The honchos of the content industry believe in their black hearts that 'human nature' dictates that 'we the public' are each of the same mind-set as they are themselves. These evil ladder climbers think that everyone else would act as they do with the same greedy desires that they themselves hold (taking and monopolizing, stealing and 'pirating' etc.) thus, they advocate dominance and control to save a "once upon a time" profitable but now rapidly deteriorating business model.

If you ask the RIAA, I am sure that they will readily admit their belief that 'we the public' are nothing but a bunch of "thieves" who only respect copyright when forced to do so at the point of a proverbial gun.

In angry response, some folk become p2p appologists. (Many of our visitors and participants unfortunately fall into this category ...and those who do only fall into the RIAA's hands when they advocate "defiant" mass sharing of the RIAA stuff.)

SURE, Boycott-Riaa believes in FREEDOM and FAIR-USE utmost! SURE, we think that non-commercial "sharing" of media with others SHOULD be considered as nothing more than free promotion there-of and that a "copy" of something is NOT the same as the "stealing" someting.

...however, if YOU are one of the many who visit our forums and are thinking that by sharing RIAA tunes via p2p/torrents (whatever) that you are making things better with your "act of rebellion" you are WRONG and need to WISE UP!

I salute you for wanting to bring down the same foe Boycott-Riaa wishes destroyed, but you are GOING ABOUT IT THE WRONG WAY and you are ONLY helping to make the availability of the RIAA advertisements more prevalent. PLEASE, get a clue! Cease and desist!

(At LEAST, please stop advocating such actions in OUR forums! Go to downhillbattle.org or p2p.net or somewhere else to voice such wrong-headed thoughts!)

The RIAA can NOT be defeated if you keep them alive by sharing their ads on your computer. And, if you TAINT our message by continually advocating such actions here in our forums, you only damage OUR effectiveness and detract from OUR message!

I know, I know. This stuff all might seem to be subtle points (or might even be deemed "nit-picky") but in the grand scheme of things, we really do think it matters!

Go ahead, I welcome you to tear my arguement on this "sticking point" apart if you can.

The Boycott site has it's opinion about file sharing. Many Forum posters will follow that same line of thinking too, however, there will be fringe posters on both sides of this issue. I would welcome them both, even if I don't agree with the extremes.

ditto that Capt-n-Jack!

(Even though we have an "agenda" and "mission", this is still an OPEN forum... hell, we continue to let even mroop keep posting.)

folks, you are ALLOWED to disagree

(and if you truthfully DO disagree, you are ENCOURAGED to say-so in our threads!)

...but back it up with reasoning and be prepared for a fuss/fight!

I don't disagree at all. Give the RIAA what they want. Get their music OFF P2P networks. Then we can sit back and watch the extinction of the RIAA dinosaur.

I agree with the principle yet somehow disagree.... The reason the RIAA is crumbling is because the songs ARE on P2P. If people remove songs from P2P, then consumers start buying them in stores again or online, and the RIAA profits. Do we want the RIAA to die? or just to change its business model. They key to defeating the RIAA is not in appealing to P2P sharers, but to educating the demographic who is buying Beyonce and Britney albums. Demand for RIAA music is not created by P2P sharers; they only fulfill demand. In other words we should not be trying to stem the supply, we should be trying to eliminate the demand, by education.

Everything that has demand WILL be shared via P2P or other means, whether it's RIAA stuff, DMusic stuff, or anything else that can be converted to bits. This is a universal truth that many wont accept and some are spending millions to try and change. It's pointless, and pointless for us to believe we can make changes by cutting supply. That is, after all, the RIAA's tactic.

Rather than appealing to people not to share it, let's appeal to people not to consume it. The RIAA's income is no longer spread evenly over the age range, they earn most of their money from teenagers' demand, they are who we need to educate.

Talk to your little niece today. Point to the Britney poster on her wall, sit her down and talk.

(My FIRST choice would be NEITHER,) but I'd rather they "consumed" it than "shared" it.

"Talk to your little niece today. Point to the Britney poster on her wall, sit her down and talk."

I'd also advocate locking out all of the music channels on the tv. Emty-vee does nothing but promote a negative body image for young women, a negative social image for both genders, and a lifestyle inconsistant with being a good human being. (And I'm not some fundie stick in the mud, I grew up on MTV!)

Turn this 24 hour commercial off. In fact, the best thing is to lock out everything but PBS. There's nothing on PBS that will hurt a growing mind or support a megacorporate mindset. At least not before 9 pm. Faced with a choice of PBS only or doing something else, kids might actually choose to read or recreate. At the very least they'll learn something.

Kill your television. And then start eyeing the radio.

"The reason the RIAA is crumbling is because the songs ARE on P2P. "

WRONG!! The reason the RIAA is crumbling is because they refuse to change their business model. When Napster first started, the music industry saw record growth. Only after they shut Napster down and reduced new releases did their sales start to decline, coincidentally at the same time our nation's economy went on the skids.

Instead of changing their business model, the RIAA has decided to SUE THEIR CUSTOMERS. What a great sales strategy that is.

"Do we want the RIAA to die? "
YES. The are a useless organization acting like a monopoly designed only to promote the profits of the companies they represent. The sooner it dies the better.

"Demand for RIAA music is not created by P2P sharers; they only fulfill demand."
WRONG again. How is it that an album heavily traded on P2P networks also have record sales when released? There are many examples of this occurring.

"It's pointless, and pointless for us to believe we can make changes by cutting supply." Obviously you haven't studied economics. The basic principle of supply and demand dictate that if you change one or the other, you affect one or the other, and the resulting price. We can make changes by cutting the supply. If people can't hear the music, who will buy it?

MP3 files of songs act like ads for the artists. The more MP3 files shared, the more free advertising an artist gets, the more CD's they sell, etc. You want to eliminate the RIAA?? Give them exactly what they want. Take their music off the P2P networks, and make sure you ALSO "don't consume" their music. The RIAA will not die unless boycotting their music is full and complete.

"downhillbattle.org or p2p.net or somewhere else to voice such wrong-headed thoughts!"

Really? Schmoo you answered your own question.

Speaking as a classic rocker who doesn’t care for 99% of the new stuff:

If you must listen to RIAA music downloads from your old bands, go to www.allmusic.com and look for your favoite artist or group. More often than not, they have 30-second snippets of songs. The RIAA can’t get their info from there, can they?

And don’t forget to BUY USED. There are many out-of-print or limited-edition albums that are available at a reasonable price. It will not give the artist(s) royalties because it is a re-sale, but the RIAA gets nothing, either!

(*And I am still trying to find something good on DMusic. I'll take the advice of listening to cover songs and judge a band from that. Thanks, whoever brought this to mind!*)

"The reason the RIAA is crumbling is because they refuse to change their business model."

