For some reason folks get all would up about the big bad record companies of days gone by.

If we can put our preconceived notions and biases aside for a second and focus on the subject of illicit theft of music, films, tv shows, software, financial information, medical records, personal information ect. Which is the real topic. Lets not get too myopic on the topic of illegal downloading.

If any one of us is an artist and wants to make a living in selling and recording music, we have a right to do so. And just as a florist or baker, we should expect people and law enforcement to be on our side and embrace and protect us.

This subject has gone way over a lot of people's heads.

Yes people are still going to drive drunk, run red light, steal and kill, but that doesn't mean we have to turn a blind eye. That is what makes a civilized society, with people able to make a viable living doing what they are good at and love. And a society that supports, embraces and protects it.

Everything runs it's course. Things move slowly but that is the way it is sometimes.

The actions against Kaazaa, Napster, Limewire, Pirate Bay, did in fact have a major impact regardless if anyone wants to admit it or not. Apple was a failing company when it introduced it's life saving product the iPod and it's iTunes store. And in part because of that huge success of it was able to move on and grow. Without the law going after Kaazaa, Napster and such that paved the way for viable legal music commerce there might have not been an itunes store or an Apple as we know it.

Pretty soon when internet service providers can all jack up fees all they want to make up for their losses in cable television package subscriptions, they will see how dependent we are on the internet and charge your per page, or per usage. They will charge user premiums since they will be able to block porn, video and other services and charge you extra.

It is just a matter of time when this subject of illegal downloads takes a turn to mean something different altogether. When paying 99cents is going to be cheaper than scourging the internet looking for freebies.

[Edited 12/23/10 5:33am]

SoulAlive said:

SquirrelMeat said:

The thing is, the whole industry is still a rip off. Why do pop stars need be millionaires? Who defined that? It was the labels, who were earning so much they decided they better throw the artists a bone to keep the gravy train on the track.

I think the industry NEEDS to crash, build up fairer. Otherwise it will be nothing but Cowell dross and bland mid atlantic Pop RnB drivel.

Very interesting viewpoint.

That's a fantastic question I've thought about many times. It's nonsensical, especially now. These people are not worth millions of dollars.

V10LETBLUES said:

The actions against Kaazaa, Napster, Limewire, Pirate Bay, did in fact have a major impact regardless if anyone wants to admit it or not. Apple was a failing company when it introduced it's life saving product the iPod and it's iTunes store. And in part because of that huge success of it was able to move on and grow. Without the law going after Kaazaa, Napster and such that paved the way for viable legal music commerce there might have not been an itunes store or an Apple as we know it.

Now you know that's wishfull thinking at best. After Napster, Kazaa, Limewire, the Pirate bay and so many others we now have countless peer to peer torrent sites who are uncontrollable.

Face it, the succes of Apple's itunes proves that the industry missed an enormous opportunity. For more than a decade they did nothing but bitch and moan and the only efforts they made were into useless copy protection technologies, scaring people off even more to buy CD's, and pointless lawsuits trying to shut down one site, when there is a hundred popping up after that.

They should have made everything legally available 10 years ago already, for a reasonable price and in a custom friendly way, like Apple did. Then they would have made a shitload and would have been the biggest defenders of the internet by now. But they didn't, so now they are just sore losers.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 6:02am]

Tremolina said:

V10LETBLUES said:

The actions against Kaazaa, Napster, Limewire, Pirate Bay, did in fact have a major impact regardless if anyone wants to admit it or not. Apple was a failing company when it introduced it's life saving product the iPod and it's iTunes store. And in part because of that huge success of it was able to move on and grow. Without the law going after Kaazaa, Napster and such that paved the way for viable legal music commerce there might have not been an itunes store or an Apple as we know it.

Now you know that's wishfull thinking at best. After Napster, Kazaa, Limewire, the Pirate bay and so many others we now have countless peer to peer torrent sites who are uncontrollable.

Face it, the succes of Apple's itunes proves that the industry missed an enormous opportunity. For more than a decade they did nothing but bitch and moan and the only efforts they made were into useless copy protection technologies, scaring people off even more to buy CD's, and pointless lawsuits trying to shut down one site, when there is a hundred popping up after that.

They should have made everything legally available 10 years ago already, for a reasonable price and in a custom friendly way, like Apple did. Then they would have made a shitload and would have been the biggest defenders of the internet by now. But they didn't, so now they are just sore losers.

-

Are you suggesting that fear of legal action has not pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet?

I mean nowadays most webmasters work to keep any of that stuff off their sites to avoid any problems. The legal actions have had a major impact.

It's still there, just like anything else in society that people think they can get away with, but without enforcement of laws and respect of others and their property you have a nonviable society that will never and should never be tolerated.

People forget ONE HUGE thing and that is that Apple and iTunes is a store, YES steve jobs gets money, but that stuff in the store he is selling is property of the label and they get their cut, people make it seem like Labels didnt want the music to sell so Steve took over and is getting paid. Not the case, he is just a store/vendor for them, just like Virgin Mega Store or Tower Records was a place to sell music that is what the Apple Store is. MOST of what steve makes is from the sales of iPods,Iphones and all that other stuff, he is just the leading vendor in selling digital music for the labels right now.

