Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
TheUglySoldier
Metalhead

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:44 am
Posts: 1679
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 7:39 am 
 

John_Sunlight wrote:
Don't do your homework on metal. It really doesn't work out too well.


My BA indicates otherwise.
_________________
Blacksmith - Heavy Metal/Hard Rock from Sydney

Absolute Power: heavy metal and pop culture news, analysis and commentary

Top
 Profile  
inhumanist
Metal freak

Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:09 pm
Posts: 4540
Location: 50 Forts Along the Rhine
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 7:57 am 
 

@lord_ghengis: Are you sure they weren't just talking about an increase in fans didn't result in an appropriate increase in sales, as opposed to an actual drop in sales? I find that hard to believe, otherwise you might have a point. Still, the reason could just be that a lot of small bands finally got some recognition through the internet and since it's a competition and any given customer can only spend so much on music, the internet is, in a way, just leveling the field while leading to an overall increase in listeners and sales. For me personally there is the additional aspect of many of the mid-range bands (like Cannibal Corpse and Nile) not deserving their success relative to better acts, but that's not really relevant.
_________________
Metantoine wrote:
If Summoning is the sugar of fantasy metal, is Manowar the bacon?
CorpseFister wrote:
Personally, I prefer to know nothing of the esoteric hierarchy of MA and the profane rituals required to attain rank.

Top
 Profile  
lord_ghengis
Metal freak

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:31 pm
Posts: 5400
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:08 am 
 

From memory the Nile one specifically mentioned a drop. I have seen bands treat every download as a lost sale, and that is about the most erroneous way of thinking I can see anyone having on either side of this issue, so I'm definitely NOT making that case. Reading back over the Cannibal Corpse one posted earlier in the thread, it was a drop of 30k, but it didn't mention what it was coming down from, so they might be close enough to that "so rich it doesn't matter" phase. Of course, the redistribution through to the smaller, more impressive acts is a good thing, but part of me still likes the idea that a descent sized portion of the bigger bands can play this sort of music and making a living off it, even if it isn't the best bands. Along with that reasonable cause for at least part of the shift would be the rise of online shopping, I don't shop in stores anywhere near as much as I used to, and most of my purchases for this mid to larger sized bands were done in a physical store, where my standards for one are far less discerning, I think a lot of people would have an "eh it's ok and it's right here in my hands" reaction like me, which is obviously missing from webstores.
_________________
Naamath wrote:
No comments, no words need it, no BM, no compromise, only grains in her face.

Top
 Profile  
Goatmixer
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:57 am
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 1:29 pm 
 

You have to consider as well Nile’s self professed “drop in sales/increase in fans” point doesn’t tell the whole story.

For established bands that build up a renowned body of work, a significant number of fans over time will stop buying new releases and be a fan purely based on the ‘classic’ releases the band is known for. Ive lost count of the number of older bands who ive got into and seen live post their heyday (Nile being an example), that ive never bought or even listened to their latest release. Fans have a saturation point with bands. If you already have 5 Nile albums, you like them - enough to see them live if they swing by your city – but you aren’t a rabid fan, what is the incentive to buy more? Theres too much damn music out there.

Top
 Profile  
Riffs
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:48 am
Posts: 912
Location: Montréal, Québec
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:45 pm 
 

It's true that the mid-sized bands have it really tough. This could be due to lots of factor other than illegal downloading but it is a fact.

That's a big reason why there are less bands making it big today, as I said earlier. For amateur bands who don't give a shit, this is a great time. For established bands from the pre-Napster era, they don't feel the hit as much. It's the guys in mid-sized bands trying to live a fully pro musician life who are getting fucked more than ever, with no room to grow.

But again, there are many factors at work and it's tough to comprehensively determine every aspect, like illegal downloading.
_________________
mjollnir wrote:
Noble Beast's debut album is way beyond MOST of what Priest did in the 80s.

Top
 Profile  
TheUglySoldier
Metalhead

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:44 am
Posts: 1679
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:44 pm 
 

The problem is, people throw the "it isn't really stealing" card out as if they can't comprehend the change of the definition of a word. They see stealing as needing to be the taking of a physical object, but for a long time people have been talking about the "stealing" of ideas, as well as skipping the bus fare "stealing a ride". It is stealing, it is simply a different form of it, and if you'd rather not call it that, then that still doesn't magically make it right.

Some bands are have been impacted more than others - as others have said. People are still buying Maiden albums, for instance, but the band probably turn a pretty penny over other things as well like merchandise and concerts. You then have the smaller local bands - I'd assuming that the leaking of releases is less likely for these guys, and they mainly play to crowds who are quite invested in them, and would thereby (perhaps) be more likely to grab an album, anyway. They probably aren't even breaking even at their level, but the return isn't great - although illegal downloading isn't the biggest factor in that, if that makes sense.

As others have said, it really does seem to be the worst for the bands in the middle ground. They aren't yet at a point where they are necessarily making a lot of money from tours - especially if they are self-financed - but need to play bigger venues for their crowds, so there are more overheads - and if a lot of people are downloading the record for free, where are they gonna turn a profit?

One point that is made is that musicians "shouldn't" want to make money out of their music, which I think is ludicrous. It is their right to try and make money out of whatever the fuck they want to, just as you can choose to ignore it if it doesn't gel with you they are doing so.

I'm not 100% against what I suppose you could call "illegal" downloading, but I don't take part in it. I'll look at reviews, stream a few songs on youtube (which isn't that different, really) and whatever the band has made available themselves and buy it if I want it. Partially because, well, I don't take stuff that isn't mine, and partially because I don't get this whole "listen to the full album before buying". I love the feeling of going and buying a CD or vinyl or whatever and putting it on and listening to it all the way through and being excited by songs I've never heard a single note of before, it is a great feeling that I wouldn't trade.

