Absolute Anime

Taken from ifpi.org,

1. Pirate Bay, one of the flagships of the anti-copyright movement, makes thousands of euros from advertising on its site, while maintaining its anti-establishment “free music” rhetoric.

2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.

3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.

4. Illegal file-sharers don’t care whether the copyright infringing work they distribute is from a major or independent label.

5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.

6. ISPs often advertise music as a benefit of signing up to their service, but facilitate the illegal swapping on copyright infringing music on a grand scale.

7. The anti-copyright movement does not create jobs, exports, tax revenues and economic growth – it largely consists of people pontificating on a commercial world about which they know little.

8. Piracy is not caused by poverty. Professor Zhang of Nanjing University found the Chinese citizens who bought pirate products were mainly middle or higher income earners.

9. Most people know it is wrong to file-share copyright infringing material but won't stop till the law makes them, according to a recent study by the Australian anti-piracy group MIPI.

10. P2P networks are not hotbeds for discovering new music. It is popular music that is illegally file-shared most frequently.

Your thoughts?

6. ISPs often advertise music as a benefit of signing up to their service, but facilitate the illegal swapping on copyright infringing music on a grand scale.

Thats a load of crock. Most ISP's who offer free music often do it via iTunes, a widely recognised source of LEGAL music, due to their work with the RECORD LABELS.

And I see no harm in downloads. I'm doing it right now on a £129 piece of software. I do it with music. It's easier with music, because people are still gonna pay to go see the shows, buy the CD/DVD. The artist will always make a bigger revenue than what "We," the downloaders, "steal."

Rikoku wrote:And I see no harm in downloads. I'm doing it right now on a £129 piece of software. I do it with music. It's easier with music, because people are still gonna pay to go see the shows, buy the CD/DVD. The artist will always make a bigger revenue than what "We," the downloaders, "steal."

This is a massive misconception to do with music. Almost ALL tours run at a loss, I am just shocked so few people know this painfully obvious fact.

To be honest Rikoku, since I started making music, years and years ago, I have stopped downloading it illegally. I talked to other musicians, most of them were not angry with the idea of things like limewire, kazaa and other file-sharing programs. They are more upset that people are making the decision about what they should and should not get by people who are supposedly their fans. For all you know they could agree or completely disagree.

I see it as a mark of respect for the music that you pay the small amount to get the whole package rather than a half arsed download.

Did you know that quite a lot of music artists "Leak" their work onto the internet before the release date, just so they get word of mouth BEFORE the official release? Which prompts some fans to buy the legit version, or even a special version with bonus tracks and/or DVD. Don't get me wrong, if i had the scratch, I would buy, no question, but, with my funds the way they are, I prefer to download.

Rikoku wrote:Did you know that quite a lot of music artists "Leak" their work onto the internet before the release date, just so they get word of mouth BEFORE the official release? Which prompts some fans to buy the legit version, or even a special version with bonus tracks and/or DVD. Don't get me wrong, if i had the scratch, I would buy, no question, but, with my funds the way they are, I prefer to download.

Quite alot, does not mean all. It is just a gross injustice to assume or make this decision for the people that make the music.

I would rather believe it was the promotional wing of a record label whose job it is to spread word of mouth. As it is the reason why it exists in the first place.

Plus I have nine other points to address in my post young man!

And some i can't even begin to Speculate on, like:

2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.

3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.

5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.

There is only so many things I can make an effort to argue, y'know? I argue what I understand, know, and care about. I mean, It's so easy to self produce your own music these days, big record labels need only take an interest if you've become a phenomena, y'know? Like those awful Arctic Monkeys, or the superb Get Cape. Wear Cape. Fly. The bands that are aptly called "MySpace Bands," people who get spotted via the internet. To me, point 5 is quite redundant. Lots of underground bands stay there and STILL make a profit, enough so they can make more music, tour, create merch, etc. It's all how you do business, and sloppy business makes point 5 relevant.

Rikoku wrote:And some i can't even begin to Speculate on, like:

2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.

3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.

5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.

There is only so many things I can make an effort to argue, y'know? I argue what I understand, know, and care about. I mean, It's so easy to self produce your own music these days, big record labels need only take an interest if you've become a phenomena, y'know? Like those awful Arctic Monkeys, or the superb Get Cape. Wear Cape. Fly. The bands that are aptly called "MySpace Bands," people who get spotted via the internet. To me, point 5 is quite redundant. Lots of underground bands stay there and STILL make a profit, enough so they can make more music, tour, create merch, etc. It's all how you do business, and sloppy business makes point 5 relevant.

You are still making assumptions about what those projects want. Perhaps that underground band what to be the next big thing? Maybe they want to be the next Muse?

