TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Steve Angello's Antipiracy Statement
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »

Just curious...how much do artists get from online stations,

Like DI.FM?

quote:

Originally posted by activate my point is that it's quite rediculous to compare any aspect of industry to how it was 100+ years ago.

But...it was you who stated the time quotes, not him. He merely brought up an arbitrary example of "before", and you chose to take it back to the 1900s...so....

Ultimately it really is in line with his argument. Times and the available technologies have been instrumental in forcing adaptation.

throughout history there has always been ways to get stuff cheaper, or for free.

wont change anytime soon, until some software engineer comes up with a more secure digital media format.... and then that gets cracked.


smoke a doob and chill out steve.


no sense in stressing over things you cannot control.

quote:

Originally posted by TheVrk This to me is the crux of the problem... If the promos were handled properly then pirating would never (or barely) be an issue.

I agree with this to a certain extent, but when you're pressing a track on vinyl or having a sound engineer perfect the digital copy, there are other people involved a long the way who can make copies.

Also, promos are exactly that - promotional copies. Sales are directly influenced by the amount of exposure it gets prior to release. Unfortunately, sometimes the promo gets out too much or is too popular with big DJs that people are sick of the track by the time it is officially released. (Think: Magic M)

quote:

Originally posted by exstasie Just curious...how much do artists get from online stations, Like DI.FM?

$0 - it is promotion however.

quote:

Originally posted by terrytutone fans of house music dont seem to want to pay for anything. they want the music for free and then when the parties roll around they wanna get comped too. they dont show any real love besides self proclomations on message boards. even worse, the djs dont want to pay for shit either. they just steal all the music off soulseek and go out into the clubs with it. its such a joke when you see these nothing djs playing up front music that you know they cant legitimately acquire.

+100000

alot of artists have stopped producing music for 2 reasons. Either they themselves cant afford to make music anymore. It costs money to build/rent studios, hire session artists, spend months to make an album etc. OR labels cant see any profit from "fringe" genres like electronic music and opt to concentrate even more on a sure thing such as hip hop. Massive layoffs at the big labels has a trickle down effect on EVERYONE from artists to small labels. If people are unwilling to part with a buck or two for their favourite song, the industry will cease to exist. I fear next for the film inudstry which has even more at stake as their budgets are hundreds of times greater than that of a musical artist.

Bottom line, It takes MONEY for things to happen in any industry and that money has to come from the consumer.

quote:

Originally posted by Shade $0 - it is promotion however.

Wasn't there some royalty thing that was to be introduced which would screw over all online radio stations or something?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 alot of artists have stopped producing music for 2 reasons. Either they themselves cant afford to make music anymore. It costs money to build/rent studios, hire session artists, spend months to make an album etc. OR labels cant see any profit from "fringe" genres like electronic music and opt to concentrate even more on a sure thing such as hip hop. Massive layoffs at the big labels has a trickle down effect on EVERYONE from artists to small labels. If people are unwilling to part with a buck or two for their favourite song, the industry will cease to exist. I fear next for the film inudstry which has even more at stake as their budgets are hundreds of times greater than that of a musical artist. Bottom line, It takes MONEY for things to happen in any industry and that money has to come from the consumer.

I disagree. Especially with Electronic music, all you need to produce is pretty much a MIDI keyboard, speakers, and appropriate software. The software itself is often pirated because the artists know their music is going to be pirated, so they don't feel bad producing music that will be pirated on pirated software. So the production setup itself costs less than a good DJ setup. Anyway, my point is that there's still a lot of people sitting in their home-made studios making quite decent tracks with a simple setup like that. So I wouldn't say people stopped producing music at all. These guys don't make any money off of the music at all, and they continue making it cause this is their hobby.

So the industry won't cease to exist. I think at this point, music piracy is at its peak - EVERYONE knows how to do it. And yet, even the Electronic music, which as you say, should be collapsing right about now, is still going strong. Singles and albums are still being made. And I don't see the quantities of singles and albums that are released go down at all. Quality isn't going down either. So what's going on? where's the collapse of the industry? Perhaps you meant the collapse of the labels.

