Century Media suing BitTorrent users... Opinions???

[pack1fan4life]

Don't have a mobile device that can use Spotify (or any app). Not only that, not everything is on Spotify. So the choice was, listen via Youtube, or download.


And I DO buy albums when I have the money. It's not as often as I would like, but I've gotten crap from my parents about buying TOO MANY albums before. I also go to shows and buy merch of bands I discovered...through downloading.

 

[DuchessOfDork]

I know that, and I don't hold you guilty for it. However, when an 18 year old kid in the US complains that he doesn't buy music legally (much anyway) because he has no money for it, I make it a point to remind him that for TEN DOLLARS a month, he can listen to a bazillion songs legally.

Plus, the artists get a bit more money. I was just listening to a story about this on NPR. Artists get paid a bit more if subscribers listen to their music, so you're helping out, even if it's just a little bit.

 

[PureXul]

I wasn't talking about the strategy of the lawsuit itself. I was talking about the way they're going about it from a technological standpoint using buzzwords to attempt to sue a large group of people as one particular entity.

Yes, I am aware that this is a settlement scare tactic. I know exactly how this works, and I know that 99% of these people will never see the inside of a courtroom. My whole argument based on my original lol comment was the whole absurdity of the attempt to sue a "swarm".

A swarm is a term for all of the peers that are sharing/downloading a torrent - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_BitTorrent_terms#Swarm . If you google "lawsuit swarm does," this is not a new or absurd tactic. There are contentions about specific methods of suing swarms - ie, you can't group Does from multiple swarms into a single lawsuit - but the Swarm Does method has plenty of precedent.

The actual case files for CM vs Swarm Does require a PACER account, and quite frankly I'm not interested enough in this to pay for the court docs. However, it would be safe to assume that each of the six cases they files refers to one offending torrent, and the Swarm Does are the parties that were downloading and/or sharing that specific torrent. With that in mind, it makes perfect sense to file an initial suit against those Swarm Does, subpoena the ISPs, then revise the suits to name the actual offending parties.

 

[dcowboys311]

Don't have a mobile device that can use Spotify (or any app). Not only that, not everything is on Spotify. So the choice was, listen via Youtube, or download.

Or buy


I understand where you're coming from and to a large extent sympathize with it -- me diving into metal as much as I have is 100% due to downloading, I download albums all the time with the intent of never, ever purchasing (rare/OOP/not available, not shelling out $100 for a used copy on eBay type albums), have purchased merch of bands I discovered through downloading, etc. There are a million ways to justify it but ULTIMATELY you are still taking for free an experience that is meant to be paid for. I fully support downloading as a trial&error/sampling method and will continue to do so until it is no longer an option, but come on.....you're in the wrong here.

When I was in college and spent 95% of my money on basic expenses like rent, food, or schoolbooks and the remaining 5% on beer, there were a lot of things that I wanted but could not afford. It's just a fact of life. You can't and shouldn't have everything. Fortunately I was in a position where a large portion of the music I liked was available to me for free and legally but from the sounds of it, you aren't.

One suggestion is to take all that money you gave to Delta or the bus company or whatever method you took to come to Atlanta and budget it better so that you are supporting the people you want to support.

 

[dcowboys311]

Honestly the best thing going right now is Bandcamp. Bands can stream as much or as little of their music as they want. They can offer albums for free download or sell digital albums for whatever price they want and the link is impossible to miss. They can sell merch. BandCamp only takes 15% of your music sales and 10% of your merch sales. Something that's caught on recently in the death/black world that hasn't yet in the trad/power/prog world is labels offering their entire discography up on BandCamp for streaming with a digital download option right there and a link to the physical media on the page as well. It's perfect.

 

[nailz]

I agree with you, but I think the point he was trying to make is... if you're gonna download something, why not pay for it so you're not outright stealing it?

Yes, it was mainly this. Also, Digital content is now often cheaper by a significant amount than physical media. I get wanting physical things for money and how that can be a preference, and that's fine. It's no longer for me, but if that's how you'd like to do it, cool. But to out and out claim its an inferior product is silly.

I spent a lot of money on my equipment (thanks for the complement by the way ), and people have often taken my provided web versions and used them for a multiple of advertising, and I don't get compensated. That fucking BLOWS for me, but I put the content out there and it's not worth losing my mind over. But the idea that people shouldn't have to, or WON'T pay me for my work just because it's 'websize' and not the high-rez HQ versions is what you're basically saying. The shots I post are perfectly usable for nearly everything you'll ever need them for. I'm going to drop it here on this part of the discussion because it's not really relevant, but there you have it.

 

[nailz]

Don't have a mobile device that can use Spotify (or any app). Not only that, not everything is on Spotify. So the choice was, listen via Youtube, or download.

Excuse machine is full of excuses. Honestly, your sense of entitlement blows my mind. I don't honestly care if you download everything you ever listen to. What baffles me is how you can honestly project an air of not feeling like you're doing anything wrong.

