Re: "their love of windowed releases." -- is THEIR right.
It's a big part of why I switched many years ago to the belief that BIG IS BAD in and of itself. The only way to make The Rich respond is to limit their money and power. You're still of the notion that the present plutocracy works the way "capitalist" purists claim, in spite of all evidence that it's not a meritocracy.
And yet you defend the actions of BIG and BAD entertainment companies...
You, sir, are one hilariously complicated, hypocritical individual.
Re: Re: "hall not identify any commercial information technology products"
Makes sense, you don't want to draw attention to products that are in use, as this could result in providing a terrorist with direction.
Terrorist0: Aha, the NSA says 3 Mile Island is using WindowsXP SP1, we know the vulnerabilities, we can turn off power or cause a melt-down. Those infidels will feel our wrath.
Terrorist1: Yes, thank Allah Security listed what systems they use, I spent two days looking for vulnerabilities in Windows ME.
In all seriousness, critical infrastructure would not be easily hacked into. It would be far easier to have people on the inside do the job. There's a quote I learned in Networks and Security in 4th year (paraphrased)"90% of the resources attempt to block people from getting in, while 90% of the theft occurs from the inside."
The sad part, 90% of the population would believe the US Gov knows what they are doing :(
Re: Re: Out_Of_The_Balls (or, a pre-emption of stupidity for the sake of moving past it already)
I usually don't read posts in advance of making mine, nor often go back, so on that score, you're wasting your own time and making the site repugnant to others. Both those are fine with me. Ad hominem isn't an argument; mine then wins by default.
Does this lack of reading include the main articles? Your arguments and their supporting premises often indicate as such.
Re: Logically then, if people were paid to consume, no one would.
Along with that, never forget that Mike's goal seems to be to do away with copyright altogether, so his vision is to allow anyone and everyone to flog the same content. In Mike's bizzaro-world, there's never any need to protect the source producer of the content or prevent grifting.
Nice insertion of bullshit here. Mike has repeatedly said in main articles he is NOT against copyright, but the ABUSE of copyright.
I agree and do the same. When I was in university, sure I'd look all over, now I don't want to waste my time with that.
I buy way more movies (than I should) now because I'm not a broke student, but MOSTLY because they are in the discount bins. Some "new" movies are still $17.99 and up, well I am not paying that, but I will pay $10 or less if I know it is good (aka seen it before and like it) or $5 or less if it appears interesting.
Yes, I've spent upwards of $5 on a single DVD without knowing whether it was good or not. That's not too much of a risk, but $15 at the theatre or for a "new" DVD, nope, not worth the risk.
Or you could purchase a distro of GNU/Linux that comes with libdvdcss/2 because they signed a license and paid the fee.
Is there a free version for Windoze? All I have ever seen is the ones that are OEM, which means the cost of the machine (or OS) included the license feel and SW required to read the DVD.
I'm willing to bet that license was a LOT cheaper than what they will charge a GNU/Linux distro.
I am curious about these talented musicians you speak of who have decided to call it quits:
0) How long have they been in the industry?
1) Have they been gigging all along or just writing and recording?
2) Have they setup social networking and to what extent (creating a MySpace page doesn't count - are they active? are they trying YouTube?)
3) Are they professional or hobbyists?
4) Have they been building up a fan-base via playing live and attending festivals?
5) Do they interact with fans and try to talk to people?
6) Do they feel the only way is the old-label way?
7) Were they ever signed to a label before?
8) Did they receive advances from the label?
9) Did they have to pay said advances back?
10) Have they tried alternative means beside the label-favoured method of "get signed or die" ?
11) How old are they?
12) Do they have dependents? House? Wife? Kids?
13) Have they tried in the new "free" market (as you referred to it) or are they giving up based upon fears of what might happen if they really gave it a go?
14) Are their live performances drying up?
15) If they are non-performers, are their attempts to connect with non-writing performers failing?
16) Have they adapted by moving to areas where music is more popular (there are areas of cities or entire towns where live music just isn't popular)?
17) Are they finding their music is actually on P2P sites or bitTorrent sites? How many seeds?
