Why doesn't the industry flood the internet with files with no audio, white noise, or PSAs? Title them with top 40 hits, and maybe people will grow tired of wasting their time. Maybe this wouldn't work. Do uploaders have ratings on these p2p sites? I've never used one.

there have been companies doing this for a few years, I even hired them a few times, I saw no substantial drop in piracy, or increase in sales. unfortunately, I think the problem is more substantial than this solution is effective at... the honest truth is, through decades of discussion, attempts, and other means, the only real solution is appropriate legislation with real effective consequences.

Companies try that technique with movie files and although they clog things up a little bit, P2P search engine sites usually have ratings systems for the uploader's rep and/or for the file's quality. So the bad apples get weeded out eventually.

Yeah, the thing is any file has what's called a "MD5 Checksum" which is unique for the particular file, and impossible/improbable to fake. There are users on those sites that quickly flag the imposter as a fake, and people avoid it.
Thanks for the thought, but as Rack says the only plausible solution at this time is governmental. ie, enforcing laws already on the books, or adapting measures that reflect todays reality.

The way to fight that monster is to make the music available for free after a period of time in you own website and with excellent quality.
Instead of denying, trying to control everything, we should strive for more freedom of ideas.
Would you charge for the information available here in Gearslutz? This site is fundamental to my education as a musician/producer/blabla. It's priceless.

Music is communication and information. Should be set free.

Music is interpretation and ideas. It's about the fact that if you dedicate your life to something you shouldn't have to be poor by doing so. Music is free and always has/will be... play and/or write your own.

Bollox.
I choose to impart any information on Gearslutz. Choice!
If my music is going to be free, that should only be by my own choice, not forced on me be a set of ideologue amateurs.
No one is sharing information full time on Gearslutz, hence no need to be paid professionally. The people who devote the most time to Gearslutz (Jules for example) earn income from the advertising at Gearslutz.
It ain't free baby.... it's paid for.... like most other good things in life.

@Chrisso:

So why exactly is the government so lax when it comes to copyright enforcement? What's their angle?

I've come to respect your opinion, and I honestly don't know anymore.

• Because it's a gang loot on a massive scale.... millions of people doing it.
• It's proven difficult to fix technologically, leaving legal proceedings the only resort. Two high profile cases are dragging on, and dragging on.....
• Free music (albeit illegal) is popular with the voters.
• And a few of the most powerful voices in London/Washington (Google, Apple, Facebook) have all benefitted from the continuation of the looting.
The next US Presidential election will be fought as much online as it will in the town hall.

Once Apple and Google see more revenue from legal sales than illegal filesharing, I expect the tide to turn, led by the tech companies looking to protect their new business in streaming and the cloud.... this is already starting to happen.

Thanks C. Lately I've been feeling like I'm getting raped by both rich people and poor people. And not just about music stuff.

As long as it feels right it's okay. Safe word?

At least someone's playing the comedian tonight.

Long weekend here in Ireland, it's a matter of nature. x

It may be illegal, but it's not unethical. Music is free.
No need to be anachronic with this. Selling records was a market of a few decades.
Musicians will always be musicians, and if they stop writing music because they can no longer sell records, well they should stop. No one is going to miss those musicians.

I write my own music and it's mine for a time, then it belongs to the people who listen to it. Just like I own every melody from Vivaldi or every song from The Beatles. I own Blues, rock & Roll and ambient music. It's yours too.

Every word of which is factually wrong.

it is unethical and music is not free, unless the creator gives it to you. sorry.

not an ounce of truth in that, what do you do for a living by the way?

here's what you get for free:
http://www.soundclick.com


does that excite you? no stopping them from making music, you are right on that count!

If you own a beatles melody let's see what the courts think of that, as well as Paul McCartney...

more ramblings from neverwuz hobbyist piracy apologist who can't make it professionally so they want to deny the professionals their careers, nothing but jealousy.

Could be that, Or, it could be that I don't like the way the world works.
Music is free, and I don't care what a court says about that. And I'm not saying i'm going to make money out of someone else's creation. I have enough creations of myself.
No one is going to stop me from singing a tune in the park with my guitar under a hot sunny day. Is that illegal? Music is mine and it's yours, what is on you mind is yours.

And by the way
big reknown musicians have now more people listening to their music because of "piracy".
Roger Waters is staying in my country for a month to play stadiums every other day... oooh internet is sooo bad and piracy is sucking the life out of poor Waters...

awesome. let me know how a life of selfish self serving arrogance and greed works out for you.

no, music is not free - you just don't like that fact.

no, you're just going to deny them the money they are owed from their creation, wow, you're a swell guy... no respect for artists.

you might want to put down the bong and get back to class. you might also want to learn a little bit about copyright.

I doubt that's true, people have been listening to be reknown acts for years, ever here of this massive free device known as "radio". the issue here is not "listening" the issue here is "consuming" and there's a difference.

It actually is, from record sales, which is why he is now forced to sing for his supper if he wants to get paid. He might not even have that opportunity to play gigs of that size if it weren't for the investment made in him by the pre-piracy industry.