My point exactly. If the songs are removed from P2P then the RIAA doesnt have to change its business model now does it. The RIAA can stuff us with any business model it wants as long as there is demand

"Instead of changing their business model, the RIAA has decided to SUE THEIR CUSTOMERS. What a great sales strategy that is."

yep. But when there's so much demand for the music, that's the easiest thing to do. The RIAA knows public disapproval holds no match for the insatiable appetite for Britney. We need to address DEMAND. Demand, RIAA will always supply.

"How is it that an album heavily traded on P2P networks also have record sales when released?"

Because it's not an all or nothing issue, There are many who download it free, and many who buy it.

""It's pointless, and pointless for us to believe we can make changes by cutting supply." Obviously you haven't studied economics."

Obviously you haven't studied history. Did the removal of suppy of alcohol eliminate its demand in the early days of the 1900s? Eliminating file shareing will no more lessen the demand for music that prohibition did for alcohol

"The basic principle of supply and demand dictate that if you change one or the other, you affect one or the other"

You're confused. Supply is not affected here. the RIAA will gladly supply music.

"If people can't hear the music, who will buy it?"

Now you're really confused. Shutting down P2P will not stop people from hearing it. Only shutting down radio will. Most people dont go to P2P to "hear" music, they go there to get what they have already heard or know they like.

"MP3 files of songs act like ads for the artists. The more MP3 files shared, the more free advertising an artist gets"

That's the grand plan, and it can happen that way in the future, but now, most people download what they hear, not hear what they download.

"The reason the RIAA is crumbling is because the songs ARE on P2P."

Yeah. That's why Billboard started using download information to formulate their singles charts. The best-selling music has consistently been the most shared. Overall sales are down, but they are making almost as much as they used to with only a fraction of the product. EMI cut artists and made a profit last year.

If you hurt anyone, it was the people whose music you DIDN'T share. They've been cut from the roster so you can get more Fifty Cent.

Having your music widely shared is a sign of success, not failure.

The RIAA is crumbling because they are wasting billions trying to stop P2P, which has replaced radio as the primary way for people to find new music. Plus they don't have to fork over the big bucks for payola.

P2P is saving the industry about 2 to 2.5 billion a year in promotional CDs that they used to have to send out.

So if the people at DMusic start going out of their way to piss you all off, will you hurt us by propelling us to the top of the charts? Is that what it takes? How big of assholes do we have to be before you'll hate us enough to listen to us? Do we have to sue you?

"Most people dont go to P2P to "hear" music, they go there to get what they have already heard or know they like."

And you're there to make sure they find it, providing a valuable service to the RIAA, free of charge.

I dont share RIAA music. My point is simply that this war must be won by convincing people not to download RIAA stuff, not by convincing people not to share it.

Oh, the "Just Say No" approach. It's worked so well in the war against drugs.

"That's why Billboard started using download information to formulate their singles charts."

Those are paid for downloads from site like Itunes and such. Not downloads from p2p.

Fobix, I guess it depends on your point of view here. I think what you're saying is share it, but encourage people not to buy it. The problem is, once people have heard what you're sharing, you have no control over what they do. That means those folks may then share it with their friends, etc. and in the end, people in that chain WILL buy it. This whole process is feeding the RIAA. Even with all the P2P sharing going on, sales are still way up, so someone is buying!

"The RIAA knows public disapproval holds no match for the insatiable appetite for Britney."

Exactly. They use it like a drug to lure you in. But if you've never heard something, you won't know you've missed it! Sharing RIAA music lures your friends with the RIAA drugs. Some of them will get hooked.

"Oh, the "Just Say No" approach. It's worked so well in the war against drugs."

As opposed to border police? They made a big dent too huh.

fobix
You bring up some very good points I haven't thought of, and I appreciate the point of view. But things are changing and keep changing regarding the music "scene" (for lack of a better word), and for the music industry.

Speaking of history, I find it amazing that history is basically repeating itself. How so? The RIAA record labels didn't want their music played on the radio. I know that seems SO ridiculous today, but that is the truth. The RIAA labels fought hard to prevent their music from being played on the radio. It resulted in forced licensing, which is where I believe P2P will end up. P2P is today's radio, and history is bound to repeat itself.

And while I think you make many valid points worth considering, I still don't believe that sharing RIAA music on P2P networks will destroy the RIAA. Redirecting the DEMAND for music to the thousands of other music choices out there that exist outside the RIAA will hurt them the most. Share those OTHER choices, since it won't get you sued.

But it may only force the RIAA into a modern business model. That still doesn't make me want to be sharing or downloading their music anytime soon. And the most important point to keep in mind is to NOT buy any RIAA music. Buy used CD's. Buy independent CD's. Boycott RIAA.

"As opposed to border police? They made a big dent too huh."

That's the RIAA approach. It doesn't work either.

Both the war on drugs and the war against music fans could be solved by the same approach that was used for alcohol. Legalize it and tax the hell out of it to discourage its use.

*takes in all the info and opinions*
Very interesting.

"Oh, the "Just Say No" approach. It's worked so well in the war against drugs."

No, I don't think that worked too well, but for gawds sakes, don't people have any self-control?!?! I want, I want, I want...I GOTTA HAVE THIS SONG...

Many people here, me included, have done just that, "Just Say No" regarding RIAA music. If people bitch about a problem ("sue-them-all") then they better put up and do something!!! We are a limited number here, but all music buyers can do something TOGETHER, but it's going to take a substantial number of us. We need your help too!

Which gives me an idea! Is anyone sharing any text file or "mp3" audio file promoting boycott-riaa?? I don't know how many people on P2P would download it, but at least you could spread the word that way. Just give it a title of some Brittney song.

"(At LEAST, please stop advocating such actions in OUR forums! Go to downhillbattle.org or p2p.net or somewhere else to voice such wrong-headed thoughts!)"

Consider it done then. When I have anti-riaa thoughts, I'm guessing I'm welcome and encouraged to post here. That's fine. I'll keep my wrong headed thoughts to myself.

You know, it's kinda funny.

When I first came to this site 3 years ago (give or take), we were constantly getting flack from anonymous RIAA stooges, calling us pirates and thieves. We're hurting the artists, we don't care about the music, we were told.

But a lot of us are musicians. We're against the RIAA because the music industry is more corrupt than ever and is now forcing a technological speed bump on everything that they can touch.

And we are against the RIAA because, in the U.S., you play the game by their rules or you just don't play. Period. They own the entire game, the board, the pieces and the fake money.

The Internet showed up and hundreds of thousands of musicians flocked to it, finally having a way to reach a global audience without a record label. The majority of us are not trying to become rich and famous. We just want to be heard.

So we have argued for p2p. Strenuously and overtly, directly in the face of the RIAA.

Now the p2p users are here to tell us that, "Hey, we want Madonna! We're gonna share every movie ever released. We're going to kill the labels by putting them in the ears of every teenager with an Internet connection."

So, on behalf of the 20,000 or so artists at DMusic, I'd like to say thanks for all your fucking help.

"And we are against the RIAA because, in the U.S., you play the game by their rules or you just don't play. Period. They own the entire game, the board, the pieces and the fake money."

