don't agree with society as it is. So what? If its true we live in a capitalist democracy as you say, I am entitled to elect officials whose views are similar to mine, and whose presence in the political administration can change things to suit my needs and wants. They do in fact have the right to remove things from our world that don't agree with them. The real warped and disoriented view of society in America is that our archaic political values must be kept despite the changing markets we welcomed with open arms when immigration was employed.

The most hilarious scene in America right now is the Democrat who is unknowingly a Republican.

everyone wants to be robin hood when they are high, then they sober up and remember how the real world works.

This is a very bad way to think unless you're a fascist. This Message Edited On 04.17.09This Message Edited On 04.17.09

everyone wants to be robin hood when they are high, then they sober up and remember how the real world works.

at the moment, I have no money in which to buy cds. What else can you expect when you are only a freshman in high school?

however, I do plan on making it all up to the artists I have downloaded when I "eventually" get a job.

That CD booklet statement was in response to this:

These things might be more convenient to you, but they're not entirely convenient to the creators of the art that want booklets and covers to go along with their music.

Which is making it sound like I'm the only person in the world who music piracy benefits.

Those particular records have the most potential for mass appeal because modern civilization, or the mass of it, has been groomed with superficial pop music as the norm, just like many other forms of mainstream media. The masses are distracted with what seems to them to be the epitome of musical mastery, when in fact these Kanye Wests have been and are being outdone in the underground a million times over, but will never receive the same amount of attention because they are not as profitable, or don't want to walk around in Burberry and LV and make pseudo-controversial statements.This Message Edited On 04.17.09

Nothing was built from the ground up by mainstream labels except for their headquarters. The mainstream operates in a bribing way, offering underground artists with appeal in areas of interest by those labels global distribution and recognition. Then they proceed to simplify that artist and the genre surrounding him in the major industry, and turn him or her into a paycheck. This, in my eyes is a corrupt business that takes the spotlight away from artists who truly deserve it in favor of a totally artificial figurehead.

Then please prove me wrong, because its not pleasing to think about things like this.

Not gonna lie, the majority of music I download is because the shitty stores here in the UK don't stock/cater for what I need. I order what I can online, but it's still not good enough. This being said, I own over 300 cds, which is still ever increasing... when I eventually find what I want.

But it doesn't really matter because blogsearch is so much more quicker, and delivers for the more obscure bands.





This Message Edited On 04.17.09

cuz fuck the system man

Some people are just alienated by the concept of 'the mainstream'.

Definant to the end...keep rockin' TPB, as a torrent site you still kickass.

I'll leave the file-sharing debate primarily to the staffers here, but I think that the lack of coporate money being poured into music wouldn't have all that big an impact. As already said there has been a surge in indie music, and it's pretty easy nowadays to record your own music with pretty good quality, given the right programs. Maybe this will (or has) incite a musical revolution in some way or another

It's easy to record your music and put it online, but it's hard to gain the type of exposure that even an indie label can provide. The exposure and the world wide contacts is where the labels shine over any type of self-promotion.

I'm sure a reasonable artist would be willing to sacrifice CD booklets for the sake of distribution, which they already have, by allowing their music to be purchased in mp3 and various other formats off the internet.

The idea of not being able to physically own a piece of music scares me. I mean, try not physically owning a piece of art...
That's pretty much why I hate iTunes and love the vinyl markets that have reopened in the last few years. Don't get me wrong, I utilize compressed audio all the time for its convenience, but having something always outweighs having some crude form of it.

when i buy a record its almost solely for the insert and artistic element of the physical copy as ive already heard the music and decided i like it

Everybody torn up about it should discover the bliss of rar files.

Or the bliss of Amazon, if you're honest enough.

Constitutionally, my people can overturn drug laws they disagree with (the majority of America does believe that the War on Drugs is a backwards effort causing more trouble than good). I don't look at any illegal thing with bias, because I can live without it even if it were legal. People need to understand that their dislikes are likes in other social groups.

In America, I'm pretty sure the Constitution doesn't state that we have the right to overturn laws like that. Unless you're getting it mixed up with the Declaration of Independence ("..it is the right and duty of the people to alter or to abolish [the government]")

Personally, I don't mind if someone downloads a hard to find album, but I seriously wish people would stop acting like record labels deserve all the losses. Record labels are often necessary for commercial success.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioyqmeVszis

I just gotta add that independent, respectable labels with reasonable profit margins deserve much more money and respect that bullshit labels like Universal.

edit: That is to say, labels such as Universal or Warner Brothers will ask for ten times the profit they need to survive and take away money from the artists themselves. I see them as an opportunistic monster.This Message Edited On 04.18.09

i think everyone should stop making music and produce more pornography in its place

Whoa whoa whoa, I didn't say anything about stealing. I'm just saying it's more satisfying to buy independently produced/released cd's or lp's, and they should serve as a role model.

