» Main Menu []

» Welcome Guest []
Welcome, Guest!
Please Login:

Username:

Password:


Need To Register?
Forgotten password?

» IndieSoc Forum []
» Forum
» Today's Posts
» Stats

Threads: 7432
Posts: 161438
Members: 975

Hot Topic:
»
Newest Post:
» Cable TV meets the internet (Carl, 10-12-2016 - 13:35)
Member of The Day:
» (No posts)
Newest Member:
» onzappe (4-7-2008)

» Who's Online []
Guests: 7507 Guests
Members: 1 Member

Mercury Rising

Key []
Super Administrator
Administrators
Super Moderators
Moderators
All Registered Members


[ Members Visited Today ]


IndieSoc
Advanced Search


Printable Version | Send to Friend
Subscribe | Add to Favorites
Author: Subject: YOUSENDIT ETC - EVERYONE PLEASE READ!
nome
Moderator





Posts: 1683
Registered: 21-10-2003
Location: At the bottom of the garden
Status: Offline

Mood: Flid!
posted on 18-1-2007 at 17:17 Reply With Quote
YOUSENDIT ETC - EVERYONE PLEASE READ!

Hello everyone,

Can you all please make sure you don't make ANYTHING available for download through indiesoc unless you its your band/own the copyright.
If anyone isn't sure what this affects u2u me.

Thanks,
Nome

[Edited on 18-1-2007 by nome]





I used to think I had something to say but my dumb ideologies gave me away.

Currently listening to:
View nome's Profile E-Mail nome View All Posts By nome U2U nome nome's Gallery MSN Profile
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 18-1-2007 at 17:53 Reply With Quote
this is kind of funny... did you angry letters or something?

either way, if the material is not actually hosted on the site, and there is an appropriate disclaimer such as 'this site is a public forum and is not responsible for content posted here' then there shouldn't be a problem.

don't give into corporate pressure! they should be earning their salaries by investing in good music that is actually worth people spending their money on, and not just squeezing every last penny out of talentless cokeheads. The great Bob Dylan said it best:

" I remember when that Napster guy came up across, it was like, 'Everybody's gettin' music for free.' I was like, 'Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway.' "





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
Matt Paradise
Moderator





Posts: 3693
Registered: 17-10-2002
Location: BACK IN DA HOOD
Status: Offline

Mood: Pimpin
posted on 18-1-2007 at 18:03 Reply With Quote
Fuck tha man.





I often go to sleep with pyjama bottoms, socks and a t-shirt on. When I awake I am naked. This is a popular phenomenon, known in scientific circles as theft. My family members steal my clothes in the night and sell them down the market. I often walk to work and see kids wearing the clothes that only the night before I was sleeping in. It is a disturbing development.

Currently listening to:
View Matt Paradise's Profile View All Posts By Matt Paradise U2U Matt Paradise
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 18-1-2007 at 18:05 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by slow riot

either way, if the material is not actually hosted on the site, and there is an appropriate disclaimer such as 'this site is a public forum and is not responsible for content posted here' then there shouldn't be a problem.


actually that might be a complete lie.

still, major record labels suck balls, and I would advocate people going out of their way not to pay for any of the 'music' that they are responsible for staining the world with.

Give your money to people who actually deserve it instead, there are plenty out of there.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
Spark Tarpauline
Posting Freak





Posts: 1437
Registered: 15-1-2003
Location: N/A
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 18-1-2007 at 18:57 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by nome

Hello everyone,

Can you all please make sure you don't make ANYTHING available for download through indiesoc unless you its your band/own the copyright.
If anyone isn't sure what this affects u2u me.

Thanks,
Nome

[Edited on 18-1-2007 by nome]


Why?

Currently listening to:
View Spark Tarpauline's Profile E-Mail Spark Tarpauline View All Posts By Spark Tarpauline U2U Spark Tarpauline Spark Tarpauline's Gallery
dunnerz
Moderator





Posts: 5245
Registered: 16-10-2002
Location: At my Desk
Status: Offline

Mood: 9-to-5
posted on 19-1-2007 at 11:05 Reply With Quote
I'm waiting for Mr Dyson's word on this, I mean, after all he does own/run/is responsible for the whole forum........