Sounds like a REAL monopoly to me. So why isn't the Justice Department doing something about this? Oh yeah, that's right. They are too busy helping the RIAA stop those people sharing their music on P2P networks. What a vicious circle.

Ever hear the phrase "Pop Will Eat Itself"? I think what we have hear is "GREED WILL EAT ITSELF". Not only does the RIAA and MPAA act like greedy bastards (that's just a given now), but we consumer's act that way by downloading their music for free, sharing it, just because "I want, I want, I want...I GOTTA HAVE THIS SONG... " And doing so with considering the consequences. That other musicians just trying to get their music heard may not be able to. It sickens me.

"So, on behalf of the 20,000 or so artists at DMusic, I'd like to say thanks for all your fucking help."

Your welcome. In all seriousness tho, the group I'm with would happily release anything we can get our hands on. But we can't release the inferior 128k (on average, poorly encoded crap) available at some of these so called independent musician sites.

Our users are expecting 192k files at a minimum, with vbr being preferred. Some (many! in fact) files being offered on these sites (dmusic, etc) are very poor quality, poorly recorded AND poorly encoded. how do you honestly expect to get exposure with bad samples? Give us something to work with, and we'd be happy to encode your stuff to reasonably sounding audio files.

Incidently, I'm not a p2p user; I was always a fan of ftp and irc. IRC was long since trading music, way before napster. and that's not going to stop. If you want the exposure the riaa artists have, support a ripping group. Or die like the dinosaur of the riaa. Your choice.

Wow. Give you guys something for free and you complain that the portions are too small?

Support a ripping group or die?

I am so sick and tired of ultimatums and being told to pick a side. I hate the RIAA with a passion because they are a bunch of greedy bastards and I will never support anything that spreads their "illegal" music.

I am a dinosaur, so what happens to me doesn't matter.

But what about the 20-year-old musician? Either the RIAA is going to steal his work from him under the guise of "work for hire" or you'll take it and bitch about the quality of the mix because the original wasn't compressed in a studio trash compactor.

The more talented the young musician, the more reason he has to ask why he (or she) should bother. It's a lose-lose situation, a choice between the sharks and the piranha.

You're better off being an accountant. Or a crack dealer.

RaidHHI, I think every song I have at Dmusic is at 192k (I'd even put .wav files on there if I could!)

(BTW, variable bit rates are not as good as constant bit rates IMHO.)

And no, I don't really want anyone to "have to go somewhere else" to voice "wrong-headed" thoughts. (I didn't mean my comment in the literal sense.) Of course you may use these forums and continue advocating sharing of RIAA tunes if you so desire...

But understand that I (and other Boycott-Riaa "true-believers") will take every opportunity to destroy that arguement.

Because it IS WRONG!

Gdziemann,

"Wow. Give you guys something for free and you complain that the portions are too small?"

- Sometimes even free isn't worth dealing with. I get all kinds of offer for free things in my email. Should I not complain, since it's free?

"Support a ripping group or die?

Like it or not, The simple fact of the matter is, people like us exist, We (not you) push whatever material the public wants out there. if your not with any ripping group, your audience is limited. It's quiet similiar to the riaa, except we're not trying to screw you. We simply want to release what you have, but we're not going to put you into contracts, or usurp your rights to your material.

You could I suppose hope for the best with kazaa and such spreading your material around. Who knows, maybe somebody who downloads a 128k sample will think so highly of your music (trash compactor indeed) that they want to listen to more of it. I won't hold my breathe, but theres a sucker born every minute.

I am so sick and tired of ultimatums and being told to pick a side. I hate the RIAA with a passion because they are a bunch of greedy bastards and I will never support anything that spreads their "illegal" music."

"I am so sick and tired of ultimatums and being told to pick a side. I hate the RIAA with a passion because they are a bunch of greedy bastards and I will never support anything that spreads their "illegal" music."

You are on a side, either for or against them, but a side you are on. A side indeed. Their is no neutral here.

so, you get your "rocks off" by enriching the ones you call "enemy" because you get to siphon some of the "kudos"?

...I call you an UNPAID promoter and/or slave.

("But I can stop ANYTIME I want!")

", you get your "rocks off" by enriching the ones you call "enemy" because you get to siphon some of the "kudos"?"

siphon some of the what? I'm unfamiliar with the term.

"...I call you an UNPAID promoter and/or slave."

slave to what? We don't promote anything either. Everyone's music is alphbetically catalogged and available in that fashion. Ftp directories are setup like so:
0-9, A-G, H-O, and P-Z; If you call this promotion, then everyone should be doing it; instead of paying for huge advertisements. Don't ya think?
Simply storing the music isn't promoting it. You won't see any flash banners telling you to download this or that; you'll see what is available and can leech whatever you like. I simply don't see the promotion link to this manner of self service. We don't promote anybody. We store/archive music and make it available for use. We aren't biased in what we'll store either. Anyone regardless of label affliation or not can be archived with us. Providing we can locate a source cd to rip from.

"(BTW, variable bit rates are not as good as constant bit rates IMHO.)"

Nothing wrong with your personal opinion, but HHI has to follow the established rules of the scene. And that is, VBR.

For reference and an education (no offense intended, but many don't understand mp3 very well; so education seems fitting) [ http://hqscene.fatty.dk/ ] thats hqscene.fatty.dk All scene-internal ripping groups follow this format. RNS, APC, HHI, IRO, etc.



("But I can stop ANYTIME I want!")"

Well, yes; we could do so. But, we have invested much time/energy and real estate to simply stop.

"You are on a side, either for or against them, but a side you are on. A side indeed. Their is no neutral here."

Who is "them"?

How (or IF) do you make $$$ RaidHHI?

While I await an answer to that simple question, I could remind for the umpteenth time that I am against the RIAA. But I am certainly not FOR this.

"I simply don't see the promotion link to this manner of self service."

Neither do we. So the "support ripping groups or die" seems a little hollow. You're not helping anyone and you're not hurting the RIAA one iota.

This is the best argument I have heard so far toward compulsory licensing and the accompanying fees.

Sorry, let me re-phrase...

ARE you in it for $$$ (honestly or not?)

Middle-men have historically been the ROOT of the problem! Are you trying to monopolize on the vague middle position while the "getting's good"?

And you didn't answer this one:

What about the 20-year-old gifted musician? You want his entire CD for free, but only if it is of acceptable bitrate and meets your discerning tastes, with nothing in return, so why make it in the first place? Seems like if you support ripping groups, you still die.

The pedulum swings George, the pendulum swings....

(let's hope some of the idiot's necks are in the way!)

Gdziemann,

"Who is "them"?"

The RIAA. Sorry I didn't make that clear. Your either for the riaa, or against them. Their is no standing on the side of the fence on this one.

Independentm,

"How (or IF) do you make $$$ RaidHHI?"

