Does anyone know of a symbol or logo that depicts that I dont do "illegal downloads"? I am always amazed at how many people will come up to the booth and ask where I get my music, and when I explian I belong to a Dj pool, they look at me and say something like "dude, you can get music for free on bear... or lime.. etc" . My response is that I am a professional and dont believe in doing that. So to prevent that and to let people know I pay for my music I would like to use a logo or sign of some sort to post on the booth. Is there any sort of recognized symbol commonly in use thats out there? Otherwise I'll make my own.
Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 8:38 pm
I get the same response and then they assume I have internet and limewire installed on my lap top and that I can download it on the spot.
Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 9:09 pm
This is the only one that I can think of ---

Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 9:10 pm
This may not be exactly what you were after but a few ideas never the less - have a search on google - thats all i did =)





Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 9:12 pm
Ill be honest with you. Its wrong to download from limewire but there are so many DJ websites that give away free new promotional music. You dowload the songs from the list and everyday they get updated. (And its legal)...
@ CSTOLL-- Cool Symbol
@ CSTOLL-- Cool Symbol
Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 9:34 pm
sad fact is ... in the long run no one cares
Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 9:59 pm
sirkitbreaker wrote :
sad fact is ... in the long run no one cares
Not true my friend, I care. Integrity is the definition of how you behave when no one is looking...
Inviato Wed 08 Apr 09 @ 11:18 pm
I've gotten the same thing at some of the parties I've played. When I tell them I don't have a song, they often ask why I don't just download it on the spot. To be entirely honest, one doesn't even need to use a dedicated downloader to do this dirty work. A thorough search on Google can often yield exactly what you're looking for.
And that pisses me off.
Internet piracy has always bugged me -- and I don't limit that to music. Just look at all the people who illegally download VDJ itself! I payed over $300 for this program; why are you so special that you get to obtain it free-of-charge?
I find it ever more frustrating as a film major. When I make movies one day, I don't want people stealing the work that I busted my ass off for.
I wish people would get their head out of the clouds and realize that the money that comes out of their pocket goes into someone else's. Sure, you can say that you don't want your cash going into the bank account of some CEO poo-bah, but what about the little guys? Should they just get a pat on the back and a "job well done"?
... And that's my rant for the day. Sorry, but stuff like this just peeves me.
-- NowhereManXP (aka DJ Who?!)
And that pisses me off.
Internet piracy has always bugged me -- and I don't limit that to music. Just look at all the people who illegally download VDJ itself! I payed over $300 for this program; why are you so special that you get to obtain it free-of-charge?
I find it ever more frustrating as a film major. When I make movies one day, I don't want people stealing the work that I busted my ass off for.
I wish people would get their head out of the clouds and realize that the money that comes out of their pocket goes into someone else's. Sure, you can say that you don't want your cash going into the bank account of some CEO poo-bah, but what about the little guys? Should they just get a pat on the back and a "job well done"?
... And that's my rant for the day. Sorry, but stuff like this just peeves me.
-- NowhereManXP (aka DJ Who?!)
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 1:28 am
"dude, you can get music for free on bear... or lime.. etc"
I laugh at people who get their music from bear or lime, the quality is crap! And if any dj actually gets music from these places and plays it publicly, good luck!
I laugh at people who get their music from bear or lime, the quality is crap! And if any dj actually gets music from these places and plays it publicly, good luck!
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 1:51 am
i dont download catalogs off limewire and such but i have no problem downloading a track or 2, if its something thats that good i will purchase a copy but my theory is that downloading one song is like copying from the radio onto a tape but as i increase in skills and whatnot i will probably stop using file sharing sites
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 2:01 am
And on the other side Dj`s should pay for the trax and promote them for free??WHY
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 3:58 am
Thing is, sites like Limewire, the files come from users' own laptops - with films or telly downloaded from these, there are so many things wrong:
They contain viruses - my niece downloaded some of her favourite tunes for her and her sister's (they are non-identical twins) 18th birthday - didn't bother to virus-check them first - my laptop ended up with about 17 viruses!
In the case of films or telly, they might be popular English-language films or telly shows - but, when they arrive and are ready to be played, they are in English with foreign subtitles or in foreign languages with subtitles in another foreign language - you try watching Star Trek in Russian with Chinese subtitles when you're Spanish!
Some people rip music from internet streams - either the song is topped and tailed or has a jingle for a radio station on it.