Some people use the argument of bands that don't print their album anymore, such as broken up groups who had a limited run anyway like Oral or Deep Switch, or forgotten releases like Pantera's early records. I gotta say, there is a big leap between that (which often is band sanctioned, in the case of groups like Deep Switch) and a band who are right NOW spending the money on trying to get the record out there. The "download and see if you dig it" thing is also endorsed by some bands, and I can see why - people hear it for free and come to the shows, buy a shirt, maybe buy the CD. I definitely get that side of it, but it really is based on an honour system - not everyone does that.

In short, I don't think it is killing the industry, but it is changing it a lot - for some bands it is good, for some bands it is bad, and I think one should respect what any artist wants to do with their creation in so far as turning a buck, be it a film, a video game, an album, etc.
_________________
Blacksmith - Heavy Metal/Hard Rock from Sydney

Absolute Power: heavy metal and pop culture news, analysis and commentary

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:00 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
The problem is, people throw the "it isn't really stealing" card out as if they can't comprehend the change of the definition of a word. They see stealing as needing to be the taking of a physical object, but for a long time people have been talking about the "stealing" of ideas,


and these would be analogous if we were talking about people who "steal" ideas to get patents and make money, with people who steal music to resell in pirated hard copies, or talking about people who steal decorating ideas from decorating magazines to decorate their own house and cause no losses to anyone with people who steal music just to listen to as though they were friends with someone who owned the CD.

I prefer, though, to look at the incoherence of the general idea.

someone recently got access to an album that isn't yet leaked onto the internet. I was given the opportunity to hear it...to possess it without the band making more money (similar to if he sold the CD on ebay), except that I possess it in addition to the copy he possesses. Now, I took him up on his offer, but I've been too busy to hear it. I might die before I hear it. How is it that at this point, this transaction complete, and me, effectively a deaf man with the radio on, or a man with pirated CDs and no electronics on which to play them (much like a dog), that I've somehow done something that has causes losses that the law should protect people from?
we can ignore whether or not I'd have bought it having been unable to hear it, and whether or not I even have the money for such frivolous purchases (perhaps the 'losses' at issue aren't sales but something else), and just ask what costs have I caused someone (a band) to suffer, while my experience is currently no different to if I tomorrow play that album and find out that I was tricked and it's just mp3s of white noise. How is it that they are worse of while I'm yet no better off? what is the offense that requires a law in such an instance*?

*this question is to get at the issue of piracy laws potentially being overbroad in scope, criminalizing what oughtn't be.
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:03 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
if a lot of people are downloading the record for free, where are they gonna turn a profit?


I might be totally wrong, here, but in the era of big record labels and 'standard contracts', didn't artists typically make fuck all on their CD sales? does that tiny percentage still outweigh the profits of touring/merch?

of course, even if it does, whose to say that ought to be how it works? (once upon a time there were no recording devices, but there were musicians and composers and orchestras)
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
TheUglySoldier
Metalhead

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:44 am
Posts: 1679
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:34 am 
 

Erotetic wrote:
and these would be analogous if we were talking about people who "steal" ideas to get patents and make money, with people who steal music to resell in pirated hard copies, or talking about people who steal decorating ideas from decorating magazines to decorate their own house and cause no losses to anyone with people who steal music just to listen to as though they were friends with someone who owned the CD.

I prefer, though, to look at the incoherence of the general idea.


You've missed the point. At no point did I state the two were analogues of each other (although considering they are both separate concepts derived from the concept of stealing, they kinda are, but I'm not sure you meant it like that). All I was doing was giving another example of when stealing isn't in the strict physical form in protest of the rigid definition of a physical object needing to be taken for it to fit a definition of "stealing".


Quote:
someone recently got access to an album that isn't yet leaked onto the internet. I was given the opportunity to hear it...to possess it without the band making more money (similar to if he sold the CD on ebay), except that I possess it in addition to the copy he possesses. Now, I took him up on his offer, but I've been too busy to hear it. I might die before I hear it. How is it that at this point, this transaction complete, and me, effectively a deaf man with the radio on, or a man with pirated CDs and no electronics on which to play them (much like a dog), that I've somehow done something that has causes losses that the law should protect people from?


You've obviously gained access to it with the intent to listen to it, your argument falls down on that sheer fact in and of itself. What, you got it so you wouldn't listen to it? Why you are effectively "much like a dog" is beyond me, you are really stretching it here. The thing is you've accepted a CD (presumably) containing the music of a band which they wish you to pay for to have that you haven't paid for. No, you haven't heard it - so what? I don't really see where your argument goes if resting on this point. This is the transfer of artistic material without the artist's consent, and without entering into the consumer contract that the band is stipulating (presumably, I don't know what CD you are talking about) by wanting to charge for it.

Quote:
we can ignore whether or not I'd have bought it having been unable to hear it, and whether or not I even have the money for such frivolous purchases (perhaps the 'losses' at issue aren't sales but something else)


Agreed. That argument is a ridiculous one.

Quote:
I might be totally wrong, here, but in the era of big record labels and 'standard contracts', didn't artists typically make fuck all on their CD sales? does that tiny percentage still outweigh the profits of touring/merch?


Contracts that the band has agreed to enter into, for the want of the percentage that they will make. It also depends heavily on the band, the record label, and the contract in general. Some bands/musicians make a large sum off the sales, others off radio royalties, performance royalties, people doing covers, etc. Some bands - as you say - make money off touring and merch, some don't. These are different business models dependent on the band and the kind of contracts they enter into, just as some don't give two shits if you download their music and others do - it is about how they have set themselves up as both artists and businesses.