18) Have they tried beyond the "here's my CD, buy it" or "buy a tShirt" approach? Perhaps packages/bundles of creative ways of interacting with fans, like a performance in a fan's home or even simple as personalized voice message or even a simple email that isn't a copy/paste?
19) Have they tried partnering with creative local folks who are big into marketing?
20) Have they tried partnering with other musicians to join fanbases for performances?
These are just a few questions and what I am trying to illustrate is that it is NOT as simple as "filesharing is killing the industry" because the business is a commodity and like all commodities, speculation plays a factor. As does disinformation (RIAA/MPAA unsubstantiated stats that play on fears).
Some people quit before trying.
I've heard the "I don't see a record store downtown anymore" as a "filesharing devastating industry proof" meanwhile there are many more factors involved: online sales mean people don't need to go out, selling music in large stores (WalMart, Zellers, Target, BestBuy, FutureShop etc...) for discounted supplier costs, increased rental space costs (especially in Vancouver where said artist was referring to)... just to name a few. People don't necessarily want a full CD, they want the song they want and singles were always reserved to a few, one shelf, with just the top-pop stuff. The rest? Well you either need the best-of or the album, whichever you derive is the better deal.
And while some argue the price is not a factor (and it finally has come down thanks to Napster), the fact that you can get a single for $1+/- instead of entire album, especially with competition from video games and home movie markets (it's not like people suddenly have more money to spend on entertainment - sorry but that is bullshit from the MPAA/RIAA).
Again, it is simply not as cut-and-dry as you make it out to be.
In the words of John Rzeznik: (paraphrased)"They dangle your dreams in front of you, so you sign"
Naturally, the labels figured out that by using acquisitions they could form a controlled monopoly over access to the "best" recording studios/producers/publishers/distributers/marketing firms.
The result is "you can try and definitely fail on your own because we are the gatekeepers, or you can sign with us, do what we tell you, give everything to us, and maybe you'll get to keep your advance. But don't count on it as we'll make you pay that back even if you fail, unless you're the few exceptions where we forgive you so we can say 'we lose and don't recoup from everyone'"
So the artists are not really making a mistake per-se, they are just trying to follow their dreams. What kind of artist (only a handful) can be legal/marketing experts while also being incredibly talented AND have the ability to write hooks that appeal to the masses without doing covers or modifying their sound to be someone else?
That's the problem today and it is a valid one, but there ARE people who can help for those who can't be like Amanda Palmer and do lots of the work themselves. So they need to partner with people who can help them but are not out for the control and those people DO exist.
Is that really the reality of the situation? Do some artists who feel the same as Mellencamp really expect the average Internet user to understand such a concept? Who really has the sense of entitlement here? Is this really a case of Mellencamp's music is traded in such large quantities and no one purchases his music, or is it no one purchases his music anymore? Is it "piracy" or is it obscurity because he's not in the spotlight? The reality is obscurity hurts you FAR more than filesharing.
For some artists, like Mellencamp and David Lowery (of Cracker and Camper Van Beethoven fame), you just can't get them to think outside the box created by the industry they once loathed while in their hay-day. That same industry they look back upon with blinded glasses because they don't understand the new model is "there is no magic bullet." The new model is "you do whatever works for you and your fans." And you must experiment to determine what that is.
All the while you have to struggle to be heard because NOW the field is level, there's no suit saying "beat it, we've got hits already" or "we like you but you need to sound like our hit machines or beat it." Now EVERYONE has a chance! If you can market yourself, if you can connect, if you can work with people who can market and connect for you without screwing you over, if you have real talent (well sometimes you don't even need that - aka popular stuff today), then you can make it.
First and foremost, you need to listen to Trent Reznor! What are you goals for you and your band, sort that out first, then you can look at the way forward and try different things, including old-school-record-label-does-all-for-you. It's all based upon your goals. You can't fight the tide, so once you realize your goals you can create a plan, and expect to have to change/adapt it, to navigate to your goal.
What's funny is the UN writes nasty letters about rights abuses or countries preventing weapons inspections. That's it. Just a letter. Nothing gets accomplished.
Remember the letter from the UN regarding Israel's reaction to the flotillas? Yeah, neither does anyone else.