My niece tried to download some tunes from artistes' own website - but she didn't realise that it only gave her a one-minute sample of the song - had I played the version of I Don't Feel Like Dancing by The Scissor Sisters that she downloaded, people would've said "Where's the rest of it?"
It's difficult to get hold of the latest hits without downloading them - you might have to pay a subscription fee, so much a month or whatever for any amount of downloads - but, firstly, you stay legal and secondly, the quality is usually good - or it should be - p2p sites, the quality is questionable.
They contain viruses - my niece downloaded some of her favourite tunes for her and her sister's (they are non-identical twins) 18th birthday - didn't bother to virus-check them first - my laptop ended up with about 17 viruses!
In the case of films or telly, they might be popular English-language films or telly shows - but, when they arrive and are ready to be played, they are in English with foreign subtitles or in foreign languages with subtitles in another foreign language - you try watching Star Trek in Russian with Chinese subtitles when you're Spanish!
Some people rip music from internet streams - either the song is topped and tailed or has a jingle for a radio station on it.
My niece tried to download some tunes from artistes' own website - but she didn't realise that it only gave her a one-minute sample of the song - had I played the version of I Don't Feel Like Dancing by The Scissor Sisters that she downloaded, people would've said "Where's the rest of it?"
It's difficult to get hold of the latest hits without downloading them - you might have to pay a subscription fee, so much a month or whatever for any amount of downloads - but, firstly, you stay legal and secondly, the quality is usually good - or it should be - p2p sites, the quality is questionable.
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 4:56 am
I have very mixed feelings about this.
Instead of condemning Internet downloading completely, I would prefer something like:
"Real DJ's buy their records"
"Real DJ's pay for music"
"If it's good enough to play, it's good enough to pay"
I draw a distinct line between personal and professional usage of music and software. I couldn't care less if somebody downloads music and software from P2P-networks as longs as it's strictly for personal usage. On the other hand, DJ'ing professionally/publicly with pirate music/software is just pathetic. Basically it shows that the so-called "DJ" has zero appreciation for his craft or the artists. I personally would not dare to show my face on a gig if I was using pirate copy or Virtual DJ or had even a single pirate track on my computer. I wouldn't have the audacity to call myself a DJ - or even a music lover - if I didn't think the stuff I play is worth paying for.
However, all this "Illegal downloading is a crime" and "Piracy is killing the music" crap would make me feel like I'm a RIAA/antipiracy spokesperson - something I have a huge problem with. The music industry tries to maintain the illusion that piracy takes the food out from the starving artist's table, which is total BS. Compared to the share those greedy pigs at the record label take the artists gets mere crumbs. Let's be honest here, the recording industry does not give a rats ass about the little starving artists or its customers. Their whole business model is based on selling the same crap over and over again and to bring huge profits to the share holders and few selected artists. Let's not forget their bed mates, the royalty collection business which is almost like a legalized mafia taxing every possible data storage device just for the POSSIBILITY it could be used for illegal activities.
The recording industry is currently engaged in a hopeless battle - and it has itself to blame for the situation. For decades they tried to sell 2 hit singles + 8 fillers (that everyone had already heard 100 times from the TOP40 format radio) on a shiny plastic disc for 25$. This might be a very lucrative business model, but from customers point of view it offers poor value for money.
Napster and other P2P-networks introduced a new service model, which was based on CUSTOMERS needs. Services like iTunes Store have clearly demonstrated that downloading music from the Internet is not just about getting stuff for free - people are willing to pay if the service offers good value for money. Unfortunately the recording industry refused to evolve and tried to desperately cling to its outdated business model for a decade too long. People got used to getting what they want, when they want, for free. Now it's too late to change people's habits.
Instead of responding to paying customers need, the record companies spends millions of dollars on antipiracy-campaigns and DRM-protection methods which have zero affect on piracy, but forces paying customers to bend over and take it up the ass.
What disgust me the most about recording industry is its "we're above the law" attitude and the complete lack of understanding of what's reasonable. These people have no moral objections to use very questionable means, such as:
- Bribing and/or pressuring government officials to pass unconstitutional laws and punishments that are vastly disproportionate to the "crime" committed.
- Illegal infiltration, hacking and/or jamming of network services and infrastructure.
- Deliberately confusing piracy (=immaterial, digital copies) to physical product counterfeiting and theft, even going as far as spreading downright lies like piracy is connected to terrorism and child pornography.
