I keep coming back to this thread even though my sensible side says I should walk away. I've got caught up in these kind of arguments before and generally they end badly - as you've pointed out things get personal and the purpose of what should have been an educated debate gets lost in all the other shit.
I also have a habit of responding to posts immediately after I read them, which is always a bad idea - emotion takes over instead of balanced reason, and some of whats gone before happens (again, I'd apologies for the wording, and as you point out the content, of some of the comments made. Cheap shots I admit, but your comments on Faderhead and MNS were equally cheap and riled me, as I believe you were/are out of line on both, and its unfair to make specific accusations against them when they're not on this forum to respond. But youre entitled to your opinions and my response was innappropriate to the discussion).
Now for the shock...
The more I read your posts, particularly the most recent, the more I think we agree on the fundamental issues but are just coming at them from polar opposite directions and completely conflicting ideas about the solution...
Digital rights management is wrong - if you own the product you should be able to copy it to as many formats on your own equipment as you like.
Artists deserve protection from being ripped off, either by the record labels or by so-called fans.
Record labels should be there to serve the artist, not the other way round.
I'd agree that you should have better (limited) access to albums before you buy them. Hell, I've got stacks of cd's at home that I'd never have bought if I'd heard them all the way through first, but I've also got books, dvds etc that this also applies to. The question is over what level of access.
As I say, fundamentally I agree with a lot of your standpoints, I just disagree with your validation of mass downloading, particularly in terms of it being a solution to the way record companies treat artists. At least we've got some common ground though!!!
If your main argument is against exploitative contracts forced on artists by the record companies, surely a more productive approach is an organised boycott/strike of the record companies by the artists - it largely worked in Hollywood when the writers guild went on strike ( I think!!!). Without the artists the record companies cease to exist, so why not force their hands?
Free download albums. Yeah, I'm cynical in that only the really big acts are doing this. The ones who can afford to take the financial risk. As a dj and promoter I only deal with comparatively small acts, and I just cant see it working for them at that level. Again, I'd be happy to be proved wrong though.
With regards to the RIAA - I've never read any of their propaganda. My opinions are my own and I'll stand or fall on that basis, I've no intention of hiding behind some organisation that I know nothing of.
Further to that, my opinion on downloading is based on the individuals I know who do/have done it. Unfortunately, few of them have lived up to your expectations of then going out and buying the product if they liked it, or supporting the artist in any other way. Its the "I've got it free, why should I now pay for it?" attitude. These experiences form the basis of my 'knowledge' and I see no reason to assume these are isolated incidents, or that they do not represent the wider problem.
Also, of all the bands we've put on in glasgow, I've yet to meet one in favor of widespread downloading or who hasnt seen it as damaging to what is a comparatively small music genre (my experineces are specific to electro/industrial/EBM, so I can only comment on that area). I'm happy to accept there's opposing views out there and I have no wish to ignore that - I've had years of experience at being proved wrong about things!!!
And I've never been to Kansas - heard its got a really pretty coloured road though
Yeah, I dj with back-up copies of original cds, all of which I own. My understanding of copyright legislation was that it is legal to make a back-up copy if you own the original. If I'm wrong, fair play - you've got me, but that was my understanding
Last point, my previous best wishes to you and your band weren't meant in a hippy-esque way, though the image gave me a laugh. I think anyone who's willing to stand by their music and be judged by the public deserves to be acknowledged for that, irrelevant of whether or not I like their tracks. It was a genuine comment to you and I hope you take it that way - whether you need it or not
Here's to keeping an open mind on both sides and seeing where it takes us