And film industry is not going to go down to piracy either, even if MPAA officials are running around screaming, "OMG THE END IS NEAR!" Movies STILL make a TON of profit from theatre screenings. They're setting record box office numbers every new year. You'll never be able to pirate the theatre experience, much like you'll never be able to pirate the club experience for music. Not to mention movies in theatres come out way before they hit DVDs, which reduces the effect of piracy as well. And DVDs are still continuing to sell well, despite all the piracy.

The effects of piracy has always been over-exaggerated by those who see a person pirating something, and think that this is profit they lost on it. That's simply not true. Only a small percentage of those who pirate would have bought the thing if they couldn't pirate it.

Lastly, the industries have long known about piracy, and yet they still haven't made it easier for the consumer to get stuff legally than illegally. A lot of music piracy comes from the fact that I could be downloading an album after a simple search from my firefox searchbar,and 3 clicks of my mouse. You give the consumers a legal way that's even easier than that, and they'll abandon piracy.

Beatport, btw, is a step in the right direction, and has been a phenomenal success, as has iTunes. If your precious industry weren't fucking idiots, and saw this back in the birth of Napster, they could have made a TON of money between then and now. Instead, they decided to shoot themselves in the foot a couple of times, wait a decade, and only then do something that should have been done in 1997.

They can cry and whine all they fucking want, but the fact of the matter is, there was a huge technological change that affected THEIR business, and they waited a decade to do something about it. Of course they're almost dying now. Any business that adapted that slowly would die.

Steve Angello shouldn't be bitching at his fans. He should be bitching at his label for being greedy retards for 10 years.

Well, at least .mp3 isn't as demonized as it once was 5+ years ago. At least now we have affordable options for the purchase of individual tracks.

However, at the same time, some of those that are crying foul about piracy on the net would also be nowhere near as popular if it wasn't around -- double-edged sword.

quote:

Originally posted by exstasie Wasn't there some royalty thing that was to be introduced which would screw over all online radio stations or something?

Some groups attempted to enforce laws which would make it necessary for online radio stations to pay performance fees - but afaik it wasn't very successful. Most online radio stations would have to shut down under that sort of pressure.

A fair bit of profit, however, does come from FM radio stations (i.e. Radio 1) playing out tracks. While many people would likely complain about things becoming 'commercial', airplay is really one of the easiest ways for an artist to make money. Getting the tracks to the right people and making sure it's a style that suits the radio... well... that becomes a bit more complicated.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur I disagree. Especially with Electronic music, all you need to produce is pretty much a MIDI keyboard, speakers, and appropriate software. The software itself is often pirated because the artists know their music is going to be pirated, so they don't feel bad producing music that will be pirated on pirated software. So the production setup itself costs less than a good DJ setup. Anyway, my point is that there's still a lot of people sitting in their home-made studios making quite decent tracks with a simple setup like that. So I wouldn't say people stopped producing music at all. These guys don't make any money off of the music at all, and they continue making it cause this is their hobby. So the industry won't cease to exist. I think at this point, music piracy is at its peak - EVERYONE knows how to do it. And yet, even the Electronic music, which as you say, should be collapsing right about now, is still going strong. Singles and albums are still being made. And I don't see the quantities of singles and albums that are released go down at all. Quality isn't going down either. So what's going on? where's the collapse of the industry? Perhaps you meant the collapse of the labels. And film industry is not going to go down to piracy either, even if MPAA officials are running around screaming, "OMG THE END IS NEAR!" Movies STILL make a TON of profit from theatre screenings. They're setting record box office numbers every new year. You'll never be able to pirate the theatre experience, much like you'll never be able to pirate the club experience for music. Not to mention movies in theatres come out way before they hit DVDs, which reduces the effect of piracy as well. And DVDs are still continuing to sell well, despite all the piracy.

im not just talking about electronic music. AND you need more than mentioned above to make a QUALITY sounding production. Sure any monkey can slap some beats together but it has to sound professional. Then again with the crap quality of mp3s i guess that doesnt matter much anymore either. And you still need session vocalists, guitarists, instruments etc if you want to make something other than burps and farts. You can always sample a record but then you have to pay big bucks upfront to licence that sound. And dont tell me you can fake it with the synths because it just isnt the same. But again, in this day and age people dont seem to care about quality.