Well I mean you obviously have a very particular view of music (mainstream=bad, underground=good) and you see major labels as a corrupting influence on their artists. It's not really something you can argue against- I see the craft involved in pop music and I appreciate it. Your sympathies are obviously with less mainstream artists.
My question then would be: why are you so in favour of illegal downloading when the music you listen to clearly doesn't fall under the major label umbrella?

My sympathies in this situation are with anybody who makes music, and my ill will towards some of their employers. I never said anything otherwise - I might dislike what these people are forced to do for money, but that doesn't mean I dislike them personally.

It's easy to record your music and put it online, but it's hard to gain the type of exposure that even an indie label can provide. The exposure and the world wide contacts is where the labels shine over any type of self-promotion.

and most artists do allow their music to be purchased online because they are reasonable and they do want to get it out to the most people, but there are those artists and fans that will always like a well done insert and that is why there should always be some sort of physical medium available in addition to mp3s.

The internet is a great outlet for public media, ranking very high globally as a top 5 source for it. Whats the point of a physical label when we can directly link music into homes? Whats the point of exposure when you can list your band among millions of others on an online conglomerate of artists, and have people specifically pin-point their tastes to find you?

Physical albums are cool things to have, the manufacturing effort is of course worth money. But since the introduction of mp3 downloading they've become optional and can remain that way, so artists should still be able to make a deal with a manufacturer to share proceeds from the sales to pay for it, but album sales shouldn't decide exposure.

Been following this case since the beginning shame that Pirate Bay lost they are appealing though. In these days of corporate media there is so much spin and bad information out there. Greedy corporate media is the problem and the expenses for there product. This is about new any better ways of distribution the internet can set people free rather than maintain people to the old corporate based greed system (they have to much to lose). It's the artists that suffer in reality. Corporate world, it's media run off spin and misinformation to make people submit.

I heard of an idea for a 'download license' by someone who was anti-copyright activist in 'steal this film 2' i think. Example you pay $50au (or equivalent in national currency) as an individual for permissions to download unlimited content for a year. If 150 million people paid this $7,500,000,000 au that's 7.5 billion $ generated not pocket change heh? This is just a small example considering many many more people use the internet from many nations. Many pay more than $50au a year on legal products and also download. This indicates to me that control and excessive greed is the motivator. Corporations want the internet restricted whereas it should be set free it's why it was created the purpose of free exchange. Corporations label to us choice but in reality is the limit of your freedom = consumerism, 'the right to choose what is choosen for you, not to actually choose yourself who you are, what you believe' since you cannot ever own these images, sounds etc. Marketing and public relations these days are one and the same. We are institutionalised into these beliefs today in many facets of life and that is scary for some is to scary to face.

I remind people of the hypocrisy, that corporations in structure are a vast network of individuals that provide a service or product without individual accountability, hence the corporate front an abstract concept. That's even the philosophy of capitalism in general. How structurally is a corporation different to a filesharing network which is about creating a network of individuals providing a service or product, again it's abstract. Truth is functionally they are the same philosophically corporations are stuck in the old ways and filesharing is the way of the future. Filesharing creates culture, free exchange creates culture namely art whereas corporate capitalism often puts out safe products for $ limiting artistic license and these are forgotten about soon enough so create no culture. They are different mentalities which can be met if people attempt reason. I think we are at a critical point of history that can empower all or stagnate society if controlled 'it's a choice' and you only have to look at the world around you to see numerous issues interrelated. Adapt or perish I say to old ideals and old controls, we live in the 21st century move forward not backwards. Download 'steal this film 2' if your interested in the case was made by the owners of the Pirate Bay it is about the case giving there perspective.