Quote:
of course, even if it does, whose to say that ought to be how it works? (once upon a time there were no recording devices, but there were musicians and composers and orchestras)


The bands themselves? You don't need to buy a CD, you don't need to get their music. You could make the same argument for supermarkets who sell fruit, but does that justify stealing food from them because you feel they shouldn't necessarily make money from it? The way I see it is that if someone offers something at a price, that is the deal of getting it. Don't like the deal? Don't get it, but I'm not going to interfere with their business by taking it. For example, I saw a band charging $30 for a cassette one time with one half hour track on it. I didn't think that was something I thought was worth $30, so I didn't buy it, nor did I obtain a pirated copy.
_________________
Blacksmith - Heavy Metal/Hard Rock from Sydney

Absolute Power: heavy metal and pop culture news, analysis and commentary

Top
 Profile  
wight_ghoul
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:44 pm
Posts: 294
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:50 pm 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
Erotetic wrote:
and these would be analogous if we were talking about people who "steal" ideas to get patents and make money, with people who steal music to resell in pirated hard copies, or talking about people who steal decorating ideas from decorating magazines to decorate their own house and cause no losses to anyone with people who steal music just to listen to as though they were friends with someone who owned the CD.

I prefer, though, to look at the incoherence of the general idea.


You've missed the point. At no point did I state the two were analogues of each other (although considering they are both separate concepts derived from the concept of stealing, they kinda are, but I'm not sure you meant it like that). All I was doing was giving another example of when stealing isn't in the strict physical form in protest of the rigid definition of a physical object needing to be taken for it to fit a definition of "stealing".

By riding a bus for free you are occupying some of the limited physical space available. You are taking up a limited physical resource that could otherwise be sold to someone else. Something is lost. Making a digital copy of something does not take anything away from someone else, it is not "stealing."

Anyone trying to sell digital copies for money nowadays is clinging to an unsustainable business model. We have the technology to distribute any music to the entire planet for essentially no cost. Let's embrace this technology, not attempt to restrict it just so that some people can keep making money using yesterday's business models.

Top
 Profile  
iloveblackmetal
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:30 pm
Posts: 74
Location: Sweden
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:40 pm 
 

I dont think downloading music is killing the music industry. Actually 90% of the records i have bought i first downloaded them. I think its actually better now with the internet as you can find more good bands. And stay the hell of shitty bands.

Again this is just my opinion.

Top
 Profile  
MARSDUDE
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:17 pm
Posts: 1706
Location: Canardia
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 6:12 pm 
 

It's a double-edged sword. Yes, there are some of us who use downloading as a sort of 'trial period', where we buy what we enjoy. But then there are also the people who feel entitled to music, and perhaps they just don't understand what it actually takes to make enjoyable music, but these people don't buy anything.

Top
 Profile  
TheUglySoldier
Metalhead

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:44 am
Posts: 1679
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:26 am 
 

wight_ghoul wrote:
By riding a bus for free you are occupying some of the limited physical space available. You are taking up a limited physical resource that could otherwise be sold to someone else. Something is lost. Making a digital copy of something does not take anything away from someone else, it is not "stealing."


Yeah, but no one else was gonna buy a ticket anyway... :p

But legit, it is stealing. You are nit-picking the examples. We can call it something else, that's fine, but it seems that the fact it IS damaging bands goes over some people's heads because they would rather follow rigid definitions than actually weigh up what they are doing. If you think nothing is lost by downloading music, we'll just have to agree to disagree, because it is. Yeah, it is "piracy" more so than "stealing", but meanings and definitions change, and I see nothing wrong with using the term "stealing" for what is going on. Language evolves.

Quote:
Anyone trying to sell digital copies for money nowadays is clinging to an unsustainable business model. We have the technology to distribute any music to the entire planet for essentially no cost. Let's embrace this technology, not attempt to restrict it just so that some people can keep making money using yesterday's business models.


A lot of bands do embrace the new technology - I agree that it is a wonderful thing that we can transmit information the way we can now, but why is it bad for musicians to want to make money of this? Or do you propose just finding another method? I can get behind that, certainly, but I think if someone wants to use an old business model, they should be able to without interference.
_________________
Blacksmith - Heavy Metal/Hard Rock from Sydney

Absolute Power: heavy metal and pop culture news, analysis and commentary

Top
 Profile  
inhumanist
Metal freak

Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:09 pm
Posts: 4540
Location: 50 Forts Along the Rhine
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:06 am 
 

There are no reasonable ways to make sure of that though. Anti filesharing legislation is either totally ineffective or borderline fascist. Or both.
_________________
Metantoine wrote:
If Summoning is the sugar of fantasy metal, is Manowar the bacon?
CorpseFister wrote:
Personally, I prefer to know nothing of the esoteric hierarchy of MA and the profane rituals required to attain rank.

Top
 Profile  
wight_ghoul
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:44 pm
Posts: 294
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:32 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
wight_ghoul wrote:
By riding a bus for free you are occupying some of the limited physical space available. You are taking up a limited physical resource that could otherwise be sold to someone else. Something is lost. Making a digital copy of something does not take anything away from someone else, it is not "stealing."


Yeah, but no one else was gonna buy a ticket anyway... :p

They're still paying for gas, paying a driver, etc. Hardly comparable to clicking 'copy' and 'paste.' A reasonable real-world comparison here would require a device that allows you to make a life-size physical copy of the bus for you to ride yourself while the original bus continues about its business unimpeded.

TheUglySoldier wrote:
But legit, it is stealing. You are nit-picking the examples. We can call it something else, that's fine, but it seems that the fact it IS damaging bands goes over some people's heads because they would rather follow rigid definitions than actually weigh up what they are doing. If you think nothing is lost by downloading music, we'll just have to agree to disagree, because it is. Yeah, it is "piracy" more so than "stealing", but meanings and definitions change, and I see nothing wrong with using the term "stealing" for what is going on. Language evolves.

New technology comes along all the time that renders old ways of making money unfeasible. When a new technology comes along making a job obsolete, are we "stealing" from the person relying on the economics of an antiquated business model? It is not "stealing" because the artist is not losing anything. They might not be able to make as much money as they used to doing the same things as they used to, but the correct response to this is to develop new business models in line with the new technology available, not to embrace the criminalization of innovation. The only bands that are "losing" anything are those that demand to continue making money by obsolete methods. There are thousands of bands who have embraced the new technology and the exposure that is now freely available to them and are ready to take their place.