Another thing people seem to miss is that they are saying the iTunes store was a great win and big loss for the labels, but also Illegal Downloading is still way up, and that labels should have done a customer friendly version like iTunes and they wouldnt be losing money. Again downloading has nothing to do with Customer Friendly and Pricing and QUality, it has to do with Access to free shit, i can go on a site and see new albums that say "iTunes Version" so people are downlaoding from Itunes and then putting it up free on a site, so how is Itunes stopping downloads? its not, they have no bearing in this, its all about the access to digital media and the ease to just put it somewhere and people finding it, for free, so again, if its easy to get people will do it, thats what is being said, if you bury so deep percentages of people searching for it will drop. And dont think that at some point someone is going to sue google for allowing an illegal site into is search domain, when that happens, you will see a HUGE drop and things get buried, if you hit someone with a huge lawsuit which is where it hurts and win, shit, then things will start to change somewhat.

lastdecember said:

People forget ONE HUGE thing and that is that Apple and iTunes is a store,

Yes, the iTunes Store is a loss leader for Apple. As far as I can discern, its sole purpose is to sell more iPods, etc. to the masses.

Soul-Alive said:

TD3 said:

yeah, yeah . . we know, the sky is falling.

I recall something that you said on a recent Nelly thread.You suggested that,since singles still sell,some artists should stop doing complete albums and focus solely on singles.It makes alot of sense.Kids don't like having to buy an entire 14-track CD when they only like one or two songs on it. Many of today's pop stars are really just 'single artists' anyway,releasing bloated albums loaded with filler.

Thoughts?

I'd go the "mini" album way, 3 to 5 songs on a album / CD'. I like a lot of Tremolina ideas. What artist are going to have to understand, the institutions that once use to build a fan base are no longer there. If they want to sustain a decade plus career they'll need something more than the 24 /7 hype machine. Fan club, such as Yahoo Groups should be apart of building their base. As Tremolina said, give ways, concert tickets, merchandise: posters, bobble heads, shirts, watches . Their merchandise should be of quality . They could do something cool such as offer music, photos, video(s) of a live concert on flash drive sometimes for a free and for a price.

I still don't think record company artist /musicians are using Youtube to their advantage. I would definitely make it a habit of acknowledging comments on my channel. I've seen independent artist upload concerts in real time and have Q & A sessions with fans. I'd do 10 / 12 minutes videos behind the scenes . . . working in studio, concert sound checks, and after concert.

The other BIG thing, record companies, artist and/or music publishers need to take heed, sheet music could be back in style. :loll: What does Guitar Center sale: acoustic / electric guitars, the electric bass, keyboards, and drums. How many times have I've read people ask for music or the tab of such and such a song on YouTube? OLGA was a hint that there's money in making sheet music / music tabs available for all genres of music. What did the record companies do, they shut it down and 97 % of the tabs weren't even correct. Steve Wonder missing out on some revenue maker, Lord knows Michael Jackson's estate is.

These people are stuck on stupid and are tone deaf.

--------------------------

[Edited 12/23/10 18:04pm]

TD3 said:

Soul-Alive said:

I recall something that you said on a recent Nelly thread.You suggested that,since singles still sell,some artists should stop doing complete albums and focus solely on singles.It makes alot of sense.Kids don't like having to buy an entire 14-track CD when they only like one or two songs on it. Many of today's pop stars are really just 'single artists' anyway,releasing bloated albums loaded with filler.

Thoughts?

I'd go the "mini" album way, 3 to 5 songs on a album / CD'. I like a lot of Tremolina ideas. What artist are going to have to understand, the institutions that were once used to build a fan base are no longer there. If they want to sustain a decade plus career they'll need more than the 24 /7 hype machine. Fan club, such as Yahoo Groups should be apart of building their base. As Tremolina said, give ways, concert tickets, merchandise: posters, bobble heads, shirts, watches . Their merchandise should be of quality . They could do something cool such as offer music, photos, video(s) of a live concert on flash drive sometimes for a free and for a price.

I still don't think record company artist /musicians are using Youtube to their advantage. I would definitely make it a habit of acknowledging comments on my channel. I've seen independent artist upload concerts in real time and have Q & A sessions with fans. I'd do 10 / 12 minutes videos behind the scenes . . . working in studio, concert sound checks, and after concert.

The other BIG thing or thing if record companies, artist and/or music publishers need to take note. sheet . . . sheet music could be back in style. :loll: What does Guitar Center sale: acoustic / electric guitars, the electric bass, keyboards, and drums. How many times have I've read people ask for music or the tab of such and such a song on YouTube? OLGA was a hint that there's money in making sheet music / music tabs available that just isn't the Beatles, Joni Mitchell or white folk artist /singer songwriters. What did the record companies do they shut it down, and 97 % of the tabs were incorrect. Steve Wonders missing out on some revenue maker, Lord knows Michael Jackson's estate.

--------------------------

[Edited 12/23/10 10:34am]

great points but everything said you have to have some sort of backing in the financing. Trust me on this, you can have these great ideas and on paper its great, but $$ comes into play to get this going. I just recently shot a short film about 15 min with this director that i have known for a few years and he cut me a deal and i had some actor friends in on it, and someone volunteered their apartment etc...so it ended up costing 2,000 to get that shot, not edited, just shot, the editing itself costs about another grand or i could do it myself. NOW this is cheap because i know him,and people are pitching in with their talents (working for free etc) but lets be real now. He recently shot a music video for an indie artist that had some backing from a fashion comapany and the music video cost about 20,000 to shoot in HD, and thats a simple set music video, 3-4 minutes with editing, oh and also 1 day shoot, or else it would have been another 20,000. So we have to remember that really the only way you can do things from the ground up, affordable, is to do things with a whole group of people that are all willing to work for nothing but the craft. And how long are people willing to work for nothing? But at the same time, how many indie directors/creators are in a position to pay everyone on board? My point basically is that U need money, be it, a label of some sort, a producer, a company behind you etc...

