Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UPC victory in piracy case

Options
13567

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    jtsuited wrote: »
    I'm releasing vinyl from now on (and much of it will be vinyl only). You wanna protect your art, make vinyl the medium of choice for your music.

    redrum-2.jpeg

    (no idea if that image is showing, cus I cant see it)


  • Options
    #63
    jill_valentine
    Registered Users Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    jtsuited wrote: »
    I'm releasing vinyl from now on (and much of it will be vinyl only). You wanna protect your art, make vinyl the medium of choice for your music.
    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Bet someone somewhere will convert it to mp3 and upload it to a torrent site.

    Yes. A number of recent high-profile and otherwise fiercely well-guarded releases leaked via vinyl rips first. The shipping and sale of vinyl tends to be a bit more... indie, I suppose, and bit more slapdash as a result.


  • Options
    #64
    splitrmx
    Registered Users Posts: 352 ✭✭splitrmx


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    and eventually you'll have no music of any quality left to listen to.
    Do you honestly believe that music of good quality can only exist with the old standard model of large labels selling CDs? Good music existed long before the ability to record audio was invented. The demise of a system where people pay for recordings of music won't result in disappearance of music.


  • Options
    #65
    blubloblu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,226 ✭✭✭blubloblu


    As a musician, you should be against this shoddy "solution" which solves nothing whilst pissing over a whole load of laws and rights, all the while not providing any income for you. IRMA do not represent you. They represent Sony, Warner, Universal and EMI (and their shareholders).


  • Options
    #66
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    splitrmx wrote: »
    Do you honestly believe that music of good quality can only exist with the old standard model of large labels selling CDs? Good music existed long before the ability to record audio was invented. The demise of a system where people pay for recordings of music won't result in disappearance of music.

    where exactly did you read me saying this?

    try not to put words into my mouth to argue your point. i never said the current business model was the only way. as an indie label owner i believe the current model is a sham.

    but in reality it doesnt matter what business model exists at any given time. the simple fact is that professional musicians NEED to be paid for their work. whether it be royalties on recordings, session work, whatever.

    in 20 years there might be totally differant way for musicians/producers/engineers/artists to get paid but the simple fact is that if an artist cannot feed themselves or their family then they will have to turn to other ways of earning an income.

    you can argue a utopia all you want but there is no escaping the fact that people need to eat.

    unless you would like your favourite artists to die for your enjoyment?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Because he was paid to. It was a commission that he worked on for 3 years. Seriously it's not that hard to guess…
    Correct. Thats the answer I was looking for.

    He was paid in advance by a patron. The model of "middlemen" taking up to 93% of the money of the sale of your music is only about 50 years old. Prior to that wealthy people would pay an artist to create great art for them.

    Today that might not be possible but look at it this way, if your band got 150,000 fans (which isnt a great deal considering the world is now your audience) and each paid a euro for everything you produced for year. Thats earnings of 150,000 euros. Even split between a band, thats a damned fine salary to do nothing but what you love...

    The internet is like an alien invader, it eats the fat ones first and Sony, Universal and others have become so very very fat off of musicians. Their deaths will stop them producing 10 global superstars a year earning 10's of millions and that wealth will spread far and wide supporting hundreds if not thousands of bands and artists chosen by a meritocracy.

    DeV.


  • Options
    #68
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    DeVore wrote: »
    Correct. Thats the answer I was looking for.

    He was paid in advance by a patron. The model of "middlemen" taking up to 93% of the money of the sale of your music is only about 50 years old. Prior to that wealthy people would pay an artist to create great art for them.

    Today that might not be possible but look at it this way, if your band got 150,000 fans (which isnt a great deal considering the world is now your audience) and each paid a euro for everything you produced for year. Thats earnings of 150,000 euros. Even split between a band, thats a damned fine salary to do nothing but what you love...

    The internet is like an alien invader, it eats the fat ones first and Sony, Universal and others have become so very very fat off of musicians. Their deaths will stop them producing 10 global superstars a year earning 10's of millions and that wealth will spread far and wide supporting hundreds if not thousands of bands and artists chosen by a meritocracy.