TheUglySoldier wrote:
A lot of bands do embrace the new technology - I agree that it is a wonderful thing that we can transmit information the way we can now, but why is it bad for musicians to want to make money of this? Or do you propose just finding another method? I can get behind that, certainly, but I think if someone wants to use an old business model, they should be able to without interference.

They are free to cling to the old business model if they want. Some might even be able to make money off it for some time to come. But the writing's on the wall. And given how trivially easy it is to acquire music from virtually any band free of charge, the expectation that there is any sustainability in the artificial scarcity model of music distribution is simply not realistic.

It basically comes down to two opposing philosophical goals for the artist. Do you want to make as much money as possible, or do you want your music to be heard by as many people as possible? With today's technology, the latter goal is more easily achievable than it ever was before. Furthermore, there are plenty of artists who are able to continue producing while distributing their music freely and widely. Artists trying to make more money by limiting their audience are redundant.

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:20 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
You've missed the point. At no point did I state the two were analogues of each other (although considering they are both separate concepts derived from the concept of stealing, they kinda are, but I'm not sure you meant it like that). All I was doing was giving another example of when stealing isn't in the strict physical form in protest of the rigid definition of a physical object needing to be taken for it to fit a definition of "stealing".


if you weren't making an analogy, then your example was missing the point (I presumed it was safe to infer you were saying something relevant, though you didn't state as much).

(what I was doing was undermining the idea that your more expansive definition has any analogue that is analogous to how we think of piracy (as a 'bad' kind of stealing, in contrast to farmers stealing lambs from their mothers). if the only analogy is to other acceptable behavior called stealing, then proving by analogy that it's stealing doesn't offer any moral or political argument for opposing it legally.)
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:33 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
You've obviously gained access to it with the intent to listen to it,


yet I've not done so. just as I may have the intent to break a liquor or prostitution law...but until I actually do it, I haven't broken the law. (and, the other issue, of course, is even once I've broken that law, it isn't clear I've engaged in any sort of moral wrongdoing.).
suppose I do listen to it... you're in the difficult position of trying to account for how I've caused harm, since you have the difficulty of explaining the difference that causes harm between the case of my sitting next to the person who owns the CD and my hearing the same CD he has with only a difference in proximity. if you can't demonstrate a distinction, you have to accept or oppose both.

TheUglySoldier wrote:
The bands themselves? You don't need to buy a CD, you don't need to get their music. You could make the same argument for supermarkets who sell fruit, but does that justify stealing food from them because you feel they shouldn't necessarily make money from it? The way I see it is that if someone offers something at a price, that is the deal of getting it. Don't like the deal? Don't get it, but I'm not going to interfere with their business by taking it. For example, I saw a band charging $30 for a cassette one time with one half hour track on it. I didn't think that was something I thought was worth $30, so I didn't buy it, nor did I obtain a pirated copy.


who's to say that I ought to be paid for every time I use the word 'the'? me myself?!

just because they want to doesn't mean they are an authority on legal or ethical questions. ...some parents want to deprive their children of education/healthcare/etc., but our society argues for their right to have such things and against a parents' ownership of a child, such that what they want to do isn't the beginning and end of the question of how they ought to parent--others in society are considered more authoritative in determining such things. Similarly, a lawyer or political philosopher might have a better take on the issue of capitalism and intellectual property than whoever so happens to produce it. maybe one band wants to say 'if you buy my CD, only you are allowed to listen to it--you are not allowed to have a friend sit next to you while you listen to it' ... but I don't know what people would make of such a clause in the contract between buyer and seller. it may as well say 'you have to pause before exhaling'...never might the trouble of enforcing these demands--whence comes such rights to make such stipulations and condemnations?
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:58 am 
 

MARSDUDE wrote:
It's a double-edged sword. Yes, there are some of us who use downloading as a sort of 'trial period', where we buy what we enjoy. But then there are also the people who feel entitled to music, and perhaps they just don't understand what it actually takes to make enjoyable music, but these people don't buy anything.


for me, I'd put it a little differently. it's not that I feel entitled to music, but only that if I expected that the supply was so tightly controlled as to show I'm not entitled to it, I'd overwhelmingly abandon my pursuit of new music.

suppose I knew that whatever I heard on YouTube I couldn't replay, or download to hear when I wanted, knowing how much that would irk me (I prefer to not know of things I can't have, rather than want what I can't have), I'd stop using it. I'd have never heard Mgła. ...where in the world would I ever hear Mgła? I've never heard it on any radio, never heard it on TV, never heard anyone playing it, never heard it anywhere that I might encounter it and discover I like it. even just using the internet in general, still nothing. Only by involving myself in music forums to aid my conscious pursuit of music did I hear of them, something I'd not have done in a world where free music was hard to get a hold of.
But, we can, in any case, go further than this. sometimes I use forums and sites and hear of bands that I'd like to hear... and they aren't even popular enough to be illegally available on YouTube, and so I still don't hear them, and still don't have any reason to think of paying for their product. I'm even less likely to buy a song from a band whose description is promising than a band I've actually heard and liked.
So, if you compare a hypothetical world such as that, against the real world, you can't find in either case that the artist is financially better of. the lack of a digital presence doesn't hurt them, only me, and the presence of one doesn't hurt them, it only helps me (and potentially others like me).

in my opinion, the bands who're truly hurt by this world of ours are those who are on the radio, who are on TV, who locals listen to, who friends talk about, who are the only music that you would legally encounter if the laws were by some magic successfully enforced. ...If it wasn't for mp3s delivering what Sweden had to offer, I might have been a year away from buying a Slipknot album. if that's all I'd heard, why would I think to buy unpronounceable gibberish foreign guy band? how would he be better off if my taste had remained at the lowest common denominator? he wouldn't, only the guys with good advertizing would.
...so, by downloading Mgła, instead of shrugging at the word 'Mgła' and giving a thousandth listen to a one a handful of cherished legally pressed CDs that would be among the tiny number of albums I'd be familiar with, how am I harming that artist? I don't mind you saying Slipknot has been harmed by my behavior--since I don't even want to download them, let alone pay for them now that I know better (the way education hurts churches)--but to say I'm making things worse for Mgła by liking their work instead of not even knowing their name, I'm far from convinced.

