23 ms·

Hello Downloader

267 points by alainbryden 14y ago

pwny 14y ago
Doing it right!
pkteison 14y ago
No company scores any points with me by starting out by greeting me as a "pseudo-criminal".
- elliottcarlson 14y ago
  Assuming that this readme is included with torrents of the music being downloaded, then it would be accurate.
  - _delirium 14y ago
    If they seeeded the torrents, though (which would seem to be the only way they could actually get this file into a torrent?), wouldn't it be legal, since you're downloading it from the copyright holder, who has given implicit permission by making it publicly available on a torrent?
- coderdude 14y ago
  'Pirate' though, that one sounds cool so we'll accept it. Seriously? They are implying by that greeting that it is not them who would label you as such a thing. Moreover it sounds like they've had it up to here with the major labels and distribution outlets who would call you an actual criminal and mean it. Also, don't kid yourself. It is a crime (morally wrong, if not outright encoded in law) to download someone else's work for free so that you can enjoy it without paying a dime to anyone (even the artist), unless they're giving it away. You don't even see that page unless you tried to acquire their artists' work for free.
  - tomp 14y ago
    > morally wrong, if not outright encoded in law I'd say exactly the oposite. It's illegal (= prohibited by law), but might not be morally wrong - I don't feel bad for downloading movies/music when any of the following are met: (i) the content is not readily available (e.g. movies right after release, movies and music in non-G6 countries) (ii) the content is of shitty quality or atmosphere (e.g. low bitrate, CDs, cinemas) (iii) I would not pay for content (i.e. even if it were readily available in supreme quality, I would rather not have it than buy it) (e.g. albums that I'm not sure are good).
    - coderdude 14y ago
      This is where most people really start to bicker about this issue. There is the group that understands that it is morally wrong to steal, and then there is the group that does mental gymnastics to get out of "feeling bad" about it or to otherwise justify it somehow. You even end it with "I would not pay for content [...]." If that isn't outright just saying "yeah I steal and I don't care" then I don't know what is.
      - tomp 14y ago
        I guess the issue is elsewhere - there is a group of people that think that copying is the same as stealing, and there is the group that can see the difference. I belong to the second group. Let me try to explain it to you... Would you rather that I stole your car, or just copy it?
        coderdude 14y ago
        That doesn't even make sense. Stealing is stealing regardless of whether it's something physical or something digital. Just because humans invented a new way for things to exist doesn't mean that products in that form aren't being stolen when you acquire them for free by downloading them off the The Pirate Bay.
        tomp 14y ago
- nicholassmith 14y ago
  Actually I think it's a reference to the traditional mainstream accusation that pirates are all these degenerate criminals lurking to steal your laptop to feed their mp3 addiction.
- tbundy 14y ago
  Yep, pretty sure they're being facetious.
- alainbryden 14y ago
  The original document was included with a torrent and that greeting was intended to be tongue-in-cheek.
- darrenkopp 14y ago
  Remember, this isn't a blog post, it's intended as a stop for people who were downloading the album without paying, which is illegal.
- mikecane 14y ago
  >>>No company scores any points with me by starting out by greeting me as a "pseudo-criminal". The tongue-in-cheek of that didn't register? He wasn't being insulting. He was using the terms the music industry itself uses. And the "pseudo" preceding "criminal" should have been seen as tongue-in-cheek in that context.
akie 14y ago
I like it. I would be interested in seeing if this works for them.
- meatsock 14y ago
  using cheeky viral memes have been in the flashbulb's m.o. from the beginning - in fact he got some good press and buzz when he originally uploaded his album with this disclaimer to filesharing sites upon it's release four years ago. imo the piracy angle is downplayed because he makes most of his income from television commercial jingles for unilever and verizon.
- lis 14y ago
  I doubt that it will work. People who are willing to donate money to a band are much more likely to buy the album, instead of downloading it. That's how they want to show their support.
- alainbryden 14y ago
  It happened 4 years ago, and the guy's not rich, but this model supported him enough to release 7 full length albums since, and do quite a few concerts. Furthermore, his attitude towards the music industry (and fantastic creativity in music and other things) gained him a bit of a cult following.
killercup 14y ago
Very nice. This may be weird, but I totally enjoyed reading this. However, I'm actually surprised they didn't mention their Bandcamp presence[1], where I bought something a few month ago and was very pleased with the experience. But then again, I don't know from when the "Hello Downloader" document is. [1]: http://alphabasic.bandcamp.com/ http://alphabasic.bandcamp.com/