- Publishing forged "researches" about revenue losses that have absolutely nothing to do with reality.
- Randomly sending blackmail letters with absurd compensation claims - even to people who never even used P2P-services.
- Ruining peoples' lives just out of malicious spite, e.g. by suing housewives for hundreds of thousands of dollars - her terrible of crime being the share of few MP3's over Kazaa. Obviously the "criminal" is not expected ever be able to pay a single dime. They just want to make a warning example of her.
From a cultural point of view the P2P-networks are revolutionary. They enable customers to access a much wider selection of music which they normally would never encounter. This allows a more democratic medium for new artists to gain popularity with a relatively low cost. I consider this to be a welcome change to the mind numbingly boring and generic, mass-produced big-money mainstream brain-torture that has conquered TV and radio. In fact, it has been proven that P2P-networks are viable promotion tools and can actually boost record sales and ticket sales to live concerts.
The recording industry claims to be serving the artists interests, but in reality the vast majority of artists don't approve the methods they are using. Truth is that these fat cats are just plain lazy, greedy and too stubborn to understand that in the long run it never pays off to bite the hand that feeds you. They are not stupid though - they are morbidly scared of the Internet because they know that eventually they will become redundant in the logistical chain of transferring the money and music between the customer and the artist - like it ideally should be.
Instead of condemning Internet downloading completely, I would prefer something like:
"Real DJ's buy their records"
"Real DJ's pay for music"
"If it's good enough to play, it's good enough to pay"
I draw a distinct line between personal and professional usage of music and software. I couldn't care less if somebody downloads music and software from P2P-networks as longs as it's strictly for personal usage. On the other hand, DJ'ing professionally/publicly with pirate music/software is just pathetic. Basically it shows that the so-called "DJ" has zero appreciation for his craft or the artists. I personally would not dare to show my face on a gig if I was using pirate copy or Virtual DJ or had even a single pirate track on my computer. I wouldn't have the audacity to call myself a DJ - or even a music lover - if I didn't think the stuff I play is worth paying for.
However, all this "Illegal downloading is a crime" and "Piracy is killing the music" crap would make me feel like I'm a RIAA/antipiracy spokesperson - something I have a huge problem with. The music industry tries to maintain the illusion that piracy takes the food out from the starving artist's table, which is total BS. Compared to the share those greedy pigs at the record label take the artists gets mere crumbs. Let's be honest here, the recording industry does not give a rats ass about the little starving artists or its customers. Their whole business model is based on selling the same crap over and over again and to bring huge profits to the share holders and few selected artists. Let's not forget their bed mates, the royalty collection business which is almost like a legalized mafia taxing every possible data storage device just for the POSSIBILITY it could be used for illegal activities.
The recording industry is currently engaged in a hopeless battle - and it has itself to blame for the situation. For decades they tried to sell 2 hit singles + 8 fillers (that everyone had already heard 100 times from the TOP40 format radio) on a shiny plastic disc for 25$. This might be a very lucrative business model, but from customers point of view it offers poor value for money.
Napster and other P2P-networks introduced a new service model, which was based on CUSTOMERS needs. Services like iTunes Store have clearly demonstrated that downloading music from the Internet is not just about getting stuff for free - people are willing to pay if the service offers good value for money. Unfortunately the recording industry refused to evolve and tried to desperately cling to its outdated business model for a decade too long. People got used to getting what they want, when they want, for free. Now it's too late to change people's habits.
Instead of responding to paying customers need, the record companies spends millions of dollars on antipiracy-campaigns and DRM-protection methods which have zero affect on piracy, but forces paying customers to bend over and take it up the ass.
What disgust me the most about recording industry is its "we're above the law" attitude and the complete lack of understanding of what's reasonable. These people have no moral objections to use very questionable means, such as:
- Bribing and/or pressuring government officials to pass unconstitutional laws and punishments that are vastly disproportionate to the "crime" committed.
- Illegal infiltration, hacking and/or jamming of network services and infrastructure.
- Deliberately confusing piracy (=immaterial, digital copies) to physical product counterfeiting and theft, even going as far as spreading downright lies like piracy is connected to terrorism and child pornography.
- Publishing forged "researches" about revenue losses that have absolutely nothing to do with reality.
- Randomly sending blackmail letters with absurd compensation claims - even to people who never even used P2P-services.