Friend of a friend of a friend asked me to put this link here:
http://www.backtrackin.net

Currently listening to:
View dunnerz's Profile E-Mail dunnerz Visit dunnerz's Homepage View All Posts By dunnerz U2U dunnerz dunnerz's Gallery dunnerz 's ICQ status MSN Profile
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 19-1-2007 at 17:11 Reply With Quote
I'd have thought this thread would spark some major discussion, and it hasn't seemed to at all.

This is a pretty important issue I think, and one that will be more and more prominent in the next few years.

Personally I think the days of paying for recorded music are numbered. People can get it for free over the internet, and whether or not somebody pays for a record comes down to a moral decision; a decision that is complicated by the fact that more often than not the artist makes zero money on an individual album sale, the money instead going to the bosses of the big corporations who control the music monopoly... hmv, emi etc etc etc..

This is complicated even further by the fact that the aim of these corperations is to make profit; a motive that is completely contrary to the evolution of music, which is by it's very nature an innovative and experimental medium. Therefore these corperations are slowly dying on their arse, because their survival depends on people making a moral decision in their favour, when for the last 40 years they have been flouting these same morals. And people are not stupid.

Therefore, it is my opinion that the future of music will be the free distribution of music via the internet, with artists exploiting this system of what is effectively free advertising to build a fanbase and promote themselves across the globe. And therefore in order for them to earn a living they must not only make and support good music, but also be able to create an entertaining and involving live performance, and treat their fanbase with dignity and respect. A return to the true roots of music once again.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 19-1-2007 at 17:41 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by slow riot

This is complicated even further by the fact that the aim of these corperations is to make profit; a motive that is completely contrary to the evolution of music, which is by it's very nature an innovative and experimental medium. Therefore these corperations are slowly dying on their arse, because their survival depends on people making a moral decision in their favour, when for the last 40 years they have been flouting these same morals. And people are not stupid.


As little post-script rant, this attitude displayed by these corperations has also created a major problem in that most people now see music as a commodity, a consumable product that is overly hyped, and then discarded like yesterday's garbage.

When really, music is really a living breathing lifeform that continues to evolve regardless of whether or not there is a bunch of yes men spinning an elaborate yarn that relies on glorifying the music of yesteryear in order to remarket some fresh faced rehash of it.

So, I suppose what I'm getting at is that people can do what they want with music, it is an artform and as such is public property. We are free to make our own moral decisions. That is the whole point of art, that it inspires a unique reaction inside each one of us that only we can feel, leading us to the realisation that we are morally capable beings, and that no one can tell us what to do, how to behave and how to react.

And therefore it is our decision whether or not we want to go to shows, sing in the shower, wear t shirts of our favourite bands, tape things from the radio, upload things to yousendit or dance like a clown.

Fuck the man indeed.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
xjohnx
Super Moderator





Posts:
Registered: 1-1-1970
Status: Offline

Mood:
posted on 19-1-2007 at 19:45 Reply With Quote
Agreed with your first post mostly, but in the second i'd have to disagree, of course music is a commodity, all culture is a commodity when it boils down to it, not that thats neccesarily a bad thing mind.
Also i wouldn't say that recordeds music days are numbered, just that their sales will drop a bit. Although i agree that when it comes down to it, i quite hope the record companies rather desperate attempt to keep a tight grip on a particular chunk of their market fails.

Would like to know what the actual threats were as regards downloading music were, i'd imagine you can get round it surely, especially since the stuff available on indiesoc is pretty tame overall and all forums contain links to stuff so it seems odd .






Currently listening to:
View 's Profile View All Posts By U2U
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 19-1-2007 at 20:04 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by xjohnx

Agreed with your first post mostly, but in the second i'd have to disagree, of course music is a commodity, all culture is a commodity when it boils down to it, not that thats neccesarily a bad thing mind.
Also i wouldn't say that recordeds music days are numbered, just that their sales will drop a bit. Although i agree that when it comes down to it, i quite hope the record companies rather desperate attempt to keep a tight grip on a particular chunk of their market fails.


i dunno man, I would see music as performing a much more important function than simply being a consumable item, but maybe I'm taking on an idealogical view that is simply not practical or even true.

