Draconian, stifling, ridiculous, and F***IN' STUPID.

You won't get any argument from me in that regard as I too think the way that music (and movies for that matter, since they follow the same scheme) is just wrong.  And lets not get into an argument how stupid software licensing is either, as I'm no fan of that crap either  (though I give props to Stardock for no-nonsense approaches to licensing their software and management of licenses for that software).

The whole thing is a mess, but it is a mess because too many people ignored the restrictions that were placed on things and kept spending their money supporting the record companies and movie studios and their restrictions.

If you want the rules changed, boycott the products and let the copyright holders suffer the economic impact of their stupid restrictions and rules.  When they can't sell their product, eventually they won't have enough money left to pay the legal fees needed to sue people into submission and we'll get new laws and rules that will make sense.

In the interim, as I've said before, the laws and protections favor the rights holder -- and that is the people that released the discs -- and not the customers and consumers.  Those rights holders (Sony, Disney, FOX, Viacom, Universal, etc., and their subsidiaries) bought and paid for the laws they have by paying millions into the coffers of politicians campaign funds.  They are high on the feeding list and they get what they want while the public was long since sold out by the politicians.  Just more of the corrupt political system (with equal blame to be placed on both Democrat and Republican pol's).

I see peer-to-peer file sharing as doing exactly that, and thus I hope that it continues to flourish. According to the news last night, CD sales are down 16 percent this year from last, which was down significantly from the year before as well.

Now, don't let this make you believe that I don't buy music to support artists - I, in fact, by quite a lot of music, in the name of showing support for the musicians I like. (Thankfully, most of them are signed to smaller, independent labels, which makes me feel a lot better about it, knowing I'm not just putting more money in BMG's coffers, but I'm helping foster the release of new music on indie labels.) But I still usually download something before I buy it, to see if it's worth my money.

You know, if you don't buy music, the only albums that will be sold are those of Justin Timberlake, and all those 'entertainers' instead of music artists. Yes, they will still be bought. And that stinks. It will not improve music quality to boycott, but destroy any shred of hope for the major labels ever releasing good music.

I just said, I buy smaller, independent label music quite often.

Out of curiousity, let's see what CDs I've purchased recently and what label they're on:

Neurosis' "Enemy of the Sun", "Through Silver in Blood", "Times of Grace", "A Sun that Never Sets", and "The Eye of Every Storm". All on Neurot Recordings, Neurosis' private recording label.

Battle of Mice's "A Day of Nights". Neurot Recordings.

The Pax Cecilia's "Blessed are the Bonds". Self-released (I donated to them).

Gojira's "From Mars to Sirius" and "The Link". Prosthetic Records.

The Mars Volta's "Amputechture" and "De-Loused in the Comatorium". Okay, I admit it - these guys are actually on a large label, BMG.

But that's it. Almost everything I buy lately is on indie labels.

So it isn't my fault that music sucks these days, and Justin Timberlake is a multi-platinum "recording" artist.

I was just reinforcing your point, is all... Really, even if it didn't sound that way AT ALL.

Hey, well, I'm not going to tell you the last ones I bought. I am responsible.
*hangs head in shame*

But I don't KNOW the independent music. And since it's illegal to peer-to-peer, I don't. So I won't GET to know. So I won't BUY their music, I'll go buy the Essential Stevie Ray Vaughn (Epic), Back in Black by AC/DC, or Eliminator by ZZ Top, or maybe ever Dark Side of the Moon... classic rock stuff. Because I know it, I like it, and I want to rock.

Lots of indie labels have sample tracks on their albums, so you can decide if you want to hear more. Specifically, go check out Neurot Recordings. They've got real rock. In comparison to this, AC/DC doesn't rock. It's sissy stuff.

Okay, I want to 'sissy' rock.

I might check it out later, right now I'm going down to Tin Pan Alley.

It'd only be $23.76 if she downloaded from ITunes at $0.99 a song.

Still, this whole premise is complete bullshit...I must agree with you, SanCho.

~Zoo

But I don't KNOW the independent music. And since it's illegal to peer-to-peer, I don't. So I won't GET to know. So I won't BUY their music, I'll go buy the Essential Stevie Ray Vaughn (Epic), Back in Black by AC/DC, or Eliminator by ZZ Top, or maybe ever Dark Side of the Moon... classic rock stuff. Because I know it, I like it, and I want to rock.