But this cyberterrorism buzz-word, fearmongering crapolla they call a "report" will actually do something. It will be used by the US to push more ACTA/SOPA/PIPA/ScrewLotsUnderThisSection legislation. Yet nothing will come of the rights abuses or war crimes or anything else that the UN does that comes without teeth.
It depends on the label, not all labels have access to all markets. You have to find the right label/team for you, for your goals.
I highly doubt Reznor would have signed with Columbia if he wanted South Asian markets like India/South Korea/Thailand or other markets like Japan/China/Russia.
To reach those markets you'd go with a team focused on those markets.
If Trent decided he LOVED Bollywood, he'd team up with a group from that area, who's got the connections (not just says they have the connections) and who does the promotion (not just says they do the promotion).
Re: "the overall story was pretty much what I expected."
Why don't you read it instead of skimming, you might learn and understand more.
There's a lot of detail and key words used and if you fail to read those key words, you'll misinterpret (which I assume is your intention given your past comments in other threads).
Maybe you should re-read it, especially Reznor's comments on DIY and what is most important - goals.
And the second important point, the labels HAVE CHANGED (some are still the same I am sure).
It is NOT _just_ because of his NIN fanbase that Reznor was able to negotiate a deal where he kept his masters. Likely he had other options, which he said he did, so he was not under the old way of "sign or you'll never grow in this forest."
Your overly simplified summary conveniently misses several key points that change the overall message. Given your tone, I'm sure that was intentional.
On the post: HBO Has A Distribution Problem, But Just 'Going Without' Does Nothing To Push Them To Solve It
Re: "their love of windowed releases." -- is THEIR right.
And yet you defend the actions of BIG and BAD entertainment companies...
You, sir, are one hilariously complicated, hypocritical individual.
On the post: Innocence Of Muslims Maker Produces Acting Waiver Signed By Cindy Garcia
IMDB
On the post: Here We Go Again: Latest Draft Of White House Cybersecurity 'Executive Order' Is Leaked
Re: Re: "hall not identify any commercial information technology products"
Terrorist0: Aha, the NSA says 3 Mile Island is using WindowsXP SP1, we know the vulnerabilities, we can turn off power or cause a melt-down. Those infidels will feel our wrath.
Terrorist1: Yes, thank Allah Security listed what systems they use, I spent two days looking for vulnerabilities in Windows ME.
In all seriousness, critical infrastructure would not be easily hacked into. It would be far easier to have people on the inside do the job. There's a quote I learned in Networks and Security in 4th year (paraphrased)"90% of the resources attempt to block people from getting in, while 90% of the theft occurs from the inside."
The sad part, 90% of the population would believe the US Gov knows what they are doing :(
On the post: Colbert Takes On First Sale Rights; Mocks Kirtsaeng Case
Re: Re: Re: Selling a vinyl copy is more TV show staging, not relevant.
Thank you! Thank you very much!
On the post: Dear RIAA: Pirates Buy More. Full Stop. Deal With It.
Re: Re: Out_Of_The_Balls (or, a pre-emption of stupidity for the sake of moving past it already)
Does this lack of reading include the main articles? Your arguments and their supporting premises often indicate as such.
On the post: Dear RIAA: Pirates Buy More. Full Stop. Deal With It.
Re: Logically then, if people were paid to consume, no one would.
Nice insertion of bullshit here. Mike has repeatedly said in main articles he is NOT against copyright, but the ABUSE of copyright.
But don't let facts get in the way of your logic.
On the post: Dear RIAA: Pirates Buy More. Full Stop. Deal With It.
Re:
I buy way more movies (than I should) now because I'm not a broke student, but MOSTLY because they are in the discount bins. Some "new" movies are still $17.99 and up, well I am not paying that, but I will pay $10 or less if I know it is good (aka seen it before and like it) or $5 or less if it appears interesting.
Yes, I've spent upwards of $5 on a single DVD without knowing whether it was good or not. That's not too much of a risk, but $15 at the theatre or for a "new" DVD, nope, not worth the risk.
