No.They will have their own websites and people all around the world will download their music for a fair price.New artists and not so famous artists will join in cooperatives to manage a website.John McLaughlin,John Mayall and Jan Akkerman(just to say a few) have done this way before and now Radiohead is strengthening this idea.The law will change and the record companies will close,that's for sure.It's just a question of time.
wow, you are completely fucking deluded. A CD today costs the same as it did 20 years ago and less than it did 25 years ago, you adjust for inflation and it doesn't cost shit - try not going to McDonalds a couple times so you can afford a CD. In the meantime, you're stealing the artists material and you are hurting them more than you are the labels, it is no different than if they were to electronically extract money from your bank account. The only thing that will happen in your model is that no one will make any quality music any more because thieves like you steal it.
Yep.If you like to go back in time,lets do it properly.CDs are 30% more expensive than LPs were but the recordable midia is 60% cheaper and demands less jobs to be manufactured.The artwork lithography is cheaper,the packaging case is cheaper,storage and delivery have less costs.Record companies are far more profitable today but the artists still have the same 8% in each sale. Besides,I was mostly talking about changes.Blogs have a role in these changes.People realy can buy CDs,as you say,but only where they are available.Websites will solve this problem.That's not my model,pal;read the papers.Time will tell. You call me thief,I could call you of many things...but I remember those turntable manufacturer's mumbles.
Hey QP!Just want to say hello and thanks for everything.You know,I hate McDonalds,man.Argh...Let's go to Puccini's Cafe! Soon non polite people will show up and we will have 368 comments guiding to nowhere.Bye,bye.
Of course as in anything among the masses, a part of it will be used for their own gains and many like I listen to stuff I hadnt heard before to see if I want to go buy it (not purchasing blindly).What most do not understand the best you can get in MP3 is 320 kbs and the CD in wav format is 1411 k and for one, why thfk would one want anything less.This steal theory is way off base.Of course anything on the net is accessable but the quality is basically crap.The way for these artists to make more sales is to put it out on the net in the lower caste form to go fishing for people who have never heard them, thereby engaging in more possible sales.Some just dont get it.Also if its over 5 years old it should be free anyways in any form or just keep it.I probably have everything on LP anyways and CD.Oh by the way, I paid for it all, probably in three or four different formats, all the way back to 8 track to CD.So get off the bloggers back and get a clue, the artists labels crackdogs are on the hunt, only to limit the artists range of sales.I buy many after hearing the posts.Good stuff alot of it.Lastly the guy who has to cuss to emphasize his point is brain dead and needs a shot of education as well as patience in thought.Deluded mentioned is usually the one who mentions it.I think its more like, conclusion, derived from unclear thought.Hope the music posts comes back.
if you want to copy a CD all you have to do is have the local library search...painless. so, should we outlaw libraries?
musicians who make music for the love of music want it to be heard. the digital rights thing goes beyond any comprehension except greed.
there will always be those to purchase. there will always be those to copy. there are those who have reasons for both. how can anyone judge another.
i miss black and white...i explored a world of jazz that i never knew existed.
i am glad to see this site back. yes, we must resist the laws till the laws become obsolete. the laws are 'needed' to keep folks 'inline' because folks have tired of the corp music industry gouging.
the artist are sick of the corp music industry...we are sick of the corp music industry.
'they' try to present life to us in a box...blogs like this take us out of the box.
please send my regards to black and white as there is no place to express gratitude for those efforts also.
"No.They will have their own websites and people all around the world will download their music for a fair price.New artists and not so famous artists will join in cooperatives to manage a website.John McLaughlin,John Mayall and Jan Akkerman(just to say a few) have done this way before and now Radiohead is strengthening this idea."
This only works for the already famous and well known artists. These artists was once helped by record companies to get famous.
I also see that you decided that you have the right to force others to work the way you feel i right (so that you can have it for free).
If you ask any artist if they want to spend endless time with paper work, distribution and manufacturing rather than to use their time for creating music; what do you think their answer will be?
The ones you mention has started their own companies where they pay others for doing the paper work etc for them. They canb afford it because they are already known.
How famous do you think Radiohead would have been if not EMI had put down enormous amounts of money in promoting them?
"musicians who make music for the love of music want it to be heard."
That's right.
"the digital rights thing goes beyond any comprehension except greed."
Why shouldn't you pay for the music if you find pleasure out of it? The one's who are greedy are the one's who want to enjoy others work for free.
I think that you must respect the will of those who created the music. If they want to work together with a record company then you must accept that. And please don't give me this "evil record company" justifications. No offense but, you don't know anything of how they work.
If musicians want to give their work away for free then you can have it. The it is ok. If they don't want to give it away then it is stealing when you download it without paying for it.
Nothing you can come up with justifies what you are doing. The music is their property and they have the rights to decide about it.
You probably have no evil intentions and I assume that you just have not info to know why it is illegal to download for free´.
But know you do, so if you keep on doing it you are stealing and caould also be considered to be a greedy person who wants others to work for free so that you can have it without paying.
14 comments:
I'm happy to see QP back on-line,even empty.Godspeed
Marcelo
Let's hope he doesn't break the law again.
Let's hope he does break the "law", newbie. That's how you erode the "law" into irrelevance. Then it's not the law anymore.
and then artists won't make music because no one pays for it so they can't make a living and you're stuck listening to old copies of N'Sync.
