This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

Open Letter about file sharing to some chick at NPR

Discussion in 'Bar' started by Revson, Jun 29, 2012.

  1. Revson

    Revson Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Messages:
    633
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
  2. wutzington

    wutzington massive member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cologne
    I think letters don't change shit.
    Someone said once that as long as there is nothing better than "free", people will choose "free" and I think that person was right.
    You have to compete with "free".
    Find something that makes music worth buying again, that can't be downloaded (like a live performance for example).
     
  3. drew_drummer

    drew_drummer Dancefap

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    6,486
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    London, UK
    The guy is a douche. Talking down about a "free culture" on a wordpress blog. :rolleyes:
     
  4. Revson

    Revson Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Messages:
    633
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    What made it not worth buying in the first place? Why is paying $10 for a collection of music that you enjoy (along with other artwork) that several people spent weeks/months creating unreasonable? And you can take it with you anywhere and enjoy it at anytime. Isn't the ultimate purpose of any work of art the enjoyment it brings you? How is that not worth money?

    You are right that people will choose free over spending any sort of money. I'm guilty of it, too, especially in my college days. The last couple of years I've changed my mind about file sharing because I ultimately came to the same conclusions stated in the article.
     
  5. 006

    006 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,955
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    As long as is there is a way to get it for free, people will take it.
     
  6. wutzington

    wutzington massive member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cologne
    Of course it is worth the money. But why spend money if you can get the same thing - minus the artwork and physical copy, which you would have to create yourself - for free?

    It's not about stopping piracy. It's about creating something that is impossible to pirate.
     
  7. 006

    006 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,955
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Which is impossible with music. If it can be heard, it can be stolen.
     
  8. SentencedToBurn

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2001
    Messages:
    3,270
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Chicago
    gotta be the dumbest thing ive ever heard. so who cares if you have 500 cracked audio plugins? who cares if you have 500 illegally downloaded movies and 15,000 illegally downloaded albums? because they didnt make it impossible to pirate??? This whole "this is just the way it is" argument is bullshit. the quality of EVERYTHING goes down if every art form is just full of hobbyists because no one can sustain a living off of it
     
  9. Ermz

    Ermz ¯\(°_o)/¯

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    20,382
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I bet he was using Verizon, AT&T or Charter to facilitate doing so too. The corporate world has us by the balls - you sort of have to pick your battles on that one. Doesn't make you a douche, simply a realist.

    I fundamentally agree with the guy. It seems like he has a relatively grounded view of how these things go down. Ultimately any artistic 'free culture' does simply support other interests. As said, these companies don't exist in a vaccuum. Profit lost by artists is simply diverted to others who are looking to institutionalize theft and appear to be succeeding in doing so, philosophically, to the new generation. As someone whose dozens of works have been, and continue to be pirated, I can relate on the grounds that none of it is really 'free'. The filesharing sites have vested financial interests in looting and profiteering from our work, at our own cost. Most absurdly I find that it's the artist, or their representation which needs to take the time to draft the DMCA takedown notices and other forms of legal persuasion to kick these sites into action to remove blatantly copyright-infringing content. The law puts the burden of proof on us, which means we effectively need teams of lawyers working around the clock in order to protect our interests. Sounds feasible.

    The thing is, I disagree with his assertion that it has to be the individual's choice to do the ethical and moral thing. That lends way too much faith to the human race, who by and large on the whole 'ethics' and 'morals' points fail dismally. If the continued existence of common laws and organized religion has anything to say, it's that we NEED morality to be instituted and enforced through fear.

    Fear is ultimately the only true motivator when it comes to dealing with the general populace. Our countries' respective leaders all prey on ours to further their own agendas on a regular basis. We simply need to find a way to inject that fear back into online filesharing. Whether it's through being able to set up 'dummy' trackers, which keep records of each individual user who downloads illicitly-provided content, or through taking a step back and simply waging a war on these hundreds of illicit filesharing sites. We need to show that prosecution for theft of intellectual property has the same risk associated with it as the theft of physical property.

    The problem is that without an active online police force, nothing will change in regards to the decline of professionalism in art. You CANNOT rely on the good will of the general populace to overturn a whole new generation's status quo. It is only when it is in their own best interests that people rise up to do anything. Stealing from artists has no immediate, nor appreciable impact on the average person. Thus, they do not care, will continue to do it, and will also continue to justify their behavior in ways that reconciles them with their own asinine sense of existence.

    Furthermore we can probably gain some mileage through correct education. Most people inherently need to be stupid, unfortunately that seems to be a constant in the human race. However, there are many who are being misled by the propaganda spurted by these corporate interests, and have no fundamental knowledge base with which to dispel the illusion. If simple morality or 'ethics' classes were mandated in general schooling, it may help some little bit with those few who are capable of higher thought.
     
  10. Trevoire520

    Trevoire520 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,055
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Fife, Scotland
    The difference being he didn't steal any copyrighted material in order to write his blog.
     