I think recorded music's days are very very numbered. In a time when people would rather pay for ringtones than actual music, the record labels need to do something with a lot more weight than simply chase a couple of sales lost through downloads.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
xjohnx
Super Moderator





Posts:
Registered: 1-1-1970
Status: Offline

Mood:
posted on 19-1-2007 at 20:43 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by slow riot

Quote:
Originally posted by xjohnx

Agreed with your first post mostly, but in the second i'd have to disagree, of course music is a commodity, all culture is a commodity when it boils down to it, not that thats neccesarily a bad thing mind.
Also i wouldn't say that recordeds music days are numbered, just that their sales will drop a bit. Although i agree that when it comes down to it, i quite hope the record companies rather desperate attempt to keep a tight grip on a particular chunk of their market fails.


i dunno man, I would see music as performing a much more important function than simply being a consumable item, but maybe I'm taking on an idealogical view that is simply not practical or even true.


Not sure here, i'd say music was a cultural commodity, and is therefore used to sell a vast range of other commodities. I think you view a 'commodity' as being more of a negative thing than me, coz i wouldn't describe anything simply as being a consumable item.

Quote:
I think recorded music's days are very very numbered. In a time when people would rather pay for ringtones than actual music, the record labels need to do something with a lot more weight than simply chase a couple of sales lost through downloads.


I definitely think that in terms of the youth market recorded music is losing it a bit, so perhaps your right and i'm being pessimistic. However, I think these companies usually have their fingers in other pies (eg recording itself, promotion and so on), and can easily afford to take some sales losses until they have made some serious changes in reponse to market shifts, what those changes are i don't know, and yeah i hope they fail aswell. Can't really see what they could do about it, payable download sites aren't really going to catch on that well.






Currently listening to:
View 's Profile View All Posts By U2U
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 19-1-2007 at 21:48 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by xjohnx

I think you view a 'commodity' as being more of a negative thing than me, coz i wouldn't describe anything simply as being a consumable item.


yeah I think you're right there.

Quote:
Originally posted by xjohnx

I definitely think that in terms of the youth market recorded music is losing it a bit, so perhaps your right and i'm being pessimistic. However, I think these companies usually have their fingers in other pies (eg recording itself, promotion and so on), and can easily afford to take some sales losses until they have made some serious changes in reponse to market shifts, what those changes are i don't know, and yeah i hope they fail aswell. Can't really see what they could do about it, payable download sites aren't really going to catch on that well.


They're pretty much shafted I think, the rise in quality of software for producing and engineering has meant that any kid in their bedroom can get their hands on quality studio equipment that previously was exclusive to expensive studios. And with sites like myspace (bad example, but less corporate versions will undoubtedly start appearing) people can network themselves and do their own promotion. Plus with sites like wikipedia and many others, people can even learn in depth about music theory as well.

So basically anyone with a computer and a bit of self motivation can teach themselves the entire musical process, from composing and playing, to producing and engineering. And to add insult to injury they can do all their own promotion.

The major record labels are fucked!

Plus as an added bonus the license on recorded music (in this country at least) expires after 50 years, so in a few years time they won't even be able to sell all their mainstays from the 60s.

No wonder they're shitting themselves and sending out angry letters to small internet forums.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 19-1-2007 at 22:13 Reply With Quote
if any more proof on how fucked they really are was needed (and how far they are willing to go to deprive people of their privacy):

(from the independent)

Music industry threatens ISPs over piracy
By Nic Fildes
Published: 18 January 2007

The music industry opened up a new front in the war on online music piracy yesterday, threatening to sue internet service providers that allow customers to illegally share copyrighted tracks over their networks.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, or IFPI, said it would take action against internet companies that carry vast amounts of illegally shared files over their networks. It stressed that it would prefer not to pursue such a strategy and is keen to work in partnership with internet providers.

John Kennedy, the chairman of the IFPI, said he had been frustrated by internet companies that have not acted against customers involved in illegal activity. He warned that litigation against ISPs would be instigated "in weeks rather than months". Barney Wragg, the head of EMI's digital music division, said the industry had been left "with no other option" but to pursue ISPs in the courts.

The IFPI wants ISPs to disconnect users who refuse to stop exchanging music files illegally. Mr Kennedy said such activity is in breach of a customer's contract with the ISP and disconnecting offenders the IFPI had identified would significantly reduce illegal file sharing.

Mr Kennedy said talks with internet companies have been ongoing over the past year, but no action has been taken. "I realised I was being filibustered ... if they still want to filibuster, their time will run out," he said.

