attention fellow producers..... rampant piracy

[v404]

I only see it as a problem when labels don't repress any of their records and the public is forced to download via p2p/bit torrent or forums/blogs

Another excuse. I can't buy the Mona Lisa, because da Vinci's not painting them anymore. Does that give me the right to go steal it? Besides buying a reproduction of it or picking it up at auction, I can't legitimately get it. Too bad, you can't have everything.

How is that an excuse?! While I get your analogy, it's a rather poor comparison.. I mean, there's only 1 Mona Lisa.. And if you really like it, you can pick up one of many ample reproductions.. And I don't think anyone entertains the idea of obtaining the original.

But with music it's different. Why should one not be allowed to enjoy something they like merely because it isn't available? While I agree that stealing something you can buy is still theft, I don't think it's entirely out of line to obtain something that is otherwise "unavailable" through unconventional means.

Case in point: Daniel Bell... He's made some great music that hasn't been commercially available for over a decade.. So one's options are to either submit to gougers (who are exploiting it's very "unavailability") or to obtain it through downloads.. Or should one just simply not listen to it at all because you can't buy it?!

Personally, I think it's circumstances like this that fuel file sharing. That & places like Beatport.. If you don't want your music to be shared digitally you're going to have to suck it up & not make them readily available in digital formats.. If everybody had to rip something from vinyl in order to share it, I think a large portion of file sharing would diminish.

But in the end, it's really a direct result of the medium itself. Vinyl & DJ-oriented electronica is ephemeral.. Most things are pressed in limited quantities & if you miss something, even if you knew about it & were trying to obtain it when it was available, your only other option is to download it from Beatport or the like or get it free from some other source. And while I completely encourage people to support & buy it whenever possible, sometimes that isn't even an option.

Now I'm not condoning what this guy is doing but I don't think that file sharing should be written off completely as theft. Because for artists like Daniel Bell, it's pretty much the only exposure they'll get. And I'm sure in the long run, an artist would rather people be listening to their music for free than not at all, no?

[Lub]

Another excuse. I can't buy the Mona Lisa, because da Vinci's not painting them anymore. Does that give me the right to go steal it? Besides buying a reproduction of it or picking it up at auction, I can't legitimately get it. Too bad, you can't have everything.

That is about the stupidest arguement I ever heard against piracy. Trying to compare a second-rate minmal techno track to a masterpiece don't really cut it for me.

[brianc]

That is about the stupidest arguement I ever heard against piracy. Trying to compare a second-rate minmal techno track to a masterpiece don't really cut it for me.

There's no universal standard on quality. What's garbage to one may be genius to another.

[brianc]

How is that an excuse?! While I get your analogy, it's a rather poor comparison.. I mean, there's only 1 Mona Lisa.. And if you really like it, you can pick up one of many ample reproductions.. And I don't think anyone entertains the idea of obtaining the original.

Granted it's a VERY loose analogy, buying a reproduction still gets money to the copyright owner. Regardless of something's availability, someone still owns the rights to that object.

And yeah, it's definitely not always a black/white thing, but I have a hard time convincing myself it's ok to download something when there's even a slight possibility of my getting it legitimately somehow.

[djxlr8r]

I only see it as a problem when labels don't repress any of their records and the public is forced to download via p2p/bit torrent or forums/blogs

Another excuse. I can't buy the Mona Lisa, because da Vinci's not painting them anymore. Does that give me the right to go steal it? Besides buying a reproduction of it or picking it up at auction, I can't legitimately get it. Too bad, you can't have everything.

I agree with Lub's post. That is by far the stupidest most absurd comment I have read. Did you not read or understand my post fully? I am a HUGE supporter of vinyl. I buy vinyl almost every week. If I can get a record wether it's from my local record store or online I will purchase it no question. Let me try to understand your point. Are you implying that if any record that is NOT available through any online/record store and if it's out of print meaning that it'll never be available ever then that doesn't give anybody the right to at least hear via mp3 format? If so, you're a total douche and it's people like you that's actually hurting the market not helping it with that type of asinine mentality. v404 hit the nail on the head with the Daniel Bell example. His records have been out of print for years and pretty much all of his records are in such high demand, that the second hand market is actually laughing their way to the bank, not Daniel Bell nor the labels. If these labels were to wake up including Daniel Bell and are to repress those records, the labels will make a fortune! Who's fault is it there, genious?!

[brianc]

Did you not read or understand my post fully?

I read your post carefully, and I definitely appreciate the fact that it seems like you definitely support the artists in whatever way you can. I think because of its shortness, my reply to your original post came off a lot more harsh than I intended, and I apologize to you for that.

I know where you all are coming from in that sometimes it's really hard to find some releases. It's definitely a tough call--do you wait for a re-press that may never happen, do you pay a ridiculous amount to someone selling it (who also probably recorded it to keep, so it's not like you're taking over complete control over the intellectual property anyway), or do you find it online? All three options make sense to me, but I have a hard time justifying the download option to myself, and in these cases I can understand why someone else would choose that option.

As far as posting stuff that is readily (or soon to be) available and that you don't own, I just don't see how that can be justified. It's really easy to get sick of songs, and everyone hearing something a million times before its even released has to have a negative impact on sales.

[jpls]

dan bell is one thing....but i'm pretty sure its not too hard to find
copies of the latest underline record or my own.


i can easily tolerate a certain amount of piracy/sharing...but i think sites
like this are not just helping to "expose" people to new music.



funny...i am now "blacklisted" on this site...but the zip file with my tracks
is still being hosted.

[jpls]

i should add that i wish i didnt have to bitch about these things...

sucks that someone who enjoys my music has to piss me off too.