Jonbouy

ProjectM

Man, I feel this gets seriously besides the point here man. Just let it go....
 
Original post edited btw since it seemed to take so much focus out of the message...
 
 
Whatever

I'm putting an opinion forward.  You are the one that put your 'heart' into it and clouded into an emotional issue.
 
I don't mind if you don't agree with my POV at all.  I don't actually disagree with yours but even if I did I realise you are entitled to it and wouldn't think any less of you for it or think you were 'out of line' for having it.
 
Mind you with this story and the publicity it seems to have created, if this guy has managed to garner enough mugs to shell out for his library and to become loyal paying customers in future as a result I've got to take my hat off to him.  It could be the marketing move of the century.
 
Sadly, I don't need a Taiko library just now even if it were free.

Jonbouy, I have always enjoyed our encounters here on the forum and I seriously don't mind that our opinions differ on this. There's a middle ground somewhere and any discussion on this should be healthy for the biz and all of us. But that needs that opinions and facts from both side of the table is taken into consideration.
 
But being accused of not caring for the right things and needing a sainty check - hell yeah, I take that personally. And you keep at it!
 
Perhaps I used the wrong expression there - then I guess I should appologize(?) - but you base your argument towards me, based on semantics instead of looking at the content of my message whcih was given in relation to the article. On either side of an argument, there's room to look at the other side. Sheesh, relax a little my friend. I have no idea what I've said or done to you to have you go off like bull infront of the red blanket.
 
I have no problems with your opinion on this. I simply stated that I hate piracy and why, and that I feel for the guy based on my own experience. The personal attacks are unnecessary.

I'd support the anti-piracy movement more if it benefited the artists in any way. As it is it's merely there to provide a way for lawyers and record execs to extort even more money from music lovers. Instead of keeping up with the times and adapting to new technologies they are trying cling to an outdated business model. If they had focused their efforts toward online distribution they'd have a much healthier bottom line without antagonizing their customer base and criminalizing otherwise law abiding citizens. It also puts unnecessary strain on a judicial system that is already stretched to the limits and should be focusing on real criminals. It's the same old song and dance. Rich, slothful dinosaurs can't be bothered to invest in new ideas so they use their power and money to lobby governments into crushing up and comers. Remember the hubbub about VCRs back in the 80's? Seems a little silly now doesn't it? It didn't kill Hollywood. It made it stronger and created an entirely new way for them to sell their product. The people that support the heavy handed approach being taken to this issue are usually the same folks who will scream "FREE MARKET" when anyone dares to try and implement rules to stop corruption, consumer abuses and environmental catastrophes. The hypocrisy boggles the mind.

Adapt or die. 

"I don't condone piracy anymore than I'd condone someone stealing my bike from outside a shop, but I put a lock on it because I know it's likely to get stolen if I don't. I also learned early if something you get something with out working for it it worthless, that is true in my experience."


So this theoretical bicycle Jonbouy- if it gets pinched it is worthless to the person who stole it. What about the person who it was stolen from? Worthless I suppose.

Rain
I remember getting in touch w/ the owners of a Russian fan site dedicated to my wife, politely asking them to cease distributing her material for free. They had everything she'd ever recorded, even the most obscure stuff, all freely available. They never even replied and the site is still up and running. 

ProjectM 
I've had a couple albums pirated, 6 months of work next to our day jobs not including the song writing, thousands of dollars for studio rental/equipment and mix and master services, time and money spent on promotion, getting labels involved, getting agents involved, loads of paper work, less time with friends and family, less time spent catching up on much needed rest and leisure time and so forth... 


The sales stoped over night,litterarly, when they hit the pirate sites. We still owe money on one of the records and we can see on a couple of sites that it has been downloaded several thousands of times. 


Whatever hippie free the world destroy the capitalistic industry nonsense these bastards argue with, it doesn't take away the feeling of having your gut ripped out. Sure, it is to be expected that your stuff gets pirated and thankfully we get paid to play live so we don't face bankruptcy from doing this... Live shows and day jobs, that keeps us going. I have more than once asked my self if I can handle this kind of stuff though. At one point I quit playing music and started composing it for the money. 


The worst part is when telling stories like tese to a proud pirate, they always counter when they're out of arguments: The people who downloaded your music probably wouldn't pay for it anyway so your music can't be that good. 


Well, pirates are narrow minded bastards and I want to shoot them where it hurts! But what can be done?


The lack of respect amazes me! 


And how shortsighted and selfish! 


I could go on for hours about this. Sorry for the rant! 

@ Rain and ProjectM, 

Sorry to hear :( 

I find true statements such as the above unsettling (very sad) and is why I believe that piracy is indeed part of the problem; as I said in my earlier post about legendary bands splitting up and others going bankrupt!