The IFPI took legal action against 10,000 individuals in 18 countries during 2006. It won a spate of significant legal victories against peer-to-peer platforms such as Kazaa that was forced to pay a $115m (£58m) settlement.

A spokesman for the Internet Service Providers Association said ISPs are "mere conduits of information" that can not be held liable for offences committed by customers. "ISPs cannot inspect every packet of data transmitted over their networks," he said.

Geoff Taylor, the executive vice-president and general counsel of IFPI, said that ISPs are in the best position to stop copyright infringements. "While it might be possible to argue that an ISP is exempt from liability for damages, that does not mean rights holders can't obtain an injunction to stop infringements of their copyright," he said.

A spokeswoman for Tiscali, a UK ISP, said the onus is on the IFPI to prove that the user is engaged in illegal activity and that the music organisation should share the cost of resolving disputes. Last year, due to a lack of evidence, Tiscali refused to close the accounts or hand over the details of 17 customers who the British Phonographic Industry claimed were involved in illegal file sharing.

During 2006, global digital music sales doubled to about $2bn on the back of an 89 per cent surge in music downloads to 795 million. The success of the digital music market has been underlined by bands like Koopa which is expected to score a Top-40 hit this week despite having no record label or any physical copies of their CD on sale.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot
xjohnx
Super Moderator





Posts:
Registered: 1-1-1970
Status: Offline

Mood:
posted on 19-1-2007 at 22:31 Reply With Quote
I imagine they will have to rely increasingly on a monopolisation of live music by certain promoters, eg the NME's rapid moves towards setting up more clubs and expanding in order to retain some high share of the market. Which makes the international co-operation hinted at in that article quite interesting.
Also I wonder if we'll see a shift in format away from cd's to a more competetive (in the eyes of hmv and co) format?






Currently listening to:
View 's Profile View All Posts By U2U
dunnerz
Moderator





Posts: 5245
Registered: 16-10-2002
Location: At my Desk
Status: Offline

Mood: 9-to-5
posted on 21-1-2007 at 00:08 Reply With Quote
Right - I'm not going to read the whole of the above, but recorded music and physical albums are far from numbered.

Record stores, and singles will very soon disappear, but there are a lot of people like me who like to actually own a physical something that I've bought, rather than an mp3 copy. Also as nice as it sounds, bands do need to make money to survive, so they'll never stop selling albums in some form or another.





Friend of a friend of a friend asked me to put this link here:
http://www.backtrackin.net

Currently listening to:
View dunnerz's Profile E-Mail dunnerz Visit dunnerz's Homepage View All Posts By dunnerz U2U dunnerz dunnerz's Gallery dunnerz 's ICQ status MSN Profile
Carl
Senior Member





Posts: 904
Registered: 10-11-2002
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 21-1-2007 at 15:05 Reply With Quote
"This is complicated even further by the fact that the aim of these corperations is to make profit; a motive that is completely contrary to the evolution of music, which is by it's very nature an innovative and experimental medium."

I would have thought that wanting to make money goes hand-in-hand with the evolution of music, whether it's Roland bringing out the 303, a fledgling Mississippi Delta record label trying to put out some blues 78s, or a Jamaican dub studio trying to push forward some new reggae sounds. Maybe today it's possible to produce good quality 'recorded' music in your bedroom, but this hasn't been possible for most of the history of recorded music.

I wonder if, had there been no music business, no studios, no labels- how much of our great music would be around today? I can think of a few famous artists who did a total DIY thing even back in the 60s- like Sun Ra who recorded and pressed all his own LPs, and funded his worldwide tours by selling them at concerts- but for the most part I can't see how most of the artists I like would have got big without there being a label there to provide them with equipment, marketing and distribution.

I'm particularly surprised you would say this Slow Riot, considering that the evolution of Electronic music in particular has largely been driven by changes in technology- often brought about by pretty big electronics companies who were there to make a profit.

"A return to the true roots of music once again."

If we're talking about a return to live music played on instruments in peoples' homes and at venues, perhaps. But even then, in the West, the sheet music was being produced by companies out to make a profit.






Currently listening to:
View Carl's Profile E-Mail Carl View All Posts By Carl U2U Carl
Simon Dyson
Webmaster
Administrator





Posts: 7411
Registered: 16-10-2002
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 21-1-2007 at 15:50 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by dunnerz

Also as nice as it sounds, bands do need to make money to survive, so they'll never stop selling albums in some form or another.