Copyright laws are needed if we remain on old systems however revision of them is a must. Creative Commons is a great creation in days where media is so available it should be treated like books are now. Books are paraphrased, quoted and nobody asks for $ otherwise students couldn't afford to study. Electronic media in the 21st century deserves the same treatment in sampling and editing I think. Life is defined by images, sounds and recognising that people can identify with media therefore allowing them to create from them empowers people, empowers culture and our humanity as a whole. It seems to me as time goes on we put trademarks on more things than ever and everything is for sale well I have news for people you own yourself.This Message Edited On 04.18.09

Sorry about my long posts I am passionate on the internet and individual rights in general. I read a lot of philosophy, know a bit in sociology and am a student in psychology, criminology and justice so tend to think such issues shape society. People have an opportunity to open or close there eyes both realities have opinions that need to meet in the real world. Corporations cannot reclaim millions of $ in profit from suing people with no money in the first place. I side with filesharing I admit, I see it as an opportunity to unify and empower people to be all they can. Rather than controlling or fearing which governments and corporations love to do. Filesharing is a political issue these days! This Message Edited On 04.18.09

Sucks that they got convicted, but don't the companies see they're making matyrs?

This bites tbh. I don't use the site but I have friends that do, they must be pissed.

god forbid people actually pay for music anymore...

Internet is srs bizniz ITT.

Britney Diva,

You have a remarkably naive view of the major label system for someone who is otherwise arguing very well.

The reason so many people are being laid off is not because of file sharing per se. It is because the execs do not want to admit that the glory days (the 90s) of massive profit margins to pay their obscene salaries are over. They choose to fire people rather than take a pay cut. As a result, rather than having a large number of people looking for new and talented acts, they have very few. This causes them to sign fewer acts but to market those acts much more intensely in the hope that some of them take off.

In the event one of them does, it is not the artist that reaps the benefits, its the label. In the days of 360 deals, the artists see very, very little money from physical sales (especially since people mostly just want the single and aren't willing to buy an entire album to get it). They only really make money on the road and thats only if their live act can match the hype which, given the vast scale of major label marketing machines, is almost impossible.

This Message Edited On 04.18.09

Thats even leaving out the fact that the internet has caused the mainstream to break up into many niche markets as people now have access to a much wider variety of music amd can pick and choose what they want. The offshoot of this is that even the artists with the widest appeal reach far fewer people. It is easier than ever to ignore what doesn't interest us and focus on what does because its all at our fingertips.

Now, this doesn't mean I condone piracy (though I sometimes us it myself) but it does mean that the way music is distributed has to change. The major labels only power is marketing and they have shown that they no longer understand the market by continuing to act like its the 90s when there was a discernable mainstream that most people were tied into (typically by listening to the radio or watching mtv). But no one listens to the radio anymore and mtv stopped playing music years ago.

Sorry for the length of the post but I care about music and the artists that create it alot (especially given that my best friend is one such person) but its not so simple as "file sharing bad, major labels good" or vice versa. File sharing came about and continues to survive because the major labels had a chance to take advantage of the internet back in the days of napster. Instead they tried to pretend nothing had changed. Well, they are paying for it now.

Artists can still get their music out, more easily than ever actually. The difference is that the money isn't in sales anymore, its in touring. Its about putting the fans first, about giving them what they want when they want it. If they like your music, THEY WILL PAY YOU. Thats the difference with the major labels. They use their marketing machines to try to TELL YOU whats good and then demand that you pay through the nose for it after waiting through months of hype for them to deign to let you purchase an album that was finished almost a year previously.

Basically, what I'm saying to the major labels is, the 90s are over, the internet is here. You can choose to use it to make things better for all of us, or you can continue to hope in vain that it will go away. Its your call.

Quite a discussion here

Let me throw my opinions on here real quick

Torrents = bad. never legit. always shady.
Rar Files = Great for the music fan, the critic, and the curious.
The Pirate Bay = A hosting site. Most of the time, copyrighted stuff is usually forbidden on there. Bootlegs primarily.
A Music fan that downloads = 90% of the time, that person is going to buy the album they downloaded. For example, I got the new Depeche Mode album recently as well as the new Heaven and Hell album and I plan on buying them both once they are released. To many, music is music. To most, buying new music is a treat, as the physical form will always be there, and that cd will look good in your never-ending collection of music. Download, but always buy. I do.

they were accused for "providing a website with sophisticated search functions, simple download and storage capabilities"..lol sounds like google

This effin' sucks! I get all my stuff from TPB! Anyway, if it meant anything illegal, next time they should slap a warning sign on the site saying "Delete the files from your computer after you've listened to them, and go out and buy the CD, you moron". Then perhaps the feds will stay off their case.

oh, btw - never used that site but that whole case still sucks.
I guess stopping downloads in general (would that be possible) would pretty much eradicate most small bands or degrade them to hobby artists or homeless bums, at least I would actually buy much less albums if I wouldn't have the chance to listen to them before spending my money.
without downloads mainly the big ones with the music companies behind them could make a living with music. and I'm pretty sure it's only those who make a lot of cash anyway that get hurt by downloads.
but eh, I'm not an expert, just some thoughts on my side.