No.They will have their own websites and people all around the world will download their music for a fair price.New artists and not so famous artists will join in cooperatives to manage a website.John McLaughlin,John Mayall and Jan Akkerman(just to say a few) have done this way before and now Radiohead is strengthening this idea.The law will change and the record companies will close,that's for sure.It's just a question of time.
wow, you are completely fucking deluded. A CD today costs the same as it did 20 years ago and less than it did 25 years ago, you adjust for inflation and it doesn't cost shit - try not going to McDonalds a couple times so you can afford a CD. In the meantime, you're stealing the artists material and you are hurting them more than you are the labels, it is no different than if they were to electronically extract money from your bank account. The only thing that will happen in your model is that no one will make any quality music any more because thieves like you steal it.
Yep.If you like to go back in time,lets do it properly.CDs are 30% more expensive than LPs were but the recordable midia is 60% cheaper and demands less jobs to be manufactured.The artwork lithography is cheaper,the packaging case is cheaper,storage and delivery have less costs.Record companies are far more profitable today but the artists still have the same 8% in each sale.
Besides,I was mostly talking about changes.Blogs have a role in these changes.People realy can buy CDs,as you say,but only where they are available.Websites will solve this problem.That's not my model,pal;read the papers.Time will tell.
You call me thief,I could call you of many things...but I remember those turntable manufacturer's mumbles.
Hey QP!Just want to say hello and thanks for everything.You know,I hate McDonalds,man.Argh...Let's go to Puccini's Cafe!
Soon non polite people will show up and we will have 368 comments guiding to nowhere.Bye,bye.
Welcome back, QP! I'm very happy and i hope that the wonderful work that you do here, still remain in the air for a long time. Thanks.
Of course as in anything among the masses, a part of it will be used for their own gains and many like I listen to stuff I hadnt heard before to see if I want to go buy it (not purchasing blindly).What most do not understand the best you can get in MP3 is 320 kbs and the CD in wav format is 1411 k and for one, why thfk would one want anything less.This steal theory is way off base.Of course anything on the net is accessable but the quality is basically crap.The way for these artists to make more sales is to put it out on the net in the lower caste form to go fishing for people who have never heard them, thereby engaging in more possible sales.Some just dont get it.Also if its over 5 years old it should be free anyways in any form or just keep it.I probably have everything on LP anyways and CD.Oh by the way, I paid for it all, probably in three or four different formats, all the way back to 8 track to CD.So get off the bloggers back and get a clue, the artists labels crackdogs are on the hunt, only to limit the artists range of sales.I buy many after hearing the posts.Good stuff alot of it.Lastly the guy who has to cuss to emphasize his point is brain dead and needs a shot of education as well as patience in thought.Deluded mentioned is usually the one who mentions it.I think its more like, conclusion, derived from unclear thought.Hope the music posts comes back.
glad to see this forum back alive, it's been amazing and wonferfull place of music.
Welcome back, with emptyness...
if you want to copy a CD all you have to do is have the local library search...painless. so, should we outlaw libraries?
musicians who make music for the love of music want it to be heard. the digital rights thing goes beyond any comprehension except greed.
there will always be those to purchase. there will always be those to copy. there are those who have reasons for both. how can anyone judge another.
i miss black and white...i explored a world of jazz that i never knew existed.
i am glad to see this site back.
yes, we must resist the laws till the laws become obsolete. the laws are 'needed' to keep folks 'inline' because folks have tired of the corp music industry gouging.
the artist are sick of the corp music industry...we are sick of the corp music industry.
'they' try to present life to us in a box...blogs like this take us out of the box.
please send my regards to black and white as there is no place to express gratitude for those efforts also.
"No.They will have their own websites and people all around the world will download their music for a fair price.New artists and not so famous artists will join in cooperatives to manage a website.John McLaughlin,John Mayall and Jan Akkerman(just to say a few) have done this way before and now Radiohead is strengthening this idea."
This only works for the already famous and well known artists.
These artists was once helped by record companies to get famous.
I also see that you decided that you have the right to force others to work the way you feel i right (so that you can have it for free).
If you ask any artist if they want to spend endless time with paper work, distribution and manufacturing rather than to use their time for creating music; what do you think their answer will be?
The ones you mention has started their own companies where they pay others for doing the paper work etc for them. They canb afford it because they are already known.
How famous do you think Radiohead would have been if not EMI had put down enormous amounts of money in promoting them?
"musicians who make music for the love of music want it to be heard."
That's right.
"the digital rights thing goes beyond any comprehension except greed."
Why shouldn't you pay for the music if you find pleasure out of it? The one's who are greedy are the one's who want to enjoy others work for free.
I think that you must respect the will of those who created the music. If they want to work together with a record company then you must accept that.
And please don't give me this "evil record company" justifications. No offense but, you don't know anything of how they work.
If musicians want to give their work away for free then you can have it. The it is ok. If they don't want to give it away then it is stealing when you download it without paying for it.
Nothing you can come up with justifies what you are doing.
The music is their property and they have the rights to decide about it.
You probably have no evil intentions and I assume that you just have not info to know why it is illegal to download for free´.
But know you do, so if you keep on doing it you are stealing and caould also be considered to be a greedy person who wants others to work for free so that you can have it without paying.
the cd sale is only for the companys, bands and artist retain about 10%, the real money for artist are the live concerts. music companys sucks
Post a Comment