Swizz Beatz Defends Megaupload: Says It Was Taken Down Because It Was Too Powerful For RIAA To Control

from the and-it-was dept

Fri, Jul 27th 2012 6:51am — Mike Masnick

One of the oddities concerning the Megaupload shutdown and indictment was the fact that the company had named famed producer (and husband to recording star Alicia Keys) Swizz Beatz as CEO just a few months prior. Beatz is extremely well known in the industry, and widely respected. After the shut down artists like Diddy and Busta Rhymes immediately spoke out in support of both Megaupload and Beatz. Beatz wasn't named in the lawsuit, but recent filings in the case have the US Justice Department noting that Beatz has not been cooperative with their lawsuit, suggesting he may get dragged unwillingly into the fight.

We wrote about an interview with him a few months ago, where he talked about how greed from the labels explained their unwillingness to embrace new technology. In a new interview, as pointed out by TorrentFreak, Beatz is going even further and defending Megaupload. He touches on a variety of issues, but notes that the company was offering a system (not unlike BitTorrent's new offering) whereby artists could offer their work for free, paid for by ads... with 90% of the money going to the artist (more or less the flipped ratio of a traditional record deal). He repeatedly notes how many friends he has in the music world, and how it would be ridiculous for him to piss them all off by "robbing" from them. Some have raised questions about Beatz's claims -- and he's mostly refused to give any specifics while the lawsuit is ongoing -- but no one can deny his widespread influence and respect in the industry. Furthermore, he highlights the new business models and how they represent an opportunity.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: swizz beatz
Companies: megaupload

69 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

BreadGod (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 6:56am

Cue the inevitable troll comments about how Swizz Beats is a dirty pirate apologist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- arcan, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:05am
  
  Re:
  damn apologists they are everywhere....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:11am
  
  Re:
  Which will com from MAFIAA apologists
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
  
  Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:54am
  
  Re:
  "Cue the inevitable troll comments about how Swizz Beats is a dirty pirate apologist."
  
  No, more like cue the comments that point out that this guy misses the point entirely. It's not about control, it's about a scammer in New Zealand selling someone else's content without permission and racking up $150 million doing it.
  
  That is money right out of the artist's pockets. That is money right out of the chain that produces new music, movies, and software.
  
  He doesn't get it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - TDR, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:07am
    
    Re: Re:
    Prove it, AC shill. Now. With documented, non-industry evidence. And prove as well that infringement causes any harm whatsoever, with the same conditions as the above. Otherwise, provide a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site. Now. Any other response, including silence and/or imitating/parodying this one, will be taken as such a retraction. Your mad rantings convince no one, and your condescension destroys your arguments no matter what you say. Conduct yourself in a civilized manner like a human being and without insults, and we may pay attention to you. Otherwise, sod off, smeghead.
    
    Here is what you and your MAFIAA masters really say: "COMPETITION!!!???? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LAWS!!! BUT BUT LAWS CAN'T BE WRONG!!! THEY JUST CAN'T!!! PIRACY!!! WE HAVE TO MAKE IT OUT TO BE SOMETHING IT ISN'T SO WE CAN KEEP FLEECING THE PUBLIC!!! WAAAAHHHHHH!!!! ARMIES OF SHILLS AND TROLLS TO CONSUMER BLOGS!!!! NOW!!!! WE MUST TURN BACK TIME TO 1990!!!!! AAAHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!! KILL THE INTERNET!!!! KILL THE INTERNET!!!! KILL THE INTERNET!!!! WE CAN'T ALLOW THE PEOPLE TO KNOW THE TRUTH!!!! WE CAN'T LET THEM COMMUNICATE!!! GAAAAAGGGHHHHHHH!!!!! WEEEE... AAAAAARE... OOOOOOOBSOLEEEEEEEEEEETE!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - MrWilson, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:46am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If the Department of Justice can't prove it, a lowly AC shill won't be able to either.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:34am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What the fuck was that? Seriously dude, it's a discussion here, not child care.
      
      Fact is Megaupload made 150 million, plain and simple, and people were not paying for access to their own files. They were paying to download, and the most popular downloads (apparently hidden from the top list) were copyright files.
      
