MusicNonStop - End Of An Era

[Effigy]

MusicNonStop have announced on their website that they have ceased trading.

As an on-line store that has helped build and sustain the alternatvie industrial scene for many years in this country, this has to go down as a pretty sad day.
A lot of the stuff I've got into as a dj over the last 5 years has been through them, and while my bank manager might be glad they're now gone, I'm personally gutted, especially as they were a sound bunch who always took time for a chat when I met them down at Infest.

Just goes to show the power of illegal music downloading on what is a relatively small music scene (yeah, thats a pointed comment, feel free to hurl abuse at me).

Oh yeah, anyone have any recommendations for other good on-line industrial/electro stores?

[Plus1]

Crap, now where will I buy from?

[Tailz]

Snap, and to top it off it means im not getting the new hocico Box set

[deepfriedmango]

Originally Posted by Tailz

Snap, and to top it off it means im not getting the new hocico Box set

saw hocico down in london there. the limited box set does look really nice as a collectable, could have picked you one up if id known. doh!

[killdozer]

Originally Posted by Effigy

MusicNonStop have announced on their website that they have ceased trading.

As an on-line store that has helped build and sustain the alternatvie industrial scene for many years in this country, this has to go down as a pretty sad day.
A lot of the stuff I've got into as a dj over the last 5 years has been through them, and while my bank manager might be glad they're now gone, I'm personally gutted, especially as they were a sound bunch who always took time for a chat when I met them down at Infest.

Just goes to show the power of illegal music downloading on what is a relatively small music scene (yeah, thats a pointed comment, feel free to hurl abuse at me).

Oh yeah, anyone have any recommendations for other good on-line industrial/electro stores?

Apologies for coming to this thread as late.

First, I think it's important not to attribute the demise of MNS to "illegal" downloading. Downloading is a symptom of the cartel rip off that music buyers have been subjected too for years. The reason that MNS stopped making money was simple - the scene is tiny. And greedy.

Labels and Stores have combined to impoverish artists and rip off "fans" or listeners for years. Bands get a pittance (if anything!), and you, the loyal customer gets ripped off for your troubles.

If industrial had the same ethos as punk it would be far stronger. And MNS would probably still be in business.

"Pay no more than X for this disk", control distribution, and more importantly, nurture the scene rather than bleeding it dry.

To an extent, MNS were victims, in so much as the "scene" has mirrored the general mainstream record labels - if something sells? Clone it. Don't foster innovation, foster "sameyness". VNV are popular? Get sound-a-likes! If Hocico are good, get 17 other bands going the same thing, and release 46 different "deluxe" versions in "luxury" packaging but with the same tracks (more or less). Look at the labels releasing "industrial", "ebm" or whatever you call it...it's a morass. Faceless rip offs of other bands, countless sound-a-likes and look-a-likes.

Where MNS were not blameless was in not using their position as the 800lb gorilla in a tiny wee scene and forcing change or innovating. IE offering listeners/customers/consumers a better, or even different way of accessing music. MNS became (passively or actively) part of the problem. As soon as they did, they were dead. DRM free downloads at cut price? There are labels who will allow this and MNS could have used them to leverage the bigger labels. Cutting the price of CD's? Widening the scope of the business/distro channel? Pushing merch sales much harder? Tour tie-ins?

I feel sorry for the guys who ran MNS losing their jobs, and it's a shame that a source of music has gone, but I can't be too upset when another of the old guard withers on the vine.

We need a new outlook. New ideas. Not simply the "I want to be the HMV of industrial"

As for the Hocico box set? One day a band won't try selling old rope in shiny bok for extra cash, they'll offer a CD in a recycled cardboard sleeve/minimal packaging for a fair/cheaper price, or DRM free downloads at full quality for less again. A deluxe version might included extra tracks/remix kits. ie much more for your money.

As for downloading? It's the saviour of music. A move (hopefully) away from the monetisation of art. A "marketplace" where the cartels can't and don't control. And remember, downloading was borne from the record companies old world view. The one where they wanted the video recorder banned. Where it's *still* illegal to make a backup copy of a CD in this country (UK). People want to share things they like. Downloading can *drive* the sale of music. It used to be you had to buy a record on faith, with no idea if it was good or trash. I download music, and if i like it, I buy it. 100% of the time. repeated listening means buying product - but I'd rather buy direct from the artist then from EMI etc. Downloaders are a lost sale, but a sales opportunity.

