Log in

View Full Version : poor starving artists

2003-09-26, 21:53
Musicians who complain that their material is being traded and that they are losing revenue from CD sales, are best described as "businessmen". Art should come from the soul and from the passions, without expectation of financial reimbursement. The most rewarding things one can do in life, such as helping people, raising children, loving someone, or creating something beautiful; do not earn people money.

Artists ought to be flattered that there are others who take an interest in their work. Every person who shares one of their songs on a p2p network should not be thought of as "a lost sale" but as "another fan".

Some musicians have been outraged at file sharing, and have authorized to have corrupted versions of their music spread on p2p networks. Cases such as that demonstrate that the fans have a higher regard for the artistic product than those particular musicians do. Tampering with the artistic product in the name of profit, disqualifies one's artistic credentials.

Artists don't have to be poor in order to qualify as being artists, but they can't expect to make a major living off of their art either. They have to understand that being an artist is not a financial occupation. It is a labor of love.

2003-09-27, 00:57
fake files only push people to better files
i could have gone with 128- wait no
320! yay and verified
get lost only knoobs fall for that

i think we need to reach the artists
tell them we can start a new business that distibutes world music
every local cd would be in cd shops and international stuff u could get online for cheap prices of course --50 cents a song--

id be happy

only a rotton theif lowdown bludger wouldnt think so

i only have to steal music because 3\4 of it i cant buy and ive got no credit cards and pay pal wont work for me

how am i to sample music when i dont personally watch to tv much at all or listen to radio at all

2003-09-27, 23:43
Originally posted by Criminal_Sniper
i only have to steal music because 3\4 of it i cant buy and ive got no credit cards and pay pal wont work for me
You're not stealing music. You're copying it from a friend of yours on the internet.

And this is not a lost sale for the record companies, because you would have done something else besides buying a CD if you couldn't download.

It is something we all ought to be grateful for, that kids are downloading tunes on the internet rather than going out and creating mayhem.

Since the artist contracts don't mention anything about digital mp3 files, it is wrong of the record companies to collect fees regarding file sharing. The money from the lawsuits which they filed is not being given to the artists. Nor is the money from pay download sites either. Clearly the record companies are the ones stealing from the artists. Here's a great article on that subject:
RIAA is Full of Bunk, So is New York Times (http://www.counterpunch.org/glahn09192003.html)

2003-10-24, 01:47
Normally I don't like to copy and paste articles from other sites. I prefer linking instead. But this essay by W. Friedman, also known as dumwaldo, at slyck.com was an outstanding work and I believe due to its exceptionally high quality, that it ought to be mirrored here. If their site goes down then this essay must be preserved.

what if peer to peer 'wins'? (http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2238)

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2003 22:24 GMT
Post subject: what if peer to peer 'wins'?


lets take an honest look at things for a moment here. what is the worst thing that could happen if peer to peer were to eventually overtake the recording industry and bankrupt them all, as the RIAA claims will eventually happen if the current path is not deterred.

so what would happen? well music would probably get better as a result. in fact music would probably improve so much it would eventually be looked back at as a tremendously favorable improvement. if the big business record companies were all eliminated there would be no more music motivated by greed and fortune seeking. the only motivation left to create music would be, well, a love of music.

most of the music made available by the large recording interests is not art and the creators and performers are not 'art'ists. they are part of an industry fueled by a desire for money. from the author and performer of the music all the way down to the guy that empties the garbage pails in the studio and back up to the president of the record company, every single one of those people is doing a job in search of a good paycheck. none of them, performers included, are doing it because of an inner passion that drives them to create. it is not art, it is music that is mass produced for profit.

the loss of current music continually fed at rapid pace would become overshadowed by the sheer quality of the musical works. do you really need a new song every week if the 'old' song is not played out in 3 days? quality music has a lasting quality that keeps it from getting old quickly.

the problem with creating music with longevity is it equals lower sales. lower sales of course equals lower profits. recording labels are not in business to bring you art, they are in it for the money and nothing else. plain and simple, this is capitalism at its finest.

capitalism and art mix as well as oil and water. i would like to think that years from now music itself will evolve and grow far greater than it is today as a result of the growing free trade of music among a global community. the music industry might eventually fall, but it surely will not stop the music.

if anything the advent of online filesharing guarantees that we will forever have a supply of fresh music. at no time in history has it ever been as easy as it is now to get music out to masses. no longer does an ARTist have to cowtow to the demanding 'recording industry mafia'. the free trade of music through peer to peer services is a god send to any true artist, but it is a detriment to the purveyors of 'made for profit' recordings that have nothing to do with art. these are the guys getting 'cheated' and not any creator of art. don't let the propaganda fool you.

so what do you think would happen if peer to peer filesharing 'wins'?

peace out,