Nawledge Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 you decide http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/ if microsoft did that no musician would touch a pc with a 10 foot pole, but then again doesn't microsoft own part of apple? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeronyne Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I am no Apple apologist, but I don't see why anyone would expect Apple to be the pioneer in changing artist compensation. Certainly, they're not to be commended for toeing the line, but aren't there other people to blame way before you get to iTunes? What if WalMart, who can get the Scorpions and Sheryl Crow to change things on their albums or affect their sales substantially, decided only to carry albums of artists who were compensated "fairly"? What if the larger retailers actually followed Univ/Vivendi's lead and dropped the retail prices of CD's to under 12 bucks, thereby increasing demand and reducing the lure of piracy to some degree? What if all ARTISTS decided to boycott record companies and agree to self distribute over the web? I don't dispute at all what that website claims about Apple, but why choose such a relatively small (and very new) target? "For instance" is not proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawledge Posted November 20, 2003 Author Share Posted November 20, 2003 because even though (you) are not claiming apple to be different, (Apple) claims that they are different and just when you thought apples marketing hyperbol couldn't get any worse, now they are using it to feed on (us) in what could be described as the (musicians) most pivotal time in instituionalized recording history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steadyb Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawledge Posted November 20, 2003 Author Share Posted November 20, 2003 steady now b. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superbobus Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Old news. My only comment can be: "Dude, you will for sure earn some dough when people download your songs on Kazaa." NOT... http://www.bobwijnen.nl Hipness is not a state of mind, it's a fact of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dementia13 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I think that kind of misses the point. Apple doesn't own the tunes to have a choice of what royalty to pay the artist. The music being sold there is still the property of the record companies. If Apple were actually behind the production of some original music, then you could talk about what royalties they should and shouldn't pay. Where do you get that about MS owning part of Apple? Microsoft and Apple create apps for each others' platforms, but I don't believe that one owns part of the other, unless you care to cite some actual facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthetic Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Isn't Apple just buying the songs from the record companies and then reselling them? So why should they be responsible for how the musicians get paid? They're a reseller in this case. Wait, this just in... Tower is in on this conspiracy! And WalMart! I like the "RIAA Radar" to help you "make sure you don't pay for major label music." And "a burned copy of the real CD will always sound better than a burned iTunes album." And "used CDs at Amazon cost 5 bucks." Implying that it's better to rip off your music than to buy it at iTunes? How does that help musicians? At least musicians are getting paid something through the Apple model, unlike the neverland "download new music, then go to the store and buy it if you like it" scenario. And I also understood that iTunes is a loss leader for Apple, they're making their money on the iPods they hope to sell. Just because you have nice photoshop skillz doesn't mean you have the solution. I agree that musicians have the potential to make more from downloadable music, but you don't have to villify the one company who's actually successful at selling online music in the process. p.s. I've bought more music on the iTunes store in the last month than the last year at record stores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
progfusion74 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Just use musicmatch .. just kidding, but although I have major issues with Apple's closed hardware, I see nothing wrong with iTunes. I use musicmatch cause I have been a longtime user, and wanted to stick to that. Don't download too much since $10 for an album is still a lot, but I think for albums that I might not get in the store cause $15 is too much, it's a great solution and over the years will get getter. http://www.indiegrooves.com/dnm/images/dnm_small.gif My Blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burningbusch Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 "If you want to support the musicians you love, the best way to begin is by downloading the song for free on a filesharing network. Then send them what you want to give, no middleman. 14 cents. 99 cents. 10 dollars." I just downloaded "Brand New Day" off Kazaa and would like to send Sting 3 cents. Does anyone know his Paypal address? Busch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dementia13 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I just downloaded "Brand New Day" off Kazaa and would like to send Sting 3 cents. Does anyone know his Paypal address? Actually, that's an excellent idea. You know, cars are so overpriced, they're unreliable and the only reason the automakers can charge what they do is because they've built up such a perceived need through advertising. I think I'm going to go drive a Suburban off the lot and send the dealer the $5000 I think it's worth. Think they'll mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanS Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Speaking of Schting, I just bought his latest off of Amazon.ca for $10. I feel this is a reasonable price to pay for a cd. Anyone want to buy mine for $9.99? What we record in life, echoes in eternity. MOXF8, Electro 6D, XK1c, Motif XSr, PEKPER, Voyager, Univox MiniKorg. https://www.abandoned-film.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmoron13 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by dementia13: I just downloaded "Brand New Day" off Kazaa and would like to send Sting 3 cents. Does anyone know his Paypal address? Actually, that's an excellent idea. You know, cars are so overpriced, they're unreliable and the only reason the automakers can charge what they do is because they've built up such a perceived need through advertising. I think I'm going to go drive a Suburban off the lot and send the dealer the $5000 I think it's worth. Think they'll mind?can we please drop the ridiculous analogies?! Whether we consider it theft or not, there's a big difference between downloading a song and stealing a car, just as there's a difference between robbing a bank and stealing some candy from the local quickymart. and for the record, I believe that burning busch was using sarcasm. And for that matter, music is intellectual property, and thereby not tangible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeon Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Nawledge wondered out loud: ...doesn't microsoft own part of apple?In a word, no. Go tell someone you love that you love them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