      The rest of your post is fucking disgusting. If that is how you think, I truly think you need to see a doctor or something.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:51am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "With documented, non-industry evidence. And prove as well that infringement causes any harm whatsoever, with the same conditions as the above. Otherwise, provide a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site. Now. Any other response, including silence and/or imitating/parodying this one, will be taken as such a retraction. Your mad rantings convince no one, and your condescension destroys your arguments no matter what you say. Conduct yourself in a civilized manner like a human being and without insults, and we may pay attention to you. Otherwise, sod off, smeghead."
        
        I guess you missed that entire part of the comment, huh?
        
        He asked you for proof to back up your claims. Things are obviously not plain and simple if the "case" the U.S. said was a sure thing is falling apart before the public's eyes. Obviously, thing were not as clear cut and dry as you and others would have the rest of us believe.
        
        Fact. Megaupload, A BUSINESS, made money. Plain and simple.
        
        That fact alone is not enough to assume, which is what you are doing, that people were paying to download copyrighted material. What it says is that people were paying to use the services offered by Megaupload, namely, cyber locker storage.
        
        That is the only fact that can be extrapolated from that figure. People paid money for file storage services. Nothing more, nothing less.
        
        So again, as TDR already said, "Prove it, AC shill. Now. With documented, non-industry evidence. And prove as well that infringement causes any harm whatsoever, with the same conditions as the above. Otherwise, provide a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site."
        
        Of course, you can dismiss this comment like you did TDR's but if you do so it does more harm for you than it does the rest of us. It goes to show that despite things being as "plain and simple" as you claim they are, you can't come up with anything even remotely resembling proof/evidence to support your FALSE claims. In which case, dismiss away.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 12:34pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You don't even give any proof of your claims and you expect us just to take your word on it?
        
        You're the one who's disgusting. You can't deal with facts and just get all emotional. I got no respect for rabid ideologues like you.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - John Fenderson (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:39pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Again, prove it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jeff_Vader_runs_the_Deathstar? (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:09am
    
    Re: Re:
    Well, looking around here on my desk I see a $5, 3 quarters and a random coffee cup of change so I can mail that somewhere to cover more than the part of the "$150 million" that would have ever been seen by an actual artist...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:55am
    
    Re: Re:
    That is money right out of the artist's pockets. That is money right out of the chain that produces new music, movies, and software.
    
    No it isn't!
    
    You provide no evidence - because there is none.
    
    He doesn't get it.
    
    No - YOU don't get it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:26am
    
    Re: Re:
    1. It's not money of of creator''s pockets. Just because someone got something for free does not mean they could or would pay for it.
    
    2. If people went to megaupload for "free" content and MU still made money then it just goes to show that artists should offer up their contetnt megaupload style.
    
    3. We even don't know if pirated content was the intent of the site. Content takedowns of things in violation of copyright law were done while MegaUpload was operational so that works in mega's favor on this point.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:36am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "Just because someone got something for free does not mean they could or would pay for it."
      
      They didn't get it for free. They paid for a "download pass" to get it. It wasn't free.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        They paid for cyber locker services. Nothing more, nothing less. That much is actually provable with facts.
        
        You don't even have proof people were paying for a "download pass". Unless you do. In which case, present it. Otherwise, much like the rest of your comments, this one too is JUST YOUR OPINION, based on absolutely nothing even close to an actual fact.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - The eejit (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 12:07pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        No, you could access one file at a time for no monetary cost to yourself. You could upload things for no monetary cost to yourself..
        
        Try again.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 12:36pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        And here you prove your ignorance.
        
        You didn't have to pay for anything to download from Mega. The free downloads worked fine and I got plenty of legal content from there.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2012 @ 7:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You're just making it up as you go along, do you?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - TtfnJohn (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:59am
    
    Re: Re:
    Lemme see now. He's an artist himself and he doesn't get it?????
    
    Care to explain that dichotomy?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:05am
    
    Re: Re:
    That is money right out of the artist's pockets. That is money right out of the chain that produces new music, movies, and software.
    