    DeV.

    thats a lovely idea but it doesnt really take into consideration that most people dont seem to give a crap what they download for free. they'll just as easily rip off an indie label putting out a run of 1000 7" vinyls as they will a major label.

    so in reality its the majors, with their already fattened bank accounts, that will survive while the small indie goes under.

    the rich get rich and the poor get poorer.


  • Options
    #69
    jill_valentine
    Registered Users Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    I suspect the folks at Merge and labels like them might disagree with that suggestion, given that they just got a Billboard #1.

    This article with David Byrne is well worth reading:
    http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne?currentPage=all


  • Options
    #70
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    jill_valentine wrote: »
    I suspect the folks at Merge and labels like them might disagree with that suggestion, given that they just got a Billboard #1.

    This article with David Byrne is well worth reading:
    http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne?currentPage=all

    if you're talking about the american label merge, then the arguement really has no place in a discussion about an irish ISP and involving irish artists. merge are a label that started in a time when money was getting thrown around and despite the fact that they stayed independent, they certainly dont fall into the "small indie" category. infact they had a US number 1 album as far back as early 2004 if i remember correctly. merge are a long way from being regarded as a "small indie" in the sense that we would speak about.

    we live in a country where it doesnt take very large sales to get a number 1 single but is close to impossible to make a dent in the market elsewhere.

    if you want to talk real world in relation to our industry over here take a look at someone like the richter collective. what if they made a loss on their next 3/4 releases due to illegal sharing? i would take a guess that, unless they're sitting on a pile of cash, they'd have to call it a day.

    small indie labels are mostly operating on a release by release basis, breaking even can even by enough reason to put you out of business.


  • Options
    #71
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    there are a couple of artists i like so if i like their album i will pay online to them as i have recently done. but theres so much garbage music bands out there now i wouldn't even download them even though i could get them free. but i will always support my favourite music bands.

    i'm just glad that these corrupt illegal music companies have been denied from ripping off internet users and they can go back under the rock they came out from imo good riddance to them. irish law has won the day today.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    I know its video (machanime actually) but Red vs Blue (www.redvsblue.com) started out as a bunch of drunken gamers voicing over video recording in Halo. They grew a fanbase and 4 series later almost all of them have quit their jobs and do this full time now from the VERY SAME model I outlined above.

    The trick is that you have to be great at it and produce something that really inspires people. 150,000 people who will pay you 1 Euro for a year. Thats your goal and its not all that hard with some hard graft (yes, you still have to work building a fanbase).

    Hopefully 1,000,000 people will rip your stuff off and spread it around because of all the people it subsequently hits some of them will become patrons. Red Vs Blue went super huge because it got ripped off left right and centre and everyone was sending it to their mates. They built a fanbase of loyal followers who not only paid a euro for a season, they bought DVD's by the 1000's and t-shirts and a ton of other stuff.

    So dont tell me it wont work because it has and it will. But you have to be great at what you do and you have to work at it. No one said it would be easy.

    DeV.


  • Options
    #73
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    ps: google Ronald Jenkies to see someone who has done this perfectly. Awesome story of a guy and his piano playing anything BUT piano concertos :)

    DeV.


  • Options
    #74
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    DeVore wrote: »
    I know its video (machanime actually) but Red vs Blue (www.redvsblue.com) started out as a bunch of drunken gamers voicing over video recording in Halo. They grew a fanbase and 4 series later almost all of them have quit their jobs and do this full time now from the VERY SAME model I outlined above.

    The trick is that you have to be great at it and produce something that really inspires people. 150,000 people who will pay you 1 Euro for a year. Thats your goal and its not all that hard with some hard graft (yes, you still have to work building a fanbase).

    Hopefully 1,000,000 people will rip your stuff off and spread it around because of all the people it subsequently hits some of them will become patrons. Red Vs Blue went super huge because it got ripped off left right and centre and everyone was sending it to their mates. They built a fanbase of loyal followers who not only paid a euro for a season, they bought DVD's by the 1000's and t-shirts and a ton of other stuff.