- Ruining peoples' lives just out of malicious spite, e.g. by suing housewives for hundreds of thousands of dollars - her terrible of crime being the share of few MP3's over Kazaa. Obviously the "criminal" is not expected ever be able to pay a single dime. They just want to make a warning example of her.
From a cultural point of view the P2P-networks are revolutionary. They enable customers to access a much wider selection of music which they normally would never encounter. This allows a more democratic medium for new artists to gain popularity with a relatively low cost. I consider this to be a welcome change to the mind numbingly boring and generic, mass-produced big-money mainstream brain-torture that has conquered TV and radio. In fact, it has been proven that P2P-networks are viable promotion tools and can actually boost record sales and ticket sales to live concerts.
The recording industry claims to be serving the artists interests, but in reality the vast majority of artists don't approve the methods they are using. Truth is that these fat cats are just plain lazy, greedy and too stubborn to understand that in the long run it never pays off to bite the hand that feeds you. They are not stupid though - they are morbidly scared of the Internet because they know that eventually they will become redundant in the logistical chain of transferring the money and music between the customer and the artist - like it ideally should be.
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 5:33 am
@AuralCandy.net
A very good and interesting post there mate and I have to agree with some of points.
I enjoyed reading it, thanks.
@Chris, lol
Love that poster, top class mate.
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 5:42 am
Up until about five years ago I used to get all my music free "promos" as I was recognised as a DJ that the promotions company would like feedback from, I played out to a lot of people back then but it different now so much has changed one thing is the late licencing law coming out, a lot of the clubs in my area are empty as people decide to stay in the pubs! something that wasn't an option before.
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 6:44 am
Charlie Wilson wrote :
Up until about five years ago I used to get all my music free "promos" as I was recognised as a DJ that the promotions company would like feedback from, I played out to a lot of people back then but it different now so much has changed one thing is the late licencing law coming out, a lot of the clubs in my area are empty as people decide to stay in the pubs! something that wasn't an option before.
Late licencing in pubs, the smoking in public places ban, supermarkets selling beer 4 times cheeper than in pubs, bars and clubs...
All contributing factors to the demise of our proffessions. not just piracy.
I show people my play lists and can prove the origin of all my music.
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 7:24 am
Another nasty trick they pull in the UK is not putting the 12" or extended versions on the CD singles. There's plenty space but instead they tried to force DJ's to buy the CD for the radio version and the 12" vinyl for the extended one. Sod paying twice for something that should be on the CD anyway. They spent time and money putting poxy low frame rate videos on the CD singles when all I wanted was the full length version.
Over the years (25 of them) I have spent a fortune on legal music, but when they started pulling tricks like that Limewire became my friend.
I don't have a problem paying a good price for a good product, but the record industry has been ripping people off for years. Payback is a bitch!
Over the years (25 of them) I have spent a fortune on legal music, but when they started pulling tricks like that Limewire became my friend.
I don't have a problem paying a good price for a good product, but the record industry has been ripping people off for years. Payback is a bitch!
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 10:22 am
piracy does not kill music,
the industry not keeping up with the times and adapting a new business model in distributing music, tons of crappy artists releasing tons of crappy music, MTV, now that kills music!
i also think that illegal downloading helps the musicians more than ever. i've personally downloaded music people have recommended to give it a shot, not only did i buy the cd, now i attend concerts on these artists. had i not bought the cd, yes it would be hurting record companies.
i still do believe that if you are a professional dj and you are making $$ from gigs, then you should purchase your music. just like any other trade, you have to buy your tools to work.
the industry not keeping up with the times and adapting a new business model in distributing music, tons of crappy artists releasing tons of crappy music, MTV, now that kills music!
i also think that illegal downloading helps the musicians more than ever. i've personally downloaded music people have recommended to give it a shot, not only did i buy the cd, now i attend concerts on these artists. had i not bought the cd, yes it would be hurting record companies.
i still do believe that if you are a professional dj and you are making $$ from gigs, then you should purchase your music. just like any other trade, you have to buy your tools to work.
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 12:54 pm
I personally know a working DJ who works in San Diego and Los Angeles night clubs and when I asked where he is buying his music from he replied: "I never pay for music". At first I thought: Wow that's just wrong... but then I realized that NOBODY CARES. He didn't say where exactly he was getting music from but is it possible for DJ to compile crazy mp3 collection with thousands of tracks including all the latest hits and fancy remixes legally and for free?