[Effigy]

Sorry, but I dont buy your arguments. I'll try to put together a proper response to your points, but 1 of them I'll hit straight off.

Originally Posted by killdozer

As for downloading? It's the saviour of music....
It used to be you had to buy a record on faith, with no idea if it was good or trash. I download music, and if i like it, I buy it.

Poor excuse for theft of an artists work.
There's a thousand industrial radio stations on-line. You want to listen before you buy? There's your answer.
You seem to argue that downloading is a victimless crime. You dont seem to grasp the concept that it takes time and money to create the music you seem to think you have the right to use and abuse as you wish.
Try telling Faderhead, who's just announced that he's quiting the scene for this very reason, that downloading is "the saviour of music".
Bullshit mate, total bullshit.

[MarkMono]

I don't judge artists who seek remuneration for their work, but I don't have much respect for artists who expect it.

Signed bands make the majority of their cash from touring and merchandise, and unsigned bands seem to generally promote more ethical behaviour from their audience (Wonder why that is.) so I still don't see downloading as being an unworkable problem.

"Download the album for free, come and see us if you like it. Buy the kids a t-shirt."

[killdozer]

Originally Posted by Effigy

Sorry, but I dont buy your arguments. I'll try to put together a proper response to your points, but 1 of them I'll hit straight off.



Poor excuse for theft of an artists work.
There's a thousand industrial radio stations on-line. You want to listen before you buy? There's your answer.
You seem to argue that downloading is a victimless crime. You dont seem to grasp the concept that it takes time and money to create the music you seem to think you have the right to use and abuse as you wish.
Try telling Faderhead, who's just announced that he's quiting the scene for this very reason, that downloading is "the saviour of music".
Bullshit mate, total bullshit.

It's not theft of an artist work. I'm in a band releasing commercial work, In know how it operates. The theft of artists music comes from the record labels who rarely pay artists, and from the distro/stores that want to gouge ever greater profits. All at the expense of two groups. The artists and the fans.

Downloading began because the record labels refused to sanction legal downloads. Sony installed a rootkit/backdoor/trojan onto your machine to cripple your CD player! The record industry regard everyone as criminals, freeloaders and rip off merchants. And instead of coming up with a "value added" solution early on to MP3/p2p they tried to strangle it at birth. The record industry contrived to keep prices high/fix prices. They are organised crime.

And yes, downloading is a victimless crime if you discount the criminals in the record industry.

Faderhead quitting music? Big deal! He can dry his eyes and acquaint himself with the harsh realities of the big bad world - Not enough people want to buy his stuff! If he's an artist he'll keep writing and releasing and get himself a job where he can continue his labour of love. Alternately he can keep kidding himself on he's big time and it's nasty downloaders to blame. I have *zero* sympathy with anyone who thinks that music/art owes them a living. The naked city is filled with 8 million hard luck tales. Artist or accountant?
Did Picasso give up because he was rooked? Nah, he sucked it up and kept going. Mozart? No one is owed a living from this business.
He could also try and find new ways of making a living from the industry - merch sales, touring, online sales, building relationships with fans - for example, Einsturzende Naubauten, NIN are two good examples.

One guy on myspace was imploring fans to "buy two copies of every industrial artists CD you like"! Yeah, because music is charity and I should support the greed of an industry that knows no limits. What utter garbage! Buy two, keep Faderhead in his BMW! F*ck that.

Theft of an artists work starts at source. The record label. And then the record store. Way, way down the list of theives are fans. You do realise that's who you're calling a thief right? You can't download a tshirt. Or a gig.

MP3/compressed music quality sucks. But Itunes will sell you an MP3 album for not much less than the price of an album, and if the record industry gets it's way it would have been the self same price! No physical product, no distro cost, no packaging cost. Butthe same price for less quality. THAT is a rip off. The record industry maintain that you should buy digital copy of a track for your MP3 player. Another for your car, and another for each device you own! Tod Rundgren described a CD as a "circular plastic license to listen to my music". What a lot of nonsense.

Also, the most "ripped off" artists are doing pretty well thank you. Bono, Prodigy, Madonna, NIN don't seem to be thinking of quitting.

Try reading Hit Men: Power Brokers and Fast Money Inside the Music Business by Fredric Dannen for a better idea of the kinds of people that those in the record industry are.

Downloading was a solution to a problem made by the record industry and greedy people (some artists!) by a group of people who were sick of getting ripped off.

A download is not a lost sale, it's a potential fan. A potential gig goer, a potential merchandise buyer. The rules of the game are changing. Changing not because of music theives, but because of the record industry's short sightedness and greed.