- alainbryden 14y ago
  I first saw it when I downloaded Soundtrack to a Vacant Life in 2008. I believe the Bandcamp was only added in the last couple of years.
- 5vforest 14y ago
  It's worth noting that this album, (and thus, the page we're talking about) was released in 2008.
  - microtherion 14y ago
    And it appears that the legal dispute with Apple that the page refers to was also settled in some way in early 2008 (The details are unclear; all the verbiage the author has produced about his dispute with various entities in the music industry appears maddeningly incoherent and vague to me).
babarock 14y ago
Honestly, I don't think the 'donate' model is a viable one. Sure you can make some money off of it, but that cannot be the norm. I think. Maybe (hopefully) I'm wrong. Now don't get me wrong, I think that selling music in the internet age is a fundamentally broken model, so much more than the donate one. At a time where distributing media is as simple as one click, trying to make money off of distribution is just wrong. Take into account how widespread internet access is today, and do the most basic ecnomical analysis, take "Porter five force" for instance and you'll quickly realize how non-viable this model is. Labels who act as middle men between the artist and their audience might have been needed 20 years ago, but today, what are their added values? Now, if I do not believe that selling music is profitable, that doesn't mean that musicians cannot make money. Here's a simple business model for you: Make money off concerts and use your records as promotion units. Give your music away for free, hope for success, give a concert, make money. Labels want to scare you into thinking that their distribution model is the only guarantee that music/art will survive. Let's not forget that musicians existed and made money long, very long before technology allowed businessmen in suits to make money off of them.
- _delirium 14y ago
  In addition to concerts, merchandise is fairly successful for some artists. As the linked essay alludes to, a lot of music fans buy albums these days not for the music on them (which they may already have digitally), but for either collector-type reasons, or artwork-type reasons. So just selling them various kinds of artwork and collectibles can be a viable business model. I think the distribution of rewards will be a bit different than the traditional one, though, which may be good or bad. Casual listeners aren't great for monetizing via merchandize. You either need a good base of real fans, people who want to wear your band's shirt, have an album-cover print on their wall, own the special limited-edition whatever; or else you need to appeal to a genre/niche with a strong collectors' market (or both).
- Navarr 14y ago
  New business model: Kickstarter for songs.
  - 14y ago
tbundy 14y ago
I once tried to buy a digital album from a local band, without using iTunes (just don't like it). After searching around (which, to Benn's point, probably took longer than illegally downloading) I found it listed on Amazon. After I downloaded their ridiculous download software (just give me a zip?), I got right up to paying, when I was told that they were not licensed to sell to countries outside the US. Great. I can't buy my country's own product on Amazon. Nice one music industry. At that point I gave up.
ginko 14y ago
This reminds me of the game Darwinia by Introversion. This happened years ago. After hearing about it and trying the demo, I downloaded what I thought was the full copy over a P2P network. The downloaded game behaved like the full copy and contained the first 2 levels as far as I remember. After that came a sequence spoken by the scientist that went a bit like "Let's be honest. You and I know that this isn't a legal copy and I don't blame you." and went on about how supporting the developers was important. After that no further levels could be played. Introversion seems to have leaked this version on P2P networks themselves. I bought the full copy a short while later. It's strange that I have yet to find any online sources or Youtube videos about this on the web. I guess no one wants to admit having pirated Darwinia.
- alainbryden 14y ago
  I had no need to pirate Darwinia when I got it for 5$ in the Humble Introversion Bundle, along with 6 other games. (Could have gotten it for 1 cent).
  - ginko 14y ago
    My story was in 2005. 6 years before the humble bundle.
    - alainbryden 14y ago
      Ah, didn't know it was such an old game. Well in any event, thanks for sharing. While plenty of people will admit to downloading music and videos, not so many outside of the UG community admit to games. Maybe as developers, we're more wary of resentment from our colleagues which are more likely to feel harmed by our actions.
      - Tomis02 14y ago
        > thanks for sharing Such a poor choice of words.
RivieraKid 14y ago
Why don't musicians just decline to license their music if they get tiny share? Can't they create some sort of union that would give them bigger negotiating power? Or just sell the music on the internet? I wonder why market mechanics don't work here.
- tomp 14y ago