progfusion74 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by aeon: Nawledge wondered out loud: ...doesn't microsoft own part of apple?In a word, no.I think Nawledge is referring to Microsoft's investment in $150 million of non-voting Apple stock in 1997. That coincided with M$ putting more effort into Office for Mac. http://www.indiegrooves.com/dnm/images/dnm_small.gif My Blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RABid Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 The only problem I have with iTunes is longevity. My CD's will be around in 10 years. I am not sure I will have a way to play itunes in 10 years. Well, one other problem. I don't have a Mac, or an iPod. Robert This post edited for speling. My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
progfusion74 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by Rabid: The only problem I have with iTunes is longevity. My CD's will be around in 10 years. I am not sure I will have a way to play itunes in 10 years. Well, one other problem. I don't have a Mac, or an iPod. RobertRuns on windows now by the way. http://www.indiegrooves.com/dnm/images/dnm_small.gif My Blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeronyne Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by schmoron13: can we please drop the ridiculous analogies?! Whether we consider it theft or not, there's a big difference between downloading a song and stealing a car, just as there's a difference between robbing a bank and stealing some candy from the local quickymart. And for that matter, music is intellectual property, and thereby not tangible.You're right, there is a difference between downloading a song without paying for it and stealing a car: It's less risky to steal a car. And there is also a difference between robbing a bank and stealing candy from a store, but the only difference is the amount of money involved and the threat of violence. I'm not sure what your point is, and I don't see how the analogies used are so ridiculous. I am so sick of people trying to justify stealing music. If you steal music, just say you do, and admit that you know that it's illegal. Don't try to tell me that you are doing it for some higher purpose of "screwing the record company". The only way to send a message to the record company is to not listen to the music at all, because whether you steal it or not, the more people enjoy a piece of music, the more popular it gets. The only person you are screwing is the songwriter. No one here is a god...no one has a right to judge you for stealing music. But please don't insult anyone's intelligence by saying that you think that you deserve to have music for free for ANY reason. By the way, the pronoun "you" used in the above paragraphs is not directed at schmoron13...it's a general "you", as in "one". "For instance" is not proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dementia13 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 can we please drop the ridiculous analogies?!....And for that matter, music is intellectual property, and thereby not tangible. I don't buy that and you shouldn't either. Is that the "it's just information" argument? That logic is so flawed, and you're too smart to fall for that. As a musician, yes, I know you love music so much that you'd probably perform whether or not there's money involved; but you also have a highly specialized skill that deserves to be compensated. A service deserves to be compensated, it doesn't matter whether there's a physical good attached. GM provides a product, but there's also a service attached; they assemble the car for you. The car assembled is worth much more than its weight in steel, glass and plastic. When they've built it, they have a certain investment in it that they need to recoup- just as you have an investment of time in your music which you recoup when you're paid for performing. "Intellectual property" is fine for lawyers, but "legal" isn't the same as "right": "legal" is a set of rules that can be anything we want it to be. That whole argument is just an effort to justify something that's wrong- theft- by making it seem less clear that it really is theft. And so it's not so different as you think, between stealing a car and downloading a song; it just feels different. Feelings aren't reality. The only real difference is in magnitude: a $20 CD vs. a $30K car. But you can make $20 at a time add up quickly. And, for the record, I believe that Burningbusch was being hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawledge Posted November 20, 2003 Author Share Posted November 20, 2003 I don't think stealing peoples music is right, though I have a huge mp3 collection that was given to me by a roommate, as well as some that i've downloaded myself. I decided that I wouldn't do it anymore and haven't since but most people who download music are after underground music, and rartities, my friend bought me the new outcast cd, I purchased the stones 40Licks, the novelty of mp3s has worn off but the novelty of what the industry has been doing since the dawn of time is not wearing offf, and what mp3 advocates can't understand is why so many people scream at mp3 sites in the name of the artist but don't utter a whisper in the direction of the industry, whom courtney love referred so accrurately to as pirates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superbobus Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 The problem is, to make the iTMS happen, Apple had to go to the "big five". If Apple would have gone to independant artists, would it have been a succes? I heard the iTMS is starting to support more and more independants too. I hope I'm right, because otherwise the record companies are still in charge of their huge provisions and tiny parts that go the performers. I can't blame iTMS for that situation just now it has been here for only half a year. Other misunderstandings: Microsoft invested in Apple years ago. They would come up with software for "a new computer", a.k.a. the iMac. I really don't know if that means that they own Apple. If it was so, Apples would run on Windows by now. iTunes and iTMS is available for Windows for over a month now, so Rabid, you don't need to have a Mac but you'll need your PC to run on Win2000 or XP. I think iTunes is supporting other mp3 players than the iPod. Only the file format is mp3 only. That means if you buy some from the music store, you'll first have to convert the AAC formatted tune to mp3 before putting it on your mp3 player. http://www.bobwijnen.nl Hipness is not a state of mind, it's a fact of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeon Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by progfusion74: Originally posted by aeon: Nawledge wondered out loud: ...doesn't microsoft own part of apple?In a word, no.I think Nawledge is referring to Microsoft's investment in $150 million of non-voting Apple stock in 1997. That coincided with M$ putting more effort into Office for Mac.understood, and that is what I assumed Nawledge was referring to. hence my answer: no check into what M$ did with those shares. Go tell someone you love that you love them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
progfusion74 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by aeon: Originally posted by progfusion74: Originally posted by aeon: quote:Nawledge wondered out loud: ...doesn't microsoft own part of apple?In a word, no.I think Nawledge is referring to Microsoft's investment in $150 million of non-voting Apple stock in 1997. That coincided with M$ putting more effort into Office for Mac.understood, and that is what I assumed Nawledge was referring to. hence my answer: no check into what M$ did with those shares. :-) your answer was correct. Just clarifying. I am a Linux guy. Not a big fan M$ and Apple, but one has to use what one has to use, in my case Windoze for music. http://www.indiegrooves.com/dnm/images/dnm_small.gif My Blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.