People should check this local NYC artist Cheryl Martinez, from the ground up she created this company called L.E.S.G.O they have a few singles on iTunes, she has an album coming in Jan 2011, a clothing line, financed her own videos, and has a dance troop that she founded in nyc. But for ONE of her there about 10000 that cant get off the ground.

V10LETBLUES said:

Pretty soon when internet service providers can all jack up fees all they want to make up for their losses in cable television package subscriptions, they will see how dependent we are on the internet and charge your per page, or per usage. They will charge user premiums since they will be able to block porn, video and other services and charge you extra.

It is just a matter of time when this subject of illegal downloads takes a turn to mean something different altogether. When paying 99cents is going to be cheaper than scourging the internet looking for freebies.

[Edited 12/23/10 5:33am]

Really appreciate you'r input, thanx for that!

I'm surprised anybody still pays for tv packages

You are right, the providers will find a way to make (a lot of) money. I know that I'm addcited to the internet And I cannot do without it anymore. My life is organised by it. My banking, buying clothes, music, groceries, pharmacy, contact with friends, calendar, any info, I mean, really could not function without internet, whereas I function perfect without tv.

Providers know this, and likely will charge us for it

I still feel that the internet will generate a revolution, however don't know how. However, the proces is probably similar to the invention and use of the steamengine, that instignated major changes unheard of before.

V10LETBLUES said:

Tremolina said:

Now you know that's wishfull thinking at best. After Napster, Kazaa, Limewire, the Pirate bay and so many others we now have countless peer to peer torrent sites who are uncontrollable.

Face it, the succes of Apple's itunes proves that the industry missed an enormous opportunity. For more than a decade they did nothing but bitch and moan and the only efforts they made were into useless copy protection technologies, scaring people off even more to buy CD's, and pointless lawsuits trying to shut down one site, when there is a hundred popping up after that.

They should have made everything legally available 10 years ago already, for a reasonable price and in a custom friendly way, like Apple did. Then they would have made a shitload and would have been the biggest defenders of the internet by now. But they didn't, so now they are just sore losers.

-

Are you suggesting that fear of legal action has not pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet?

I mean nowadays most webmasters work to keep any of that stuff off their sites to avoid any problems. The legal actions have had a major impact.

It's still there, just like anything else in society that people think they can get away with, but without enforcement of laws and respect of others and their property you have a nonviable society that will never and should never be tolerated.

No, I am suggesting that fear of legal action HAS pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet. With new peer to peer technologies that need no central server or database anymore, but that can operate completely and soley on the back of its individual users computers, they escape liability while they also lack the technical power to stop illegal filesharing. Back in the days of napster and kazaa it was still possible to pull the plug, so to speak, out of these networks, but with current technology, that pops out these kind of sites by the thousands and that are ever evolving, things have become technically unstoppable.

--

[Edited 12/23/10 16:46pm]

Identity said:

lastdecember said:

People forget ONE HUGE thing and that is that Apple and iTunes is a store,

Yes, the iTunes Store is a loss leader for Apple. As far as I can discern, its sole purpose is to sell more iPods, etc. to the masses.

Apple reports Itunes breaks more than even every year so where do you get that from? Apple did make a mistake by jacking up the price of many downloads to 1.29 in economic bad times, but Itunes still reported 4.1 BILLION nett sales in 2010, 1 BILLION per quarter and a 22,6% increase from last year. Apple itself reported more than 20 BILLION in revenue this year, which means about 1/5 of Apple's revenue is generated by Itunes. No it's not Apple's main source of income but it's not their core business either. Plus it STILL holds about 70% of the digital downloading market.

So you damn right it's a succes

http://www.apple.com/pr/l...sults.html

http://www.macrumors.com/...n-revenue/

http://www.appleinsider.c...plies.html

http://bits.blogs.nytimes...es-profit/

-

[Edited 12/23/10 17:23pm]

lastdecember said:

great points but everything said you have to have some sort of backing in the financing. Trust me on this, you can have these great ideas and on paper its great, but $$ comes into play to get this going. I just recently shot a short film about 15 min with this director that i have known for a few years and he cut me a deal and i had some actor friends in on it, and someone volunteered their apartment etc...so it ended up costing 2,000 to get that shot, not edited, just shot, the editing itself costs about another grand or i could do it myself. NOW this is cheap because i know him,and people are pitching in with their talents (working for free etc) but lets be real now. He recently shot a music video for an indie artist that had some backing from a fashion comapany and the music video cost about 20,000 to shoot in HD, and thats a simple set music video, 3-4 minutes with editing, oh and also 1 day shoot, or else it would have been another 20,000. So we have to remember that really the only way you can do things from the ground up, affordable, is to do things with a whole group of people that are all willing to work for nothing but the craft. And how long are people willing to work for nothing? But at the same time, how many indie directors/creators are in a position to pay everyone on board? My point basically is that U need money, be it, a label of some sort, a producer, a company behind you etc...

People should check this local NYC artist Cheryl Martinez, from the ground up she created this company called L.E.S.G.O they have a few singles on iTunes, she has an album coming in Jan 2011, a clothing line, financed her own videos, and has a dance troop that she founded in nyc. But for ONE of her there about 10000 that cant get off the ground.

The days of making expensive MTV like videos to promote yourself with are over, unless you want to keep on whoring yourself to the industry like all the others. These days you make much more chance with a cheaply made, viral like video that everybody loves and sends to their friends and contacts, while your music backs it up.

Then you get a name, practically for free and the world is open for you. I have seen it happen a couple of times already, young talented people who rise to fame with not much more than the help of the internet and their own will and creativity. Once enough people pick up on it on the net, the media will pick up on it too, then they come on TV shows and shit and everybody will know them all of a sudden. And then the record labels are standing in line to sign them.