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 3:06 pm
Ah, good. The beginnings of a debate. :D
Hey, getting crumbs is better than getting nothing.
Granted: you might attend the concert of an artist whose music you illegally download. But how much of that money goes toward the venue? And to be honest, compared to the total number of people who download the music, what portion of them actually show up at concerts?
That's a poor excuse. The industry may suck, but that doesn't mean that people have the right and the excuse to exploit it. Internet piracy effects a lot more than just the music industry. Take what I said above. I'm a film major at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. When I make movies one day (or at least help to make movies one day), the last thing I want is for some shmoe to hop on the internet and download the movie that's the bread and butter of my occupation without giving me a single cent. You can say "bigwigs," "legal mafia," "what-have-you," but at the end of the day I'm still getting paid something. Which is a lot more than getting paid nothing. I can imagine that many musical artists feel the same way. I can't exactly cite which ones, but the point remains.
The industry is massively flawed and corrupt -- and governments turn their heads and twiddle their thumbs to boot. The flaw in your logic above, though, is that it hinges on the idea that the industry will turn inside-out and people will suddenly be willing to pay for music. The former is a lot more likely to happen than the latter. The music industry's practices may be highly unethical, but illegal downloading is less-than-moral as well. Two wrongs do not make a right.
-- NowhereManXP (aka DJ Who?!)
AuralCandy.Net wrote :
However, all this "Illegal downloading is a crime" and "Piracy is killing the music" crap would make me feel like I'm a RIAA/antipiracy spokesperson - something I have a huge problem with. The music industry tries to maintain the illusion that piracy takes the food out from the starving artist's table, which is total BS. Compared to the share those greedy pigs at the record label take the artists gets mere crumbs.
Let's be honest here, the recording industry does not give a rats ass about the little starving artists or its customers. Their whole business model is based on selling the same crap over and over again and to bring huge profits to the share holders and few selected artists. Let's not forget their bed mates, the royalty collection business which is almost like a legalized mafia taxing every possible data storage device just for the POSSIBILITY it could be used for illegal activities.
Let's be honest here, the recording industry does not give a rats ass about the little starving artists or its customers. Their whole business model is based on selling the same crap over and over again and to bring huge profits to the share holders and few selected artists. Let's not forget their bed mates, the royalty collection business which is almost like a legalized mafia taxing every possible data storage device just for the POSSIBILITY it could be used for illegal activities.
Hey, getting crumbs is better than getting nothing.
Granted: you might attend the concert of an artist whose music you illegally download. But how much of that money goes toward the venue? And to be honest, compared to the total number of people who download the music, what portion of them actually show up at concerts?
Quote :
The recording industry is currently engaged in a hopeless battle - and it has itself to blame for the situation. For decades they tried to sell 2 hit singles + 8 fillers (that everyone had already heard 100 times from the TOP40 format radio) on a shiny plastic disc for 25$. This might be a very lucrative business model, but from customers point of view it offers poor value for money.
Napster and other P2P-networks introduced a new service model, which was based on CUSTOMERS needs. Services like iTunes Store have clearly demonstrated that downloading music from the Internet is not just about getting stuff for free - people are willing to pay if the service offers good value for money. Unfortunately the recording industry refused to evolve and tried to desperately cling to its outdated business model for a decade too long. People got used to getting what they want, when they want, for free. Now it's too late to change people's habits.
Napster and other P2P-networks introduced a new service model, which was based on CUSTOMERS needs. Services like iTunes Store have clearly demonstrated that downloading music from the Internet is not just about getting stuff for free - people are willing to pay if the service offers good value for money. Unfortunately the recording industry refused to evolve and tried to desperately cling to its outdated business model for a decade too long. People got used to getting what they want, when they want, for free. Now it's too late to change people's habits.
That's a poor excuse. The industry may suck, but that doesn't mean that people have the right and the excuse to exploit it. Internet piracy effects a lot more than just the music industry. Take what I said above. I'm a film major at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. When I make movies one day (or at least help to make movies one day), the last thing I want is for some shmoe to hop on the internet and download the movie that's the bread and butter of my occupation without giving me a single cent. You can say "bigwigs," "legal mafia," "what-have-you," but at the end of the day I'm still getting paid something. Which is a lot more than getting paid nothing. I can imagine that many musical artists feel the same way. I can't exactly cite which ones, but the point remains.