  Because they usually licence their music before they become famous. Contrary to popular belief, music labels are NOT (for the most part) middle-men (i.e. content distributors). In reality, they are INVESTORS. They bet on a number of artists (providing them with managers, tour opportunities, studios, promotion), and only a small number succeed. It's actually quite reasonable for them to expect a huge payoff (= a large cut of the profits) from the ones who do.
  - netfire 14y ago
    The current model seems unnecessary with the internet though. Seems like artists, if they are good, should be able to become famous selling their music direct to consumer through some distribution service like iTunes without a long term contract. Once someone has made a name for themselves, it would seem perfectly reasonable for a label or a venue to approach them about doing a concert or a tour and taking a cut of the proceeds. Perhaps the problem is that bands or artists want to fast-track their road to fame. In signing with a label, it seems like they are giving up a lot to get there faster. The question is, can artists who are willing to work their way up more slowly or organically able to, or are certain doors closed because they aren't signed with a label?
    - tomp 14y ago
      Distribution and getting listeners/fans is only a part of the problem... Getting a studio and a professional to edit your music is the real cost that new artists have to deal with. I have a friend that makes music on a computer!!! and he's been wanting to produce a professional recording for more than a year (needs $$$ for studio/editing/mixing/I-have-no-idea-what).
zampano 14y ago
I have no idea if what he's trying to do here will actually work out for him, but I went ahead and donated $5 because I have to respect him for at least trying.
dmix 14y ago
The album mentioned in the post "Soundtrack To A Vacant Life" came out a couple of years ago. So this post might be old. Also, that's an excellent electronic/idm album to work to.
- zevyoura 14y ago
  Yeah, this text file was included with torrents that Benn Jordan (the guy behind The Flashbulb and the founder of Alpha Basic Records) "leaked" himself to trackers when the album was first released. I'm surprised to see it get so much attention years later.
  - Skroob 14y ago
    That explains the complaint about DRM-ed downloads. I don't believe that's true anymore for any of the major services.
    - Morg 14y ago
      What's the difference, they're all still trying to ask ten times what they'll give the artists, for no reason and while taking 30% profit on a download that's at most worth one ad showing.
uptown 14y ago
Before they determine who stole their music, they should figure out who stole their stylesheet.
- acuozzo 14y ago
  > Before they determine who stole their music, they should figure out who stole their stylesheet. What's wrong with the current style?
sdfjkl 14y ago
This is exactly the way I want to buy media and other "soft" goods. I wish it was widely adopted already. I want to know what I'm buying and iTunes previews, shareware trials, demo versions, movie trailers or what have you aren't nearly good enough to decide if I like something or not. Or someone just drags an MP3 on my Skype icon: "Hey, did you hear this song? It's really good!" -- "Wow, yes it is." (I'm a naughty pirate now, but if it weren't for piracy I'd never have listened to that song). So when I do find something I really like, be that music, software or a TV show, I often _want_ to give the creators some cash. And it's incredibly frustrating to do that. Maybe the band is on iTunes, but that album with the nice song isn't (and as they pointed out, you'd end up giving cash to people who contributed nothing to the process of creating the stuff you like). Or the movie isn't available as digital download and you're supposed to buy a little plastic box with a disc in it that you have to dust off regularly and modern computers don't even have a slot for anymore. Plus, you already have the damn thing anyways, so all you really want to do is throw some money at people to show that you appreciate their work and want them to be able to pay the rent so they can keep making cool stuff. So why not make it as easy as possible to give you money? Speaking of easy, my only problem with the above page is that I have a beef with PayPal and would greatly prefer them not profiting from anything I do (well, actually I would prefer for gaping holes to simultaneously open underneath their offices and suck them down straight to an equivalent number of burning, spiked pits in hell, but that's another story). So maybe provide some options here. Other than that, best of luck, and please let us know how it works out.
- rglullis 14y ago
  Out of curiosity, have you used/tried flattr?
  - sdfjkl 14y ago
    I like the idea of Flattr, but I think it lacked the ability to donate a specific amount to a specific person/thing. So it seems to be more of a cash-backed "Like" button, which is nice too, but different from "I feel this Software is worth £40".
- alainbryden 14y ago
mjlyons 14y ago