    So dont tell me it wont work because it has and it will. But you have to be great at what you do and you have to work at it. No one said it would be easy.

    DeV.

    im sorry but i'd have to disagree with you. this just wouldnt work as the defacto way to get music out there. the public, moan as they will, still just want music delivered in the same way.. be it cd, vinyl or digital.

    we already seen it with some really talented bands trying a differant way of distributing a product and it failing miserably.

    if you can show me just 1 instance of a pop genre group (indie/rock/pop/r'n'b) making a living from alternative distribution channels then ill take it back but until then i'll reiterate that its been tried and it has failed many times.

    dont get me wrong, i'd love to see it work. what radiohead did was a milestone and definitly ruffled a few fat cat feathers but as a source of sustainable income it just didnt work.

    ps. i do appreciate your link above and while its definitly an interesting read and concept, its not quite what we're talking here. we're talking about the recording industry in its most consumer friendly form. theres always going to be an underground movement of alternative music, i myself was heavily involved in the old squat/illegal party techno scene in the late 90's in london. the way we got music out there back then was pure guerilla tactics but it was never sustainable beyond a point.
    this was because the majority of music listeners dont want to be sold music in any other way than whats most convenient to them and unfortunatly this means hmv and itunes... we saw it in this thread already, some lad didnt even know that WAV files were available to buy online because he's never ventured away from itunes!!!


  • Options
    #75
    kfoltman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 252 ✭✭kfoltman


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Yep very true. A legal alternative would be one of the best solutions.

    7digital.ie is not bad. I'm not comfortable with paying the rip-off-consumers-and-artists oligopoly, but I'm using it instead of pirating because it's less hassle and affordable enough.

    That, and accujazz.com to discover music I didn't previously know. Which is what terrestrial radio stations should be doing, but don't.

    However, I'm not a good example as my apetite for new music is very limited :)


  • Options
    #76
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    for a longtime didnt bands like crass and cardiacs live off their own alternative distro channels and labels? (wrong genre right enough)
    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    im sorry but i'd have to disagree with you. this just wouldnt work as the defacto way to get music out there. the public, moan as they will, still just want music delivered in the same way.. be it cd, vinyl or digital.

    we already seen it with some really talented bands trying a differant way of distributing a product and it failing miserably.

    if you can show me just 1 instance of a pop genre group (indie/rock/pop/r'n'b) making a living from alternative distribution channels then ill take it back but until then i'll reiterate that its been tried and it has failed many times.

    dont get me wrong, i'd love to see it work. what radiohead did was a milestone and definitly ruffled a few fat cat feathers but as a source of sustainable income it just didnt work.


  • Options
    #77
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    what radiohead did was a milestone and definitly ruffled a few fat cat feathers but as a source of sustainable income it just didnt work.

    twas priceless advertising though


  • Options
    #78
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    maccored wrote: »
    for a longtime didnt bands like crass and cardiacs live off their own alternative distro channels and labels? (wrong genre right enough)

    they did. but like you said its not the same thing really.

    could you imagine some pop diva slumming it in a squat in hackney and releasing records with artwork that looks like it was done by a kid?

    im sorry but sales would be zero.

    the reason it worked for crass, conflict et all is that they sold to a market that was all about "the collective mind"

    make no mistake, despite appearing to the contrary, those old anarcho punk labels knew exactly how to market their records to maximise sales. and their business model wasn't really that different to the majors today. it looked different and worked on a smaller scale but it was based on the same formats and concepts.


  • Options
    #79
    bytey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 266 ✭✭bytey


    10 years from now , all internet will be similar to tv, ie a subscribed
    licensed package of a certain number and type of websites.

    its already in progress, and all will be government patrolled.

    you will not be able to access sites that you do not pay a fee for
    unless its sanctioned to be free.

    think its impossible ?

    think again .


  • Options
    #80
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    bytey wrote: »
    10 years from now , all internet will be similar to tv, ie a subscribed
    licensed package of a certain number and type of websites.

    its already in progress, and all will be government patrolled.

    you will not be able to access sites that you do not pay a fee for
    unless its sanctioned to be free.

    think its impossible ?

    think again .