Point 5 is alot more relevant than you might believe. Labels are not pools of money and being honest, they are not the big evil bad guys and gals, it is so easy to portray/dismiss them as.

Record/publishing deal does not = fame and fortune. A deal is merely the beginning. That is a huge misconception; everyone really needs education on how the music industry works or infact all creative industries. So many false ideas just float around.

+:D.Ř.Ę.Ŧ.Ļ.Ĭ .N:+ wrote:

Rikoku wrote:And some i can't even begin to Speculate on, like:

2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.

3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.

5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.

There is only so many things I can make an effort to argue, y'know? I argue what I understand, know, and care about. I mean, It's so easy to self produce your own music these days, big record labels need only take an interest if you've become a phenomena, y'know? Like those awful Arctic Monkeys, or the superb Get Cape. Wear Cape. Fly. The bands that are aptly called "MySpace Bands," people who get spotted via the internet. To me, point 5 is quite redundant. Lots of underground bands stay there and STILL make a profit, enough so they can make more music, tour, create merch, etc. It's all how you do business, and sloppy business makes point 5 relevant.

You are still making assumptions about what those projects want. Perhaps that underground band what to be the next big thing? Maybe they want to be the next Muse?

Point 5 is alot more relevant than you might believe. Labels are not pools of money and being honest, they are not the big evil bad guys and gals, it is so easy to portray/dismiss them as.

Record/publishing deal does not = fame and fortune. A deal is merely the beginning. That is a huge misconception; everyone really needs education on how the music industry works or infact all creative industries. So many false ideas just float around.

Next Muse?

Muse are a British Indie/Alternative band. I have heard worse.

And I know that record deals are just hot air. It's the fans and sales that make a band, and yes, I Know that by saying that I have contraried my own point about illegal downloads, but, i believe I said that there will always be more sales than illegal downloads. Some acts self release music, be it via MySpace, Bebo, or little gigs they do down the local pubs and clubs. Enter Shikari did this, and are signed to their own label.

I am aware that big labels mean a bigger CHANCE of commercial success, but it's not always a given, as you say Dret. For instance, being signed to a label like EMI MAY give you that bigger chance of success than if you were signed to Geffen. Business is business.

The best way to make it big in music is dedicate, and do nothing but. Good acts that disappear after one album are a sad thing to behold, y'know? (and I am not meaning one hit wonders, I mean acts that are commerically unsuccessful) I reckon they could still make music by themselves, and release it via the web, and carry on going strong with their dedicated fans. Selling out and just constantly releasing tat, I believe, is a way to fall on your sword, in a manner of speaking.

I used muse as its a classic example of a project starting from so little and becoming massive.

I personally would used Shikari. But I do respect Muse, even though Matt's voice kinda grates on most songs.

Rikoku wrote:Muse are a British Indie/Alternative band. I have heard worse.

And I know that record deals are just hot air. It's the fans and sales that make a band, and yes, I Know that by saying that I have contraried my own point about illegal downloads, but, i believe I said that there will always be more sales than illegal downloads. Some acts self release music, be it via MySpace, Bebo, or little gigs they do down the local pubs and clubs. Enter Shikari did this, and are signed to their own label.

I am aware that big labels mean a bigger CHANCE of commercial success, but it's not always a given, as you say Dret. For instance, being signed to a label like EMI MAY give you that bigger chance of success than if you were signed to Geffen. Business is business.

The best way to make it big in music is dedicate, and do nothing but. Good acts that disappear after one album are a sad thing to behold, y'know? (and I am not meaning one hit wonders, I mean acts that are commerically unsuccessful) I reckon they could still make music by themselves, and release it via the web, and carry on going strong with their dedicated fans. Selling out and just constantly releasing tat, I believe, is a way to fall on your sword, in a manner of speaking.

Not quite ignorant to not know Muse bro

The way you worded your post made you sound like you didn't. I apologise.

YEAH DOWN WITH ILLEGAL MUSIC DOWNLOADERS. Poor bastards, get a [censored] job!

Well, I can tell your juvenile, moronic, and didn't read one of Dret's posts. Allow me:

Dretlin wrote:8. Piracy is not caused by poverty. Professor Zhang of Nanjing University found the Chinese citizens who bought pirate products were mainly middle or higher income earners.

Your flame failed my son. Please, don't try again.

Rikoku wrote:Well, I can tell your juvenile, moronic, and didn't read one of Dret's posts. Allow me:

Dretlin wrote:8. Piracy is not caused by poverty. Professor Zhang of Nanjing University found the Chinese citizens who bought pirate products were mainly middle or higher income earners.

Your flame failed my son. Please, don't try again.

Good use of that point. I would like to see a UK study of this. Even though the Chinese one is useful none the less.