people seem to prefer to lump everyone together and try to condemn everyone by association, rather than actually demonstrate any harm in individual cases. is that what the argument has to be? is it like feminists faulting you for nothing in particular, nothing more than being one more drop in the flood of the awful patriarchy they hate--you didn't necessarily do anything wrong, you're just complicit for perpetuating the culture in which other people actually cause harm.
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:07 am 
 

wight_ghoul wrote:
They're still paying for gas, paying a driver, etc. Hardly comparable to clicking 'copy' and 'paste.' A reasonable real-world comparison here would require a device that allows you to make a life-size physical copy of the bus for you to ride yourself while the original bus continues about its business unimpeded.


reminded me of this :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPn7ov_0LV0
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Hircine
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:13 pm
Posts: 936
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:06 pm 
 

I got guilt tripped when I payed nothing on a "Pay what you want download" so I ended up paying 10 quid on merch instead. So maybe not...
_________________
Life is your worst enemy.

Wolfgong wrote:
By the way I am straight and male and get a kick outta tricking chicks to get into their pussy

Top
 Profile  
Scorntyrant
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:55 am
Posts: 1112
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:27 am 
 

Erotetic wrote:
MARSDUDE wrote:
It's a double-edged sword. Yes, there are some of us who use downloading as a sort of 'trial period', where we buy what we enjoy. But then there are also the people who feel entitled to music, and perhaps they just don't understand what it actually takes to make enjoyable music, but these people don't buy anything.


for me, I'd put it a little differently. it's not that I feel entitled to music, but only that if I expected that the supply was so tightly controlled as to show I'm not entitled to it, I'd overwhelmingly abandon my pursuit of new music.

suppose I knew that whatever I heard on YouTube I couldn't replay, or download to hear when I wanted, knowing how much that would irk me (I prefer to not know of things I can't have, rather than want what I can't have), I'd stop using it. I'd have never heard Mgła. ...where in the world would I ever hear Mgła? I've never heard it on any radio, never heard it on TV, never heard anyone playing it, never heard it anywhere that I might encounter it and discover I like it. even just using the internet in general, still nothing. Only by involving myself in music forums to aid my conscious pursuit of music did I hear of them, something I'd not have done in a world where free music was hard to get a hold of.
But, we can, in any case, go further than this. sometimes I use forums and sites and hear of bands that I'd like to hear... and they aren't even popular enough to be illegally available on YouTube, and so I still don't hear them, and still don't have any reason to think of paying for their product. I'm even less likely to buy a song from a band whose description is promising than a band I've actually heard and liked.
So, if you compare a hypothetical world such as that, against the real world, you can't find in either case that the artist is financially better of. the lack of a digital presence doesn't hurt them, only me, and the presence of one doesn't hurt them, it only helps me (and potentially others like me).

in my opinion, the bands who're truly hurt by this world of ours are those who are on the radio, who are on TV, who locals listen to, who friends talk about, who are the only music that you would legally encounter if the laws were by some magic successfully enforced. ...If it wasn't for mp3s delivering what Sweden had to offer, I might have been a year away from buying a Slipknot album. if that's all I'd heard, why would I think to buy unpronounceable gibberish foreign guy band? how would he be better off if my taste had remained at the lowest common denominator? he wouldn't, only the guys with good advertizing would.
...so, by downloading Mgła, instead of shrugging at the word 'Mgła' and giving a thousandth listen to a one a handful of cherished legally pressed CDs that would be among the tiny number of albums I'd be familiar with, how am I harming that artist? I don't mind you saying Slipknot has been harmed by my behavior--since I don't even want to download them, let alone pay for them now that I know better (the way education hurts churches)--but to say I'm making things worse for Mgła by liking their work instead of not even knowing their name, I'm far from convinced.

people seem to prefer to lump everyone together and try to condemn everyone by association, rather than actually demonstrate any harm in individual cases. is that what the argument has to be? is it like feminists faulting you for nothing in particular, nothing more than being one more drop in the flood of the awful patriarchy they hate--you didn't necessarily do anything wrong, you're just complicit for perpetuating the culture in which other people actually cause harm.



Really? So am I right in thinking that the whole era of hearing something at a mates place and saying to yourself "I'll buy that if I ever see a copy" is before your time? It certainly used to be that you would keep a mental list of that sort of stuff, even to the point of remembering which of your friends had particular cool albums so you could ask to listen to them when you visited. I have to say that "I'd rather remain unaware of something that not be able to have it right now" comes across as really OCD/instant gratification.
_________________
[quote="Mike_Tyson"]

"I think the average person thinks I'm a fucking nut and I deserve whatever happens to me."

"My intentions were not to fascinate the world with my personality."