My sympathies in this situation are with anybody who makes music, and my ill will towards some of their employers. I never said anything otherwise - I might dislike what these people are forced to do for money, but that doesn't mean I dislike them personally.

Whats the point of exposure when you can list your band among millions of others on an online conglomerate of artists, and have people specifically pin-point their tastes to find you?

This indicates to me that control and excessive greed is the motivator.

that corporations in structure are a vast network of individuals that provide a service or product without individual accountability, hence the corporate front an abstract concept.

Truth is functionally they are the same philosophically corporations are stuck in the old ways and filesharing is the way of the future. Filesharing creates culture, free exchange creates culture namely art whereas corporate capitalism often puts out safe products for $ limiting artistic license and these are forgotten about soon enough so create no culture.

File sharing came about and continues to survive because the major labels had a chance to take advantage of the internet back in the days of napster. Instead they tried to pretend nothing had changed. Well, they are paying for it now.

Artists can still get their music out, more easily than ever actually. The difference is that the money isn't in sales anymore, its in touring. Thats the difference with the major labels. They use their marketing machines to try to TELL YOU whats good and then demand that you pay through the nose for it after waiting through months of hype for them to deign to let you purchase an album that was finished almost a year previously.

this wont change a thing. People will ALWAYS find ways to download free music be it from websites, blogs , torrent sites or P2p like Limewire etc.

For Sony, BMG etc to actually stop this, they should shut down the internet which is impossible! This wont affect a thing....shame to see TPB go though.

Who the hell uses Limewire anymore?


This news is horrible, I almost cried.

I'm just saying. People who know the internet will find stuff on blogs, other sites etc. Nubs will use p2p. So everyone will still download and not buy. Majority of the people I know use p2p lol. They don't know how to use torrents. All they know is Facebook.

This sucks, The Pirate Bay is/was my favorite

...The Pirate Bay is still up and running.

I think it should be noted that the only bands that throw out their stuff for free and still make a comfortable profit are the bands that are already big - aka NIN, Radiohead etc. In other words the bands that already know they have a dedicated fanbase who won't let their artists walk away with nothing.

They've signed the contract and most-likely sent their music to the label. So, they were never forced to do anything. Also, most of these bands aren't forced to go more mainstream, bands start hearing about the money they could be making and change of their own free will. These forced changes are rarely the label's fault.

The answer is right there in your question. What's the point of exposure when you're one of millions of other faceless bands? To give your band a face and an edge over the others.

You're digging too deeply into my first answer, I was accused of being strictly partial to underground music as opposed to mainstream music and I was simply confirming that isn't true. Though yes, many mainstream artists are forced to do things they probably wouldn't do if they didn't have to for a paycheck, like hundreds of photo shoots, letting songwriters hired by their label criticize and re-construct songs they themselves wrote in order to fit a status quo, their label influencing the way they dress and who they talk to, etc.

Music isn't a competition, and when looked at in a business light it's turned into a machine churning out radio hits in the hopes of success for money, while the underground starves for attention because they aren't as profitable as I mentioned earlier. The only edge in fame is unprofitable notoriety in a literally free market as music would be if piracy is legalized.

Only ninjas can beat pirates.
And octopi, winged legions of them.

Reality is their is issues on both sides no matter what peoples thoughts are one side cannot take priority. Corporate interests are aligned with production, profit and old forms of distribution with some new ones. Other interests are reflected by ordinary people who use p2p traffic, see altruism, culture and pay if you like important.

Money will always exist it's just now people have to earn it rather than hype it. I agree with what WillieFisterbut says though 'if people are dumb enough to buy hyped stuff so be it sort of thing'. People have the right to make the wrong choices well at least in our perception that's freedom. But I do think people fall prey to this doomsaying to much. I have bought 100's of CDs and DVDs but I do this only if I respect the artist when I can afford it as I am a university student.