Well, at least it's just rich rock stars you are mad at, I guess you actually do then recognize all the good record labels have done to promote the arts, piracy on the hand has done ZERO.

How much money has Napster, Limewire and the Pirate Bay contributed to artists careers? None, Zero, Zippo...


So you are a digital Maoist who believes all artists must be peasants, is that it?

So again, what is it that you actually do for living?

You vs the world? I'll take the world.
The laws and customs that make music NOT free and provide income for musicians were hard won, and have been in place since before you were born.

Roger Waters is old school. he made his name and all his money from the established music industry. Both he and the Gilmour version of Pink Floyd have always sold out huge stadiums and made a ton of money touring. I'm struggling to see any validity in your point.
Maybe, point to the young band, 5 years or less on the scene, heavily pirated, that's also playing a month of stadiums in your country?

I think the new business model in the industry isn't producing the quality of output that the old one did. Where are the great albums going to come from? Surely if album sales are down, so are recording budgets and the investment in finding and cultivating the talent. The musicians/artists haven't gone anywhere, but many are small, independant businesses now, and if they are signed they aren't backed to the same extent. If the primary product is ticket sales and the recordings are more and more just promos for these ticket sales and merchandise etc then why invest so much in the recordings? I don't like the new business model and i'm not even part of the industry, just a music fan that would like to see great albums being produced again. You need to hire the best and pay them for the time it takes to produce great work in order to have great albums. Less incentive to do so if it's not going to sell, the profit from the profitable artists on the books are needed to be re- invested in the up and coming acts. Tightening up the piracy doesn't stop anyone making music independantly, gigging it to find a following and spread the word and putting it up on itunes to sell.

Music is free just like an apple is free. They both occur naturally, and no one is stopping you from growing your own apple tree if you can. However, going onto a farm and stealing all of their apples is a different story. So if you are saying music as a concept is free, I agree. If you choose to ignore the labor it takes to produce music to the point of being consumable and enjoyed by others, I disagree. Many people offer free music anyway, listen to that. And just because you don't intend to profit doesn't mean someone else isn't. If you don't like how the world works, at least understand what you don't like about it and direct your anger there. If you don't like the label system, support independent artists.

Yes, the great BS of the 'free music' mantra is that those who do the talking, rarely do the walking. Music can be free if you make it yourself and share it freely. music isn't free if I pay to make it and require some payment in return to cover my costs. What we are seeing is the 'free music' believers taking music that isn't free, and NOT offering any free music of their own.

No, I don't ignore the labor it takes to produce music. I produce music as well, in fact I'm recording an album of 26 tracks and I've been working on it everyday since a few months. You can bash me all you want, you don't know me.
What I'm trying to say Radiohead said it better:
I downloaded In Rainbows for free from their website. And then, when they came to my country, I paid more than a hundred dollars to watch them perform live.
No piracy involved. Music free. Performing live, paid for.

I wasn't bashing you, but in the case of Radiohead they chose to do that experiment, and are also in a position to charge $100 for a ticket and sell enough of them to actually break into profit (I'm assuming...). A big part of why they could do this is because of how many records they had sold previously, and the big budget support system they had the luxury of walking away from when they no longer needed it.

Again, BS.
Playing live is nothing new.
When OK Computer came out fans 1) bought the album and 2) went to see the band live.
What you are describing is not adding income, it's taking income away!

The cost of living hasn't gone down in the last 10 years.
Radiohead sold albums and made money from touring. If albums are now 'free' you have absolutely reduced their income while their costs have increased.

And as a musician yourself, why would you not want to support great musicians making great music in the studio?

Yet I'm pretty sure if any of the people you are stealing from decided to offer you a bit of old fashioned pay back, you would be more than happy to appeal to what courts say about your right to not suffer personal harm. Truth is, you are a hypocrite and too stupid to realize that the Only reason there are things for you to steal (and I'm not just referring to music) is the concept of ownership. Do away with that and you will remove every luxury the modern world affords leaches like you. You have the classic looter mentality. You think others' belongings are yours to take.

Think back on all of this once you have grown up and you are still a poor nothing. While you struggle to pay rent and work a crappy job, remind us about your new way of doing things. Let us know what your way of thinking gets a person in life.

Awesome Post!


Posted from a scoring stage or recording studio via the Gearslutz iPhone app

hahahaha Now I'm a thief! and even more! a childish one!

The world is owned by a few corporations who stole from you and me the Earth, but I'm the thief because I believe music should be free. Interesting... By the way I never said I'm a "pirate". You read what you need to read, because I'm showing a different point of view. And even so, you think paying rent and working a crappy job is something that is to be despised?... well even I know that I'm a slave with a different name: A citizen. But fortunately for me, i own my place and I work as a producer and musician, if that's what you wanted to know.

So maybe we should stick to "piracy".

Do you know what is the biggest income of an artist?
How much a musician receives for a single sale of an album?

Do YOU know how a songwriter gets paid.... ?
hint, it isn't from touring or merch...