When they are smart, they only sign for an album or two and they don't sell their rights, but will remain the owners of their craft and free to do what they want to do.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 17:38pm]

Tremolina said:

V10LETBLUES said:

Are you suggesting that fear of legal action has not pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet?

I mean nowadays most webmasters work to keep any of that stuff off their sites to avoid any problems. The legal actions have had a major impact.

It's still there, just like anything else in society that people think they can get away with, but without enforcement of laws and respect of others and their property you have a nonviable society that will never and should never be tolerated.

No, I am suggesting that fear of legal action HAS pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet. With new peer to peer technologies that need no central server or database anymore, but that can operate completely and soley on the back of its individual users computers, they escape liability while they also lack the technical power to stop illegal filesharing. Back in the days of napster and kazaa it was still possible to pull the plug, so to speak, out of these networks, but with current technology, that pops out these kind of sites by the thousands and that are ever evolving, things have become technically unstoppable.

--

[Edited 12/23/10 16:46pm]

No we cannot stop the human condition. Stealing is just a part of who some of us are. But EVERYTHING regarding the net is technically stoppable. It's just a a matter of how Kim Jong-il we can get down with.

Comcast, one of the largest cable providers here in the US is about to buy television and movie giant NBC/Universal. As the largest internet provider now has a stake in the products most commonly pirated, do you think that they are going to idly stand back and watch their money snatched from optic cables?

Before this purchase they didn't care either way, As long as folks paid their cable bill. Now that they control a big chunk of the gateway AND a big steak in the products, do you think they will not do their best Kim Jong-il impersonation that lobbyists can buy?

What I'm trying to say is it's not about nickles and dimes and pop starlets any more. The big boys are coming now and they play rough.

Tremolina said:

lastdecember said:

great points but everything said you have to have some sort of backing in the financing. Trust me on this, you can have these great ideas and on paper its great, but $$ comes into play to get this going. I just recently shot a short film about 15 min with this director that i have known for a few years and he cut me a deal and i had some actor friends in on it, and someone volunteered their apartment etc...so it ended up costing 2,000 to get that shot, not edited, just shot, the editing itself costs about another grand or i could do it myself. NOW this is cheap because i know him,and people are pitching in with their talents (working for free etc) but lets be real now. He recently shot a music video for an indie artist that had some backing from a fashion comapany and the music video cost about 20,000 to shoot in HD, and thats a simple set music video, 3-4 minutes with editing, oh and also 1 day shoot, or else it would have been another 20,000. So we have to remember that really the only way you can do things from the ground up, affordable, is to do things with a whole group of people that are all willing to work for nothing but the craft. And how long are people willing to work for nothing? But at the same time, how many indie directors/creators are in a position to pay everyone on board? My point basically is that U need money, be it, a label of some sort, a producer, a company behind you etc...

People should check this local NYC artist Cheryl Martinez, from the ground up she created this company called L.E.S.G.O they have a few singles on iTunes, she has an album coming in Jan 2011, a clothing line, financed her own videos, and has a dance troop that she founded in nyc. But for ONE of her there about 10000 that cant get off the ground.

The days of making expensive MTV like videos to promote yourself with are over, unless you want to keep on whoring yourself to the industry like all the others. These days you make much more chance with a cheaply made, viral like video that everybody loves and sends to their friends and contacts, while your music backs it up.

Then you get a name, practically for free and the world is open for you. I have seen it happen a couple of times already, young talented people who rise to fame with not much more than the help of the internet and their own will and creativity. Once enough people pick up on it on the net, the media will pick up on it too, then they come on TV shows and shit and everybody will know them all of a sudden. And then the record labels are standing in line to sign them.

When they are smart, they only sign for an album or two and they don't sell their rights, but will remain the owners of their craft and free to do what they want to do.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 17:38pm]

That is a cheap video, to pull off a short film for under 10,000 thats un-heard of, and the only reason i got that deal was the camera man was someone i knew before he had any kind of rep, so i got the hook up with that. However the advancement in tech has led to cheaper budgets, but lets not think you are going to shoot a film on 500 bucks, cause you arent, if you want HD and all that stuff which is basically the only way u will get anything seen, you are going to be paying in the thousands, thats just realism. YES some people break in with a 1,000 video, but that is not run of the mill, that is pure luck, that happens once in a million. MTV type videos you mention are costly they are around 500,000 on average, and the cheapest ones are coming in around 10-25,000 most artists that do the "cheap" videos usually are borrowing for it, get grants or enlist in programs. Now if you want to avoid all this cost, you have to buy the equipment yourself which costs about 5,000 at least, go to film/editing school, which is about another grand at least, and then you can do these things on your own. But to think that Joe Schmo is going to wake up tomorrow and do a video for nothing and get signed is a false sense of dreaming, thats a fantasy world , and mainly why we have celebs like Snooki.

V10LETBLUES said:

Tremolina said:

No, I am suggesting that fear of legal action HAS pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet. With new peer to peer technologies that need no central server or database anymore, but that can operate completely and soley on the back of its individual users computers, they escape liability while they also lack the technical power to stop illegal filesharing. Back in the days of napster and kazaa it was still possible to pull the plug, so to speak, out of these networks, but with current technology, that pops out these kind of sites by the thousands and that are ever evolving, things have become technically unstoppable.

--

[Edited 12/23/10 16:46pm]

No we cannot stop the human condition. Stealing is just a part of who some of us are. But EVERYTHING regarding the net is technically stoppable. It's just a a matter of how Kim Jong-il we can get down with.