Be it CD or download either way piracy does indeed occur and of course that in itself effects artists/writers who are lucky enough to make a profit, some still owe, others go bankrupt (it's true) and it's more unsettling that there are people who simply don't care or don't fully understand or who are simply very selfish and narrow minded; for crying out loud one song only cost $1... but furthermore the artists/writers get only a small cut (share) of that!! 


     Listen up everyone

Discussions like these are sensitive, it can really stir the emotions in some of us, I guess words are likely to get mess-up (not explained well) grammar and spelling errors and/or then misconstrued completely because of the sheer nature of such a very sensitive topic. 

That said; Please try and be a little more understanding, open-minded, don't take every word so dang literally and please try to keep the peace.  If you offend a friend here surely it's not too difficult to apologize. 

I feel for people like Rain and ProjectM because I know others (exceptionally talented signed writers/musicians) who you think would be financially successful and retired by now given the numerous credits they achieved (music awards) but in fact are effected very badly, some of them turned to hard drugs, gone bankrupt, lost everything and others committed suicide. :( 

No doubt it takes more than talent to be a 'real' success and it's the consensus that the music business is ruthless (corrupted) as explained in my earlier post (loopholes in the laws).  I'm not putting blame on labels alone and not all are that bad; point is; there is much more to this very complex beast (music business) that would fill 2000+ pages (too much to discuss here)! Now on top of that you have so-called music fans not willing to part with just $1 for their favorite songs; if people don't like the song they simply won't wast time or take the risk of downloading it from some warez/torrent site... 

.... fact is; people have a fair idea that downloading from warez/torrent sites is illegal - when they hear a song they love on the radio or TV guess what?... for a lot of people will first-up search the Internet to see if they can get it for free rather than pay.  Honestly I was silly to think that the Internet leveled the playing field but instead it has become a superhighway of corruption that allows criminal activities to flourish even-more!  Sorry to say; that is the reality! IMO! 

Again; sorry for the rant :-( 

jamesg1213

mike_mccue


"A large collection of taiko drums does not travel. I had to go to them."




I wonder how the folks that actually made the drums feel about having the sounds stolen and sold all over the web by a "samples" company?

Given that a small taiko drum retails at upwards of $1,000, I doubt if they're expecting to sell many to people recording in their spare rooms.

I just found a warez site that let me download an actual Taiko drum!!!  (Want the link?)

Oh I get it- the two sentences have no relation to each other. Why are they in the same paragraph?

Make something that can't be pirated if you don't want it pirated because if it can be it will be,

Herein lies the rub. It can be pirated. No matter what it is or how it is released, if it is intended for mass distribution, it can be copied. The distribution channel of the original is irrelevant. Vinyl was being ripped and copied to 8-track long before streaming audio was around.What is new is not that things can be copied, but that the copies can be distributed widely anonymously, and virtually without consequence from locations beyond the reach of the law. 

The digital tape recorder was never really available in this country (USA) because the audio industry convinced congress that they would lose their shirts if perfect copies could be made, and hassles over what type of copy protection circuit could be built into those machines before they could be marketed here. Copy protected (DRM) digital audio has been largely abandoned because it made the songs unusable for the user or was so easily circumvented that people got ripped versions that did not have DRM to make life easier, not just because they were free. 

The inescapable conclusion to your observation is that since you cannot record anything in music that cannot be pirated, then you should not make anything. Or rather you should not make anything that you do  intend to make money. The artists who seem to be the most sanguine about the inevitability of piracy, are those who can fill a stadium with fans willing to spend 1000 times the artist's piece of the cost of a paid download to watch them sweat.

Most musicians will never have that business model. The dream of being discovered on a download site and elevated to super stardom is like the dream of hitting the lottery. Clearly the guy who spent so much time and money creating a sample library of obscure drums should not have expected to break even. Increasing his costs by trying to distribute it in a secure way might have actually worked for him. It would probably not have netted him much more. But only because the demand for his product is so low that it is hardly worth the trouble to steal. Regardless or how you present your recording to the world, if it becomes popular, you will lose a lot of potential revenue to pirates. 

So you can ridicule him for not anticipating the pirates, and say it is like complaining about getting wet when you jump in the river, but it is absurd to advise him to take the ferry if there is none. And one thing this thread has demonstrated is that there are people who are not making millions in the business, who are suffering real harm from the pirates.

Bouy - that's the pragmatic truth. And I don't think anyone here is naive enough to ignore that. 

It is an assumption on your part that people "surprised" and totally shocked. If you've read that interview, you'll know that the guy knew his stuff would be stolen when he started out. - Though of course, there can be shock when you actually see it happen to you and what the numbers are.

I don't think anyone is expecting any drastic change in the situation. But if a few people see the light, all the better. And I don't see how anyone could argue against that, not unless they stick to their assumptions.