  11. wutzington

    wutzington massive member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cologne
    I DO care if you have 500 cracked audio plugins, 500 downloaded movies and 15.000 downloaded albums. I love what I do, I am very passionate about audio engineering and I have worked hard to get the few audio skills I have.

    I don't want to sound negative.
    I think it's a very exciting time for the art of audio engineering.

    But let's face it: Economically, the only way you can make the whole thing profitable again is by finding something new to add to it.
    Something revolutionary.
    A stereo recording of a band is nothing new anymore.
    Just like a photograph or a movie.

    You can't sell photos to anyone anymore. With movies it's the same thing. But you can still sell the thing of which you make the photos/movies/recordings. People still go to live concerts. People still visit the grand canyon just to experience it instead of just looking at pictures of it. People still go to the zoo to look at animals instead of just watching a documentary.
    People want their music in a format that transcends the term "physical".

    What I mean to say is:
    Audio engineers will only disappear in the sea of hobbyists if the artform does not evolve and transcend what it is at the moment.

    Listening to a recording of a sound is not the same thing as listening to the sound itself.
     
  12. TesticleMilkshake

    TesticleMilkshake pewpewlazrz

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    New York
    While I understand the sentiment and sympathize with BOTH ends of this argument, I find this letter extremely frustrating, because it's not TRULY acknowledging the realities of economy or the complexities of a wired society. Why not write about something of great importance on a global scale and that the majority of society can relate to? Why not write about how Japan happens to be one of the largest consumers of CP? Why not write about how Russia happens to be one of the largest producers of CP? Why not write about internet bullying? Anything better then some shit smeared on a fucking wordpress blog. Go post some cat pics on your tumblr and call yourself "cool".

    I'm a graduate student, I'm attending an a first class school, but paying a shit ton of money for my education, which will hopefully, pay off in the long run. Virtually ALL my money goes towards food, transportation or education. I'm 24 and I live at fucking home, for chris'sakes. While I try to buy albums of student and up 'n' coming musicians, it really does not bother me when I rip a year-old album from a multi-platinum millionaire like Lady Gaga. Bitch makes a lot of regardless of money whether she sells shit on iTunes, Amazon, etc. CONCERTS. LIVE MUSIC. ENDORSEMENTS. It's like that South Park episode. Brittany Spears couldn't buy a new jet with a jacuzzi because of lost of sales to torrents and rapid-shits? Fuck, I'm still trying to figure out how to pay for my medical crap and wondering how I am going to pay off student loans when I graduate. If I can find it for free, I will download it for free, unless it is an artist I know who is struggling or I'm going to like the album artwork. Priorities in this media-saturated, pop-cultural wasteland of a country are FUCKED-UP. To quote Peter Griffin, "Land of the Free, Home of the Whooper."

    While what I am saying could be considered hypocritical, I'm sure this open letter to NPR was written by some pompous-ass, trust fund baby hipster from Williamsburg, who has never really worked with the music industry, has not a feasible economic worry in the world other then when what time Daddy is going to pick up the tab at the local vintage thread boutique. People lie this will just take up a cause just to look trendy and because their roommate has a Moog. BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND HOW SOMETHING WORKS ON A HIERARCHAL ECONOMIC LEVEL, I'M OOOHHHHSOOOOOO DEEEEEEPPPPP. I bet you that kid started this blog to get some filthy NYU art student to suck him off. And I hope she gives him a bad case of Blue Waffle dick too. These ass-tartlets are just as bad as the mid-life crisis, corporate jerk-offs who signed Justin Bieber. Fuck the system, I'm going to listen to Devin Townsend and Regina Spektor.

    Also, I'm drunk right now, but seriously. Honestly, I would probably have more respect for a letter written like this coming out of UltimateMetal, but the fact that it was addressed to "college student Emily White at NPR" makes it more likely that the writer faps to the guys from MGMT.
     
  13. Donovan S.

    Donovan S. Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Oklahoma, US
    If you would have read the whole article, you'd know the writer is a teacher of music business economics at the University of Georgia.

    Lady Gaga is a terrible example considering the INCREDIBLE amount of musicians that lose tons of money due to file sharing.

    I'm totally with Ermz on this one.
     
  14. Donovan S.

    Donovan S. Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Oklahoma, US
  15. TesticleMilkshake

    TesticleMilkshake pewpewlazrz

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    New York
    IT'S A COVER!

    No, I take back my hipster rant, though this professor really came off to me as smug and pompous. Also, I'm largely being an asshole, which I'll forwardly admit.
     
  16. Brandon E.

    Brandon E. Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    NJ USA
    Honestly...Piracy exists. It isn't going anywhere. People will continue to do it as long as the internet exists. Everybody needs to stop bitching about it, and the top minds up there need to figure out a way to restructure this industry. I am not a genius, I don't know how to fix it, but bitching about piracy is definitely not helping anything.