Everyone in our group has real fulltime jobs primarily in IT fields. HHI is not designed for us to make money. It's not even designed to support itself on it's own. it requires money from each of us every month to continue it's operation. Let me re-iterate; HHI makes nothing, no money (not even to support operating costs); We charge nothing for access, accept nothing for access. You can't even donate. (Money anyway, but you can donate cds to rip )

Gdziemann,
"Neither do we. So the "support ripping groups or die" seems a little hollow. You're not helping anyone and you're not hurting the RIAA one iota.
"

It's not as hollow as you might think. Ripping groups (and not p2p users) are the ones responsible for the so called leaks going on. Top sites get the leak from a real ripping group, then it's trickled down to p2p users and others. No ripping group, no serious mp3 files available. Just the crap encoded by amatuers who think all codecs are the same, typical garbage you can download on kazaa, for example.

Now, if you want just crap on the networks to drive people away from them, that's good. But, if you drive those people away and they obviously don't know better is available, they'll just do what they've always done beforehand: Buy the original RIAA crap in the store.

Independentm,

"ARE you in it for $$$ (honestly or not?)

Middle-men have historically been the ROOT of the problem! Are you trying to monopolize on the vague middle position while the "getting's good"?"

We're not in it for the money. we're in it for the music. We love music, that's all. HHI started as a private club of music lovers looking to exchange music with others of high quality files. Not p2p crap so many of you are accustomed to. We are not middlemen.

Gdziemann,
"What about the 20-year-old gifted musician? You want his entire CD for free, but only if it is of acceptable bitrate and meets your discerning tastes, with nothing in return, so why make it in the first place? Seems like if you support ripping groups, you still die."

George, you need to re-read what I posted. We will gladly PAY (purchase!) a cd of any nature to rip it. We do not expect to obtain it for free, no. And I already said so. with the cd in hand, we can add a quality release to our archives (quality as in encoding, not necessarily the artist).

As for nothing in return, you get free hosting; With nothing expected ever from you. You sign nothing away, and we don't sell your music to anyone. (IE; we're not going to fuck you like mp3.com did)

"Your either for the riaa, or against them. Their is no standing on the side of the fence on this one."

"Ripping groups (and not p2p users) are the ones responsible for the so called leaks going on."

"We (not you) push whatever material the public wants out there."

There's a flaw in this logic.

If what you're doing is actually of benefit to the artists in some way, then you're providing the RIAA this service for free.

If what you're doing hurts the RIAA, then why would we want to let you do the same thing to us?

If there are only two sides to this issue, then you'd better take a close look at the fucking fence because you're trying to straddle it and it's going to wind up jammed up your ass.

Pick a side.

HHI is not designed for us to make money. It's not even designed to support itself on it's own.

Everyone in our group has real fulltime jobs primarily in IT fields.

...so, it's just a "hobby" then

fine, nothing wrong with that.

There are 5 dozen sides.

(some valid, some not.)

I'd rather "fight" the "wrong" ones (I WIN more fequently that way!)

as gdZiemann said...

PICK a side!

"...so, it's just a "hobby" then
fine, nothing wrong with that."

No, these guys control the world. Just ask them. They're "the ones responsible for the so called leaks going on" and pushing "whatever material the public wants out there."

They want to take credit for being the capo de capo of the pirates flooding the p2p with RIAA tracks. "Support ripping groups or die!" they say, while simultaneously trying to pretend they're hurting the music they support.

Just another deluded evil overlord providing tools for the fools.

Almost 12,000 people have been sued for being the end users of this. I bet they thought they were hurting the record companies, too.

Gdziemann,

"They want to take credit for being the capo de capo of the pirates flooding the p2p with RIAA tracks. "Support ripping groups or die!" they say, while simultaneously trying to pretend they're hurting the music they support."

take credit? LOL, you can do the research yourself. p2pusers are at the bottom of the food chain. Professional Ripping groups are the ones responsible for the 0day leaks. Not some joe schmoe sharing thru his kazaa connection. laugh Laugh Laugh.

"No, these guys control the world. Just ask them. They're "the ones responsible for the so called leaks going on" and pushing "whatever material the public wants out there.""

Why don't you just check into the statements for yourself? Who knows how many individuals read this website, Some of them might have a clue; they might know what I've already said, and what You SHOULD know; since your in the music business.

"Just another deluded evil overlord providing tools for the fools."

It's foolish to keep your music to yourself, to constantly remain practically unheard of. It's also a foolish thing to assume p2p is the be-all/end-all of the mp3 scene. Mp3's have been around alot longer. Ripping groups were the first, and p2pusers are and will always be, the lowest pondscum on the food chain. It's just the way things are.

Fools indeed.

well...? We're still waiting to see whose side you decided to be on.

Not that we really have any question about it. We just want to see if you can accept the truth.

Gdziemann,

"Almost 12,000 people have been sued for being the end users of this. I bet they thought they were hurting the record companies, too."

This is fairly simple economics really. I give away a cd, they don't go and buy it. That's 1 lost sale. If they give 3 copies away, and those 3 individuals also do not buy it, that's 3 more lost sales. Now we're at 4 lost sales, for the cost of a single cd-r.

I'm not using hypothetical what-if scenarios either George, These are very real. I gave away the Dave Mathews Band cd yesterday (3 copies) to various individuals who were planning to buy it. I saved them the time, and fuel expenses. These people were actually going to buy the damn cd.

4 lost sales for one days work, is not bad. And I certainly hurt the riaa more by doing ths, then you do by whining about it here.

Gdziemann,

"well...? We're still waiting to see whose side you decided to be on."

We are not for the riaa. I don't know how I can make this any clearer for you.

"Not that we really have any question about it. We just want to see if you can accept the truth."

Truth is a funny thing. Theres your version, mine, and what's actually what.

"And I certainly hurt the riaa more by doing ths, then you do by whining about it here."

"We are not for the riaa. I don't know how I can make this any clearer for you."

You clearly ARE for the RIAA. You're working for them. Read the Rachel Stevens thread. It's the world's biggest PR game and you have actually invested time and equipment in helping them get their music to more and more people.

You say you're an IT professional. How much do you make an hour? Don't tell me, just think about it. And how many hours do you devote to "hurting" the RIAA by working for them for free?

The RIAA knows just as well as we do that eventually they lose the legal battle. The longer they fight it, the longer people like you will make sure that there are high quality versions of all of their stuff available to the world when compulsory licensing kicks in. Because you're such rebels.

Maybe you'd like to go through the back catalogs and get some of the older works ready for them, too. I'm sure they'd appreciate that because they certainly won't do it themselves. EMI was flabbergasted to consider that people would want higher quality than 128k.

They're counting on you to do the grunt work and get the good versions out there. So is Dave Matthews. Your good day's work cost him a big $4 or so and he's got three more happy fans.

You may THINK you're not for the RIAA, but you clearly are working FOR them. The people on this side of the fence don't do that. We don't support the RIAA or its artists. We'd point you to someone like ilyAimy instead.

You may see yourself on the other side of a fence from the RIAA, but that fence is just to make sure the sheep don't stray from their pen. They own your heart and soul.

