[PAULYBEE2656]

the rules are rules and i personally think that chris has been pretty kind with his actions lately and that guy just got nabbed. end of story. its a new dawn for the internet, i have many blogs on my bookmark folder and today, 12 of them died!

[nicfit]

Originally Posted by PAULYBEE2656

its a new dawn for the internet, i have many blogs on my bookmark folder and today, 12 of them died!

Something specific happened? You made it sound pretty apocalyptic

[RdTv]

^agreed....do tell

The only mp3 blogs being shut down are those that blatantly upload commercially available albums. That is taking the piss, people need to earn a living. I can't see blogs that up interesting music which is harder to find being shut down. It's as simple as that. Buy the records, if you like them. One thing is uploading a song or two off a new release, another is uploading a whole record for everyone to save pocket money. Not fair.

[PAULYBEE2656]

well nodatta went today and lost in tyme which is a prog gem of deleted shit! thats just 2 many were crappy bedsit blogs with too much shite on em.....

[gmku]

Not to get off track too much--but I've always viewed file sharing much like tape copies. Isn't it generally for people who are interested in hearing what something sounds like? Then if they like it well enough, they go out and buy a "real" copy on CD or LP?

I know for the few times I've gotten a CD-R of a download that it's never the same as having the "real" thing. I'm always on the lookout for an LP or at least a manufactured CD to replace it, because it seems more legitimate.

I know there are people who are satisfied with a "copy," but I would think they are a minority and that most consumers would see a shared file as a placeholder or as test copy to see if it's really something they're interested in. I also know I've grown up with more of a "collector's" mentality than most young people today seem to have.

There was that big to-do in the 70s about home taping and how it was killing the industry. In reality, it was boost, because it helped more people hear more music, which they would then go buy for themselves.

[nicfit]

Originally Posted by gmku

Not to get off track too much--but I've always viewed file sharing much like tape copies. Isn't it generally for people who are interested in hearing what something sounds like? Then if they like it well enough, they go out and buy a "real" copy on CD or LP?

There was that big to-do in the 70s about home taping and how it was killing the industry. In reality, it was boost, because it helped more people hear more music, which they would then go buy for themselves.

I agree, but sadly in today's world youngsters are growing up with the idea that everything MUST be free.
Thus resulting in living happily downloading stuff and buying fu*kin' nuthin'. Happy with a 80gb ipod filled with records, without even knowing how their covers look.
I think there's an old thread somewhere about how the "spreading" of mp3 and mp3 players is affecting the market/mentality of music listeners.

Originally Posted by gmku

Not to get off track too much--but I've always viewed file sharing much like tape copies. Isn't it generally for people who are interested in hearing what something sounds like? Then if they like it well enough, they go out and buy a "real" copy on CD or LP?

There was that big to-do in the 70s about home taping and how it was killing the industry. In reality, it was boost, because it helped more people hear more music, which they would then go buy for themselves.

Well, you forget a pitoval point in the whole thing: Taping an album in the 70's or 80's was a different thing from being able to transfer with ease the sound on your hard drive on different formats. I've seen scroungers downloading an album complete with perfect reproduction of the disc tracklist and artwork which they got off some website; an almost perfect fake.
As far as i know those people hardly ever buy any records. Just like toothpaste or chewing gum, music costs money to make and gives an income to the artist and the people who work with/for him/her.

[PAULYBEE2656]

totally agree. i do get a lot of dloadable stuff advance or not..... out of the last 10 albums i bought 7 of them are ones ive downloaded. its about getting more knowledge, i mean i havent the money either to go out every week and buy every release! i can see the anti point too but i reckon if you asked many bands, which i have, most wouldnt really care unless sales stopped totally. i dont get this "youre stealing from the artists" arguement. a download ahs music and a jpeg of the album, not the total package. its like buying a can of baked beans, but without the can

[gmku]

I see your point, Porky. And there were bootleggers in the 70s and 80s, too, who'd make a pirate LP from a (shitty sounding) taped copy.

There will always be that element. But aren't the majority of downloading consumers doing it for legitimate reasons--as a quick copy that they'll eventually replace with a real copy, if they like it enough?

It just seems to me, too, that the music industry always uses the "taping" consumer as the scapegoat for its own ineptitude. Maybe if they didn't try to screw the consumer with their inflated prices and tepid releases, fewer consumers would do this.

First of all, I don't think that the majority of people who binge on promos or downloaded albums advance their knowledge of music or their taste in any particular shape or form. If anything, getting greedy and wanting to hear big quantities of what comes out on the market is creating more and more a situation where many listeners improvise amateurish journalistic efforts without having even listened to a record the way, perhaps, it might have deserved being listened to. Second, you are making assumptions about bands encouraging folks to download their music for free in a climate where record sales are falling sharply by the day: That is simply not happening and never will. Unless, of course, you still have a romantic view of the artist as canvas of artistic expression for the people. In some cases that is true, but more often than not that isn't the reality, no matter the amount of talent that an individual might possess. You Radioheads can afford to do the giveaway thing because they know that their vast and loyal fanbase will still want the product straight from the factory, but that's a very popular band which we're talking about.

edit-Pauly

Originally Posted by gmku

There will always be that element. But aren't the majority of downloading consumers doing it for legitimate reasons--as a quick copy that they'll eventually replace with a real copy, if they like it enough?

I am fairly sure that's the case for a lot of people. Still, can you really believe that your average person can really afford all the records that they so continuously chat about on the internet all the time? I am pretty sure that some posters on here don't own a lot of the records they might champion on this or other sites. It's...... just the way people are.

[tesla69]

Originally Posted by gmku

I see your point, Porky. And there were bootleggers in the 70s and 80s, too, who'd make a pirate LP from a (shitty sounding) taped copy. .

wait - you're asserting that in the West they'd pirate an LP from a shitty tape of a studio lp (we're not talking concert or rare stuff)? I need some examples!

[gmku]

Don't have any.

Gmku is right, I have heard of that happening myself. I can't recall any particular album but, god almighty, the cheekiness of it all!

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by atsonicpark

Hmm.. Well, if it's a copyrighted work, it's still probably pretty popular. Most albums that attain a copyright have probably been heard more than the new Wolf Eyes tape bullshit. That's what I meant, I guess, without getting technical about it.

any creative work, whether painting, song, or dance, or album, is copyrighted instantly. every album is copyrighted. the whole deal being that Chabib , nor sonic youth, nor I for that matter, want this forum shut down because of "illegal" filesharing promoted by people on this board.

the government IS suing people about this.

go buy the fucking album if you care so much about the music.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by gmku

I wonder what's the difference between file sharing and me making a cassette tape copy and giving it to somebody. Is it that I'm not selling it? Or how is it different from loaning a CD or LP and letting him or her tape or rip a copy?

copyrighted file sharing is ILLEGAL

making a tape copy and giving it away is ILLEGAL

loaning a CD and letting someone make a copy is ILLEGAL

hell, they are suing people now because the record industry wants to make it ILLEGAL to upload your CD into an MP3 player or to a PC for the purposes of loading an MP3 player.

I don;t agree with this, but it is the law, and I would hate to get sonic youth or chabib in trouble for this.

*edited for stupidity*

[nicfit]

Moshe ?

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by PAULYBEE2656

totally agree. i do get a lot of dloadable stuff advance or not..... out of the last 10 albums i bought 7 of them are ones ive downloaded. its about getting more knowledge, i mean i havent the money either to go out every week and buy every release! i can see the anti point too but i reckon if you asked many bands, which i have, most wouldnt really care unless sales stopped totally. i dont get this "youre stealing from the artists" arguement. a download ahs music and a jpeg of the album, not the total package. its like buying a can of baked beans, but without the can

the "baked beans" are what COSTS MONEY

they are not free! the plastic CD costs about 10 cents in materials and about adollar to manufacture. a vinyl record costs abotu a dollar in amterial and about 3 to manufacture.
the songs HOWEVER, costs from a thousand dollars to a hundred thousand dollars to record and master and mix and transfer.

BUY THE MUSIC PEOPLE

filer sharing is for suckas.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by tesla69

wait - you're asserting that in the West they'd pirate an LP from a shitty tape of a studio lp (we're not talking concert or rare stuff)? I need some examples!

nearly every single album being sold in the old USSR and Eastern Block back in the day was pirated like this. they wopudl make a high quality cassette/reel to reel copy, then make their records a nd 8 tracks off of that.

you think that russian sonic youth daydream nation is directly from the sonic youth masters? shit. they are missing 1/3 of the songs!

in puerto rico, latin america, asia, europe, pirated movies are for sale on the street, as DVD's, and pirated music is on sale as CD-r's sometimes before the actual shit goes on sale in the country it was made in.