The old copyright thing again

In this section, you can talk relaxedly about everyday matters, and also engage in more serious discussions. Please try to keep this place accessible to everyone and write your posts in English.
Message
Author
User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

Re: The old copyright thing again

#101 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 25 Jul 2010 16:34

Desert_Storm wrote:And because this is, after all, a forum and supposed to be fun: Click here for a nice piece that is not only ingenious from the musical point of view (it's an a-capella fugue [multiple voices entering at different points of the piece and running simultaneously] and one of the very few post-Bach fugues I like [it's actually much better than Glenn Gould's attempt], but that's getting OT), but also fits in nicely with our discussion from the lyrical point. It's about a young musician called Johnny Virgil and his attempt to make it in the music business. This particular track is subtitled "The dance of the A&R men", and shows different label guys trying to talk him into signing the contract with them.
Because the lyrics are quite hard (sometimes near impossible) to understand due to the fugue structure of the song, click here to read them. They are arranged quite nicely on that side and are shifted in each time a new voice enters. Pay attention to the background vocals during the chorus (My name is Johnny Virgil...). Favourite line in the lyrics:

"Hi, Joe, about publicity
Thought about the photo op with the cripple
No, we need a sharper hook - like a scandal
Maybe you could rape a nun
Or better still a priest
Some androgeny could be interesting"

The track is called "Suit Fugue", and it's taken from Kevin Gilbert's album "The shaming of the True", which is a concept album dealing about this guy Virgil trying to get into the business. If you don't know Gilbert yet, try the album or look up his live performance of Genesis' "The Lamb lies down on Broadway". Have fun :)
Thanks for the tip. I'll download it right away.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
Desert_Storm
Posts: 784
Joined: 20 Jun 2004 13:13
Location: Zürich/Vienna
Contact:

Re: The old copyright thing again

#102 Post by Desert_Storm » 16 Aug 2010 02:52

What a lovely surprise, making fun of me without saying anything to any arguments brought up. That's most certainly what discussion is all about, or the nearest you can reach.
Talking about growing up, are we?
I, too, am a neat guy. And I, too, am just a love machine
Also, a stupid europeoid with snake primitive language

User avatar
Bender B. Rodriguez
Posts: 1942
Joined: 06 Oct 2003 15:13
Location: Anywhere but the "Sanctuary"..because i'm banned from that place (Santiago de Chile)

Re: The old copyright thing again

#103 Post by Bender B. Rodriguez » 16 Aug 2010 03:24

sheesh,lighten up.
☢ ☢ ☢ all hail the deathweed ☢ ☢ ☢

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

Re: The old copyright thing again

#104 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 16 Aug 2010 17:19

Indeed. Besides, the last posts in the thread added little new information or viewpoints to the argument.

I propose we approach it from a different angle. We already concluded that copyright is quite silly to begin with and also concluded that it doesn't actually hurt that many artists in the wallet, just the recordlabel. Now, let's accept for a fact that downloading will never go away (because it won't). What would the music industry have to do to adapt to the new demands from the audience?
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

Re: The old copyright thing again

#105 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 30 Aug 2010 18:17

No ideas? Oh well. I came across this article, which tells a really good story. This is actually why the recordcompanies are so much against the internet. If artists are able to make this amounts of money by selling their stuff directly to the fans, they're done for.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200911 ... 7011.shtml

So please, keep this in mind the next time you read about some organisation funded by the recordcompanies complaining about how bad downloaders are.

After all, recordcompanies are super-serial about this, downloading is just as dangerous as manbearpig.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

Re: The old copyright thing again

#106 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 11 Dec 2010 19:54

Necropost. Below story is nothing short of unbelievable: EMI uploads, then sues.
EMI Promotes Music on ‘Piracy Haven’ RapidShare
Written by Ernesto on December 04, 2010

Record labels are not always acting honestly when it comes to file-sharing. In public they often condemn BitTorrent sites and file-hosting services, but behind the scenes they sometimes use the same tools to promote their artists. This has become painfully obvious in the ongoing court case between EMI and MP3tunes where evidence was provided that the record label posted tracks on the ‘piracy haven’ RapidShare.

emiIt is no secret that BitTorrent and other file-sharing sites and networks are used as a marketing tool by the entertainment industry.

TV-industry insiders have admitted to uploading shows to BitTorrent in advance to generate buzz, and bands do the same even though they have a hard time admitting it.

Aside from using file-sharing sites to bring attention to new material, they are also used by the music industry to make critical business decisions. As we’ve shown in the past from leaked information, record labels use ‘illicit’ download statistics to determine what singles to put out next.

Although file-sharing networks are clearly seen as a valuable marketing tool, the entertainment industry prefers not to admit this in public and especially not in courts, where they have to convince judges how evil these sites are and that piracy is in fact killing their industry. This can sometimes lead to embarrassing situations of which we have a brand new example today.

In the ongoing battle of RIAA record label EMI against music search engine MP3tunes, a recent court filing reveals that EMI was actively marketing their music on RapidShare. Interesting, yes, but also quite embarrassing since EMI was labelling RapidShare as a known ‘Piracy Haven’ in the same case.

“In defense of the Sideload.com music search engine, MP3tunes told the court that EMI promoted bands by distributing free MP3s online. EMI told the Judge our position was ‘pure fantasy’ claiming that EMI never distributes free MP3 songs online,” Michael Robertson of MP3tunes told TorrentFreak.

“Thanks to our users we quickly amassed a list of more than 1400 such fantasy EMI songs that were available online and in depositions they finally admitted they put free songs online so they would spread ‘virally’,” Robertson added.

Faced with this new evidence EMI decided to change its position and argue that MP3tunes’ website Sideload was linking to ‘suspect’ places such as RapidShare. However, this was not a particularly strong argument as the defending party had evidence that EMI was using the file-hosting service to market tracks from their own artists, including their best selling act Coldplay.

“They say we link to RapidShare which they called a known haven of piracy. However we uncovered internal emails where EMI themselves put songs on RapidShare and sent emails to others instructing them to download them from RapidShare. With EMI spreading files far and wide, their experts grudgingly admit that it’s impossible to tell which links are authorized and which are not,” Robertson said.
Claimed evidence that EMI used Rapidshare to promote tracks

mp3

The text above is taken from page 9 of a recent court filing. Unfortunately all the juicy details about EMI’s use of RapidShare are “filed under seal” since the record label claims they are corporate secrets and as such can’t be made available to the public.

In the sealed document, MP3tunes’ lawyer refers to an EMI employee placing music on RapidShare and sending emails to bloggers and marketers telling them to get the song from the file-hoster, TorrentFreak was told. This is of course a painful revelation for EMI as they themselves claim that RapidShare is a piracy haven, blaming MP3tunes for linking to it.

EMI is maintaining a double standard when it comes to file-sharing sites, to say the least. It seems that they themselves can use the service to promote their artists, but as soon as others make this information accessible they try to shut them down in court – a repeat of the same file-sharing hypocrisy we’ve seen in the past.
http://torrentfreak.com/emi-promotes-mu ... re-101204/
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
Andreas
Posts: 4533
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 18:09
Location: Potsdam, Germany

Re: The old copyright thing again

#107 Post by Andreas » 14 Dec 2010 01:01

Why would it be unbelievable? If you can get away with it...

...but it didn't work

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests