CAVEAT- Please note I personally do not endorse, nor agree with the statements made in this article. In fact, I think this is more RIAA propaganda (for example, note the improper use of the word "pirate"). I actually posted this because it was on CNet.com, and wanted readers to be able to post their views on the article. ~Code
============================================

Full story

This seems like a desperate attempt to get consumers to accept the "established" online services as your only "legitimate" source. PURE BS...note the ending statement, as if Fader has undergone "redemption" by using Rhapsody...lol...

This article just shows that someone can string together a lot of words, and just accomplish a long piece of obvious silliness, made more evident by its attempt at mind-numbing propaganda.

But, in the end, downloading is burdensome, Fader suggests. "Obtaining the songs is a nuisance. It's a pain to download them, to organize them, to back them up."

Who the heck is this fader guy? if it's such a pain why is the recording industry so up in arms over downloading

And when you come down to it, Fader adds, people really don't care much about having physical ownership of their music. What they really care about is having access to the music they like, when and where they want it.

This guy is obviously not a music lover. I'm not into music as most on this site but if I buy something it's mine, I want to own it period.
Code I can understand why you put that disclaimer at the top of the article.

Is someone out there writing boilerplate for these kinds of articles?
For example..."turning freeloaders into paying customers..." Hmmm...seems I've heard that line before (and the RIAA's own stats show they believe that 52 per cent of the "heaviest downloaders" are still buying their crappy CDs).

I tell you, any time you see an abundance of the words "piracy" and "pirates" (inappropriate since they are at odds with the definition of pirates and piracy under Title 18,Chapter 81, Section 1652 of USC)you can almost always bet it's pro-RIAA propaganda. In this short article, I found eight ( instances of the word pirate or derivations thereof ("pirated,piracy, and pirate"). To really cinch it, notice an absolute absence of the words "copyright infringement". You'll notice an almost pathological aversion to actual use of the words "copyright infringement" in this, and other pro-RIAA articles.

Yes, once again the 250,000 artists who are actively trying to get their music heard are brushed off as illegitimate members of the "pirate network".

And once again, I say that 2004 is the year to clear the P2P net of the RIAA pestilence. Get their garbage off of Kazaa, LimeWire, Grokster, Morpheus and everything else.

Let the sheep and 12-year-old children flock to the "legitimate" sites. But let's take control of P2P and turn it into something for discerning adults.

And here's a listening tip...

I finally found a radio station I can listen to all the time. It's a subscription service BUT if you have Real Player or Midows, you can listen to a stream. The only downside is that you never find out who the artists are without the subscription player.

And they're all indies.

www.eoradio.com

That was supposed to say RealPlayer or Windows

Legitimate networks, heh, who gets to decide what is legitimate? The corporate industry "businessmen" that gouge prices and wrench money from people's wallets, or the target audience, the people that want to listen to the music?

Some people seem to forget, that the reason the "top level" of any government, corporation, or society exists to organize and fulfill the wishes of the whole, that is, the ones below like consumers. They're not doing that right now.

Technologically, if you can see it, or you can hear it, whether it's at the theaters, streaming through your computer, or on a CD/DVD, you can get an almost exact copy for free and are able to distribute it. Watching/listening to movie trailers or songs that are streamed or embedded code? No problem, there's plenty of free programs out there that can download them or output it to a file. Quicktime, windows media, audio, it doesn't matter. The technology is here, it is making things free. They need to stop trying to force the world into a permanent 80s.

Havast ye pirate dogs, I'll be sayin' it yet agin. $.99 for a cheap assed substandard Mp3 file? Arrrr, fuck ye. I'll not be a payin' it.

Lol captdunsel...good thing I wasn't drinking anything at the time I read your comment.

I second gdZiemann's comments. Get their trash out of the p2p networks. Never before has there been a better marketing tool for indies than now (it's free to boot). Not buying riaa music is only half the equation.

I'm sure captdunsel's parrot will second his statement (and poop on the printed version of this article as well).

"You and I can get free Internet access, but we don't do it because we don't want to put up with the limitations of free service."

Like a larger selection, free unlimited downloads, and No DRM, some real nasty limitations there.

I felt my brain beginning to rot reading this article.

The debate behind the debate is still (as everyon here knows) the fundamental relationship between artists, fans, and the labels. The real issue is that in the legal realm, the labels have all the control and use it to screw everyone (quality, taste, and "consumer" issues included).

What they're offering is a cosmetic change to the same deal, and that's not going to change because they can't get their heads beyond the economic analysis. The end ("Fader puts it simply: 'I was a big downloader of Kazaa, but when I tried Rhapsody, I felt I was a free man.'") is ironic because at the one point they try to address the basic issues, they get it completely backwards.