Quite simply. Piracy is a crime of opportunity.
 
Locking a bicycle doesn't prevent the possibility of it being stolen, but it greatly reduces the opportunity.
 
I already talked about supermarkets calculating the differential between losses due to opportunity and having everything on display.  They know some of it will go missing because of how it is displayed/presented.  They calculate the loss against the cost of fighting theft.  They are business people they work out how to make it pay against the reality that many people don't play ball.
 
Putting it in a box and mailing it out limits some of the opportunity and also gives an opportunity to find the culprit that leaked an online copy for distribution.
 
We've already discussed that vendors prefer supplying a download.

Rain


Bouy - that's the pragmatic truth. And I don't think anyone here is naive enough to ignore that. 

It is an assumption on your part that people "surprised" and totally shocked. If you've read that interview, you'll know that the guy knew his stuff would be stolen when he started out. - Though of course, there can be shock when you actually see it happen to you and what the numbers are.

I don't think anyone is expecting any drastic change in the situation. But if a few people see the light, all the better. And I don't see how anyone could argue against that, not unless they stick to their assumptions.

Thanks Rain, that is the most objective outlook on the whole thread.
 
I'm all for people seeing that the consequences of wholesale theft costs us all in the end. 
 
I'm bored of the common emotional responses and indignation that often flares up around the subject. 
 
I do also think that an expectation that exists among creative types that some reward for what they do is some kind of entitlement.  I'm not saying that is true in this case but it is an attitude that seems to prevail along with the piracy issue.
 
I think just as many of us share a responsibilty not to steal we also have a responsibility not to provide no-brainer opportunities for those that will steal given an easy chance and that's the stance I'm taking on it lately.

In the days before the internet, musicians had to rely on those over-paid labels to promote their work (so less potential).  Back then, many people would "copy" their music onto cassettes for their friends but, since this took some effort, this wasn't that big of a deal to the overall record sales.

Now musicians can get FAR more exposure thanks to the internet (more potential), but it's now even easier to get a copy of the work.

Sounds like nothing has really changed except for the scale (and there's more stuff out there to experience).

craigb


In the days before the internet, musicians had to rely on those over-paid labels to promote their work (so less potential).  Back then, many people would "copy" their music onto cassettes for their friends but, since this took some effort, this wasn't that big of a deal to the overall record sales.

Now musicians can get FAR more exposure thanks to the internet (more potential), but it's now even easier to get a copy of the work.

Sounds like nothing has really changed except for the scale (and there's more stuff out there to experience).

Well, you had to know someone who owned the album. For someone like me, in a small town of 11 000 souls, you can imagine that the number of people I knew and w/ whom I shared musical interest was ridiculously low. 

In many case, I'd buy one album, you'd buy the next and so on, and we'd made tape for each others. Freeloaders who didn't have anything to trade were often excluded. But pretty much everybody I knew actually wanted to own originals too. 


If I grew up in that same town today, I'd have a pool of anonymous resources of millions of people to start my collection. Somebody out there has it for you to take, often conveniently packed as a single file containing the entire artist discography.


Worth mentioning that, in many countries, a portion of the $ coming from the sale of blank cassettes was injected back in the industry. It was the case in Canada. However, w/ the advent of MP3 players and such, no adjustments were made, so that's a direct lost right there. May seem trivial, but I've seen the numbers, and it has a very real impact. And once again in that case, it's not the suits upstairs who'll be negatively impacted first.


Same for airplay vs royalties. Since corporations have taken over, almost every radio station has been assimilated as a part of one of the two or three main networks, competing against each other. So in short, if network A plays your song, you most likely won't get any royalties from network B and C, and your exposure will be limited to the audience of that particular network. And you won't go on that particular popular TV show to sing your song because the competition owns that station.


And obviously,  the heads of those networks do have direct influence over the artist's music.


That's what happens when the same people own the papers, the radio stations, the TV stations and the record labels...

 
I was chatting to this Chinese bloke in the pub the other night.
 
I asked him what he does for a living and he said, "I'm a Pirate."
"Oh" I said, "So you sail on a boat."
 
"No" he replied, "I fry pranes."
 
 

Jonbouy
I'm all for people seeing that the consequences of wholesale theft costs us all in the end.  
 
I'm bored of the common emotional responses and indignation that often flares up around the subject. 
 

So what, Your coming off as a pushy jerk, if that's the message your shooting for, congrats, you've done it.


Your need to express your opinion on this subject is important, I get it, I also get where all the others are coming from.


Get off that dead horse and if it bothers you that some here express otherwise, don't shove it down their throats. It's kind of tyrannical in a sense.


There is my rant, I'll wait for your response.

Jonbouy


I appreciate your observation.

Thank you kind Sir.