Comcast, one of the largest cable providers here in the US is about to buy television and movie giant NBC/Universal. As the largest internet provider now has a stake in the products most commonly pirated, do you think that they are going to idly stand back and watch their money snatched from optic cables?

Before this purchase they didn't care either way, As long as folks paid their cable bill. Now that they control a big chunk of the gateway AND a big steak in the products, do you think they will not do their best Kim Jong-il impersonation that lobbyists can buy?

What I'm trying to say is it's not about nickles and dimes and pop starlets any more. The big boys are coming now and they play rough.

very true, once the Big Boys get in on things its going to have go further underground, and like i was saying ALL it will take is one major lawsuit on Google for allowing illegal sites into their search engines, to really cause a stir, just imagine a multibillion dollar suit from every label/movie company against google for allowing these sites into their search engine, if that happens these companies would own google, and you can kiss the search engines goodbye or expect these new costs to be popping up.

V10LETBLUES said:

Tremolina said:

No, I am suggesting that fear of legal action HAS pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet. With new peer to peer technologies that need no central server or database anymore, but that can operate completely and soley on the back of its individual users computers, they escape liability while they also lack the technical power to stop illegal filesharing. Back in the days of napster and kazaa it was still possible to pull the plug, so to speak, out of these networks, but with current technology, that pops out these kind of sites by the thousands and that are ever evolving, things have become technically unstoppable.

--

[Edited 12/23/10 16:46pm]

No we cannot stop the human condition. Stealing is just a part of who some of us are. But EVERYTHING regarding the net is technically stoppable. It's just a a matter of how Kim Jong-il we can get down with.

Comcast, one of the largest cable providers here in the US is about to buy television and movie giant NBC/Universal. As the largest internet provider now has a stake in the products most commonly pirated, do you think that they are going to idly stand back and watch their money snatched from optic cables?

Before this purchase they didn't care either way, As long as folks paid their cable bill. Now that they control a big chunk of the gateway AND a big steak in the products, do you think they will not do their best Kim Jong-il impersonation that lobbyists can buy?

What I'm trying to say is it's not about nickles and dimes and pop starlets any more. The big boys are coming now and they play rough.

While the deal, may God forbid it, will probably be blessed by the FCC and the US Justice department, blessing is still delayed untill next year.

When it does happen tho, there two things to take in mind: 1) comcast only owns a lot of cables in the US and 2) comcast is bounded by laws.

You say they will go all Kim Jung Il? Not sure what you are trying to imply with that really, but if you are suggesting that they will be able to shutdown peer to peer networks then you are mistaken, because a) it's technically not possible when there is no central server ro database (in the US) to take down, because it runs on millions of individual computers ALL OVER THE WORLD and b) they are bound by laws and those laws are bound by borders while the internet has no borders nor is it easy to uphold the law on it.

Moreover, most problems for consumers will likely emerge on the cable TV market with Comcast casting NBC/Universal competitors out of the market.

And also if the merger goes through, I don't think it will it work. It will be another failure like the AOL/Time Warner disaster. They didn't go all Kim Jong il on everybody either did they? But they did go down in conflict and disynergy. Just wait and see.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 18:13pm]

lastdecember said:

Now if you want to avoid all this cost, you have to buy the equipment yourself which costs about 5,000 at least, go to film/editing school, which is about another grand at least, and then you can do these things on your own.

You haven't heard of viral videos have you? Where I come from several talented young people have managed to put themselves in the spotlights with them already. Also, these days you don't have to pay up to 5000 for equipment and go to school to make a video yourself. All you really need is a camera and an editing program for your computer. Be smart, learn it yourself or ask some creative people you know to help you out with it. Cool people, family and friends will help you out for free, or buy something second hand.

It's the same with making music. It's not extremely expensive anymore to make a decent sounding record these days and mix it yourself on your computer. No it's not a super professionally produced and digitally mastered CD, but you don't HAVE to pay your ass off for an expensive studio and the whole record production process anymore. Hell, every artist records like that these days in their own home studio and they can throw it on the net just like that, which many of them also do.

That's the way of the future. Not the whole money and fame game of the industry, but the game of the internet.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 18:28pm]

Tremolina said:

lastdecember said:

Now if you want to avoid all this cost, you have to buy the equipment yourself which costs about 5,000 at least, go to film/editing school, which is about another grand at least, and then you can do these things on your own.

You haven't heard of viral videos have you? Where I come from several talented young people have managed to put themselves in the spotlights with them already. Also, these days you don't have to pay up to 5000 for equipment and go to school to make a video yourself. All you really need is a camera and an editing program for your computer. Be smart, learn it yourself or ask some creative people you know to help you out with it. Cool people, family and friends will help you out for free, or buy something second hand.

It's the same with making music. It's not extremely expensive anymore to make a decent sounding record these days and mix it yourself on your computer. No it's not a super professionally produced and digitally mastered CD, but you don't HAVE to pay your ass off for an expensive studio and the whole record production process anymore. Hell, every artist records like that these days in their own home studio and they can throw it on the net just like that, which many of them also do.

That's the way of the future. Not the whole money and fame game of the industry, but the game of the internet.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 18:28pm]

But again something like Viral videos is nothing more than what mtv does with reality shows, sure u may find the needle in the haystack of talented filmmaker/actor whatever in a viral video, but most are nothing more than a quick do this, get your 15 minutes and be gone, so im more interested in staying power and im yet to see that from anything coming from those things, NOT that labels or companies are pushing out the talent these days, that all died when numbers took over around 1992. But theres too much of this get rich quick "thought" process from too many of these youtube makers things like that, so to me that mind set is what is going on at labels too, and thats because the public really isnt interested in the "art" anymore, its all disposable, so to me longevity is more important but that wont happen anymore with these types of things, i mean has anyone even heard from the filmakers of the "blair witch project" ever again, no, why, because they sucked to begin with, the movie sucked, and it was a fad.

So things may break through here and there, but as i said before using the "net" may get you seen, but becoming a one Youtube video wonder is nothing more than the pipe dreams that labels use to get people to sign nowwadays

i think illegal downloading is a good thing.
the record industry has to be brought down.
their bullshit strategies has destroyed the good things about pop music.

Rightly said:

i think illegal downloading is a good thing.
the record industry has to be brought down.
their bullshit strategies has destroyed the good things about pop music.

then you're just an immoral, ignorant dumbass. the next time someone steals from you make sure you feel the same way

Rightly said:

i think illegal downloading is a good thing.
the record industry has to be brought down.
their bullshit strategies has destroyed the good things about pop music.

to be fair though, the labels strategies that u suggest are responses to what the public wants, if we think labels are the cause of shit, the public needs to look in the mirror, we had about 15 years of shit talent that just slipped by because it sold and everyone patted each other on the back for it.

I haven't been able to listen to pop radio since the mid eighties. the greedy industry is responsible for destroying pop music culture.
they have destroyed the evolution of pop culture which didn't belong to anyone but could be appreciated by everyone.
The industry should be destroyed.

SoulAlive said:

SquirrelMeat said:

The thing is, the whole industry is still a rip off. Why do pop stars need be millionaires? Who defined that? It was the labels, who were earning so much they decided they better throw the artists a bone to keep the gravy train on the track.

I think the industry NEEDS to crash, build up fairer. Otherwise it will be nothing but Cowell dross and bland mid atlantic Pop RnB drivel.

Very interesting viewpoint.

thats basically the same thing i just said....... Except for the last part...

V10LETBLUES said:

For some reason folks get all would up about the big bad record companies of days gone by.

If we can put our preconceived notions and biases aside for a second and focus on the subject of illicit theft of music, films, tv shows, software, financial information, medical records, personal information ect. Which is the real topic. Lets not get too myopic on the topic of illegal downloading.

If any one of us is an artist and wants to make a living in selling and recording music, we have a right to do so. And just as a florist or baker, we should expect people and law enforcement to be on our side and embrace and protect us.

This subject has gone way over a lot of people's heads.

Yes people are still going to drive drunk, run red light, steal and kill, but that doesn't mean we have to turn a blind eye. That is what makes a civilized society, with people able to make a viable living doing what they are good at and love. And a society that supports, embraces and protects it.

Everything runs it's course. Things move slowly but that is the way it is sometimes.

The actions against Kaazaa, Napster, Limewire, Pirate Bay, did in fact have a major impact regardless if anyone wants to admit it or not. Apple was a failing company when it introduced it's life saving product the iPod and it's iTunes store. And in part because of that huge success of it was able to move on and grow. Without the law going after Kaazaa, Napster and such that paved the way for viable legal music commerce there might have not been an itunes store or an Apple as we know it.

Pretty soon when internet service providers can all jack up fees all they want to make up for their losses in cable television package subscriptions, they will see how dependent we are on the internet and charge your per page, or per usage. They will charge user premiums since they will be able to block porn, video and other services and charge you extra.

It is just a matter of time when this subject of illegal downloads takes a turn to mean something different altogether. When paying 99cents is going to be cheaper than scourging the internet looking for freebies.

[Edited 12/23/10 5:33am]

either way whether people were illegally downloading things.. the goverment was going to block, have complete control over the internet and jack up the fee.

so illegal downloads have nothing to do with the system that the government is going to set up..

even if everyone stop illegally downloading today... eventually in the future, they were going to set up a "pay per click" ...........

lastdecember said:

Tremolina said:

You haven't heard of viral videos have you? Where I come from several talented young people have managed to put themselves in the spotlights with them already. Also, these days you don't have to pay up to 5000 for equipment and go to school to make a video yourself. All you really need is a camera and an editing program for your computer. Be smart, learn it yourself or ask some creative people you know to help you out with it. Cool people, family and friends will help you out for free, or buy something second hand.

It's the same with making music. It's not extremely expensive anymore to make a decent sounding record these days and mix it yourself on your computer. No it's not a super professionally produced and digitally mastered CD, but you don't HAVE to pay your ass off for an expensive studio and the whole record production process anymore. Hell, every artist records like that these days in their own home studio and they can throw it on the net just like that, which many of them also do.

That's the way of the future. Not the whole money and fame game of the industry, but the game of the internet.

-

[Edited 12/23/10 18:28pm]

But again something like Viral videos is nothing more than what mtv does with reality shows, sure u may find the needle in the haystack of talented filmmaker/actor whatever in a viral video, but most are nothing more than a quick do this, get your 15 minutes and be gone, so im more interested in staying power and im yet to see that from anything coming from those things, NOT that labels or companies are pushing out the talent these days, that all died when numbers took over around 1992. But theres too much of this get rich quick "thought" process from too many of these youtube makers things like that, so to me that mind set is what is going on at labels too, and thats because the public really isnt interested in the "art" anymore, its all disposable, so to me longevity is more important but that wont happen anymore with these types of things, i mean has anyone even heard from the filmakers of the "blair witch project" ever again, no, why, because they sucked to begin with, the movie sucked, and it was a fad.

So things may break through here and there, but as i said before using the "net" may get you seen, but becoming a one Youtube video wonder is nothing more than the pipe dreams that labels use to get people to sign nowwadays

Well of course just being a rising star on Youtube won't make you a mega star for the entire world instantly, but the point is that you do not need lots of money, resources, a major company or the MTV anymore to make yourself known. You can do it all by yourself these days, which by the way is much more appreciated by most people than yet another whore of the industry that is only trying to suck some dollars out of your pocket with his or hers no talented CD full of filler. Yeah really!