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:10 am 
 

Scorntyrant wrote:
Really? So am I right in thinking that the whole era of hearing something at a mates place and saying to yourself "I'll buy that if I ever see a copy" is before your time? It certainly used to be that you would keep a mental list of that sort of stuff, even to the point of remembering which of your friends had particular cool albums so you could ask to listen to them when you visited.


yep.
[warning: life story below]
I bought the Mortal Kombat OST on tape when I was a pre-teen, but I wouldn't have done that of my own initiative, it was only because I had a gift voucher for that store. I never went to music stores and looked around. after that I didn't really have any reason to buy anything... I taped some things off the radio, a few years on we got a 4x CD burner, and my older brother discovered Korn. a little later I started to like music, but by then I got the internet (this was when people still hosted songs on websites instead of just p2p), and that music I heard about in chat rooms I couldn't get anywhere except for the internet (and I'm talking like Slipknot 'before they were cool [internationally]', nothing underground...just stuff that, when I did actually enquire at a music shop, I was told they'd have to import it and charge about NZ$60 back then (this was the pricefixing era, RRP was NZ$30), when I was a teenager and the minimum wage was NZ$5 and I rarely had anything for lunch at school ... I never became someone who longed to save up and buy an album and then cherish it). the internet (dial-up though it was) was like having access to a really cool radio station, and people on forums or in chatrooms were like the DJ, and I could hear all these artists that I hadn't heard before, and do what was like dubbing those off the radio (...make my little CD compilations from mp3s). At that age, I hadn't heard of 'royalties', so I had no reason to think this was different to taping from the radio except that I didn't have to fast-forward and rewind tapes anymore. I started listening to whatever I could get a hold of, not knowing anything about subgenres... never seemed like a big deal, no more than taping TV shows I liked so I could rewatch them when I wanted rather than only watch them when a TV station would profit from me doing so.

Scorntyrant wrote:
I have to say that "I'd rather remain unaware of something that not be able to have it right now" comes across as really OCD/instant gratification.


no worries. I just hate the frustration of not having something I want.
a major earthquake fucked up my city a couple years ago, and being a first-world nation, everybody complained about the damaged sewerage ... we had no flush toilets for weeks, some people for months, some to this day. ...people in Sudan who've never even conceived of a flushing toilet aren't getting as frustrated at their lot in life as the people in my city did about this temporary situation.
"It is not actual suffering but the taste of better things which excites people to revolt." - Eric Hoffer
if you don't know what you're missing, you're not going to get all upset about not being able to have it.
sure, I can look at hot women and say 'I can't have that...oh well, on with life', but I just don't feel that way about things that've always been a right-click-save away. If there was a big crack down on piracy, maybe I would become more free-spirited and listen to music able to happily forget about the ones I like but can't buy rather than avoid hearing them so I don't have to pine for possessing it. not a bridge I have to cross :) but most importantly, doing so wouldn't do anything to help any artists I like or might like.
(I enjoy some pop songs on a Chinese radio station my mp3 player picks up...but I rarely listen to it, because it frustrates me to hear a song and not be able to find out what it was (since I can't even google the lyrics...). it's like meeting someone who seems cool but then walking away without getting their name or number...how fucking annoying! I've only bothered at all to tune in because I can leverage YouTube copyright protection to tell me what the songs are by recording off the radio and then putting them on youtube and waiting for an infringement notice with the information I want :P)
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Nepthys
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:54 am
Posts: 2
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 5:19 pm 
 

Honestly, every angle of this topic has already been covered, but I'll put my two cents in anyway.

I don't think its stealing, especially if you intend on buying the album. Quite a few times I've ordered a CD but in my impatience to hear it, I've downloaded it and listened to it before it arrived. For those of us who don't have a great deal of cash in general, options are fairly low when it comes to spending, and personally I think that bands should appreciate that someone is that keen to enjoy their music, but then, I haven't exactly been on the other side of the fence so to speak.

Top
 Profile  
Hastein45
Metal newbie

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:56 pm
Posts: 198
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:55 pm 
 

I think too many people give themselves too much credit in regards to listening and then buying. Everyone I know(minus myself) downloads way more music then they buy and they rarely attend shows, and after they download albums they rarely purchase it even if they like it. They become content and usually focus their money elsewhere. Outside of band sanctioned downloads I don`t download anything. You people can go on about how the more popular bands make enough but I see no justification in stealing from them based on their income. It was through their hard work and dedication that they got to that point and they should be rewarded accordingly. They are all entitled to make money from their passion, just as anyone else is. I won`t go to work as a carpenter and just punch nails for the love of it. And no one will refuse to pay me because "I make enough".

I want to quote Daniel from Aeon talking to guy who asked how much Aeon wants in return for their music: "Am i greedy? Let me tell you, i kill more strings in a year then i have collected cash from Aeon for since i started back in 2001... Thats about sums it up on how much money Aeons brings me.... And lets not even start to talk about the amount of money we have been puting down thru the years in equipment and stuff. And not the least... all the touring we done and will be doing that cost more money then we make. And now i have not even started to talk about the insane amount of time we have put down in the band. I would love doing Aeon as a profession and not having to have a dayjobb besides the band. But thats pretty much impossible nowadays for a band in our size."

Top
 Profile  
TheUglySoldier
Metalhead

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:44 am
Posts: 1679
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:13 pm 
 

Everything really regarding this has been said, so I'm not going to stay and argue until we are all blue in the face. What I will say, however, is that as someone who comes from a family where money has been made off creative and artistic projects, and that is what has kept the family going, it IS stealing, it IS damaging, and it IS absurd to think you have any right to something just because you can have it.
_________________
Blacksmith - Heavy Metal/Hard Rock from Sydney

Absolute Power: heavy metal and pop culture news, analysis and commentary

Top
 Profile  
inhumanist
Metal freak

Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:09 pm
Posts: 4540
Location: 50 Forts Along the Rhine
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:48 pm 
 

Spoiler: show
Image
_________________
Metantoine wrote:
If Summoning is the sugar of fantasy metal, is Manowar the bacon?
CorpseFister wrote:
Personally, I prefer to know nothing of the esoteric hierarchy of MA and the profane rituals required to attain rank.

Top
 Profile  
In
Metal newbie

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:41 pm
Posts: 208
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:53 pm 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
Everything really regarding this has been said, so I'm not going to stay and argue until we are all blue in the face. What I will say, however, is that as someone who comes from a family where money has been made off creative and artistic projects, and that is what has kept the family going, it IS stealing, it IS damaging, and it IS absurd to think you have any right to something just because you can have it.

I'm not going to weep for you simply because you don't know how to adapt to a changing marketplace.