    Honestly, as a starting artist, I am half GLAD piracy exists. When I make cds, they become readily available to anyone on the internet to hear. This is exposure. These people would NOT be paying 10 dollars for a cd they have never heard of by an artist they have never heard of. I have friends in bands who receive messages from fans that are from countries they've never even sold a single cd to. And you know what? I think that's awesome. Music to me is about reaching as many people as possible, if I wanted to make money I wouldn't be trying to play guitar for a living. I want to spread my message. I don't want people sacrificing their money to me unless they WANT to donate to my cause, and there is NOTHING hindering that. If my cd is sitting in your itunes library, and you've never listened to it, and its never made any impact or influence on your life, I don't want your 10 dollars. They can pirate all of my shit for all I care, and I just hope that if they enjoy it enough, they might choose to buy it and send some money in my direction to support my art. I also truly believe that if you are REALLY THAT GOOD, you WILL be okay. Die hard fans will always support you. I know a lot of shitty mediocre musicians in bands nobody cares about who like to bitch about how they make no money because of piracy and the state of the industry. You know what? Work harder. Make something people care about, make people want to support you, because they will.

    It is a simple fact that because of piracy, you might be making less money, but there are for damn sure more people out there in the world who are listening to your tunes, and that's really what I think it's about for a real artist.

    I do acknowledge that because of piracy AND youtube, less people are making money and the industry is going down the tubes, but that shit is THERE and it is NOT going anywhere. You can't blame people, you can only blame the existence of the internet, and I'm not sure how far you'll get with that.

    PIRACY ISN'T GOING ANYWHERE, GET OVER IT AND FIND SOME NEW IDEAS.
     
  17. TravisW

    TravisW Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    918
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Fargo, ND USA
    I think the problem is the notion of "Free". My band's demo is free. Actually, everything I've personally recorded is currently available for free because I decided that it should be. What people are considering to be "free" is actually stolen. "Free" inherently implies that the person who technically owns an item is willingly giving it away. When that person isn't willingly giving it away, it's "stolen".

    So basically, most of an entire generation of music buyers has gotten used to thievery. And, like most antisocial human behavior, they can rationalize it in the blink of an eye.
     
  18. Brandon E.

    Brandon E. Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    NJ USA
    I think it about this way...if you think people pirating your music means that they would have bought your cd if the internet wasn't around, you are wrong. Somebody who would NEVER have blindly paid 10 dollars for your cd off the shelf is now having a chance to check it out, are you really going to be upset about that? If yes, then you might not be an artist for the right reasons.

    How many people can actually afford to buy thousands of cds? Almost nobody. But now, thousands of cds are being heard by people who could never have afforded to in the past, and for the sake of music being spread and heard, the world has never been better. I am willing to sacrifice album sales from unenthusiastic buyers for art to be able to spread like this.

    This is coming from somebody who believes that real genuine music is made for being heard, influencing, and impacting people's lives. This is what's most important. It's SECONDARY purpose is to be sold for money, but the latter is more important to me.

    So that's my philosophy, if anyone doesn't agree...well they can go ahead and bitch about people stealing their shitty bands cd that probably sucks anyways.

    Support the artists you care about. Check out the ones you DON'T care about by pirating their shit on the internet. Maybe you might find a good one and become a supportive fan. Sounds good to me.

    This is reminiscent of a rant that was delivered to me by a very successful, very influential, and moderately famous guitar player, and I stand by everything he told me.
     
  19. Ermz

    Ermz ¯\(°_o)/¯

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    20,382
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    So now they are going to listen to it for free and never give the artist the $10 anyway? Yeah, I can definitely see the benefit.

    It's great to sit back and pontificate about the whole situation from an idealist's perspective. The reality is that quality albums take time to write, a lot of know-how and gear to record and a lot of manpower and connections to press, promote and distribute. None of that comes for free.

    What you're effectively saying is that the artist should dig deep out of their own pockets in order to gain fulfillment through the knowledge that others are liberally stealing their music. It's all good, so long as the world gets to listen to it, right? It won't matter that thousands of other bands would've released cheap, home-produced CDs that theirs will get washed out in. It won't matter that the average listener will barely give it a spin due to their randomized, 10,000+ song playlists queuing a track maybe once a month. So long as you have that minimum wage job at Walmart there to support your life as a musician, that's what it's all about, right? It won't matter that you'll never be financially secure enough to own a home, raise a family, have healthcare, nor live a life of any means... it's all about the art.

    It's a good thing I don't disagree with you, otherwise I might have to worry about people 'stealing my shitty clients' CDs, which probably suck anyway'.

    /shoots self
     
  20. Brandon E.

    Brandon E. Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    NJ USA
    Where is the benefit? That when you tour in these countries, people will be at your show. When they listen to your cd, they might buy it, they might buy your other cds, they might buy your new cds from then on, and they might buy your merch. Hell of a lot better than never having heard it at all if you ask me.

    And you know what? Yes. That IS what it's all about. You know who was poor? Vincent Van Gogh, Franz Schubert, Charlie Parker...real artists who created for the love of their art.
     

Share This Page