I'd be much more likely to donate money for a track/album if I had some automatic way of tracking which I had donated to. One way to do this would be a website that let you donate a suggested amount for a song or album. For each song/album you donate towards, you get some signed key that says you supported that song. There's some interesting things that you could build off of this: - Media players could show a little badge whenever you're playing a song you've donated to. They could also remind you (if you wanted) when you listen to a song frequently but haven't supported it. - Hook into Facebook - when someone downloads a song, they can see which of their friends have donated to it. - An additional metric for music suggestion services. What better way to show you like a song than by putting your money where your mouth is?
jlarocco 14y ago
Can somebody explain how a donate button like the one on this page complies with the PayPal TOS? I looked into adding one to a site, but the PayPal terms seem to make it pretty clear they're for non-profits or giving money for a specific cause. If you get >$10k in "donations" they can/will even hold your money and require "proof" it's going to the cause you tell people it's going to. I've seen the buttons on a number of sites, and they rarely seem to match up with the PayPal TOS for donations. Does PayPal not enforce that requirement? In my case, I've decided to go with a small, one time signup fee, but I'm still curious.
tomash 14y ago
Excuse the shameless plug, but pages like these ensure me that launching musicrage.org was a good idea.
kittxkat 14y ago
This is why I love bandcamp (for example http://ohdaughter.bandcamp.com/ http://ohdaughter.bandcamp.com/). The first couple of downloads (I don't know how many, maybe the first 100) of a track/album are usually free, and after that you pay for the music. So when you suddenly go all Lady Gaga as an Indie artist you get at least something out of it, but when nobody knows you the can have a free listen. If the free downloads are out, you have to buy the music. Some artists have a steady price like 8-10$ per album or 3-4$ for an EP (which I find very reasonable and am totally willing to pay if it goes directly to the artist, and it mostly does!) and some let you choose the amount you want to pay for the music. And if that wasn't enough, if you have paid for the download, you get the audio files in almost every possible format existing. Ah, bandcamp. Music distributing done right. /edit: Some more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandcamp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandcamp - Pricing model: Set by artists - Available audio formats are MP3, FLAC, AAA (aka .m4a), Vorbis and Apple Lossless and even more - About 4 million songs online, including music from Sufjan Stevens, Amanda Palmer (Dresden Dolls) and Coer de Pirate, and game soundtracks from Minecraft, Machinarium and Plants vs Zombies And last but not least: http://bandcamp.com/faq http://bandcamp.com/faq (yes, they do cover all questions who could possible arise) (And no, I don't work for them. I just love them, as do many others: http://bandcamp.com/testimonials http://bandcamp.com/testimonials)
- elektronaut 14y ago
  As an artist, Bandcamp is fantastic. When someone buys an album, the money goes to our Paypal account immediately. Not only is the sales stats updated in real time, you can even play Defender on the graphs. Other digital retailers like iTunes take months just to get a sales report, let alone get paid. I'd say 90% of our digital revenue comes from Bandcamp, which is surprising.
- Morg 14y ago
  I like the idea, but 10 bucks for an album is a total steal. It's the same price as a CD if you count out one and a half links in the retail chain. It's expensive enough to make one hesitate. IMO it should cost what it brings the artists today, +15% for distribution and everything would be fine, we'd all buy tons of music @ 1.15 bucks a CD and everyone would be happy.
mindstab 14y ago
YES
zobzu 14y ago
Heh I know. Donate isn't a very good model. Etc. I don't even especially like their music. But I clicked the link. I read it. No fancy HTML. Strong points. So I clicked donate anyway. It might not be much, it won't last, and I wont donate to them every month, but hey, for me it's more of a way to say "I support your point of view".
bobsy 14y ago
I am surprised more labels aren't doing this. How much is a label spending combating piracy? How many labels have actually prevented an album become available via bit-torrent? Few albums actually flop because they can be pirated. I think a viable strategy is for the label themselves to upload the album with a message like this. Its going to be pirated anyway. These people aren't going to go to iTunes or buy the CD. Why not just have a simple message which says something like: "If you enjoyed this album please consider making a donation to the artist. The artist will receive 85% of your donation. The other 15% helps cover the cost of production." I mean, its worth a shot isn't it.
cm-t 14y ago
Framablog, a blog about free software, net neutrality and popularizy these philosophie just published a french translated version http://www.framablog.org/index.php/post/2012/05/24/salut-a-toi-pirate http://www.framablog.org/index.php/post/2012/05/24/salut-a-t...