Downloading is an issue where the record industry routinely make up figures pertaiing to. The exaggerate like made to justify a fall in sale similar to the fall in the 70's at the height/end of the disco era. Punk was born as a reaction to that time. Downloading is the 21st century reaction. Cyberpunk.

Translation : When Faderhead says "I'm quitting music because of all the nasty downloaders" what he actually means is "I'm having a hissy fit because I'm not even half as popular as I think I should be and I'm not selling many records or making as much cash as I would like".

The industrial scene is tiny. And it's dieing. If not already dead. Killed by an utter lack of good bands, by a lack of innovation. By a bunch of fuck lazy cissies that mime on stage, and by greedy idiots that think the world owes them a living.

NIN, Ministry, Marilyn Manson and Front 242 are still the big fish in scene. They are all over 20 years old. Why is that? Did big bad p2p downloading stop people getting into new bands too? Or is it just that the scene got taken over by accountants who'll sell you endless knock off sound-a-like bands instead of seeing the music progress?
They are best because they progress. They grow and change, picking up fans along the way. How many new bands will release multiple albums? Or at least albums that sound different and don't bore people utterly to death? Not very many.

Combichrist have a half chance of rising out of this, Modulate could too, a fair number of the rest are heading down the same plughole grebo went before, and Goth, and all the other genre's that sub split into even smaller and sillier sub genres.

I'm in the industry and I don't fear downloaders. Ears are my friend, not my enemy. If my stuff is good enough it'll sell. If not? You know the rest.

The cream of the crop rise to the top.

[MarkMono]

Originally Posted by killdozer

A download is not a lost sale, it's a potential fan. A potential gig goer, a potential merchandise buyer.

This is a far more eloquent re-parsing of what I was trying to express.

I still love industrial with all my little rotten heart but the current scene is hardly a very good advert for it.

[killdozer]

Originally Posted by MarkMono

This is a far more eloquent re-parsing of what I was trying to express.

I still love industrial with all my little rotten heart but the current scene is hardly a very good advert for it.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing of your post!

You managed in two sentences, what I did in an essay!

My command of the English language knows no beginning... ;-)

Originally Posted by Effigy

Sorry, but I dont buy your arguments. I'll try to put together a proper response to your points, but 1 of them I'll hit straight off.



Poor excuse for theft of an artists work.
There's a thousand industrial radio stations on-line. You want to listen before you buy? There's your answer.
You seem to argue that downloading is a victimless crime. You dont seem to grasp the concept that it takes time and money to create the music you seem to think you have the right to use and abuse as you wish.
Try telling Faderhead, who's just announced that he's quiting the scene for this very reason, that downloading is "the saviour of music".
Bullshit mate, total bullshit.

If I buy the CD I intend to listen too how is it theft? I'm checking it out before I buy, then buying.

If I go to buy a microwave oven, should I have to choose based on looking at the box? Or finding someone else who has the same oven? No, I *inspect* the goods. Same with music. Same with art. If I buy a picture I look at it first. Not on the web, not on a low bitrate streamed radio station. If it's good? It's bought. I've also yet to hear an industrial radio station play a full CD or even a selection of the tracks from a CD, and at a time of my choosing. Sorry, I don't 273,000 hours spare to take in enough airtime to hear enough from the unscripted multitude of stations. I like to write tracks too you know. And eat, and live etc.

It does take time and money to create music. I grasp the concept well - I do it! As an artist I know only too well. I also know that the record label overcharges and takes a chunk out of royalities to recoup the overcharge.

Steve Albini is a friend of a friend of mine (if that makes sense), here's what he has to say - http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

As for abusing music? How, pray tell do I do that? I buy product. Do prodigy abuse music when sampling a track and not declaring it? Please justify/explain my "abusing" music.

[djtoast]

Originally Posted by killdozer

It's not theft of an artist work. I'm in a band releasing commercial work, In know how it operates. The theft of artists music comes from the record labels who rarely pay artists, and from the distro/stores that want to gouge ever greater profits. All at the expense of two groups. The artists and the fans.

Bullshit.

Bands sign contracts with labels; no-one puts a gun to their head and forces them to; it may seem that once they're successful that they "deserve" a bigger slice of the rewards, but hell, they shoulda negotiated a better deal then. Whining about it after the fact gets very little sympathy from me.

Originally Posted by killdozer

And yes, downloading is a victimless crime if you discount the criminals in the record industry.