Gdziemann,

"You clearly ARE for the RIAA. You're working for them. Read the Rachel Stevens thread. It's the world's biggest PR game and you have actually invested time and equipment in helping them get their music to more and more people."

We are not involved in any way in any promotion of any kind. We rip/release/archive the music. We offer it, sorted alphabetically by artist. We don't do anymore then that with regard to making sure you know the music is there. We don't even publish a listing. nor a "new release list". if you want to see what's new, assuming your ftp client supports it, you would sort the directories by date. Walla, new rips are obviously, newer dates. So much for PR work.

The equipment was somewhat necessary for the video production experiments I wanted to do at the time. We just lucked out in the fact that I had requested high end equipment for that task, and it happened to be perfect for audio/video encoding jobs too.


"You say you're an IT professional. How much do you make an hour? Don't tell me, just think about it. And how many hours do you devote to "hurting" the RIAA by working for them for free?"

Yes, I'm professionally employed in the IT field. I don't work behind a helpdesk. I'm one of the guys on the front line so to speak. I re-iterate, I nor any member of HHI works for the RIaa nor any other such organization.

"The RIAA knows just as well as we do that eventually they lose the legal battle. The longer they fight it, the longer people like you will make sure that there are high quality versions of all of their stuff available to the world when compulsory licensing kicks in. Because you're such rebels."

Yes, I'm sure the RIAA is thankful that we are giving away high quality copies of there music. Perhaps we could invoice them for the bandwidth. Think they'd mind paying it? Since you think we work for them and all.

"Maybe you'd like to go through the back catalogs and get some of the older works ready for them, too. I'm sure they'd appreciate that because they certainly won't do it themselves. EMI was flabbergasted to consider that people would want higher quality than 128k."

Come to think of it, Actually I would like access to that catalog. I like much of the older music they have squirreled away.

Unlike you, I realize the boycott mentality is foolish and isn't working. I'm not going to disregard good music that I grew up listening too, just because it's an RIAA affliation. I don't care if they signed a deal with the devil himself, That's not my problem. I simply enjoy good music, regardless of it's label affiliation.

"They're counting on you to do the grunt work and get the good versions out there. So is Dave Matthews. Your good day's work cost him a big $4 or so and he's got three more happy fans."

They were fans prior to my giving them the cd. They were going to buy it initially, and I pursuaded them not too. he didn't gain any fans, he already had them. I just kept the fan from equalling a sale.

"You may THINK you're not for the RIAA, but you clearly are working FOR them. The people on this side of the fence don't do that. We don't support the RIAA or its artists. We'd point you to someone like ilyAimy instead."

You think the few of you here who actually don't spend money on anything riaa/mpaa entertainment related actually matter? Be realistic. Your in the minority. What you refuse to spend, some teenager will do for you. Even if 20 of you were totally for this boycott, what you don't spend in a year, a few teenagers can make up for in a few months.

See the light and realize this, "don't buy it, it's riaa' is a waste of time and energy. your not going to hurt the riaa in the least this way. not enough of you are doing it to count. It would be like 2 dial up modems trying to overload a cable modem. It's just not going to happen. Not enough of you, not enough bandwidth from the dial up users.

"I'm not going to disregard good music that I grew up listening too, just because it's an RIAA affliation. I don't care if they signed a deal with the devil himself, That's not my problem."

Well at least you finally declared your side. Stop pretending that you're the fearless RIAA fighter.

"You think the few of you here who actually don't spend money on anything riaa/mpaa entertainment related actually matter?"

You mean the file sharers? No, they don't really matter at all. Most of the audience is full of chumps and children anyway. They wouldn't know a major chord from a minor, much less have a clue about whether any talent was involved in the content of a CD. They want Crazy Frog.

What you don't seem to realize is that if the Supreme Court came out tomorrow and said, "P2P is legal and don't bug us about it again," those 80% of people will whoop and holler and celebrate because you beat the system.

But the system that owns the work of the artists by default will remain. We've barely dented it.

Once they get into the system, well, you can chew them up and spit them out, share or not, listen or not. By the time you get their hands on them, it really makes no difference, the deal with the devil has already been struck.

"I don't care if they signed a deal with the devil himself, That's not my problem."

It is precisely the details of this agreement that concern the 20,000 acts at dmusic and anyone else ready to sell their soul for quick cash. That's the RIAA we're boycotting.

If we save one musician from ruining his life, we've done our job.

Gdziemann,

"Well at least you finally declared your side. Stop pretending that you're the fearless RIAA fighter. "

I wasn't pretending to be anything. I told you we have nothing to do with the riaa, and that's entirely true. I'm sure they do not approve of the actions of myself and associates. We're interested in music, not the label affiliation. This doesn't make us for the RIAA anymore so then it makes us for ford/chevy if one/some of us drive those.

"You mean the file sharers? No, they don't really matter at all. Most of the audience is full of chumps and children anyway. They wouldn't know a major chord from a minor, much less have a clue about whether any talent was involved in the content of a CD. They want Crazy Frog."

Cute. But no, I think we both understood I wasn't speaking of those individuals. I was speaking of the individuals who preach do not share it, don't download it, don't buy it. That crowd. Let's not sidestep. I don't consider file sharers as having a voice on either side.

"If we save one musician from ruining his life, we've done our job."

Fair enough. That same musician can continue flipping burgers to support his/her musical talents.

RaidHHI and gdZiemann, if you think it was a bad choice for me to have "time warped" this thread back to the front-page, ...well, I appologize.

...but I think the central issue/point you are fussing over is a very important one for our readers/participants to consider.

"Your either for the riaa, or against them. Their is no standing on the side of the fence on this one."

"We're interested in music, not the label affiliation."
-----

"We (not you) push whatever material the public wants out there."

"I don't consider file sharers as having a voice on either side."


I don't think you know what you're for or against.

-------

"That same musician can continue flipping burgers to support his/her musical talents."

Or computer programming, accounting, stock broker, venture capitalist, insurance adjuster, pilot or whatever else they have as a back-up career. And probably get health insurance, too.

Or they could work at a help desk. What's your point?

Ok, since my "nicey nicey" disclaimer/explaination is out of the way...

""We (not you) push whatever material the public wants out there.""

Our point exactly. "PUSH"

(Do you really kid yourself that you are working against the RIAA by "pushing" their crap? C'mon RaidHHI. Use your talents and abilities to HELP the effort. Stop being an pawn. Easy availability on the net should be considered as nothing more than PROMOTION of the product they want to sell instead of a "siphon" from those sales. (Hell, thats what THEY claim it is!)

Get a clue!

PERSONAL MESSAGE FOR compmore:

"(At LEAST, please stop advocating such actions in OUR forums! Go to downhillbattle.org or p2p.net or somewhere else to voice such wrong-headed thoughts!)"

I took a swipe at downhill.org and p2p.net because they seemingly advocate (at least more-so than we at Boycott-Riaa) the "share more RIAA to win" philosophy that this thread is talking about.

(AND I also must admit they were "easy targets" of my displeasure because both those sites often tend to refuse to even acknowledge Boycott-Riaa's existance.)