    Conspiracy theories that way
    > :D:D


  • Options
    #81
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    bytey wrote: »
    10 years from now , all internet will be similar to tv, ie a subscribed
    licensed package of a certain number and type of websites.

    its already in progress, and all will be government patrolled.

    you will not be able to access sites that you do not pay a fee for
    unless its sanctioned to be free.

    think its impossible ?

    think again .
    This, unfortunately, is a distinct possibility. Verison and Googles new deals for "premium speed" content is the unpleasant start of it but it doesnt HAVE to be that way.

    Unfortunately it doesnt HAVE to be utopia either or anything like it, it really depends on how much we stand up to the people who would like to control the internet. (Blackberry in the middle east anyone?)


    DeV.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Conspiracy theories that way
    > :D:D
    Its by no means a conspiracy theory. http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/08/google-verizon-deny-deal/


    Do you think Eircom wouldnt pay Boards to refuse connections from UPC so they could say "Boards.ie, only on Eircom!". Too right they would. It would be death to us of course but hey, we would be rich... not everyone will be as smart as us :)

    DeV.


  • Options
    #83
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    DeVore wrote: »
    Oh and lol at the hypocrisy of the OP's "I download TV and films but people who download music are thieves". No, mate, you arent stealing video and tv, you're just taking something that doesnt belong to you. And not paying for it. :)

    Somehow music is different to films and tv? oh yes, thats right, I forgot you're a musician, thats the obvious difference.

    DeV.

    Like I said earlier Devore, I'm not a serial downloader. I've downloaded a couple of seasons of a TV show that I now watch religiously on TV. It was and always has been shown for free on TV - I could just as easily have waited a year to record repeats - Would this have been ok in your eyes? I was just playing catch up. And I only downloaded because none of my mates had the boxset and the video shop doesn't stock it for rental.

    And I'm not a musician. A wanna be one yes, but I'm far far from being anywhere near a musician :D:D

    Al.


  • Options
    #84
    bytey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 266 ✭✭bytey


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Conspiracy theories that way
    > :D:D

    see,
    its people like you who will let this happen , because you react in this way when someone points out the inevitable reality

    enjoy your internet while you can , cos pirate music will have to be posted in in envelope 10 years from now


  • Options
    #85
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    bytey wrote: »
    10 years from now , all internet will be similar to tv, ie a subscribed
    licensed package of a certain number and type of websites.

    its already in progress, and all will be government patrolled.

    you will not be able to access sites that you do not pay a fee for
    unless its sanctioned to be free.

    think its impossible ?

    think again .

    if that turns out to be the case then I and most other people will just not use or pay for broadband. because of the limits to freedom of information online. tv will die off soon. no matter what you watch you are bombarded with adds and the decibels in noise as soon as adverts come on would make you half deaf the way it is now. plus the garbage that is on the idiotbox now is only for braindead people thats why i don't watch tv. if the net ever goes like this then it's bye bye to broadband and i will just find something more interesting to do.


  • Options
    #86
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    zenno wrote: »
    if that turns out to be the case then I and most other people will just not use or pay for broadband. because of the limits to freedom of information online. tv will die off soon. no matter what you watch you are bombarded with adds and the decibels in noise as soon as adverts come on would make you half deaf the way it is now. plus the garbage that is on the idiotbox now is only for braindead people thats why i don't watch tv. if the net ever goes like this then it's bye bye to broadband and i will just find something more interesting to do.

    Like masturbation?


  • Options
    #87
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Like masturbation?

    masturbation without broadband???? :eek:

    dear god man, have you lost your mind?


  • Options
    #88
    bytey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 266 ✭✭bytey


    sorry , to clarify

    TV and Internet will be delivered online ,
    to a HD tv , with optical connection to the web .
    ( call it a pctv )

    tv content will be website based as well.

    home pcs will move to pad formats like ipad type devices sharing the main tv hub broadband

    actual pcs will become more specialist ( ie like daws ) and more expensive .
    all content ( web , tv ) will be paid for and controllable .

    and all piracy sites blocked .

    the free web is going to end - no doubt about it .