Now lets move onto remixes. Want to get your record popular? You need remixes. And who pays the remixers? Why none other than the artist either directly or through the label.

As for the justification that its a hobby. Well, what if someone someday declares your profession a "hobby"? How would you feel?

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur The effects of piracy has always been over-exaggerated by those who see a person pirating something, and think that this is profit they lost on it. That's simply not true. Only a small percentage of those who pirate would have bought the thing if they couldn't pirate it. Lastly, the industries have long known about piracy, and yet they still haven't made it easier for the consumer to get stuff legally than illegally. A lot of music piracy comes from the fact that I could be downloading an album after a simple search from my firefox searchbar,and 3 clicks of my mouse. You give the consumers a legal way that's even easier than that, and they'll abandon piracy. Beatport, btw, is a step in the right direction, and has been a phenomenal success, as has iTunes. If your precious industry weren't fucking idiots, and saw this back in the birth of Napster, they could have made a TON of money between then and now. Instead, they decided to shoot themselves in the foot a couple of times, wait a decade, and only then do something that should have been done in 1997. They can cry and whine all they fucking want, but the fact of the matter is, there was a huge technological change that affected THEIR business, and they waited a decade to do something about it. Of course they're almost dying now. Any business that adapted that slowly would die. Steve Angello shouldn't be bitching at his fans. He should be bitching at his label for being greedy retards for 10 years.

True that not as many people who download illegally would buy. But also true that many many people who would have bought, now choose to steal it instead.

Id rather have 10 people buy my song than have a million people steal it. Because a million people may have my song, but what do i have to show for it? And dont give me this promo crap. So people know who you are so they can steal your next track? Give me a break!

Time to pay up! I mean its only a buck for god sakes!

People can use any number of arguements to allow them to sleep better at night. But the bottomline is no matter how you justify it, YOU ARE STEALING.

Shit, I agree with Jay

I made the point earlier on that when Kazaa and Limewire were filled with fake music files (looping tracks, static blasts), I stopped downloading most current music because it was taking way too long to find the track I wanted. The biggest motivation for downloading music for free probably isn't the fact that it's free, it's that it's EASIER than purchasing the music legit, EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. If there's one thing that Business has proven over the years, it's this: People are willing to pay the price for convenience.

Why haven't the major labels simply found the mass-networks, flooded them with bad files and made the whole process a giant hassle for would-be thieves? It would take about 5 minutes to place a hundred different fake files all named "Don't stop the Music - Rhianna" and fuck up the system. It worked on me in the past, and I know many others who stopped downloading for a while for the same reason. But now, it's as easy as it was back in the days of Napster to find the new song I want. These big mighty labels should beat the downloaders at their own game, they want free files? Supply them with hundreds of free files that do nothing but blast static, loop shitty verses and destroy eardrums with high-pitched bleeps and whines.

Step two should have been done way back when Napster took off. Set up a file-selling website/program, connect it to a credit-card, and let people find all the music they need with a few clicks of their mouse. If they don't want to use their credit card, they can have monthly bills mailed to their house. But the files need to be AVAILABLE (I mentioned already that the main reason I end up downloading EDM is that I can't find the songs and remixes I want on the legit sites (ie: iTunes)), and they need to be EASY TO FIND. If I can't find the song I want on iTunes, I'm STILL getting that song, whether it's legal or not. Because you better be DAMN sure that I'm not spending 30 bucks on an imported CD with the song I want and 14 shitty filler-tracks to go with it.