    Stop. OMG. It hurts. I still can't stop laughing.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:06am
    
    Re: Re:
    Alleged scammer in New Zealand. Oh wait, I forgot, it's the 21st century and it's guilty until proven innocent.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 1:39pm
    
    Re: Re:
    He doesn't get it.
    
    Seriously?? I'd say given what he does, and has done for quite some time, he understands the workings of the the music business better than 98% of the people on the planet.
    
    And quite frankly, I firmly believe that he is the real reason Megaupload was shut down. Because if it was really about infringement, and they really had enough proof, they'd had it for close to two years before they chose to use it.
    
    The simple fact is that Beatz's knowledge of how the industry works, combined with his large circle of friends (because even if it's really half of what he'd brag about it's still a pretty large list) gives him enough clout to be able to pull some serious talent away from the major labels and away from their control.
    
    Because in the end, their fight has nothing to do with money directly, but ultimately who controls the flow of money. And anything that disrupts their control of the flow is absolutely unacceptable.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Franklin G Ryzzo (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 2:06pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Let's do some quick back of the envelope calculations...
    
    4% of all music consumed is unpaid and come from cyberlockers...
    
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120726/20131119853/riaa-knows-tried-to-hide-th at-most-unpaid-music-acquisition-comes-offline-swapping.shtml
    
    Of the 236 lockers that were tracked in 2011, 75% of all unpaid material that was accessed could be attributed to a top ten list. On that list, Megaupload (the largest cyberlocker in the world at the time by leaps and bounds) came in 7th with around 3% of that 75%...
    
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/dotcom-tells-ars-industry-stats-vindicate-megas -takedown-policy/
    
    So that means Mega can be accused of facilitating roughly 2.25% of the downloads from all cyberlockers that facilitated only 4% of all music consumed. That would mean that Mega would be responsible for .0009% of the total music consumed, or .0014% of all unpaid music...
    
    Let's contrast this with Fileserve, a much smaller locker service that was not targeted yet comprised roughly 46% of the 75% attributed to the top 10 locker services. This would equate to 34.5% of all unpaid music attributed to coming from cyberlockers, or 1.4% of all music consumed, or 2.1% of all unpaid music consumed depending on how you'd like to look at it. Fileshare, a much smaller locker service, could be said to have facilitated these downloads at a rate over 1500 times that of Mega...
    
    So what were we talking about again? All that math made my brain hurt, so please feel free to double check it... If I'm not doinitwrong then it would seem like there's been a lot of demonizing and crying about something that seems statistically irrelevant and that there should have been much more lucrative targets to pursue...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2012 @ 7:29am
    
    Re: Re:
    yawn...that "selling content" story agan. Before you shill, perhaps make an effort to come up with an argument? MU did not "sell content". the site was free to access, and one of the fastest ones for free use. Direct your ire at Rapidshare for that one...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
fogbugzd (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:14am

>>Furthermore, he highlights the new business models and how they represent an opportunity.

Opportunities for artists are threats to traditional business models.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Colin, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:24am

I thought this was only going to be about Megaupload, then I zoned out for a minute and he was going on about Allen Iverson and was so confused...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ima Fish (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:30am

I've always said that shutting down Megaupload had nothing to do with shutting down Megaupload. It was to spread FUD and kill the entire cloud storage market before it became entrenched.

Who would invest in an industry that can be shutdown anytime and anywhere?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:37am
  
  Re:
  "Who would invest in an industry that can be shutdown anytime and anywhere?"
  
  ANY industry can be shut down if sufficient pressure is brought to bear by established interests.
  Why do you think we don't have fully-electric cars instead of hybrids (and damned few of those)?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:41am
    
    Re: Re:
    We do have fully electric cars.
    
    Turns out that electric cars suck balls.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:53am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      When the cars first started showing there were projects of electric cars and public transportation. Oil industry killed those efforts or maybe we could be more advanced.
      