If you believe the figures bands signed to majors make more money from touring than from selling records since they get such a small cut of record sales. If anything MP3s would allow bands to make more money because they would be cutting out the middle man and selling records directly through sites like iTunes.


I think in the near future we'll see some kind of package that bridges the gap between physical records and mp3s to account for the fact that people like to have things like the record sleeve, lyrics sheets etc. that come with a physical record. Perhaps a way to package MP3s as an album with artwork that feels like an album rather than a collection of files. In fact MP3s support lyrics, embedded images etc. so it's a surprise these aren't being used.






Currently listening to:
View Simon Dyson's Profile E-Mail Simon Dyson Visit Simon Dyson's Homepage View All Posts By Simon Dyson U2U Simon Dyson Simon Dyson's Gallery Simon+Dyson 's ICQ status
slow riot
I should get a life





Posts: 2163
Registered: 4-9-2003
Status: Offline

Mood: No Mood.
posted on 21-1-2007 at 15:58 Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally posted by Carl



I would have thought that wanting to make money goes hand-in-hand with the evolution of music, whether it's Roland bringing out the 303, a fledgling Mississippi Delta record label trying to put out some blues 78s, or a Jamaican dub studio trying to push forward some new reggae sounds. Maybe today it's possible to produce good quality 'recorded' music in your bedroom, but this hasn't been possible for most of the history of recorded music.

I wonder if, had there been no music business, no studios, no labels- how much of our great music would be around today? I can think of a few famous artists who did a total DIY thing even back in the 60s- like Sun Ra who recorded and pressed all his own LPs, and funded his worldwide tours by selling them at concerts- but for the most part I can't see how most of the artists I like would have got big without there being a label there to provide them with equipment, marketing and distribution.

I'm particularly surprised you would say this Slow Riot, considering that the evolution of Electronic music in particular has largely been driven by changes in technology- often brought about by pretty big electronics companies who were there to make a profit.

"A return to the true roots of music once again."

If we're talking about a return to live music played on instruments in peoples' homes and at venues, perhaps. But even then, in the West, the sheet music was being produced by companies out to make a profit.


Hmm, you definitely make some interesting points, and obviously major props for including the legendary roland corperation in your argument. But to use them as an example, their legendary equipment was laughed at by most "professionals" for many years, until some of the early techno pioneers started finding them for cheap in second hand music shops and the like, and if these guys' motivation had been to make money, there certainly would never have been the musical revolution that followed. But then again if it hadn't been for Roland trying to make money then it wouldn't have happened either, so it's a tough call.

So I think perhaps maybe the real answer is somewhere between the 2, in that it takes people with artistic motivation and people with financial motivation in a complex unison, that allows neither 1 side to completely dominate the collective goal, but also allowing one to draw from the strengths of the other and vice versa. To cite Roland again, the amount of creativity which went into the production of those machines has meant that they are still being conistantly used in electronic music today, without any signs of becoming even slightly dated. A scenario that wouldn't have been likely if Roland had just decided to find the quickest and easiest way to make money. Which is unfortunately the attitude of the current major record labels. In that their business model is based on an entirely for profit basis, with no room for allowing creative growth.

This has unfortunately collided with a rise in accessible technology allowing people to be exposed to and acquire music outside of the current monopoly, and thus when faced with the choice, most people would much rather go behind the record labels back.

When I say a return to music's true roots, I mean in the tribal & shamanic sense. With the motivations of the artist being to synchronise a group of people's rhythms, promoting the growth of a temporarily united consciousness in which every person's individuality plays an equally important part, without the artist letting his or her ego take centre stage.

Thankyou for taking the time to read my views on the matter and to give me a carefully considered reply, I realise I take these things all rather seriously and write a large amount of waffle, but I think this issue is a very crucial one, and will shape the future of music in an unpredictable but major way.





myspace

Currently listening to:
View slow riot's Profile Visit slow riot's Homepage View All Posts By slow riot U2U slow riot





Not logged in
Last active: Never

Website developed by Simon Dyson 2003
Forum powered by XMB 1.8 Partagium Final Beta (Build: 14120211PM)
Developed By Aventure Media & The XMB Group 2002
Processed in 0.3042521 seconds, 53 queries
Bad Behavior has blocked 221 access attempts in the last 7 days.