Which brings me to another point. Back in the day, most of the big-name bands released awesome ALBUMS. The artists focused on releasing an entire album of quality tracks. The Beatles, Rolling Stones, U2, tons of classical rock bands, Elvis, Metallica, etc... all these classic artists were releasing entire albums of GOLD. The industry keeps blaming file-sharing for it's continuous drops in profits, and while I'm sure that downloading HAS had a noticeable effect on the industry, I'm just as sure that back in the mid-90's shitty albums with 2 good singles and 12 filler songs had become the norm, even from the top artists. And people were getting sick and tired of dropping 20 bucks for 2 good songs and a load of shit to go with them. This problem hasn't changed much over the years. Shitty artists with big labels behind them produce 15 shitty tracks, one or two decent tracks that 'make it big' then put all the songs on one album and tell the consumer "Hey, I'm hot shit, buy my album with 17 fantastic songs performed by me, 50 Cent!" This is unacceptable. Produce 15 shitty songs and a quality track, then market the album and charge the consumer X number of dollars for shit? Who's robbing who? Given the choice between downloading those 2 good songs for free, or dropping 20 bucks for those 2 good songs and 15 insults to my eardrum, is it any wonder that a very large percentage of people choose to steal the music they want?

And the response from the artists and record labels to all this music theft is this:

They bitch
They moan
They whine
They cry
They sue
They bitch some more
They demand legislation and compensation to protect their business

In short, they come across like that self-righteous bible-thumper we all know and hate. When has telling people to stop doing something because it's wrong EVER worked? People still smoke, people still drink, people still murder, people still steal, people still lie, people still cheat... Do you get the picture? Whether the record companies are correct or not about the morality of stealing music is entirely moot. The reality of the situation is the industry needs to adapt or die. And it's taking an incredibly long time for it to adapt.

The bottom line is this. Stealing music is wrong, I have no delusions that there is a justification for stealing music, I've done it, I do it, I know I'm doing it, but if I want a track and I can't find it on iTunes, I'm stealing it, 'nuff said. As long as it's easier to steal than it is to buy (and it is), and as long as artists continue to release over-priced albums with only a couple of quality songs (and they haven't stopped yet), a large percentage of people are going to continue to steal said music. Artists ranting about people stealing their shitty songs won't change a thing, record companies suing the pants off 14 year-old Billy isn't going to solve the problem, and trying to shut down the file-sharing sites hasn't worked yet, and probably never will. The ONLY realistic option is for the artists and labels to work with legit file-selling companies and find a way to make it as easy as possible for the consumer to PURCHASE the music they want, while at the same time attacking the free, file-sharing networks to make it as much of a hassle as possible to steal. Until record companies and artists fully grasp this truth, they're doomed to keep sinking into the pit they've dug for themselves.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 But the bottomline is no matter how you justify it, YOU ARE STEALING.

I wonder how many people in this thread have legally paid for every single mp3 on their computers?

Doesn't matter if you steal 1 song, borrow from a friend, or steal 1000+ albums, stealing is stealing. One can even say that livesets are a form of property. What's the difference between a few singles and a liveset with a few singles strung together... the question is, are you compensating the artist for the music that they have produced? Even if you're listening to a liveset you are still enjoying someone elses work.


How many of you can confess to paying every single artist for every single mp3? Does that include you Jayx1? Skipper? Chris Allen? Laura? Jamie? Are you guys saying you don't have a single pirated, uncompensated mp3 on your computers?

quote:

Originally posted by Porky I wonder how many people in this thread have legally paid for every single mp3 on their computers? Doesn't matter if you steal 1 song, borrow from a friend, or steal 1000+ albums, stealing is stealing. How many of you can confess to paying every single artist for every single mp3? Does that include you Jayx1? Skipper? Chris Allen? Laura? Jamie? Are you guys saying you don't have a single pirated mp3 on your computers?

I don't think they're making that claim at all. I think they're making the accurate claim that downloading music for free is stealing (provided of course it isn't being provided by the artist or label as a promotional tool).