Hello Downloader

267 points by alainbryden 14y ago

pwny 14y ago

Doing it right!

pkteison 14y ago

No company scores any points with me by starting out by greeting me as a "pseudo-criminal".

elliottcarlson 14y ago
Assuming that this readme is included with torrents of the music being downloaded, then it would be accurate.
- _delirium 14y ago
  If they seeeded the torrents, though (which would seem to be the only way they could actually get this file into a torrent?), wouldn't it be legal, since you're downloading it from the copyright holder, who has given implicit permission by making it publicly available on a torrent?
coderdude 14y ago
'Pirate' though, that one sounds cool so we'll accept it. Seriously? They are implying by that greeting that it is not them who would label you as such a thing. Moreover it sounds like they've had it up to here with the major labels and distribution outlets who would call you an actual criminal and mean it. Also, don't kid yourself. It is a crime (morally wrong, if not outright encoded in law) to download someone else's work for free so that you can enjoy it without paying a dime to anyone (even the artist), unless they're giving it away. You don't even see that page unless you tried to acquire their artists' work for free.
- tomp 14y ago
  > morally wrong, if not outright encoded in law I'd say exactly the oposite. It's illegal (= prohibited by law), but might not be morally wrong - I don't feel bad for downloading movies/music when any of the following are met: (i) the content is not readily available (e.g. movies right after release, movies and music in non-G6 countries) (ii) the content is of shitty quality or atmosphere (e.g. low bitrate, CDs, cinemas) (iii) I would not pay for content (i.e. even if it were readily available in supreme quality, I would rather not have it than buy it) (e.g. albums that I'm not sure are good).
  - coderdude 14y ago
    This is where most people really start to bicker about this issue. There is the group that understands that it is morally wrong to steal, and then there is the group that does mental gymnastics to get out of "feeling bad" about it or to otherwise justify it somehow. You even end it with "I would not pay for content [...]." If that isn't outright just saying "yeah I steal and I don't care" then I don't know what is.
    - tomp 14y ago
      I guess the issue is elsewhere - there is a group of people that think that copying is the same as stealing, and there is the group that can see the difference. I belong to the second group. Let me try to explain it to you... Would you rather that I stole your car, or just copy it?
      - coderdude 14y ago
        That doesn't even make sense. Stealing is stealing regardless of whether it's something physical or something digital. Just because humans invented a new way for things to exist doesn't mean that products in that form aren't being stolen when you acquire them for free by downloading them off the The Pirate Bay.
        tomp 14y ago
nicholassmith 14y ago
Actually I think it's a reference to the traditional mainstream accusation that pirates are all these degenerate criminals lurking to steal your laptop to feed their mp3 addiction.
tbundy 14y ago
Yep, pretty sure they're being facetious.
alainbryden 14y ago
The original document was included with a torrent and that greeting was intended to be tongue-in-cheek.
darrenkopp 14y ago
Remember, this isn't a blog post, it's intended as a stop for people who were downloading the album without paying, which is illegal.
mikecane 14y ago
>>>No company scores any points with me by starting out by greeting me as a "pseudo-criminal". The tongue-in-cheek of that didn't register? He wasn't being insulting. He was using the terms the music industry itself uses. And the "pseudo" preceding "criminal" should have been seen as tongue-in-cheek in that context.

akie 14y ago

I like it. I would be interested in seeing if this works for them.

meatsock 14y ago
using cheeky viral memes have been in the flashbulb's m.o. from the beginning - in fact he got some good press and buzz when he originally uploaded his album with this disclaimer to filesharing sites upon it's release four years ago. imo the piracy angle is downplayed because he makes most of his income from television commercial jingles for unilever and verizon.
lis 14y ago
I doubt that it will work. People who are willing to donate money to a band are much more likely to buy the album, instead of downloading it. That's how they want to show their support.
alainbryden 14y ago
It happened 4 years ago, and the guy's not rich, but this model supported him enough to release 7 full length albums since, and do quite a few concerts. Furthermore, his attitude towards the music industry (and fantastic creativity in music and other things) gained him a bit of a cult following.