I know BOTH of those sites (on the surface) have done much to help promote your vids compmore.

...I think that somehow/somewhere in all the above I have personally offended you. I want you to know that if I had, it was NOT my intention.

As you should very well know, the entire "copyright/music/content war" debate is getting more and more intense each and every day. The 'factions' which in the earlier days were all more firmly on one side are now starting to bicker about the more subtle points. (As this very thread clearly illustrates.)

I hope we have not lost you as a friend and that Boycott-Riaa has not lost you as a participant over some personal slight I may have inadvertently done to you.

I wouldn't have posted all this HERE publicly, but I can't find you via any of the other means that I usually have connected with you in the past. It seems like you packed up your toys and went home.

MANY of our "old-timers" have become jaded with each other and now sometimes act as if they hate each other's guts. Unfortunately, due to human nature, such apathy occurs in lengthy aquaintences.

I have done my best to "keep the peace" best I can ...and may have failed miserably...

But I still salute each and every one of you "old-timers" for the individual contributions you have made to the effort along the way!

(yes, even mroop)

...ok, that being said, can we all get over this bickering crap and get back to work now?

"...ok, that being said, can we all get over this bickering crap and get back to work now?"

I do not consider the debate between Raid and George "bickering" at all. Although, the discussion is indeed intense, both have remained extremely civil and almost downright cordial with each other. This is exactly the type of discussion that SHOULD be occurring here.

No, save the lets stop the "bickering crap and get back to work now" line for mrpoops posts.

"Although, the discussion is indeed intense, both have remained extremely civil and almost downright cordial with each other. This is exactly the type of discussion that SHOULD be occurring here."

I agree kyodylee, (but the discussion between George and RaidHHI is NOT what I was talking about...

NOR am I refering to the regular "mroop" bashing we all enjoy so much.)

There are vague "behind the scenes" things that are best not publicly known (and which I shoulda kept my mouth shut about in the first place!)

Don't guess at "what's going on" because you will invariably guess wrong. (And every single one of those involved don't have the whole picture either... and I am one of them!) Things will work themselves out. (Actually, "things" mostly have already.)

'nuff said. Please drop it!

I could wish there hadn't been an interruption of this very fascinating debate between gdziemann and RaidHH1.
Hopefully, those issues under discussion can be resumed.

I have to disagree with raid on a couple of crucial points.

Raid is still of the belief that one dl is one lost sale.
As much as you would like that to be true, it has never been proven that it is. There is actually visible evidence to the contrary.

Lets look at a few examples.

1. Tired and obvious, Metallica.
First, chart the rise of Napster use.
Second, chart Metallica's rise from
"niche" to mainstream.
Overlay these charts ... hmmmm.
The more Metallica was shared,
The more they were heard and
known. The free advertising got
them buttloads of sales.

2. Compare the "Top 10 most Downloaded" files with the top 10 best sellers.

3. Duh, Revenge of the Sith.
That leaked screener really hurt
the box office, didn't it ?

4. The success of Windows is one of
the software industry's oldest
"piracy" success stories.
So called "cracking groups" made
certain that the new, unknown
Windows shell made it to the PC
of the curious, the doubtful, and
those too cautious to pay for
something "untested".

No Raid,
you don't hurt the **A's.
You are truly their best weapon
against us.

Don't worry tho,
While you "dog" on P2P, keep in mind
that they WILL get to FTP IRC Usenet
and everything else soon enough.
P2P is simply a wedge to create the
"law" they need to achive that goal.

Arrogance is truly self-destructive.

Dreddsnik,

"
Raid is still of the belief that one dl is one lost sale."

No, Not a download. An actual cd-r copy. We don't count people who download, only individuals we know in real life whom we have direct contact with on a frequent basis. Those individuals are my small sample party. They are fans of artists, they will attend concerts; But they will not purchase cd's from riaa labels in stores. not even second hand. Members of HHI supply them with cd-r copies of said albums via request.

This allows them to support the artist, not the label.

" 1. Tired and obvious, Metallica.
First, chart the rise of Napster use.
Second, chart Metallica's rise from
"niche" to mainstream.
Overlay these charts ... hmmmm.
The more Metallica was shared,
The more they were heard and
known. The free advertising got
them buttloads of sales."

I know many people who hate Metallica, both before and after the Napster incident. However, the ones who like metallica, napster didn't change anything for those individuals. People are going to download what it is they want to hear. That alone decides who's popular and who isn't.

" 2. Compare the "Top 10 most Downloaded" files with the top 10 best sellers."

top ten downloads from where tho? p2p? laugh laugh. I already told you, nobody in the scene cares about p2p. We were happily exchanging tunes long before napster came along and made the word mp3 as common as cereal.

Many contacts in the scene don't even listen too or know much about american music. The RIAA really isn't as popular on the net as you might think.

" 3. Duh, Revenge of the Sith.
That leaked screener really hurt
the box office, didn't it ?"

If you saw the quality; You'd pay the money to see it on the big screen too. Sometimes, even being cheap doesn't pay. IE: the video quality was absolutely terrible. The group that released it gets props for an early release (I suppose), but... I sure do wish some groups would take more time to clean up the video feed just a little first.

" 4. The success of Windows is one of
the software industry's oldest
"piracy" success stories.
So called "cracking groups" made
certain that the new, unknown
Windows shell made it to the PC
of the curious, the doubtful, and
those too cautious to pay for
something "untested"."

What did any cracking groups have to do with windows 95? Windows 95 had no form of copy protection on the initial release. It did have oddball formatted floppies if you recieved it that way, but handy free 3rd party apps came along to copy those.

I've been in the... darknet side of the bbs/internet scene for a very long time. I don't recall cracking groups having much to do with win95. Drink Or Die (warez group) was credited with the first leak of win95.

Windows was a success because some individuals actually liked using it; and obviously paid for it. If piracy was the key, then linux should have defeated windows by now; it's free. Pretty sad when people would rather pirate windows then run linux for free. Hmm, wonder why that is?

" No Raid,
you don't hurt the **A's.
You are truly their best weapon
against us."

I am not against you per say. I'm against the silly notion that depriving yourself of listening to music simply because it might be an riaa label is foolhearted. Why should I give up Bob Seger, Bob Dylan? I like the music. Music, not the label. a very fine distinction.

" Don't worry tho,
While you "dog" on P2P, keep in mind
that they WILL get to FTP IRC Usenet
and everything else soon enough.
P2P is simply a wedge to create the
"law" they need to achive that goal."

Really? They already have laws on the books to deal with our activities on irc and ftp. The problem is, ftp/irc users tend to be more technical savvy; We can hide via proxies (real proxies); we can also anonymously reach out and drop damn near any hostile connection out there. IE: Ircer's don't have to lie down and take it.

p2p users are an easy target and always have been. Most of the p2p users are not computer literate, so securing and/or protecting a network; limited incoming connections, etc wouldn't be something they would be inclined to do. On irc tho, it's a different story.

usenet/ftp/irc has been around for eons, moving whatever material we wanted; and that's not going to stop even with some new laws based in the united states. IRc like p2p exceeds us borders, but unlike p2p; IRCers are dedicated to what they do; and will use whatever means are necessary including but not limited to ddosing any hostile entity. Think, .gov website defacements. think irc groups. Uncle sam doesn't want it.