Quote :
Instead of responding to paying customers need, the record companies spends millions of dollars on antipiracy-campaigns and DRM-protection methods which have zero affect on piracy, but forces paying customers to bend over and take it up the ass.
What disgust me the most about recording industry is its "we're above the law" attitude and the complete lack of understanding of what's reasonable. These people have no moral objections to use very questionable means, such as:
- Bribing and/or pressuring government officials to pass unconstitutional laws and punishments that are vastly disproportionate to the "crime" committed.
- Illegal infiltration, hacking and/or jamming of network services and infrastructure.
- Deliberately confusing piracy (=immaterial, digital copies) to physical product counterfeiting and theft, even going as far as spreading downright lies like piracy is connected to terrorism and child pornography.
- Publishing forged "researches" about revenue losses that have absolutely nothing to do with reality.
- Randomly sending blackmail letters with absurd compensation claims - even to people who never even used P2P-services.
- Ruining peoples' lives just out of malicious spite, e.g. by suing housewives for hundreds of thousands of dollars - her terrible of crime being the share of few MP3's over Kazaa. Obviously the "criminal" is not expected ever be able to pay a single dime. They just want to make a warning example of her.
From a cultural point of view the P2P-networks are revolutionary. They enable customers to access a much wider selection of music which they normally would never encounter. This allows a more democratic medium for new artists to gain popularity with a relatively low cost. I consider this to be a welcome change to the mind numbingly boring and generic, mass-produced big-money mainstream brain-torture that has conquered TV and radio. In fact, it has been proven that P2P-networks are viable promotion tools and can actually boost record sales and ticket sales to live concerts.
The recording industry claims to be serving the artists interests, but in reality the vast majority of artists don't approve the methods they are using. Truth is that these fat cats are just plain lazy, greedy and too stubborn to understand that in the long run it never pays off to bite the hand that feeds you. They are not stupid though - they are morbidly scared of the Internet because they know that eventually they will become redundant in the logistical chain of transferring the money and music between the customer and the artist - like it ideally should be.
What disgust me the most about recording industry is its "we're above the law" attitude and the complete lack of understanding of what's reasonable. These people have no moral objections to use very questionable means, such as:
- Bribing and/or pressuring government officials to pass unconstitutional laws and punishments that are vastly disproportionate to the "crime" committed.
- Illegal infiltration, hacking and/or jamming of network services and infrastructure.
- Deliberately confusing piracy (=immaterial, digital copies) to physical product counterfeiting and theft, even going as far as spreading downright lies like piracy is connected to terrorism and child pornography.
- Publishing forged "researches" about revenue losses that have absolutely nothing to do with reality.
- Randomly sending blackmail letters with absurd compensation claims - even to people who never even used P2P-services.
- Ruining peoples' lives just out of malicious spite, e.g. by suing housewives for hundreds of thousands of dollars - her terrible of crime being the share of few MP3's over Kazaa. Obviously the "criminal" is not expected ever be able to pay a single dime. They just want to make a warning example of her.
From a cultural point of view the P2P-networks are revolutionary. They enable customers to access a much wider selection of music which they normally would never encounter. This allows a more democratic medium for new artists to gain popularity with a relatively low cost. I consider this to be a welcome change to the mind numbingly boring and generic, mass-produced big-money mainstream brain-torture that has conquered TV and radio. In fact, it has been proven that P2P-networks are viable promotion tools and can actually boost record sales and ticket sales to live concerts.
The recording industry claims to be serving the artists interests, but in reality the vast majority of artists don't approve the methods they are using. Truth is that these fat cats are just plain lazy, greedy and too stubborn to understand that in the long run it never pays off to bite the hand that feeds you. They are not stupid though - they are morbidly scared of the Internet because they know that eventually they will become redundant in the logistical chain of transferring the money and music between the customer and the artist - like it ideally should be.
The industry is massively flawed and corrupt -- and governments turn their heads and twiddle their thumbs to boot. The flaw in your logic above, though, is that it hinges on the idea that the industry will turn inside-out and people will suddenly be willing to pay for music. The former is a lot more likely to happen than the latter. The music industry's practices may be highly unethical, but illegal downloading is less-than-moral as well. Two wrongs do not make a right.
-- NowhereManXP (aka DJ Who?!)
Inviato Thu 09 Apr 09 @ 3:21 pm