You seem to still have much much faith that major record labels, MTV and their whole money and fame game will last, but then you won't be able to see where I am getting at. The world has changed and is still changing, fast. The losers in the new world are the the MTV's, the big artists and the big record labels, not the majority of the artists nor the consumers. There is no way to stop it, no matter how much the industry tries to hold on to the power of the law or commerce. It won't succeed.

-

[Edited 12/24/10 5:27am]

TotalAlisa said:

V10LETBLUES said:

For some reason folks get all would up about the big bad record companies of days gone by.

If we can put our preconceived notions and biases aside for a second and focus on the subject of illicit theft of music, films, tv shows, software, financial information, medical records, personal information ect. Which is the real topic. Lets not get too myopic on the topic of illegal downloading.

If any one of us is an artist and wants to make a living in selling and recording music, we have a right to do so. And just as a florist or baker, we should expect people and law enforcement to be on our side and embrace and protect us.

This subject has gone way over a lot of people's heads.

Yes people are still going to drive drunk, run red light, steal and kill, but that doesn't mean we have to turn a blind eye. That is what makes a civilized society, with people able to make a viable living doing what they are good at and love. And a society that supports, embraces and protects it.

Everything runs it's course. Things move slowly but that is the way it is sometimes.

The actions against Kaazaa, Napster, Limewire, Pirate Bay, did in fact have a major impact regardless if anyone wants to admit it or not. Apple was a failing company when it introduced it's life saving product the iPod and it's iTunes store. And in part because of that huge success of it was able to move on and grow. Without the law going after Kaazaa, Napster and such that paved the way for viable legal music commerce there might have not been an itunes store or an Apple as we know it.

Pretty soon when internet service providers can all jack up fees all they want to make up for their losses in cable television package subscriptions, they will see how dependent we are on the internet and charge your per page, or per usage. They will charge user premiums since they will be able to block porn, video and other services and charge you extra.

It is just a matter of time when this subject of illegal downloads takes a turn to mean something different altogether. When paying 99cents is going to be cheaper than scourging the internet looking for freebies.

[Edited 12/23/10 5:33am]

either way whether people were illegally downloading things.. the goverment was going to block, have complete control over the internet and jack up the fee.

so illegal downloads have nothing to do with the system that the government is going to set up..

even if everyone stop illegally downloading today... eventually in the future, they were going to set up a "pay per click" ...........

You're right about that aspect of it. But it's not the government jacking up the prices, but your ISP. They will see a heck of lot more money out of this than they ever got from their bundled cable TV packages. The cable companies saw Google and Facebook and everybody else use the internet to rake in billions and now they see it as their turn.

Your ISP never batted an eye constantly streaming their cable TV packages 24/7 of channels most of us didn't want, using up tons of bandwidth for 29 bucks or whatever, but all of a sudden when people ditched their cable subscriptions, their bandwidth is now a sacred limited commodity. How very convenient for them.

Like turning off all lights when not in use and using energy efficient bulbs and insulation, people will watch what they use the internet for.Going straight to Amazon might be cheaper that scrounging the net for freebies.

The days of wasting days and months in competitive long distance marathon Googling and chatting may soon be over. People may once again see the what the outside of their house looks like. We may have to buy lawn rakes and hefty bags again, since we had put them on eBay thinking we would never see the outside of our house again.

Such is life.

Tremolina said:

lastdecember said:

But again something like Viral videos is nothing more than what mtv does with reality shows, sure u may find the needle in the haystack of talented filmmaker/actor whatever in a viral video, but most are nothing more than a quick do this, get your 15 minutes and be gone, so im more interested in staying power and im yet to see that from anything coming from those things, NOT that labels or companies are pushing out the talent these days, that all died when numbers took over around 1992. But theres too much of this get rich quick "thought" process from too many of these youtube makers things like that, so to me that mind set is what is going on at labels too, and thats because the public really isnt interested in the "art" anymore, its all disposable, so to me longevity is more important but that wont happen anymore with these types of things, i mean has anyone even heard from the filmakers of the "blair witch project" ever again, no, why, because they sucked to begin with, the movie sucked, and it was a fad.

So things may break through here and there, but as i said before using the "net" may get you seen, but becoming a one Youtube video wonder is nothing more than the pipe dreams that labels use to get people to sign nowwadays

Well of course just being a rising star on Youtube won't make you a mega star for the entire world instantly, but the point is that you do not need lots of money, resources, a major company or the MTV anymore to make yourself known. You can do it all by yourself these days, which by the way is much more appreciated by most people than yet another whore of the industry that is only trying to suck some dollars out of your pocket with his or hers no talented CD full of filler. Yeah really!

You seem to still have much much faith that major record labels, MTV and their whole money and fame game will last, but then you won't be able to see where I am getting at. The world has changed and is still changing, fast. The losers in the new world are the the MTV's, the big artists and the big record labels, not the majority of the artists nor the consumers. There is no way to stop it, no matter how much the industry tries to hold on to the power of the law or commerce. It won't succeed.

-

[Edited 12/24/10 5:27am]

No im not talking labels, im talking to maintain things or to even get something serious up and running and sustained, U have to have some money behind, wheter its a label a company, the neighbor on the corner who invests in you, something, you cant just think that you will make a five minute youtube track and sell millions, thats a great dream, and thats why you get alot of "no talents out there" i would say about 80-90% of what is on Youtube is shit.

