(01-29-2008) U2 manager 'wants end to piracy' - BBC News*

[cydewaze]

Originally posted by U2girl I won't be surprised if this is what it will ultimately come down to, ISP banning people who downloaded music

Then people will just do it at an internet cafe (which they already do) or they'll poach other people's wireless signals and get them banned instead.

Originally posted by U2girl and/or bands leaving major labels and start new deals without the middle man.

That's what's most likely going to happen, and it's what the record companies fear the most.

I have a friend in California who is a musician (BAW met her while we were out there for Vertigo) and she has a website with a bunch of her own music. She was never able to get a record deal in her life for various reasons, so she puts her music on her website where people can buy her CDs.

Unfortunately, a website is like a needle in a haystack because there's just so much other information out there. So she stuck a few of her songs on gnutella, where people using programs like Limewire or Kazaa could find them using searches on genre, or other keywords. They'd download her songs, like them, then do a google search on her name, where her website pops up as the first hit. After one week she sold more albums than she had sold for the previous three years combined.

And the best part is, she got to keep 100% of the money, because there was no record company to eat up her profits and give her 1% or whatever artists get these days.

THIS is why the record companies want to kill file sharing. If artists can produce and market their own music, and get to keep all the money, then they don't need the major labels at all. It's the modern day equivalent of a typewriter company - producing a product that people no longer need because a better way has come along. And despite their best efforts, the writing is already on the wall.

Originally posted by U2girl And the musicians have a right to have a negative opinion on illegal downloading.

Of course. Everyone has a right to an opinion.

[MrBrau1]

Originally posted by U2girl I won't be surprised if this is what it will ultimately come down to, ISP banning people who downloaded music and/or bands leaving major labels and start new deals without the middle man. And the musicians have a right to have a negative opinion on illegal downloading.

that's what they're gonna do in France. Ban people after 3 strikes.

[U2girl]

Originally posted by cydewaze Then people will just do it at an internet cafe (which they already do) or they'll poach other people's wireless signals and get them banned instead.

You think there is no way for ISPs to know what internet cafe users are looking at/downlading ?

[cydewaze]

Originally posted by U2girl You think there is no way for ISPs to know what internet cafe users are looking at/downlading ?

Of course there is. What I'm saying is that people will use cafes to download music without risking their own internet connection.

I've never been to a cafe, so I don't know what's required of you before you can use a PC there. If they require a photo ID, then I can see them possibly being able to associate a downloaded file to a specific user, but if you can just go in, plop down cash and hop on a machine, they'll have no idea who's downloading what.

Even still, there are countless ways to hide your real IP address online. Then there's always the people who poach other people's wireless signals, and even their non-wireless signals.

The record industry has been suing people for around 8 years now, and even with all the courts on their side, the law on their side, all the tech people they can afford at their disposal, and courts willing to bend laws into pretzels to help them, they still haven't made a dent in file sharing. There are still millions and millions of people online sharing music.

These lawsuits aren't putting a dime of extra money in the pockets of the artists (the RIAA uses the money won in suits to fund the next round of suits), and they aren't slowing down the file sharing. They are however starting to cause some popular artists to look for ways to sell their music without involving the record companies (which is a good thing) and they're creating a quickly growing market for independent artists (another good thing).

At the rate things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if 10 years down the road, most artists sold their own music without involving the record companies at all. Between now and then though, it's going to be a really rough ride, because the laws on how you listen to the music you pay for are going to get increasingly tight.

[U2girl]

It's either that or tax the internet use for everyone.

[j2736]

i think the end to piracy is to fully stop patronizing an artist/band. this way, all of us suffer - the artist, the producers, the middle men, and of course, consumers. let's see what Paul M would say next if no single cent comes into their way anymore. (i hate him now.)

[bencanes1]

This is completely stupid.

Read this and be enlightened...

/blog/2007/10/when-pigs-fly-death-of-oink-birth-of.html

its hosted at demonbaby dot com

[MrBrau1]

Originally posted by bencanes1 This is completely stupid. Read this and be enlightened... /blog/2007/10/when-pigs-fly-death-of-oink-birth-of.html its hosted at demonbaby dot com

i've read that before.

Dude comes up with tons of excuses why it's ok to steal, oops, sorry, "copyright infringe."

[ybab gnuthca]

Originally posted by MrBrau1 Do you really think someone steals an album at 192 kbps with no DRM, then goes and buys a copy protected version at 128kbps?

Ha! No, that's part of the problem. Far less would download if they could get the 192 kbps (or preferably, 320 kbps) version for a reasonable price. But, the idiotic record companies have made sure that you can't do that. Transparently, because they want you to 1) buy the 128 kbps version AND then go out and buy the cd. So they can bill you twice for the same good

If they weren't so damn greedy, people would likely be more cooperative.

[bencanes1]

Originally posted by MrBrau1 i've read that before. Dude comes up with tons of excuses why it's ok to steal, oops, sorry, "copyright infringe."

Yea "dude" comes up with so many excuses, you do realize he's a former record company employee yes? His opinion carries far more weight than some corporate apologist U2 fanboy.

Enough of the damn myopia. Your head is so far up your ass it's almost funny. Massive artists dont lose from illegal downloading, they lose a pittance, artists like U2 have so many revenue streams that downloading their CDs only hurt the record company.

The entire "illegal downloading" argument is all on the record companies at this point. It's their choice why CDs have been overpriced for almost 20 years, and it was their choice when downloading became ever so prevalent to form a business model that was completely lacking in any sort of control or quality choice and still keeping the exorbitant costs to fill their own pockets.

The problem is that illegal downloading will NEVER disappear. Even if the ISPs did everything that McGuinness is calling for the pirates would find a way around that. Thats the thing about technology, it adapts to the environment. Unlike the record companies who still live in the stone age.

They don't realize they could be 10x richer by developing a business model to cater to people providing total choice. I have read countless people state how they would gladly pay a subscription fee to get legal access to high quality media, I'd pay 49.95 a month to access a high quality torrent site if that money was going to the artists.

I personally will not be buying U2's next album. I'll be downloading it on a torrent site. I'll support them by going to the shows, where they will get more than the percentage they'd get from me buying the CD . The only way to fight back to force the record companies to get a digital business model that appeals to everyone is to not support them. Eventually when that attitude hits the artists, the artists will be the ones to demand the change. Is it any wonder why CD sales have fallen so dramatically in 5 years?