      I do not think that electric cars (as in plug and charge) are the solution. I believe a fuel cell (possibly with gasoline since it's safer and we already have an infra-structure to produce it) with a battery to act as a 'cache' (like cache in processors or DVD burners). Electric cars pose another problem in the long term: what will we do when the batteries die? Some proposed using these batteries to store solar power to feed a few houses during the night (and they can sustain a few households indeed) and it would be an wonderful source of distributed 'generation' that could lower the losses in the transmission lines but ultimately it doesn't solve the problem of what to do with the dead batteries. Recycle? Trash?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:55am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        As clarification, batteries that are no longer useable in the electric cars are the ones that can still be used to feed households.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:08am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I believe in fuel cells and total electric motors, they both will have uses why limit everything to only one or the other, have multiple choices.
        
        Batteries the only responsible solution today unless people develop a non-toxic battery in the future, is to recycle them, maybe you get a rebate for bringing in an old battery.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:11am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        My pet idea is that you could trade in your battery (like you do with propane tanks) at gas stations.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yep that would work too, but they have to have a positive value else people start throwing them everywhere so they don't have to pay to get rid of them.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Haywood (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:41am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Good idea, except they would need a forklift to move them around. I guess if the engineers really applied themselves it could be as easy as driving over an automated pit. That would make refueling comparable to a fill-up with a gas car.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:00am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You'd still have issues with the obsolete batteries, even if they are LiPO. But it's an idea that is already considered for electric cars.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Richard (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:46am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Batteries the only responsible solution today unless people develop a non-toxic battery in the future
        
        The future is here already.
        LiPo batteries are already non-toxic
        
        From http://www.bmfa.org/resources/lipobatteries.html
        
        Disposal of LiPo batteries:
        
        Put the pack in a safe open area and connect a moderate resistance across the cell terminals until the cell is completely discharged.
        CAUTION: The pack may get extremely hot during the discharge.
        Puncture the plastic envelope and immerse in salt water for several hours.
        Place in your regular rubbish bin.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:45am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yes, that could be an alternative But I still believe batteries should be a cache only.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:51am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Actually, I mean fuel cells as in hydrogen cells (chemical reactions producing electric current). The same properties can be used with virtually any compound. Except it's easier to do with the hydrogen-hydrogen bond.
        
        The engine is still the same of a plug and run vehicle. And actually I strongly support electric equipment in general, with an efficiency that tops 99% in some cases it only poses the issue of how to produce the electricity to feed it while controlling the losses of the distribution system.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:12am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Do you own one?
      
      I had one for a month, don't know why people complain about it, it is silent, drove me everywhere and it was always full, in the morning.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - ltlw0lf (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:45am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Turns out that electric cars suck balls.
      
      Only because the oil industry holds the patents for the good batteries, which they won't allow manufacturers to use to replace gas guzzlers.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Do you know which patents these are? This subject is relevant to my interests.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ltlw0lf (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 5:00pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Do you know which patents these are? This subject is relevant to my interests.
        
        I believe this is what you are looking for, Google is your friend.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:31am

Oh look, Pirate Mike wrote another article praising the great work Megaupload did in giving money back to artists... Oh wait, they were going to do that. Kim Dotcom needed to buy another mansion first. God, you're disgusting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:34am
  
  Re:
  YOU are disgusting. Willingly ignoring the facts and attacking others for pointing out abuse of power and lack of due process. Disgusting and disturbing.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:12am
    
    Re: Re:
    Why feed the troll? He has nothing substantive in his post and stooping to his level will make you loose since he can beat you with experience.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:15am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It's fun =/
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - That One Guy (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:47am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Ah, but it's funner, and more effective, to just hit report and move on.
        
        Nothing, but nothing annoys a troll more than being ignored, unless it's being ignored and having their sad personal attacks, constantly debunked 'points/arguments', and childish name calling hidden from view.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:38am
  
  Re:
  "Oh look, Pirate Mike wrote another article praising the great work Megaupload did in giving money back to artists... Oh wait, they were going to do that."
  