Even if they HAVE stolen files (and I don't know if they have or not), the difference is they aren't trying to justify their actions. They know they stole, and anyone who won't pony up and admit it is just deluding themselves.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky I wonder how many people in this thread have legally paid for every single mp3 on their computers? Doesn't matter if you steal 1 song, borrow from a friend, or steal 1000+ albums, stealing is stealing. One can even say that livesets are a form of property. What's the difference between a few singles and a liveset with a few singles strung together... the question is, are you compensating the artist for the music that they have produced? Even if you're listening to a liveset you are still enjoying someone elses work. How many of you can confess to paying every single artist for every single mp3? Does that include you Jayx1? Skipper? Chris Allen? Laura? Jamie? Are you guys saying you don't have a single pirated, uncompensated mp3 on your computers?

If I have tracks that are unpaid for its because they have been sent to me directly by the artist or label. Otherwise I havea stack of receipts from music purchases last year. And I have to say, im releived that music is only 99 cents to $1.99 because back in the day a 12 inch single was 9.99 domestic and 14.99 import. I am paying a fraction of what i would have for a record. If only it were that simple when i was a poor student to have such a library of music!!

quote:

Originally posted by Spam I don't think they're making that claim at all. I think they're making the accurate claim that downloading music for free is stealing (provided of course it isn't being provided by the artist or label as a promotional tool). Even if they HAVE stolen files (and I don't know if they have or not), the difference is they aren't trying to justify their actions. They know they stole, and anyone who won't pony up and admit it is just deluding themselves.

Well, instead of demonizing the rest of us, I'd like to hear if they are 100% legit (like Jayx1 admits) or if they're hypocrites.

- Skipper
- Chris Allen
- Laura
- Jamie

quote:

Originally posted by Spam

couldn't agree more with that looong assed post.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam I don't think they're making that claim at all.

I am. I always pay for my music. Not paying for it is a major pet peeve of mine - and not to mention, cheap as hell. If someone sends me a promo and I listen and keep it, I will buy it once it's released. I buy commercially released music on itunes and my electronic DJ tunes from beatport.

did Tenaglia help him write this???

quote:

Originally posted by Porky I wonder how many people in this thread have legally paid for every single mp3 on their computers? How many of you can confess to paying every single artist for every single mp3? Does that include you Jayx1? Skipper? Chris Allen? Laura? Jamie? Are you guys saying you don't have a single pirated, uncompensated mp3 on your computers?

I haven't. It is only recently, last number of years I even gave true concious thought to the matter itself.

I haven't downloaded illegally a song in about 2-3 years I guess. But ya before that I did.

Only recently, mostly bc of this board did i even begin to give the matter much thought... of the morality of what I was doing. That, coupled w/ the ease of downloading electronic music I want now cheaply and easily via legit sites (Beatport, iTues, etc)

Im not claiming that ive never pirated music before. im just stating too many ppl think its justified, when its not. they try to justify why its 'ok' for them to do this. I never denied that it was 'wrong' to myself, or though that it was ok... i just didnt care. i just did it. upon further reflection later in my life ive decided i shoudlnt be doing it, ESPECIALLY (EVEN MORE SO) since i have such a viable legal option to get the same tracks otherwise!


if you jstu dont care, then admit that and carry on w/ your life. but dont fucking make up BS and try to make ur actions seems righteous.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam I don't think they're making that claim at all. I think they're making the accurate claim that downloading music for free is stealing (provided of course it isn't being provided by the artist or label as a promotional tool). Even if they HAVE stolen files (and I don't know if they have or not), the difference is they aren't trying to justify their actions. They know they stole, and anyone who won't pony up and admit it is just deluding themselves.

^^ Exactly my contention.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 People can use any number of arguements to allow them to sleep better at night. But the bottom line is no matter how you justify it, YOU ARE STEALING.

Thats what ppl need to admit to themselves. Dont stop on my account -- im not trying to make you stop your stealing. I AM trying to make you just see and recognize (to yourself) the truth of the matter re: what you are in fact doing, that its not legit.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur He should be bitching at his label for being greedy retards for 10 years.

Not sure why, but that line made me fucking crack up

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.