Top
 Profile  
MARSDUDE
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:17 pm
Posts: 1706
Location: Canardia
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:50 am 
 

In wrote:
TheUglySoldier wrote:
Everything really regarding this has been said, so I'm not going to stay and argue until we are all blue in the face. What I will say, however, is that as someone who comes from a family where money has been made off creative and artistic projects, and that is what has kept the family going, it IS stealing, it IS damaging, and it IS absurd to think you have any right to something just because you can have it.

I'm not going to weep for you simply because you don't know how to adapt to a changing marketplace.


Justifying your lack of respect for other people's realized creative visions. Ouch.

Top
 Profile  
TheUglySoldier
Metalhead

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:44 am
Posts: 1679
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 1:33 am 
 

In wrote:
TheUglySoldier wrote:
Everything really regarding this has been said, so I'm not going to stay and argue until we are all blue in the face. What I will say, however, is that as someone who comes from a family where money has been made off creative and artistic projects, and that is what has kept the family going, it IS stealing, it IS damaging, and it IS absurd to think you have any right to something just because you can have it.

I'm not going to weep for you simply because you don't know how to adapt to a changing marketplace.


Me? Who said anything about me following this business model? I personally am more than happy to explore other means of sustaining myself through creative endeavours. I was referring to the family I have come from.
_________________
Blacksmith - Heavy Metal/Hard Rock from Sydney

Absolute Power: heavy metal and pop culture news, analysis and commentary

Top
 Profile  
Chavaluria
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 3:36 pm
Posts: 77
Location: Mexico
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 1:47 am 
 

Don't thinks so, maybe the big companies are crying because they're not having any money from those illegal downloads.

I see the downloading culture more like an andvance copy of the record: You download it, hear it, you like it? Maybe you buy the stuff if you really liked so much, don't like it? just erase the record or give it more chance to analyze the material until you get sure that you don't really like it or maybe you change your mind and like it.

It varies from person to person if you go out and buy the stuff in physical format, yeah, the CD is an expensive piece of plastic, but also has the full artwork (I'm one of those fags that really focus in the artwork too), if there's a chance to get it on vinyl, go ahead, and expanded artwork compared to the Cd one will be featured and even those colorful will touch the turntable more than once. (Still don't get why some people buy the stuff, play it once and then are selling it again).

Back to the point: Is it killing the business? Maybe, if you're Metallica you'll probably feel harassed about it, if you're an unknown band from Mexico or Malasia, maybe you'll get lucky that someone in Germany or USA have heard your work and then, the snowball will go bigger and bigger... Maybe.

To the mp3 stuff, is the future, mostly for the ecological subject of not producing garbage (we go back with our expensive piece of plastic) and save a tree... but we don't really care (I guess) about that, just drop a high quality file for $2 or $3 bucks and we'll see.

IMO, I rather preffer to buy the stuff directly from the band/artist rather than doing it by an intermediary (labels, chain stores, etc.)

Can we open a thread about the management of big labels over bands inquiries and contracts? I've read some interesting stuff, oldie but goodie:

Excuse the grammar, mexitard here.
_________________
Kahalachan wrote:
The average person probably knows just proton, neutron, and electron, and it'll be nice if someday a periodic table of particles were everywhere like the periodic table of elements.

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:31 am 
 

Hastein45 wrote:
They are all entitled to make money from their passion, just as anyone else is.

I'm not sure about 'anyone else'.--if I do a little dance in the street and want all the bystanders who see me to pay me for it, am I entitled to their money? if I hang a painting in a gallery and tourists take a low-quality digicam picture of it (like an mp3 compared to the lossless audio), was I entitled to money by those people who're enjoying a low quality replication of my work?

Hastein45 wrote:
I won`t go to work as a carpenter and just punch nails for the love of it. And no one will refuse to pay me because "I make enough".

if, however, you _were_ repeatedly ripped-off in that fashion, would you give up, or keep doing it because you're an artist and you love what you do?

sadly. no amount of piracy has managed to get Metallica to retire. this leads me to think musicians are different to carpenters in some important way.

Hastein45 wrote:
I want to quote Daniel from Aeon talking to guy who asked how much Aeon wants in return for their music: "Am i greedy? Let me tell you, i kill more strings in a year then i have collected cash from Aeon for since i started back in 2001... Thats about sums it up on how much money Aeons brings me.... And lets not even start to talk about the amount of money we have been puting down thru the years in equipment and stuff."

if a carpenter spent more money replacing the tools of his trade than he earned as an income from it, he would get a new job.

I'm sure people who love going to the gym would love to make money from bodybuilding, but, unfortunately, almost all of them will spend more money on gym fees/equipment/supplements/etc. than they will ever make off it, so their only options are to do it because it's something they like to do, or to find something more profitable to invest their time in.

but what's the take home message you get from the quote you offered? it doesn't sound to me like he feels entitled to get bigger crowds, or have cheaper overheads in touring, or be able to charge higher ticket prices, or even to earn more money for no extra work (to record an album and print off 100,000 copies and make 100,000 dollars instead of printing 1,000 and making 1,000 dollars because piracy might keep some fans from buying copies).
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:34 am 
 

In wrote:
TheUglySoldier wrote:
Everything really regarding this has been said, so I'm not going to stay and argue until we are all blue in the face. What I will say, however, is that as someone who comes from a family where money has been made off creative and artistic projects, and that is what has kept the family going, it IS stealing, it IS damaging, and it IS absurd to think you have any right to something just because you can have it.

I'm not going to weep for you simply because you don't know how to adapt to a changing marketplace.


nor I, for one [TheUglySoldier] who makes philosophical declarations without backing them with philosophical reasoning.

may as well complain that greedy immigrant lungs are stealing all your fresh air.
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:36 am 
 

MARSDUDE wrote:
In wrote:
I'm not going to weep for you simply because you don't know how to adapt to a changing marketplace.