Um... this is just nonsense.

Originally Posted by killdozer

MP3/compressed music quality sucks. But Itunes will sell you an MP3 album for not much less than the price of an album, and if the record industry gets it's way it would have been the self same price! No physical product, no distro cost, no packaging cost. Butthe same price for less quality. THAT is a rip off.

Maybe so. My local corner shop charges an outrageous price for milk; doesn't mean i can just take it without paying. You think (certain) music costs too much? Do without, same as any other commercially available product.

Originally Posted by killdozer

The record industry maintain that you should buy digital copy of a track for your MP3 player. Another for your car, and another for each device you own!

iTunes tracks can be put on five devices legally.

Originally Posted by killdozer

Downloading was a solution to a problem made by the record industry and greedy people (some artists!) by a group of people who were sick of getting ripped off.

How is it being ripped off if you choose to buy something?

Originally Posted by killdozer

A download is not a lost sale, it's a potential fan. A potential gig goer, a potential merchandise buyer.

That may be true in part; certainly a helluva lot of downloads happen that wouldn't have been sales. Some certainly would, pretty hard to quantify accurately I expect.

Originally Posted by killdozer

The rules of the game are changing. Changing not because of music theives, but because of the record industry's short sightedness and greed.

Now this I agree with. films, TV shows, music... even books and magazines could and should be easily available legally where I live, when I want. If that were true I'd probably never steal stuff. As it is I illegally download Lost, Prison Break, BSG... I often download music before I can buy it in a shop... But I also recognise that someone else owns the rights to it and trying to justify stealing it cos at the end of the day I'm too cheap to pay what the person who owns it wants to sell it for wouldn't enter my head. It's convenience rather than price that tends to make me steal stuff - I'm at work when a TV show is on, etc etc. Not that this is any better an excuse, but I'm kidding myself less.

The record companies are doing themselves a great deal of harm by charging more than the market value of music, and yes that's a contributing factor in people turning to "piracy" (I hate that word) but nothing you've said makes it okay.

[MarkMono]

"You're not being ripped off if you agree to it."

I could quite easily believe that this attitude has played a part in how shoddily musicians are treated by record labels today.

[killdozer]

Originally Posted by djtoast

Bullshit.

Bands sign contracts with labels; no-one puts a gun to their head and forces them to; it may seem that once they're successful that they "deserve" a bigger slice of the rewards, but hell, they shoulda negotiated a better deal then. Whining about it after the fact gets very little sympathy from me.

It's not about a "bigger" slice. It's about any slice. There are some bands who will only see a tiny amount of cash off the back of some very good sales. Further, the record companies don't always do what they say they will, and can also enforce certain "exceptional" exclusions and penalties at the drop of a hat.

It's also kind of hard to negotiate better deals with companies that operate price fixing cartels. This isn't like buying a used car.

Originally Posted by djtoast

Um... this is just nonsense.

Care to explain why, or is it simply because you say so?

Originally Posted by djtoast

Maybe so. My local corner shop charges an outrageous price for milk; doesn't mean i can just take it without paying. You think (certain) music costs too much? Do without, same as any other commercially available product.

With regard to your analogy, it doesn't work. You have choice in that market. With CD/music sales you don't. THEY OPERATE PRICE FIXING CARTELS! THIS MEANS THAT YOU DON"T HAVE CHOICE! (Or at least didn't)
Futher, in fact people *have* came up with an alternative to being ripped off. Downloading!

You are thinking the way the record companies want you to think - that there is only the "traditional" way of buying music - ie the old fashioned cartel way, the "my way or the highway". That mode of thought and indeed system of arguing a point is a red herring.

In some other countries (Japan for example and, I think, Canada), a tax is levied on all media players. Downloading via p2p isn't illegal, you can download as much as you wish, and the tax is divvied between mechanical copyright collection agencies for distribution to the rights holders.

This is a scenario that the record companies have fought tooth and nail against in the countries where they hold political infuence. The UK and US in particular. Why? Because they are utterly backward looking and it takes the means to control prices out of their hands.

Put simply, if the record companies don't like the revenues they are pulling in they are at liberty to give it up and start a new venture. Human trafficking maybe, prostitution rings, you know, things they know and are good at - namely exploitation.

Originally Posted by djtoast

iTunes tracks can be put on five devices legally.

Wow....A whole 5! Thanks very much Apple! what if I have 6 devices? You are still thinking "old" style. You are thinking the way the record companies want you to think.