On the post: Biden Takes Part In MPAA Board Meeting; Suggests Studios Tell Paying Customers They're Thieves
Re: Re: Re:
Is there a free version for Windoze? All I have ever seen is the ones that are OEM, which means the cost of the machine (or OS) included the license feel and SW required to read the DVD.
I'm willing to bet that license was a LOT cheaper than what they will charge a GNU/Linux distro.
See, corruption and greed are everywhere!
On the post: John Mellencamp: Thou Shalt Not Permit The Internet To Derail Our Gravy Train
Re:
0) How long have they been in the industry?
1) Have they been gigging all along or just writing and recording?
2) Have they setup social networking and to what extent (creating a MySpace page doesn't count - are they active? are they trying YouTube?)
3) Are they professional or hobbyists?
4) Have they been building up a fan-base via playing live and attending festivals?
5) Do they interact with fans and try to talk to people?
6) Do they feel the only way is the old-label way?
7) Were they ever signed to a label before?
8) Did they receive advances from the label?
9) Did they have to pay said advances back?
10) Have they tried alternative means beside the label-favoured method of "get signed or die" ?
11) How old are they?
12) Do they have dependents? House? Wife? Kids?
13) Have they tried in the new "free" market (as you referred to it) or are they giving up based upon fears of what might happen if they really gave it a go?
14) Are their live performances drying up?
15) If they are non-performers, are their attempts to connect with non-writing performers failing?
16) Have they adapted by moving to areas where music is more popular (there are areas of cities or entire towns where live music just isn't popular)?
17) Are they finding their music is actually on P2P sites or bitTorrent sites? How many seeds?
18) Have they tried beyond the "here's my CD, buy it" or "buy a tShirt" approach? Perhaps packages/bundles of creative ways of interacting with fans, like a performance in a fan's home or even simple as personalized voice message or even a simple email that isn't a copy/paste?
19) Have they tried partnering with creative local folks who are big into marketing?
20) Have they tried partnering with other musicians to join fanbases for performances?
These are just a few questions and what I am trying to illustrate is that it is NOT as simple as "filesharing is killing the industry" because the business is a commodity and like all commodities, speculation plays a factor. As does disinformation (RIAA/MPAA unsubstantiated stats that play on fears).
Some people quit before trying.
I've heard the "I don't see a record store downtown anymore" as a "filesharing devastating industry proof" meanwhile there are many more factors involved: online sales mean people don't need to go out, selling music in large stores (WalMart, Zellers, Target, BestBuy, FutureShop etc...) for discounted supplier costs, increased rental space costs (especially in Vancouver where said artist was referring to)... just to name a few. People don't necessarily want a full CD, they want the song they want and singles were always reserved to a few, one shelf, with just the top-pop stuff. The rest? Well you either need the best-of or the album, whichever you derive is the better deal.
And while some argue the price is not a factor (and it finally has come down thanks to Napster), the fact that you can get a single for $1+/- instead of entire album, especially with competition from video games and home movie markets (it's not like people suddenly have more money to spend on entertainment - sorry but that is bullshit from the MPAA/RIAA).
Again, it is simply not as cut-and-dry as you make it out to be.
On the post: John Mellencamp: Thou Shalt Not Permit The Internet To Derail Our Gravy Train
Re: Re: Re: Re: Dear Mr. Mellencamp
Naturally, the labels figured out that by using acquisitions they could form a controlled monopoly over access to the "best" recording studios/producers/publishers/distributers/marketing firms.
The result is "you can try and definitely fail on your own because we are the gatekeepers, or you can sign with us, do what we tell you, give everything to us, and maybe you'll get to keep your advance. But don't count on it as we'll make you pay that back even if you fail, unless you're the few exceptions where we forgive you so we can say 'we lose and don't recoup from everyone'"
So the artists are not really making a mistake per-se, they are just trying to follow their dreams. What kind of artist (only a handful) can be legal/marketing experts while also being incredibly talented AND have the ability to write hooks that appeal to the masses without doing covers or modifying their sound to be someone else?
That's the problem today and it is a valid one, but there ARE people who can help for those who can't be like Amanda Palmer and do lots of the work themselves. So they need to partner with people who can help them but are not out for the control and those people DO exist.