Justifying your lack of respect for other people's realized creative visions. Ouch.


you say that as though explanations are bad things. how can you stop him from lacking that respect if you don't know why he lacks it—blindly arguing against what you _guess_ are someone's beliefs?
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти


Last edited by Erotetic on Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:39 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
I personally am more than happy to explore other means of sustaining myself through creative endeavours. I was referring to the family I have come from.


what's the relevance of that?

my mom came from a Catholic household, so I can tell you why those halfwits think abortion is immoral, but I can't say "I come from a family who was Catholic, and I can tell you that abortion IS immoral, it IS unholy, it IS absurd to think you have the creator's right to take a life". that's just confusing culture with knowledge. you know what they believe, you've given no reason for why anyone should think their beliefs are right.
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
Erotetic
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:05 pm
Posts: 907
Location: New Zealand
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:47 am 
 

Chavaluria wrote:
It varies from person to person if you go out and buy the stuff in physical format, yeah, the CD is an expensive piece of plastic, but also has the full artwork (I'm one of those fags that really focus in the artwork too)


I never really understood that.
the artwork is rarely even done by the musician.
they may as well sell a USB stick of their lossless album media along with a packet of chocolates they enjoyed, then we can talk about which musician picked the best chocolates baked by someone else for their album chocolates instead of which musician chose the prettiest picture drawn by someone else for their album cover.
_________________
В Ожидании Смерти

Top
 Profile  
wight_ghoul
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:44 pm
Posts: 294
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:01 am 
 

TheUglySoldier wrote:
Everything really regarding this has been said, so I'm not going to stay and argue until we are all blue in the face. What I will say, however, is that as someone who comes from a family where money has been made off creative and artistic projects, and that is what has kept the family going, it IS stealing, it IS damaging, and it IS absurd to think you have any right to something just because you can have it.

It's not stealing. Stop claiming it is if you have nothing but false analogies in support.

It is damaging. But so what? Airplanes were damaging to companies that made their money shipping people across the ocean. I'm sure if I was an owner of a passenger boat I would have loved to see air travel criminalized. But that's just people trying to use the law to make more money by fighting innovation.

Why is it not any more absurd to think that once you create something you have the right to control who gets to hear it and under what circumstances? This is hardly some natural right, it's a wholly artificial sense of entitlement created by the content industry. Art belongs to everyone.

Hastein45 wrote:
They are all entitled to make money from their passion, just as anyone else is. I won`t go to work as a carpenter and just punch nails for the love of it. And no one will refuse to pay me because "I make enough".

Another false analogy. As a carpenter, if someone came along with a device that could duplicate your finished work at no cost, do you think that would have any impact on the economics of your profession? As a carpenter, the only way you are entitled to money for your work is if you agree on payment for that work up front. If you make products and then try to sell them, you are in the same position as a band generally is: you have made a product of your own initiative, and now you are trying to sell it in a competitive marketplace. It's up to you to figure out how to make the product appeal to today's consumer. No one owes you anything just because you worked really hard. Many business ventures fail and many bands never make any money, it has always been this way.

Top
 Profile  
Chavaluria
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 3:36 pm
Posts: 77
Location: Mexico
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 11:34 am 
 

Erotetic wrote:
Chavaluria wrote:
It varies from person to person if you go out and buy the stuff in physical format, yeah, the CD is an expensive piece of plastic, but also has the full artwork (I'm one of those fags that really focus in the artwork too)


I never really understood that.
the artwork is rarely even done by the musician.
they may as well sell a USB stick of their lossless album media along with a packet of chocolates they enjoyed, then we can talk about which musician picked the best chocolates baked by someone else for their album chocolates instead of which musician chose the prettiest picture drawn by someone else for their album cover.


That could be fancy stuff too, giving extra care and interest with the audience that is listening to your stuff. (If we think of that deeply).

But is true: a lot of bands don't do their own artwork, but it doesn't matter (At least for me) if someone else does it.

And now you can get the online booklet/artwork with every legal download that you do (but with an extra cost, obviosuly).

Maybe it's not fundamental, but we can go back and remember the old days when Black Sabbath put their records and a lot of people felt attracted to it, first of all, for the artwork (At least the cover) and later they found the music. The music and the artwork in the vast amjority of the cases is not fundamental, but could be a factor that you can get closer to something that you don't expect and can give you an idea of what's all about: The music.
_________________
Kahalachan wrote:
The average person probably knows just proton, neutron, and electron, and it'll be nice if someday a periodic table of particles were everywhere like the periodic table of elements.

Top
 Profile  
MARSDUDE
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:17 pm
Posts: 1706
Location: Canardia
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:09 pm 
 

There's even more creative leeches than I realized. Shame.

Top
 Profile  
PhilosophicalFrog
The Hypercube

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 7:08 pm
Posts: 5983
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:15 pm 
 

can we also get beyond this super retarded mentality that a band owes us anything more than music? sure, I like having cool artwork, I like it when bands have cool artwork, but the fact that ANYONE. ANY. SINGLE. PERSON. demands anything more from a band than excellent music, is really cheapening the band's output. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - people labor for music, and people should be paid for labor. There's billions of ways to listen to something without paying that isn't stealing. Sure, we're "sticking it to the record companies", but we do hurt bands, ya know.
_________________
"Don't you talk to me 'bout Jesus, cause every word is blasphemy!"

BAPTIST- drone, meditation, ambient - new song!

Top
 Profile  
wight_ghoul
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:44 pm
Posts: 294
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:30 pm 
 

PhilosophicalFrog wrote:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - people labor for music, and people should be paid for labor.

Why? Capitalism doesn't work like that. Labouring to create a product and offering that product for sale does not entitle you to anything other than an opportunity to compete for profits in the marketplace. The smart thing to do is to monetize your band through other more innovative means, not to complain that technological advances are taking away the money that you think you are entitled to. When it comes to music, artificial scarcity is simply not a sustainable business model.

PhilosophicalFrog wrote:
There's bilions of ways to listen to something without paying that isn't stealing.

Illegally downloading it, for example.

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BloodSacrificeShaman, Google [Bot] and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

 
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group