I did my christmas music shopping at magnatune.com and throughthe riaa radar this year, hoping a little extra awareness and some solid, legal music in the right places can shift a few perspectives, or alter some money flow at the very least. I think these people are right when they suggest that most folks would like to support the musicians they love, certainly that's true for me. The catch is, I'm not so stupid as to let some unneeded third party set up the deal so they can control me, the music, and the artist all at once.

Streaming? WTF use is that when you are on the road? Now if someone can come up with a portable MP3 or whatever player that can stream through wif-fi to your bluetooth headphones using a huge jukebox in the sky whereby you only pay a small subscription fee per month then we may be talking. But other than that they can get stuffed. I'll grab my free music and use the multitude of portable MP3 players around thank you very much.

" The better approach, one that will most likely have to be part of a successful business model, is to create a sense of community among buyers or subscribers--not unlike the sense of community the original Napster as well as Kazaa and Morpheus have created among their users,"

WTF? Hello?!? Is this a shining example of an infinite loop or what? This is like saying we need to reinvent the successful model in order to achieve a successful model! Amazing...it's as if all things must be twisted and bent in order to preserve the status quo which is no longer the status quo.

I live in So. California. What did I do for Christmas? You guessed it. Had the whole boat in stitches when I sang altered lyrics a bit:

Tune to Disneyland's "Pirates of the Caribbean" ride themesong.

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.
We search and we download for just the right hash
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
It's indies we want, cause we don't have the cash
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
Yo ho, yo ho, downloading MP3s.

Well, you get the idea .... Here's the original.

http://www.slhacker.com/downloads/pirate.wav

'Yo Ho (A Pirate's Life for Me)'
Lyrics by Xavier Atencio and music by George Bruns

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.

We pillage, we plunder, we rifle, and loot,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
We kidnap and ravage and don't give a hoot,
Drink up me 'earties, yo ho.

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.

We extort, we pilfer, we filch, and sack,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
Maraud and embezzle, and even high-jack,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.

We kindle and char, inflame and ignite,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
We burn up the city, we're really a fright,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.

We're rascals, scoundrels, villains, and knaves,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
We're devils and black sheep, really bad eggs,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me.

We're beggars and blighters, ne'er-do-well cads,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.
Aye, but we're loved by our mommies and dads,
Drink up, me 'earties, yo ho.

this is the biggest lie that the labels have been liveing under thay even tell them slefs this lie just so thay bleave it 100% persent

And when you come down to it, Fader adds, people really don't care much about having physical ownership of their music. What they really care about is having access to the music they like, when and where they want it.

Fader puts it simply: "I was a big downloader of Kazaa, but when I tried Rhapsody, I felt I was a free man."

I know several of you have brought this up already, but why not beat a dead horse? A statement such as that just boggles the mind. I think I'm actually dumber after reading that. Smells like astroturfing to me.

Hey, if iTunes, Rhapsody, the "new" Napster, etc. want to toot their horn, by all means let them. I'm glad that they exist, even though I am currently not using them. They do offer another avenue for customers to obtain music, even if most of the profits go to RIAA affiliates. In theory, these services are a good way for customers to purchase "new" music without having to buy entire CDs which may only have one or two desired songs.

But pundits should remember: all of these so-called "legitimate" services owe their existence to widespread use of P2P.
If it were not for P2P, the big labels would have never agreed to allow their music to be sold via iTunes or any of the others.

Now, if only widespread use of P2P could also be a catalyst for copyright reform ...

Well, there are an abundance of crappy encoded files and spoof files floating around on the p2p nets, but if you are downloading indie stuff and ingnoring the RIAA tunes, you will find that this problem is very rare. (The source for indie files are usually from the indies themselves who take care to put good stuff up! By contrast, the RIAA labels at FIRST flood p2p with the tunes they wanna sell, THEN they flood the same p2p nets with all the garbage files to piss off the average song seeker. I wonder if anyone else has ever noticed this practice?) I agree with George, lets get rid of RIAA music on p2p and give them what they say they want.

Shmoo, of Electric Gypsy
Support Local and Independent Music!

This is an advertorial puff piece supplied through the RIAA guised as an article. When I worked in the Senate pieces of spin/disinformation for public consumption were the norm. Makes for a legitimate looking piece that creates beliefs and opinions.

This fader guy really has no clue. He was probably paid to put a good spin into these "legit" music services. He doesn ever go into any of the real details....where does this money go???

online music purchase:

RIAA:
no cd overhead
no warehouse overhead
no shipping overhead
Marketing via media players , cut marketing costs.

Consumer:
low quality music
consumer bandwidth
copy protection

why do people even buy online music ??