On the post: John Mellencamp: Thou Shalt Not Permit The Internet To Derail Our Gravy Train
John debunked elsewhere too
http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/109446/what-john-mellencamp-doesn%E2%80%99t-understand-abo ut-his-industrys-future-or-past#
On the post: John Mellencamp: Thou Shalt Not Permit The Internet To Derail Our Gravy Train
Dear John
For some artists, like Mellencamp and David Lowery (of Cracker and Camper Van Beethoven fame), you just can't get them to think outside the box created by the industry they once loathed while in their hay-day. That same industry they look back upon with blinded glasses because they don't understand the new model is "there is no magic bullet." The new model is "you do whatever works for you and your fans." And you must experiment to determine what that is.
All the while you have to struggle to be heard because NOW the field is level, there's no suit saying "beat it, we've got hits already" or "we like you but you need to sound like our hit machines or beat it." Now EVERYONE has a chance! If you can market yourself, if you can connect, if you can work with people who can market and connect for you without screwing you over, if you have real talent (well sometimes you don't even need that - aka popular stuff today), then you can make it.
First and foremost, you need to listen to Trent Reznor! What are you goals for you and your band, sort that out first, then you can look at the way forward and try different things, including old-school-record-label-does-all-for-you. It's all based upon your goals. You can't fight the tide, so once you realize your goals you can create a plan, and expect to have to change/adapt it, to navigate to your goal.
On the post: UN: The Problem With The Internet Today Is It's Just Too Open & Terrorists Might Use It
Re: But, I thought...
What's funny is the UN writes nasty letters about rights abuses or countries preventing weapons inspections. That's it. Just a letter. Nothing gets accomplished.
Remember the letter from the UN regarding Israel's reaction to the flotillas? Yeah, neither does anyone else.
But this cyberterrorism buzz-word, fearmongering crapolla they call a "report" will actually do something. It will be used by the US to push more ACTA/SOPA/PIPA/ScrewLotsUnderThisSection legislation. Yet nothing will come of the rights abuses or war crimes or anything else that the UN does that comes without teeth.
On the post: Economist's Defense Of Perpetual Copyright: It's Best To Just Ignore The Economics
Re: Is Liebowitz an "econmist"? If so, then like all, he's crazy.
Damn.
Wait, are you sure this is really you and not an imposter?
On the post: Trent Reznor Talks To Techdirt About His Unconventional New Record Deal, And Why He Still Loves DIY
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Trent Reznor Talks To Techdirt About His Unconventional New Record Deal, And Why He Still Loves DIY
Re: Re:
On the post: Trent Reznor Talks To Techdirt About His Unconventional New Record Deal, And Why He Still Loves DIY
Re: Re: Re:
I highly doubt Reznor would have signed with Columbia if he wanted South Asian markets like India/South Korea/Thailand or other markets like Japan/China/Russia.
To reach those markets you'd go with a team focused on those markets.
If Trent decided he LOVED Bollywood, he'd team up with a group from that area, who's got the connections (not just says they have the connections) and who does the promotion (not just says they do the promotion).
On the post: Trent Reznor Talks To Techdirt About His Unconventional New Record Deal, And Why He Still Loves DIY
Re: Re: Re:
So the "deal" is not the usual deal.
On the post: Trent Reznor Talks To Techdirt About His Unconventional New Record Deal, And Why He Still Loves DIY
Re: "the overall story was pretty much what I expected."
There's a lot of detail and key words used and if you fail to read those key words, you'll misinterpret (which I assume is your intention given your past comments in other threads).
On the post: Trent Reznor Talks To Techdirt About His Unconventional New Record Deal, And Why He Still Loves DIY
Re:
And the second important point, the labels HAVE CHANGED (some are still the same I am sure).
It is NOT _just_ because of his NIN fanbase that Reznor was able to negotiate a deal where he kept his masters. Likely he had other options, which he said he did, so he was not under the old way of "sign or you'll never grow in this forest."
Your overly simplified summary conveniently misses several key points that change the overall message. Given your tone, I'm sure that was intentional.
Next >>