" Arrogance is truly self-destructive."

Arrogance is a fine line between intelligence and insanity.






As much as you would like that to be true, it has never been proven that it is. There is actually visible evidence to the contrary.
"

"No, Not a download. An actual cd-r copy. We don't count people who download, only individuals we know in real life whom we have direct contact with on a frequent basis. "

Ok, Give you that. I should read a bit more carefully. Real hardcopy can be seen as a lost sale. It's also a lot easier to see as illegal.

" I know many people who hate Metallica, both before and after the Napster incident. However, the ones who like metallica, napster didn't change anything for those individuals. "

True in that those that ALREADY new of Metallica pretty much retained their opinions. The point is, Metallica WAS pretty "niche" . Napster introduced Metallica to scores of people that would not have otherwise heard them ( radio pretty much ignored them except for a few select markets ). It was free advertising and their rise in poularity reflects that. "

" If you saw the quality; You'd pay the money to see it on the big screen too. Sometimes, even being cheap doesn't pay. IE: the video quality was absolutely terrible. "

I don't know which one you saw, but the one I saw had excellent quality.

"What did any cracking groups have to do with windows 95? Windows 95 had no form of copy protection on the initial release. "

Ok, I am a pretty old bird, so my terminology gets goofed sometimes. I also have been around since the days when Compuserve was pretty much "it" for online services. Spent a lot of time on so called "elite" dialup BBS systems.
Remember when 28.8 was fast ??
At THAT time, Linux was virtually unknown. Period. The contenders ...
MS-DOS
DR-DOS
IBM-DOS
There were a few "ANSI" based menu
systems, but Windows ( I THINK ) was
the first true GUI ( albeit only a shell and
not a true OS ) . Don't remember REAL clearly when OS/2 hit the scene. I don't THINK LINUX was really in existence yet, as UNIX and ZENIX were still in wide use in business environments.
The Warez movement "pushed" ( heh )
Windows into the hands of many, for free. Word spread, it got purchased.
This appears to work in much the same way as your "push" of RIAA music.
True, only to people YOU know, that ask
for it. But,
Once they walk away from you, do they
lock it in a vault and play it for no one but themselves ??
I doubt it.
People They know hear it from them, and so on and so on etc..
What percentage of people that hear
the CD that the "person who requests it from you " ends up liking, and buying ??
Same principle.
Free promotion for the "majors" .
Increased sales for the "majors".

"I am not against you per say. I'm against the silly notion that depriving yourself of listening to music simply because it might be an riaa label is foolhearted. Why should I give up Bob Seger, Bob Dylan? I like the music. Music, not the label. a very fine distinction. "

We point to plenty of alternatives to RIAA for music. Are you suggesting that only RIAA comes out with "REAL" music ??
What makes it more "real" than the free non-affiliated alternatives ?

Airplay ?
RIAA controls that, so competing non-affiliated product never gets heard.

Popularity ?
If it doesn't get heard, popularity is limited. RIAA controls what was previously the best way to "spread the word, the Radio.

Sales ?
If no one knows it's out there, it won't be bought. How do you spread the word ?? RIAA has the major promotional channels locked down. See "Airplay" above.
I enjoy Boston, Kansas, Fleetwood Mac, etc ..
But, I bought all of those years ago, before I had a clue what the industry was REALLY about. The crap they put out now BARELY qualifies as music. It more closely resembles ads for Shoes, Clothes and 'bling. The labels stopped putting out Music long ago.
So, while I am sure that you, personally, are not against us, what you support DOES INDEED promote, and FINANCE them, in the long run, by acting
as an unpaid promotion arm for them.
the RIAA has a monopoly on the BUSINESS, not on Music.

"Really? They already have laws on the books to deal with our activities on irc and ftp. The problem is, ftp/irc users tend to be more technical savvy; We can hide via proxies (real proxies); we can also anonymously reach out and drop damn near any hostile connection out there. IE: Ircer's don't have to lie down and take it. "

Perhaps, for now.
You haven't noticed the perfectly legal
hardware and software that have been sued out of existence ?
You haven't noticed large corporate entities blackmailing COUNTRIES into supporting international laws relating to media ?
IRC/FTP/Usenet have been around since the beginning, true. They all rely on
one thing. The Internet. No public access to the Internet ? What happens to IRC/FTP/Usenet ??
Can't happen ?
Look around you.
Warner is blackmailing Dutch ISP's as I type this. How long do you think it will be for the next step ? Individual users MUST provide any personal info requested to even access the net ?
How long ??
Tinfoil hat stuff ?
Maybe.
Follow the money and the laws.

Don't be too convinced of your own superiority.
That's when you'll get suckerpunched.

BTW,
Great response.

"I'm against the silly notion that depriving yourself of listening to music simply because it might be an riaa label is foolhearted."

You're against the notion that not listening to RIAA music is "foolhearted"?

"Why should I give up Bob Seger, Bob Dylan? I like the music. Music, not the label. a very fine distinction."

Because Bob Seger and Bob Dylan will both allow children to be sued for listening to their music. It's kind of like buying diamonds from Sierra Leone or clothes from sweatshops.

"People are going to download what it is they want to hear. That alone decides who's popular and who isn't."

That's ridiculous. American Idol, Clear Channel and label advertising budgets decide who's popular and who isn't. William Hung comes to mind. And Crazy Frog.

I got into this discussion over the "there are only two sides" declaration. As much fun as it's been, I'm obviously not going to be convinced that spending time and money to give away copies of RIAA music is a good thing. You are obviously not going to be dissuaded from your conviction that you're doing something noble, striking out against the big dogs.

"We can hide via proxies (real proxies); we can also anonymously reach out and drop damn near any hostile connection out there."

Search my name at Google. Better yet, search "RIAA statistics". We don't have to hide. We can reach out publicly and the world is listening. The "hostile connections" know exactly where to find me and I say, "Come on down!"

They say that there are 8 million people in the U.S. logged on to p2p at any given time now, searching for the "illegal" RIAA tunes.

And 292 million that aren't.

I've been enjoying the debate....I agree with the last comment about minds being made up (The old "agree to disagree" adage comes to mind).

I am curiuos about some of the references to technology though. I've seen things that would have me believe that you would have us believe there is some special talent to ripping a CD that only the ripping groups have.

I do it all the time to make backups and travel copies for my car....Been doing it for years myself. No real talent to it. The lure of mp3 has nothing to do with any magic groups either. It has to do with portability and quantity(even quality is not a deciding factor). Again, I have dozens of over the counter (as well as free-ware) products that make this task almost click and go (hell, even my youngest could do it...when he was five years old).