 

[AngraRULES]

Don't have a mobile device that can use Spotify (or any app). Not only that, not everything is on Spotify. So the choice was, listen via Youtube, or download.

I could swear to god an iPhone 3GS costs a penny nowadays. O yeah, lots of carriers have free Android devices with a contract as well. I'm missing something here...

 

[Justin G]

Personally, I download all the time. I'm an 18 year old kid with little money. I buy CDs when I can, because I like owning physical copies, but I often don't have the money to do so. I refuse to pay for digital music, because the quality is inferior.

As a result of downloading, I have found some real gems that I have since bought. I also have a huge list of CDs I want to buy (and eventually will). Downloading is the very reason I'm into metal right now. It's the very reason I went to ProgPower this year.

As far as Spotify goes, do you really think everyone only listens to music on a computer? When I can use Spotify, I do.

Sorry man. I applaud your enthusiasm for the music, but there's no way to justify what you're doing. Spotify aside, bands have made it extremely easy to stream their music and see whether it's worth buying. Taking their entire albums on your own terms without payment of any kind is stealing, plain and simple.

 

[DuchessOfDork]

I could swear to god an iPhone 3GS costs a penny nowadays. O yeah, lots of carriers have free Android devices with a contract as well. I'm missing something here...

Also.. songs are $.99 on iTunes. You're telling me you can't afford $.99? Or $10.00 for an album that might have even more than 10 songs? Even when I was a broke-ass college kid, if I could pay $10 for an album I liked, I would have.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

Ok, so I've seen you mention this subject a few times and to be honest, I don't get it, especially when you yourself are a photographer (and quite good from what I can tell). You constantly go on about how physical media isn't necessary, digital is fine for everyone, blah blah blah. This is the equivalent of me saying that all I need for picture enjoyment is a thumbnail and I'll be just fine. To you that's crazytalk! Maybe for YOU all you enjoy is soundwaves -- for me and many other people, there's more to music than that. There's an experience that goes along with looking at album art, flipping through liner notes, sorting albums, trading records, and everything that comes with it. It's not just about the music, it's about the experience.

The idea of a photographer saying a physical, self-developed print of an image you took with an analog camera that you have to manually adjust for shutter speed, ISO, etc, is "irrelevant" or "isn't necessary" would hypothetically be the dumbest thing I've ever heard in the history of this board. So hopefully he won't say it.

 

[nailz]

The idea of a photographer saying a physical, self-developed print of an image you took with an analog camera that you have to manually adjust for shutter speed, ISO, etc, is "irrelevant" or "isn't necessary" would hypothetically be the dumbest thing I've ever heard in the history of this board. So hopefully he won't say it.

First of all, no, I wouldn't say it. Secondly, your extreme obvious throw off of digital technology is probably the dumbest implication I've ever heard out of you. So I hope I'm misinterpreting.

 

[Century Media]

Well, I guess I picked a good time to finally register on this forum.

Let me start off by saying that I am not a "big wig" here at CM. Most of you probably met myself (long haired guy with piercings) or Ross (taller guy) at the fest this year. We are just the lowly salesman and buyer for the company.

The lawsuit is not being discussed with us whatsoever. I'm sure your boss doesn't tell you everything about your company as well. We only know what we read online. Speaking for myself, I believe that stealing, no matter in what form, is stealing and people should be held accountable. Those people that downloaded those albums knew what they were doing.

The argument that the big bad records label ruined the industry is far from true. The record label fronts tons of money to make an artists dream a reality. Let's just run down what the money is used for:

-Printing
-Shipping
-Recording
-Producing
-Legal
-Graphic Design
-Instruments
-Video
-Radio
-Commercials
-Management
-Tour Routing
-Tour Vans
-Gas
-Press Releases
-Accounting
-Magazine Ads
-Sound Techs
-Copyrights
-Product Management
-Internet Marketing
-Merch Printing
-CD Distribution
-Internet Distribution
-Ad Takeovers
-International Visas
-Flight
-Promotionals

Any other vendor at PP can tell you that running a label is not cheap or easy. The bigger you get, the more money you spend.

Again, I am not speaking on behalf of anyone in the company or the company itself, but I feel that if anyone was a real fan of a band they wouldn't steal from them. You might as well take their merch for free when on tour. If you put out an album you wouldn't want anyone stealing it from you. If the album is not bought, the artist and label suffers. I really don't want to get into a pissing match with anyone here. Honestly, it's an argument that will never see a clear winner - so this is all I will be writing about on the subject of illegal downloading.

Hope to see many of you again next year. Thank you to all the great people that came by the table, bought some merch or just had a laugh with us. Always a blast.