Is it wrong to rip a CD to your hard disk? By your reckoning it must be, as in this country we have no rights to make back ups of our media. It's morally OK if I fly to the US though, or France. Just when I bring the tracks across the border it's theft...yes?

And please, iTunes is held up as the shining light of DRM'd music! With some services you get to copy it to one device. What about also the Microsoft "Plays For Sure" DRM schema, where in fact now the music you have bought is unable to be played on *anything* since their new music initiative came into being and they withdrew the licence. Or indeed the Virigin music service that announced your legally bought tracks would time out? Is that just? Is that right? It's legal. Or the services like Napster where the tunes you buy run our when you cease your monthly subscription?

Originally Posted by djtoast

How is it being ripped off if you choose to buy something?

If you ever looked at a record contract you would see that it's not that simple. They are very, very complex documents. A lawyer is needed to decipher most of it and even then it's extremely complex. Bands are at the mercy of poor advice and sometimes simply very dubious contract stipulations.

For example - a band I know who have had heavy rotation on MTV and yet years in were still "losing" money looked into, at great expense, why they were still in debt to the record label and living hand to mouth - When they signed the contract there were two differing royalty amounts, one for "standard" priced CD's and another for "discount" rate CD's. This bands full priced releases were being classified as discount rate and thus only qualifying for a far smaller royalty payment. Why? The record label set a much higher than normal "standard" rate for a certain number of bands, and they would then "discount" this rate for sales to distro's. This meant, despite the CD's costing full RRP price they qualified for discount rates. The band remained impoverished.

They announced the intention to challenge this legally, they have a pretty much water tight case, the problem is that their access to money to fund the case is significanty less than the record company's and basically by a process of delaying and legal clarification they managed to hold off until the band ran out of money to prosecute the case. No money? No case. The are owed a *lot* of money. Money they will never see.

Originally Posted by djtoast

That may be true in part; certainly a helluva lot of downloads happen that wouldn't have been sales. Some certainly would, pretty hard to quantify accurately I expect.

And would they have been sales if there was no downloading? I doubt it. People now like to "graze" in music. Test the water. I think thats an opportunity, rather than a restriction. And record company figures do nothing to make me doubt that. They don't have the first clue exactly how downloads are affecting music sales.
Sales in the 70's fell precipitously. For, I think, much the same reasons as they are falling now. The range of music being released has fallen significantly. The volume of "clone" music has grown exponentially, just as it did with disco music in the 70's.

Originally Posted by djtoast

Now this I agree with. films, TV shows, music... even books and magazines could and should be easily available legally where I live, when I want. If that were true I'd probably never steal stuff. As it is I illegally download Lost, Prison Break, BSG... I often download music before I can buy it in a shop... But I also recognise that someone else owns the rights to it and trying to justify stealing it cos at the end of the day I'm too cheap to pay what the person who owns it wants to sell it for wouldn't enter my head. It's convenience rather than price that tends to make me steal stuff - I'm at work when a TV show is on, etc etc. Not that this is any better an excuse, but I'm kidding myself less.

I'm sorry, you are wrong in assuming that what you are doing is morally questionable or is theft. Like I say, there are a number of methods that the "rights holders" could get payment for your actions, and in some countries they do. The problem is that they don't want payment. They want the genie back in the bottle and the bad internet to go away. That way they can go back to price fixing, regionalisation and control.

I'm not a big downloader. But that's because I'm discerning. I hate television. I "test" music out. Like I say, if I like it I buy it. If I won't listen to it I delete it and forget about it. I'm not going to regard myself as a thief for not paying for something I don't like.

Much of the current industrial scene is dodgy and image driven - straight teeth in your mouth are more important than the words coming out of it. Ooh! makeup!

When a system is epressly set up to disavantage you unfairly, it's not wrong to redress that balance.

Originally Posted by djtoast

The record companies are doing themselves a great deal of harm by charging more than the market value of music, and yes that's a contributing factor in people turning to "piracy" (I hate that word) but nothing you've said makes it okay.

In this country you don't have rights, but in France you do. It's okay to do it in France but not in this country? Is that what you are saying? I travel to the US a fair bit, is it "okay" to rip my CD's when on US soil? What about when i bring those tracks back here? The main thrust of your argument is that it's illegal in this country therefore it's wrong. Or are you referring to social acceptability? If so, you've already lost in the court of public opinion.