I'm not sure what "level" of technology you are at, but it sounds like desktop support. If you would like to go down the path of the wonders of technology, we can, but I won't tap dance on where I am in that space.

I've been designing and implementing network technologies for major corporations for many years. I've been sought out by the likes of Lockheed-Martin and the US army (to name a couple) and was drectly responsible for the implementation of multiple 25K plus user environments. I'm MCSE/MCT/CCNA/A+ certified and one of the first 10K to receive certification in Active Directory when it came about. I was directly invlolved in stress test analysis for the (then new) Windows 2000 OS and was one of three people outside of M$ that found out it couldn't scale in a multi-proc scenario beyond the 2nd processor.

You have been illuding that there is some kind of god-like nature to your hobby...More crap fom an inexperienced PC user who discovered that CD Creator could rip an un-DRM'd disc. Do those of us real techies a favor and drop that part of your dialogue. We aren't impressed. What I do know is this. The RIAA is right about one thing. There is no such thing as "hidden" on the internet. One router dump will take me right to your front door. The cold hard reality is that even though you can hide the IP in various NAT schemes, the last MAC address will always be there...One can follow these addresses to get back to your PC. I'm not guessing, I've done it. I've been involved with things of this nature to the point that it has wiped out whole life-styles. I've seen what is out there and, frankly, it's pretty scarry. As stated earlier, don't mistake the fact that the industry has yet to find you significant enough to go after as skill on your part to avoid them. You are truly breaking the law in almost every country in the world. You can't run, you can't hide. You are simply to insignificant to bother with at the present time. I personally have never used P2P (Probably won't given the climate). But I can give you 2-8 million reasons why the RIAA is interested in it. That's a lot of people to scare back into the fold (compared to your how many?).

I know that the only way to level the playing field is to convince others to look elsewhere for their entertainment. Your method assumes that the RIAA labels are all there is worth having. This logic provides incentive for not only fans, but what would be otherwise good musicians to think of them as the Holy Grail.

Do what you want, but there is no converts to your way here. We are dedicated in our believe that if you don't water the weed it will dry up and blow away.

Dreddsnick,

"Ok, Give you that. I should read a bit more carefully. Real hardcopy can be seen as a lost sale. It's also a lot easier to see as illegal."

I didn't imply that what we did was legal. I was under the impression it was understood that it's not.

"rue in that those that ALREADY new of Metallica pretty much retained their opinions. The point is, Metallica WAS pretty "niche" . Napster introduced Metallica to scores of people that would not have otherwise heard them ( radio pretty much ignored them except for a few select markets ). It was free advertising and their rise in poularity reflects that. "
"

Umm, I'm not sure exactly what you mean here. Metallica has been around for a very long time. I wasn't aware they were niche; You either liked them or you didn't.

With regard to free advertising, napster didn't advertise anything. They provided a search . It was upto you to decide what you wanted to hear. I don't remember seeing any specific flash adverts for metallica or anything else. If the people want to hear the music, it's not your right nor mine to prevent them from doing so; regardless of label affiliation. The people generally decide what they wish to hear. They do this by downloading, buying, etc that music they are enjoying. I realize this is hard for some of you, but not all of us think that if it's an riaa band, that it's junk.

This no riaa or nothing stance isn't in everyones best interests. I like music, period. I never cared much for the labels, I never saw a real need for them. If you want exposer, nothing is stopping you from getting it.

" We point to plenty of alternatives to RIAA for music. Are you suggesting that only RIAA comes out with "REAL" music ??
What makes it more "real" than the free non-affiliated alternatives"

I made no such suggestion. I said that riaa or not wasn't a deciding factor for me whether or not I will listen to the music. If I like the music, i'm going to listen to it. I'll go see a show if one is in driving range; I might even buy the original cd so I don't have to wait to come across somebody who already has it. my single purchase however will be ripped/released into the world.

I have nothing against IndependentMusicians, nothing at all. And I made no attempt to claim it's riaa or nothing. I don't like the riaa one bit. I just like decent sound. Simply calling oneself an artist doesn't make one good.

" You haven't noticed large corporate entities blackmailing COUNTRIES into supporting international laws relating to media ?
IRC/FTP/Usenet have been around since the beginning, true. They all rely on
one thing. The Internet. No public access to the Internet ? What happens to IRC/FTP/Usenet ??
Can't happen ?
Look around you."

Lets see. Conspiracy aside.
Big Business uses the internet daily; Lots of money is available via the internet. Big Business is not going to let uncle sam or anyone else keep you or me off the net. Not when we are seen as a cash cow. Checkout paypal, ebay, etc. there's simply too much money to be made now.

Oh sure, riaa/mpaa whine they are being raped; Yep. I'm sure ebay is concerned. I'm sure google is concerned, cnn.com etc; Oh poor little riaa. Quick, lets shutdown the internet to protect them from those evil copyright infringers. The internet's usefulness far outweighs it's ability to commit crime.

Gdziemann,

"You're against the notion that not listening to RIAA music is "foolhearted"?"

No. I don't believe I said that either. I thought what I said was self explanatory. it doesn't matter to me who/if/what label affiliatin an artist has. Does the music touch me in some way? if so, I'll acquire it. if not, oh well. I move on.

"Because Bob Seger and Bob Dylan will both allow children to be sued for listening to their music. It's kind of like buying diamonds from Sierra Leone or clothes from sweatshops."

They are not sued for listening to it, Lets not try to make it sound innocent. they are sued for listening to it, without buying it. And if it was 2 or 3 songs, probably wouldn't be a big deal. But, kids being kids and greedy being as greedy does, they won't stop at a few. They collect hundreds of them.

When i find p2p apps on clients computers, I tell them of the dangers; they already know and simply don't care. They don't think they'll get sued, and they laugh if you ask about it. I have no sympathy for these people. Stupid is as stupid does.

"That's ridiculous. American Idol, Clear Channel and label advertising budgets decide who's popular and who isn't. William Hung comes to mind. And Crazy Frog."

Those who use their brain for more then a hat rack aren't so niave.

"Lets not try to make it sound innocent. they are sued for listening to it, without buying it."

You just described radio.

"Those who use their brain for more then a hat rack aren't so niave."

The word is naive.

How old are you? You believe people have any influence over what's popular? The record labels decide what's popular. Radio decides based on how much the record labels pay them, not listener requests. People buy what they're being sold. In the 80s, it was disco, then Urban Cowboy, then mosquito-guitar metal. Now it's hip-hop.

Disney has more influence over my kid's musical preferences than I do. She likes Hillary Duff, Lindsay Lohan and the Beach Boys.

I can go though a decades-long list of the pre-fab lame crap that the public has consistently sucked down like cold beer on a hot day. For every Eric Clapton, there are three Partridge Families. For every Beatles, there is a Monkees. For every Aretha, we have to accept an Ashlee Simpson, who miraculously sold like a million records before anyone ever allowed her to perform, at which time we all promptly discovered she couldn't sing.

The public did that all on their own? I don't think so.