All im saying is that labels have adjusted, since they arent selling U music anymore, to be honest, if you want a career in music, dont sign with anyone, learn to play and write and build that way. I have never spoken of the fame game, because the artists im into are either past their days of the so called fame, or they cant get played on anything.

U are pointing out MTV as a loser, but they still get paid, thats what im saying, they have nothing to do with music, they make billions on those reality shows, because its cheap no talents that "to be honest" are from the Youtube mindset, and thinking well if Tom Hanks can make a movie so can i, well, thats the problem, some people just fail to realize that JUST because its easy to make a film or music, doesnt mean U can make it well, and thats why the art of it, is in the toilet. Labels will sell what they can, they adjusted because they jumped the shark on selling music, they knew it was over when it all went digital, sure its still selling, but its so easy to copy, that its not a smart business model to be in anymore, thats how they think, thats why u see 360 deals up the ass now, because they have everythinng tied up.

I fail to see how everyone thinks that artists are "rich" i mean maybe people like MJ and Madonna and Prince, Beyonce etc that we talk about constantly, but no music artist today is getting paid like that where they are millionaires, im not really sure why people think that some dude playing a concert is making that much more then they are, because they arent.

Bottom line is that regardless of music selling or not, labels still make money, mtv is still loaded with cash, they just arent selling videos anymore. I mean they just signed that dude from jersey shore to his own show, thats cheap labor, because he generates more cash for them in ratings, then all the top videos could for them, lets remember, music is not the background anymore, its a side dish.

lastdecember said:

Tremolina said:

Well of course just being a rising star on Youtube won't make you a mega star for the entire world instantly, but the point is that you do not need lots of money, resources, a major company or the MTV anymore to make yourself known. You can do it all by yourself these days, which by the way is much more appreciated by most people than yet another whore of the industry that is only trying to suck some dollars out of your pocket with his or hers no talented CD full of filler. Yeah really!

You seem to still have much much faith that major record labels, MTV and their whole money and fame game will last, but then you won't be able to see where I am getting at. The world has changed and is still changing, fast. The losers in the new world are the the MTV's, the big artists and the big record labels, not the majority of the artists nor the consumers. There is no way to stop it, no matter how much the industry tries to hold on to the power of the law or commerce. It won't succeed.

-

[Edited 12/24/10 5:27am]

No im not talking labels, im talking to maintain things or to even get something serious up and running and sustained, U have to have some money behind, wheter its a label a company, the neighbor on the corner who invests in you, something, you cant just think that you will make a five minute youtube track and sell millions, thats a great dream, and thats why you get alot of "no talents out there" i would say about 80-90% of what is on Youtube is shit.

All im saying is that labels have adjusted, since they arent selling U music anymore, to be honest, if you want a career in music, dont sign with anyone, learn to play and write and build that way. I have never spoken of the fame game, because the artists im into are either past their days of the so called fame, or they cant get played on anything.

U are pointing out MTV as a loser, but they still get paid, thats what im saying, they have nothing to do with music, they make billions on those reality shows, because its cheap no talents that "to be honest" are from the Youtube mindset, and thinking well if Tom Hanks can make a movie so can i, well, thats the problem, some people just fail to realize that JUST because its easy to make a film or music, doesnt mean U can make it well, and thats why the art of it, is in the toilet. Labels will sell what they can, they adjusted because they jumped the shark on selling music, they knew it was over when it all went digital, sure its still selling, but its so easy to copy, that its not a smart business model to be in anymore, thats how they think, thats why u see 360 deals up the ass now, because they have everythinng tied up.

I fail to see how everyone thinks that artists are "rich" i mean maybe people like MJ and Madonna and Prince, Beyonce etc that we talk about constantly, but no music artist today is getting paid like that where they are millionaires, im not really sure why people think that some dude playing a concert is making that much more then they are, because they arent.

Bottom line is that regardless of music selling or not, labels still make money, mtv is still loaded with cash, they just arent selling videos anymore. I mean they just signed that dude from jersey shore to his own show, thats cheap labor, because he generates more cash for them in ratings, then all the top videos could for them, lets remember, music is not the background anymore, its a side dish.

I guess you'r right. However, two contemporary Dutch musicians sort of embody this:

Alain Clark who is a great performer, songwriter and singer signed with a record label. He has done a tour and is succesfull, and the label is making money.

Caro Emerald could not get a record company, her last century fifty's style was not mainstream enough. She started her own production company, released her cd and she won a few prizes in Europe. She recently beated MJ his 'thriller' record of longest No 1 artist! Good for her, she got her money for her old days, so she is free to make the music she wants.

Tremolina said:

V10LETBLUES said:

Are you suggesting that fear of legal action has not pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet?

I mean nowadays most webmasters work to keep any of that stuff off their sites to avoid any problems. The legal actions have had a major impact.

It's still there, just like anything else in society that people think they can get away with, but without enforcement of laws and respect of others and their property you have a nonviable society that will never and should never be tolerated.

No, I am suggesting that fear of legal action HAS pushed illegal operaters further down into the bowels of the internet. With new peer to peer technologies that need no central server or database anymore, but that can operate completely and soley on the back of its individual users computers, they escape liability while they also lack the technical power to stop illegal filesharing. Back in the days of napster and kazaa it was still possible to pull the plug, so to speak, out of these networks, but with current technology, that pops out these kind of sites by the thousands and that are ever evolving, things have become technically unstoppable.

--

[Edited 12/23/10 16:46pm]

You seem to know about this topic. I just read an article about ICANN, Milton Mueller is talking about it. He published "Network and States, the global politics of internet governance". Did any of you read that book or knows about how ICANN really works?