A download is *only* a lost sale in the eyes of the record company. They have no, repeat, no empirical evidence to back this stance up. Statistically, a drop in CD sales is irrelevant as they have no alternative figures to see what would happen in the absence of the internet.

They (the record companies and RIAA etc) are philistines. They are frauds and money junkies. Nothing more. They have systematically tried to destroy music and enslave musicians and artists. And then cry bitter tears when something affects their monopoly and threatens to empower artists?

This is a control issue and a money issue. Nothing more.

Sorry, one other thing djtoast,

The artist whose lyrics you quote?

He disagrees with you.

Further, the image with the lyrics you use is, technically, a breach of copyright. How do you sleep at night? Haven't you seen the record company's attempts to shut down lyric sites under the DMCA (digital millenium copyright act)? Ironically, TVT were one of the labels seeking this injunction.

[UncleDave]

Please allow me to regale you with a couple of interesting anecdotes, take them as you will.

Firstly, their web page has changed since seeing this so I cant recall exactly what they said, but Stuck Mojo released their latest album for free download. Their FAQ said something along the lines of the following:

Q: Why are you giving your songs away for free?
A: Our label sometimes takes pretty much ALL our cut of the profits from CD sales. When they dont, they drag their heels paying us our share, and sometimes just dont bother paying us at all. We've been giving our music away for free for years, this time our fans just dont have to pay someone else for it!

Secondly, there once was a product by Apple. Again, I dont recall all the details and I'm hoping you'll either take my word for it or look it up yourself, I'm sure the info is online somewhere. It was i a shrinkwrap box, with the standard disclaimer saying that use of software (or perhaps even just opening the shrinkwrap) meant agreeing to the terms within. Unfortunately the terms were so restrictive that they did not allow ANY data from the CD to be copied to any other storage media. This included the hard disk on which the software itself wanted to install. It was quite literally impossible to use the software legally, because of the license agreement that the company expected us to agree to.

As I say, they may not prove any points, but just provided here as food for thought.

Oh and one last thing. ANyone who uses words like 'theft' or 'stealing' is playing into the hands of the likes of the RIAA and spreading their own propaganda. In a legal sense, copyright infringment simply is not theft. It might be OK to call it theft if you're not discussing the law, but even then it's furthering the RIAA's agenda.

Cheers.

[Effigy]

So fundamental point is that you (killdozer) object to the way the music industry/record labels etc treats artists?
And your solution to this is to download artists material without paying for it, therefore reducing the revenue created and giving record labels a further excuse to take larger cuts of what they have sold in order to cover what they will argue to be 'fixed costs' in developing/producing/marketing and releasing artists work.
Cunning plan mate, really gonna hurt the labels and obviously not going to damage the bands in any way whatsoever.
Basically you're just trying to excuse the fact that you think you're entitled to access to something without paying for it. If you then deem it worthy by your standards, you'll lower yourself to making some sort of financial acknowledgement of the work that went into providing you with it in the first place.
So does this apply to all commercial goods (cos lets cut to the chase and admit thats what music is when its provided in a business sense) or are you selective about who and which companies you rip off?
Following your logic I'm entitled to drop into Tesco today, stuff my face with whatever food I like the look of and then decide whether or not to pay for it. I'm sure they wouldnt have an objection to that. And just cos you're doing your rip-off from in front of a keyboard, dont try to make out its any different. You may as well go into HMV and fill a bag with cd's. At least have the guts to admit you're damagaing the livelihoods of the artists you so elloquently claim to be acting in support of.
You believe that music should be available for all without big business getting in the way of it? Try busking. Maybe then you'll get the respect and financial reward you deserve without feeling abused.

So you're in a band and know the problem from the inside? Fair play, you're a step ahead of me there.
But how does it work for you? Are you signed to a label? Do you release through your own label? Or do you just give it away for free? Would you object to me downloading it, passing it round all my friends and then telling you to fuck off if you asked me to pay for it? Take it the logical conclusion of your argument that everyone who wants to hear your stuff gets it for free from the net, where does that leave you? Or are you happy to creat music in your spare time and never get any financial recovery for it? If so I'll shake you by the hand and wish you all the best, cos you're a better person thatn any other musician out there.

Personally though, so far it sounds like sour grapes from someone who's not made a million out of the industry and just wants to get his own back at the big bad boogeyman who denied him his rock n' roll lifestyle.

Fuck it though, life's too short and people are never going to agree on this subject.
Believe it or not, I hope things go well for your band and you prove me wrong.
No hard feelings for not seeing eye-to-eye, keeps life interesting.