The issues could be countered back and forward because honestly their is no 100% right point of view I believe people come from different viewpoints that's life. I don't pretend to know everything who can nobody, truth is relative not absolute sometimes. An exercise in democracy would be to put these issues to the people properly and inform them in open public debate. Rather than a politically inspired case such as this where they just make martyrs and restrict the scope of the issue. The film, music industries are becoming good at alienating their customers and really encourage piracy by the one way conversation they have with the customer these days. High media prices sometimes limit consumer spending, especially those with less $ and we are in a financial crisis. Let's remember pirates may also buy legal products they admire I believe 'responsible piracy' exists which some adhere to because many wish for more great products to come and understand the realities. I realise this can be taken out of context but then again that would confirm a persons bias rather than balanced perspective.This Message Edited On 04.19.09

Ahh reading all these political and social views is kind of funny. Personally I am generally against downloading, thats not to say I don't download, but I wish I didn't. As I never use the pirate bay anyway I don't really see this as much of a loss, but to pin the £3million defecit onto four guys seems hardly fair. As they said if they didn't actually host any of the illegal files then it was not them in the wrong but the thousands of users who downloaded knowing it was illegal in the first place.

@Reddannihilation

edited my post perhaps misleading since it can be generalised to everything else my bad explained better now. Just was saying that downloaders and corporations come from different viewpoints. Right or left wing is irrelevant actually if you read my post for problem to be solved involves confronting realities often they overlap. I am interested in issues like this since Australia is bringing in mandatory net filtering and will be actively attempting to stop p2p although they will fail. Big issue here for some been protests and all. Last post have statistics assignment to do bah.

First of all, to those arguing that art is "Universal" and belongs to everyone, that's a decision that the artist makes. Bands like the Pax Cecilia and Kidcrash recognize this and make a choice to offer their music for free. However, the majority of musicians choose that they would like to make a profit from their music, and for that they need some kind of distribution label. Destroying these labels would be no good for anyone, least of all the artists.

"The record industry is dead. It's six feet underground and unfortunately the fans have done this. They've decided to download and file share. There is no record industry around so we're going to wait until everybody settles down and becomes civilised. As soon as the record industry pops its head up we'll record new material." - Gene Simmons
"Every little college kid, every freshly-scrubbed little kid's face should have been sued off the face of the earth. They should have taken their houses and cars and nipped it right there in the beginning." - Gene Simmons
You tell them, Gene

gene simmons, ethics savior

that's coming from the same man who patented the phrase "OJ" This Message Edited On 04.19.09

Nothing wrong with torrent sites. From my own experience, I can tell the ability to download stimulates buying. People have the oppurtunity to decide if they think the music is good enough to buy it.

Which was probably the smartest thing anyone who wanted to make money could do.

They haven't broken a single law. I mean, I agree that you should pay for music, but a) that's not all the pirate bay does, b) when it is music, many people just use it for testing the water, as someone else said (youtube does NOT give an adequate idea of the album, im sorry. neither do itunes clips) and c) you can't just go around wrongly convicting people, no matter how justified your cause.

Torrents have actually got me to buy more music.
For awhile I was very weary of buying an album based on a couple songs that were good and the rest was very possibly crap.

Two problems here:

Consumers are resistant to paying for their music, as well as paying full price for an album that turns out to be shit.

and

Labels are resistant to change (change that is inevitable I might add). Sorry guys, but you're going to have to find some incentive for people to actually buy music instead of downloading it. You aren't going to find a way to make all forms of file sharing illegal across the world, at least in the near future.

Right now, I download what I'm curious about and buy what I love for the lossless quality, album art, and to provide some support to the artist.

I find it funny that people and music corporations believe that this case will help stem the piracy problems when more and more will pop up with every site goes down. Oink.CD went down 4 new torrent trackers immediately were created and coded to fit the needs of those users: What.CD, Waffle.fm, STMusic, FunkyTorrents.

Didn't read 152 comments but, as far as I know TPB will not be taken down just because those guys got arrested.

i am wondering why the people who were just holding the cd store backdoor open are being sued but not the guys who were acutally stealing and passing the records around.

and sueing them wont change a thing.

and they are suing TPB they could as well sue google,blogspots and mediafire, rapid and the likesThis Message Edited On 04.20.09

woopsThis Message Edited On 04.20.09

So are you jealous that you didn't think of it? Or do you just think he should be sorry for being smarter than other people?

My opinion of the "music should be cheaper" argument is how cheap do you want it? 5$? 1$? Downloading illegally will never cost but buying will ALWAYS cost SOMETHING. Therefore that argument is flawed.

Also TPB was excellent. Downloaded some great albums from there. Some I went and bought and others I didn't.

Christ, those are some long ass comments.

Downloading illegally will never cost but buying will ALWAYS cost SOMETHING. Therefore that argument is flawed.

High media prices sometimes limit consumer spending, especially those with less $ and we are in a financial crisis. Let's remember pirates may also buy legal products they admire I believe 'responsible piracy' exists which some adhere to because many wish for more great products to come and understand the realities