  • Options
    #89
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    masturbation without broadband???? :eek:

    dear god man, have you lost your mind?

    How does that even work? I mean.... without warezed h4rdc0r3 pr0n ??


    And so we find ourselves back somewhat in the vicinity of what I like to refer to as "the topic" :)

    DeV.


  • Options
    #90
    krd
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,455 ✭✭✭krd


    bytey wrote: »


    the free web is going to end - no doubt about it .

    What was ever "free" about the internet?

    All the hippy bull**** about the internet is just that; bull****. And it usually comes from the mouths of people who are just selfish bastards who wouldn't do the slightest turn for anyone if they didn't think there was something in it for them.

    You pay for the connection - people have been bilking musicians and record companies for the last decade. The internet companies have been making money on helping these people bilk.

    Why should music be free? Why should computer games be free? Why should books be free? Why should an architect's drawings be free?

    What gives the right to anyone to walk in off the street and photocopy an architect's drawings?

    The real killer of the music industry was not the internet. It was when everyone started getting cheap CD burners. And little maggot "entrepreneurs" set up businesses selling bootleg CDs to their school mates.

    Lending a CD to a school friend is one thing - making them a copy of something you've bought is not a particularly awful sin. Being a little wanker who charges €5 a copy is.

    Most people have only been on the internet in the last 5 years. The original driver was free music. People DO value music - They ARE willing to pay for it. Though they don't care if it's the artists or the pirate.

    Where's the "free" - the pirate is always sure to make money.

    There will always be piracy, but the days of little tossers paying a monthly subscription fee to the scumbags of rapidshare (Where's the free there?) so they can download unlimited music and film are coming to an end. You'll still have little greasy bags at schools selling mp3s and CDs. But they'll probably be Cuckoo'd MP3s.

    The grease bags of rapidshare are profiting from work they had no part in creating.

    Now the entire media business is getting serious about piracy. Hollywood studios - have seen their revenue on DVD sales virtually vanish because the likes of Rapidshare. People want to see movies that cost millions to make - they have to pay for these films if they want these films to be made.

    People want good music. Musicians and everyone else involved needs to get paid. Musicianship is as much a craft as plumber or carpenter.

    A short history of copyright and piracy and technology.

    Gutenburg did not invent the first printing press. They've been around for thousands of years. Just over time they've become more technologically advanced.

    In the early days of printing, writers and publishers were paid - piracy was just too technologically difficult for the pirates. Books were expensive and most people could not afford them - even though there was a huge public appetite for books. Only the very wealthy could afford them.

    Then along came inexpensive mechanical presses. A bit like the advent of CD burners. And there was a publishing explosion across Europe. Except it was bootleggers making all the money - and there was no law to stop them.

    Eventually the publishers and the bootleggers, and all the governments of Europe did a deal. Bootleggers could continue to print the books if they paid for the right to copy the books. The copyright.

    Everyone involved in the process needs to get paid. If people could just walk in off the street and take any book from Easons they liked and walked out the door without paying for it - there would be no Easons. If Easons didn't pay writers or publishers for their magazines and books there would be no magazines or books - there would be no Easons.

    Internet piracy will eventually be shut down. The ISPs are in effect like Easons. If they keep allowing theft of material, there'll be none.

    There will be an end to the piracy. And when it happens the internet will still be there as a great distribution channel. There will probably be a boom for small independent musicians. And the same for independent writers and film makers. We'll have better books and films - of course we'll have to pay for it - the best things in life are not free.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    senordingdong
    Registered Users Posts: 10,673 ✭✭✭✭senordingdong


    maccored wrote: »
    i reckon the internet is here and the music industry has to deal with it.

    I disagree.

    If tv/film and music companies are losing so much money from downloads, I think they will just stop investing so much money in these things.

    Instead they will invest only in things that have huge returns with minimal risk, so expect plenty more 'X Factors', 'I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here,' stupid teen movies and plenty more Britteny Spears etc...


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement