Realm: second star to the right, straight until morning
Ok, since the recent action of the RIAA, questions have been asked is this legal? Has this hurt the record industry? But the other side of that coin being, has it helped some unknown artist to have a broader fan base?
Music is holy, art is sacred, and creativity is power
Everyday is EARTH DAY to a farmer
"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." Oscar Wilde
Some men are drawn to oceans, they cannot breathe unless the air is scented with a salty mist. Others are drawn to land that is flat, and the air is sullen and is leaden as August. My people were drawn to mountains- Earl Hamner Jr.
Realm: second star to the right, straight until morning
This also brings something to mind.... What about all the people that have made cassette tapes? Made tapes for boy/girl friend, trading music, what ever! Does that mean that recordable cassette tapes will no longer be sold!!!!! Because someones going to make a copy!!!!!
I buy lots of music. Some from major labels. But more often now from the smaller indi labels. The quality of the art is better. Time is taken to produce a good product. Instead of pushing out as much of the same bubble gum stuff that they can. If artist were ALLOWED to take the time to make GOOD albums, sales would improve.
And that is really with all types of music. I listen too just about everything, Mozart, to Ice-T and everything in between.
Again, as a musician I think it really is free self promotion. If your stuff is good it's going to sell regaurdless of it being able to be downloaded. I like all the bells and whistles that come with a cd/record. I like to see the new photos of the groups, the lyric sheets, who played what. If i hear something good I buy it. Plain and simple. And I think other people do too.
Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4,792
Joined: 20-Jun-2003 Zodiac: Holly
Realm: The frontier of Penn's Woods
If many years ago, when my musical talents were at peak, I would have loved to have had the avenues the computer age has allowed for the distribution of music. I see the recent laws as the contrivences of money hungry recording conglomerants who want to control who and what you hear. There is more talent out there then we are offered, and I must say much better then the crap released to the public. I agree, if I hear something I like I buy it to support the artist, but I would also download it to share. Guess I am rambling.
--------------------
I support the separation of church and hate!
IMAGINATION - the freest and largest nation in the world!
One can not profess to be of "GOD" and show intolerence and prejudice towards the beliefs of others.
Am fear nach gleidh na h–airm san t–sith, cha bhi iad aige ’n am a’ chogaidh. He that keeps not his arms in time of peace will have none in time of war.
"We're all in this together , in the parking lot between faith and fear" ... O.C.M.S.
“Beasts feed; man eats; only the man of intellect knows how to eat well.”
"Without food we are nothing, without history we are lost." - SHADOWS
Is iomadh duine laghach a mhill an Creideamh. Religion has spoiled many a good man.
1. I believe that once it is played on the radio, it is released into public domain. 2. Most bands, before they get big, get their name out by circulating their demo tapes "underground".
BTW, most of the songs on my iTunes are not downloaded via file-swapping software. Most of them are from my own personal CDs.
--------------------
Mike F.
May the Irish hills caress you. May her lakes and rivers bless you. May the luck of the Irish enfold you. May the blessings of Saint Patrick behold you.
I think that it should ultimately be up to the individual artists. If you wish that your music is to be used in the public domain then so be it. Otherwise, your creation, even though sold or played to the world, is still your creation and your property. It is no different in the art world where even after an artist sells an original painting, the rights to the work belongs to the artist unless the rights are sold or are included with the purchase. Even though the artist no longer owns the piece, the rights to reproduce the piece still rests with the artist.
However, fining and charging individuals is taking things to an extreme especially a 12 year old girl.
I agree once played it's open season because of the cassette. Obviously this has been around for years now and they never complained why now just because of new technology?
And some artists say they like file swapping as it helped their income due to interest in their music that might not have occured without file sharing.
And what about VCR's these too and the predicesor Beta (god am I dating myself big time today LOL) all TV shows also have copyrights yet the industry doesn't complain about VCRs and goid forbid anyone even have a beta any more.
Not being an artist myself, I feel like everyone has made an extremely valid point. I'm probably 90/10 in favor of the swapping. Maybe some kind of national or worldwide service an artist can use to avoid their songs being swapped? Iknow, Iknow. Too much politics and too much money. Unfortunately I think this lawsuit action is reflective of the old saying... the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
--------------------
"...so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
I voted in favor of swapping for the simple reason that once children learn how to share files via internet, they will do it - illegal or not. Then the parents are held financially responsible in these lawsuits. I think unless they find some way to encrypt the music, the sharing will continue unabated.
I agree with the argument about cassette music - I see no difference between them other than the technology is better. My cassette copy of Cheech and Chong literally disintegtrated many years ago.
I think part of the problem is that the RIAA just does not get it. People no longer want to pay $21.99 for a CD that contains 1 song they want and 9 songs they could care less about.
They want to download their songs and store them on the computer or their portable media player - be it mp3 player or CD.
I have no problem paying for songs that I want to download. But don't go charging me $2.99 per song when there is no packaging, no plastic wrapper, no insert and handling charges to the CD.
I really think they missed the boat with the internet and music. If they had realized what people wanted and not try to protect a dinosaur, they might be in a different position right now.
I for one vow never to buy another CD that is associated with the RIAA. Of course, Celtic musicians and independents are the best and I highly encourage the purchase of their CD's and products.
I agree full heartedly. I wouldn't oay $3 for 1 song that costs them nothing because they have more then likely made back the costs long ago even to pay for the unsold stuff sitting on store shelves. But I do agree I won't ever buy a RIAA supported CD or cassette ever again either just to get the 1 song I want and hate the rest of the CD. It's not worth the $$$'s. Instead would rather chip in to Highlander Radio from time to time