There are free places online to find the independent music and get it streamed to you quite legally.  Some places better than others, but there are stations legally streaming that offer up a wide variety of music.  You could also legally get paid subscription(s) to Sirius or XM, or enhanced subs to services like Rhapsody.  If you poke around a little, you can find the stuff out there where you need not worry about being in trouble for sharing the music in a non-legal means.

Of course what I'm saying doesn't change the fact that 'the man' runs, and has (basically) ruined commercial radio with too many repeated plays of absolute crap (Justin Timberlake, Timbaland and some other crap off the top 40 list currently is a fine example of same).  You will still find too much over-commercialized and over-produced and over-played crap on services like Sirius and XM, and Rhapsody, Windows Media site, etc.

Search around a little though, and you can start avoiding a lot of that crap and find more under promoted artists.

Try a google search like this one: independent artists streaming radio

and get results like this: http://www.vradio.com/ or this: http://www.radioaid.com/aboutus.php  or others.

 

PANDORA! IT'S ALL ABOUT PANDORA!

This is how you find new music, Jythier.

Or: you can download audio scrobbler, and get yourself a last.fm page, where you can get lots of suggestions based on your own musical tastes. You have no idea how many great groups I've found through those two means.

Whoo boy, I wish I gotten into this one earlier...

First of all, I think the record company going after an individual like this are showing they're nothing more than money-hungry bastards who deserve every criticism they get.

Having said this, I see peer-to-peer file sharing, for instance, as stealing and something that needs to be controlled. And this goes further than greedy record companys because even small, independent artists are disadvantaged by file sharing. In Australia, the recording industry has made allowances for those who buy a CD, for instance, and want to put it onto their Ipod. The simple rule of thumb should be, in my opinion, if you haven't paid for it then it is not yours.

A couple thoughts:

1. The money from this lawsuit won't be going to the artists. If the money was going to the pockets of the artists, I would feel better about it.

2. There really should be a better way to produce digital "samples" to help sales, rather than hurt them. Maybe an audio quality that is reduced enough to be noticeable and less than desirable? From my own personal perspective, download sites have provided a gold mine of resources, allowing me to check out material that I will be buying anyway if it's any good.

I still maintain that, in many cases, file sharing helps talented artists and hurts shitty ones.

All those CDs that I listed as having purchased lately? Who would I have heard of if it had not been for file sharing? Hmm . . .

None! Just looked at the list again, and every single one of those artists is one I've found through file sharing. If I hadn't downloaded their stuff first, I'd have never bought a single thing from them, because I wouldn't even know they exist (and that, my friends, would be the real tragedy here).

On the other hand (and if I was feeling really masochistic) I could download some of the "popular" music they play on the radio today, see how bad it really is, and then know without a doubt that these artists must be ignored and shunned as the crappy parlor magicians they are, turning tricks to make a buck.

For me at least, torrents + last.fm + pandora = musical bliss + spending lots of money on CDs for artists I want to support.

Both Pandora and last.fm give you resources to listen to new music, without downloading it to your computer. Pandora's been giving me a lot of new music lately that I'd have never heard of, as I slowly but surely compile the rocking-est personal radio station ever.

1. The money from this lawsuit won't be going to the artists. If the money was going to the pockets of the artists, I would feel better about it.

First of all, apologies for taking so long to respond to this. I agree with you on this one, for sure. This whole case has been about the big boys taking down a little person who really doesn't deserve it. It is just another example of corporations screwing over the individual

2. There really should be a better way to produce digital "samples" to help sales, rather than hurt them. Maybe an audio quality that is reduced enough to be noticeable and less than desirable? From my own personal perspective, download sites have provided a gold mine of resources, allowing me to check out material that I will be buying anyway if it's any good.

I agree. It would be really good. What Radiohead are doing, for instance, is a great idea. That you, Gid, do the same as I do shows we both respect the artists making the music we like and acknowledge this by purchasing a copy of the CD or whatever. But the reality is a lot of people (and by a lot, I mean most) if they think they can get something for free, will take it. I know people whose entire iPod is filled with music they've 'stolen'.

I like the idea of degraded quality of digital samples or, as some do, pieces of songs (30 seconds worth), which should be enough for the listener to decide whether they like what they're hearing and buy the whole song or songs.