Cheers,
Jose (Century Media)

 

[DuchessOfDork]

Let's just run down what the money is used for:

-Printing
-Shipping
-Recording
-Producing
-Legal
-Graphic Design
-Instruments
-Video
-Radio
-Commercials
-Management
-Tour Routing
-Tour Vans
-Gas
-Press Releases
-Accounting
-Magazine Ads
-Sound Techs
-Copyrights
-Product Management
-Internet Marketing
-Merch Printing
-CD Distribution
-Internet Distribution
-Ad Takeovers
-International Visas
-Flight
-Promotionals

Exactly why bands work so hard to get on major labels.. just think about the bands that aren't. Where do you think the money comes from, when a band doesn't have a label paying for all this stuff? The band, that's where! So by downloading their music, you are stealing money that was spent by the musicians themselves just to create those tracks. That sucks.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

First of all, no, I wouldn't say it. Secondly, your extreme obvious throw off of digital technology is probably the dumbest implication I've ever heard out of you. So I hope I'm misinterpreting.

Yes, you are misinterpreting. As usual.

Not sure how you can jump from one extreme to the other with such cunning. Nor am I sure how you cling so tightly to the teat of "digital technology" that even a defense of analogue technology could be considered a "throw off."

 

[dcowboys311]

Exactly why bands work so hard to get on major labels.. just think about the bands that aren't. Where do you think the money comes from, when a band doesn't have a label paying for all this stuff? The band, that's where! So by downloading their music, you are stealing money that was spent by the musicians themselves just to create those tracks. That sucks.

Everyone and their mom trying to make a living off of metal is one of the worst things that has happened to the music.

At the end of the day, it's a hobby. As with any hobby, some people can turn it into a living and make money off of it, most can't. Paying money should be expected and is not necessarily a "bad" thing.

The reality is that in this day and age, when it's relatively easy to record/release an album and EVERYONE is doing it (the number of full length albums released in 2001 was 868, 2011 saw 4273 -- an almost 500% increase and rising) but the amount of $$$ available to purchase those albums has probably decreased, the majority of musicians are gonna lose money. Downloading or no downloading.

That doesn't give anyone an excuse to not put their money where their mouth is but the days of recouping costs are loooooooooooong gone.

 

[DuchessOfDork]

Everyone and their mom trying to make a living off of metal is one of the worst things that has happened to the music.

I agree with you to some degree, but we're not talking about making a living. We're talking about spending money to create something that costs money to make. It is a product. If someone carves wooden spoons as a hobby, and someone steals those spoons, is it not still theft? Metal may indeed be a hobby, but it's still a hobby that creates a tangible product.

 

[Rezz]

...but I feel that if anyone was a real fan of a band they wouldn't steal from them.

To me this is the real catch-22 of the argument. How does the music industry expect people to become a fan of a band if the only practical way to hear them is to steal the music?

A lot of us grew up in an era when we could hear metal on the radio or MTV and get to know the music before buying the whole album. I *knew* I loved Shout at the Devil and Looks That Kill long before I purchased the album, and the same goes for probably every album I bought in the 70's & 80's. But today that really isn't an option - radio sure doesn't play anything I want to hear (at least in my town they don't - we have country and hip-hop stations). You can't expect people to blind-buy albums simply because it's in the Metal section - most of the stuff in that section sucks. Sure, people can research bands and genres on the internet - Youtube, Pandora, Spotify, band sites, etc., but that takes effort and isn't practical if you aren't at your computer. Heck, I spend all day, every day in front of a computer for work - when I'm at home I'm spending time with my family, not surfing the internet or looking for new bands. Downloading has become the new radio - unfortunately it's good enough for most people and doesn't drive record sales in the same way radio used to.

I am NOT saying that stealing is right or is the only answer (I own close to 6000 CDs and I pay Spotify their $10 per month so I can have it on my phone, but I am at a point in my life where $10 is nothing to me) however I think the music industry itself is driving people to steal by taking so long to embrace modern digital times while at the same time limiting available resources and trying to drive consumers to a few specific artists. They realized long ago that they made much, much more money by selling millions of albums from 1 artist than by selling fewer albums of more artists and they have been marketing accordingly.

 

[dcowboys311]

I agree with you to some degree, but we're not talking about making a living. We're talking about spending money to create something that costs money to make. It is a product. If someone carves wooden spoons as a hobby, and someone steals those spoons, is it not still theft? Metal may indeed be a hobby, but it's still a hobby that creates a tangible product.

Ok. Do you think that, in the absence of downloading, those 4.2k albums would have all had their costs recouped? I'm not justifying outright 'theft' and never have, so I'm really not sure why you've been questioning me along that line in this thread.

There are plenty of comparisons you can use to make your point and plenty I can use to make mine. It is a unique situation. Analogies just get us in in circles.

What exactly is 'tangible' about Metal? Music by definition is not tangible. I can't touch a Slayer song. That's half the reason there's even this whole 'theft' vs 'infringement' thing in the first place.

 

[Century Media]

How does the music industry expect people to become a fan of a band if the only practical way to hear them is to steal the music?

Sure, people can research bands and genres on the internet - Youtube, Pandora, Spotify, band sites, etc., but that takes effort and isn't practical if you aren't at your computer.

You answered your question yourself. You can use any of the formats that you mentioned and it only takes a click. Not a lot of effort there. Anyone with a smartphone can do it. And if you can afford a smartphone, you can afford music.

Ok, THIS is now my last word on this. Thank you all for playing.