  Who's "they", boy?
  Not the companies, boy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:42am
  
  Re:
  This right here proves you're not on techdirt for intelligent discussion. You just want to believe whatever you want to believe and to hell with facts and ligic.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:10am
  
  Re:
  I don'T like Kim Dotcom that much, but between him buying a new mansion and you "artist" buying another one I say screw you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Colin, 27 Jul 2012 @ 8:28am
  
  Re:
  Oh my god, you're so boring it's absurd.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:10am
  
  Re:
  Actually they did. It's call Megabox. Look it up!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:02pm
  
  Re:
  Is that like the "pending" list in Canada? 300 000 + songs
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:43am

http://gigaom.com/2012/06/21/megaupload-megabox-kim-dotcom/

This guy got a preview of Megabox, which Kim Dotcom is still planning to move forward with. He is also set on getting artists paid either through direct transaction with the consumer or money from ads.

I think it sounds interesting considering the app is not just a music player but allows people to upload music with unlimited space, as well as offers a way to shop for goods.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 7:57am

recent filings in the case have the US Justice Department noting that Beatz has not been cooperative with their lawsuit

In other words, he's telling the DoJ the truth, rather than what they want to hear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- TtfnJohn (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:01am
  
  Re:
  That and he's under no obligation to co-operate.
  
  Guild by disassociation, it seems. :-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
gorehound (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:01am

I hate the MAFIAA and will Censor them and any Artist who signs with them from my Wallet.I will buy & support Local Art & INDIE Art.I will also support Companies who give back a large percentage of sales & earnings to the Artist instead of treating Art like dirt and ripping off Artists which is what the MAFIAA does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:13am

and i dont suppose for one minute that those that have 'raised questions about Beatz's claims' are scared even more that the truth is eventually going to come out, are they? this whole Mega episode has stunk since day one. it will be released sooner or later who was behind it and why it was really done. when that happens, there will be a big pile of shit tipped on to certain high positioned politicians and industry execs (some of whom were politicians themselves before changing hats!) the consequences are going to be memorable as will the revelations that will come to light over previous and on-going court cases and the way the outcome has been/is being manipulated! i am sure the industries will survive but they will be in moderately poor shape and have a lot to do to get customers back!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 12:14pm
  
  Re:
  "i am sure the industries will survive but they will be in moderately poor shape and have a lot to do to get customers back!"
  
  Please read the tech dirt post ... Two-Cent Doughnuts Breed Decades Of Bad Blood: It's Not So Easy Going From Free To Paid
  
  With the crap they have pulled over the past 10 years they will never recover their ... ehhhem .... customers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:47pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I agree. There is literally nothing that RIAA member labels and artists could do that would convince me to give them a single dime. Even if they were the sole source of decent-to-great music (they are not), I'd just do without music altogether.
    
    They are irredeemable scum.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 11:20am

Beatz is extremely well known in the industry, and widely respected.

You mean the Swizz Beatz who has fathered four different children with four different women? That is the guy you say is "widely respected"?

You sure have a low threshold.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 2:33pm
  
  Re:
  who has fathered four different children
  How would you father four children all the same?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:49pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Begun, the clone wars have.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:47pm
  
  Re:
  To be fair, no one said he was respected for his personal life.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2012 @ 9:34am
    
    Re: Re:
    I don't know. Jerry Sandusky was pretty well respected as an outstanding football coach. Now, I doubt anyone would characterize him as "widely respected" owing to his personal life.
    
    And I realize that there's a huge difference between being a child molester and fathering a child with every woman who comes along, I think that one's personal life cannot be separated from one's professional life when it comes to being "widely respected". JMHO.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:48pm
  
  Re:
  You just lost.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 6:19pm
  
  Re:
  Wow, really? You have to sink to levels this low just to make a point?
  
  Why hasn't the prosecution recused themselves, then? I'm pretty sure they committed SOME misdemeanour we can unreasonably exaggerate to completely disregard any point of respect they have despite it having no relevance to the issue at hand...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 28 Jul 2012 @ 7:26am
  
  Re:
  Ah yes, the infamous "can't attack the message, so attack the messenger" approach. Says it all, doesn't it?
  
  You can't poke holes in what he said so instead you'll resort to insults and ad homs. [claps] Congratulations. Your own comment just basically shot down any possible argument you could have (but didn't) make.
  
  Now people can see what you'll resort to. Rather than present facts to point out the flaws with what he said, you go for the cheap shot. Well done, sir. Well done.
  
  Is it no wonder then that the majority of people who can read are realizing how full of shit you and your kind are?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]