killercup 14y ago

Very nice. This may be weird, but I totally enjoyed reading this. However, I'm actually surprised they didn't mention their Bandcamp presence[1], where I bought something a few month ago and was very pleased with the experience. But then again, I don't know from when the "Hello Downloader" document is. [1]: http://alphabasic.bandcamp.com/ http://alphabasic.bandcamp.com/

alainbryden 14y ago
I first saw it when I downloaded Soundtrack to a Vacant Life in 2008. I believe the Bandcamp was only added in the last couple of years.
5vforest 14y ago
It's worth noting that this album, (and thus, the page we're talking about) was released in 2008.
- microtherion 14y ago
  And it appears that the legal dispute with Apple that the page refers to was also settled in some way in early 2008 (The details are unclear; all the verbiage the author has produced about his dispute with various entities in the music industry appears maddeningly incoherent and vague to me).

babarock 14y ago

Honestly, I don't think the 'donate' model is a viable one. Sure you can make some money off of it, but that cannot be the norm. I think. Maybe (hopefully) I'm wrong. Now don't get me wrong, I think that selling music in the internet age is a fundamentally broken model, so much more than the donate one. At a time where distributing media is as simple as one click, trying to make money off of distribution is just wrong. Take into account how widespread internet access is today, and do the most basic ecnomical analysis, take "Porter five force" for instance and you'll quickly realize how non-viable this model is. Labels who act as middle men between the artist and their audience might have been needed 20 years ago, but today, what are their added values? Now, if I do not believe that selling music is profitable, that doesn't mean that musicians cannot make money. Here's a simple business model for you: Make money off concerts and use your records as promotion units. Give your music away for free, hope for success, give a concert, make money. Labels want to scare you into thinking that their distribution model is the only guarantee that music/art will survive. Let's not forget that musicians existed and made money long, very long before technology allowed businessmen in suits to make money off of them.

_delirium 14y ago
In addition to concerts, merchandise is fairly successful for some artists. As the linked essay alludes to, a lot of music fans buy albums these days not for the music on them (which they may already have digitally), but for either collector-type reasons, or artwork-type reasons. So just selling them various kinds of artwork and collectibles can be a viable business model. I think the distribution of rewards will be a bit different than the traditional one, though, which may be good or bad. Casual listeners aren't great for monetizing via merchandize. You either need a good base of real fans, people who want to wear your band's shirt, have an album-cover print on their wall, own the special limited-edition whatever; or else you need to appeal to a genre/niche with a strong collectors' market (or both).
Navarr 14y ago
New business model: Kickstarter for songs.
- 14y ago

tbundy 14y ago

I once tried to buy a digital album from a local band, without using iTunes (just don't like it). After searching around (which, to Benn's point, probably took longer than illegally downloading) I found it listed on Amazon. After I downloaded their ridiculous download software (just give me a zip?), I got right up to paying, when I was told that they were not licensed to sell to countries outside the US. Great. I can't buy my country's own product on Amazon. Nice one music industry. At that point I gave up.

ginko 14y ago

This reminds me of the game Darwinia by Introversion. This happened years ago. After hearing about it and trying the demo, I downloaded what I thought was the full copy over a P2P network. The downloaded game behaved like the full copy and contained the first 2 levels as far as I remember. After that came a sequence spoken by the scientist that went a bit like "Let's be honest. You and I know that this isn't a legal copy and I don't blame you." and went on about how supporting the developers was important. After that no further levels could be played. Introversion seems to have leaked this version on P2P networks themselves. I bought the full copy a short while later. It's strange that I have yet to find any online sources or Youtube videos about this on the web. I guess no one wants to admit having pirated Darwinia.

alainbryden 14y ago
I had no need to pirate Darwinia when I got it for 5$ in the Humble Introversion Bundle, along with 6 other games. (Could have gotten it for 1 cent).
- ginko 14y ago
  My story was in 2005. 6 years before the humble bundle.
  - alainbryden 14y ago
    Ah, didn't know it was such an old game. Well in any event, thanks for sharing. While plenty of people will admit to downloading music and videos, not so many outside of the UG community admit to games. Maybe as developers, we're more wary of resentment from our colleagues which are more likely to feel harmed by our actions.
    - Tomis02 14y ago
      > thanks for sharing Such a poor choice of words.

RivieraKid 14y ago

Why don't musicians just decline to license their music if they get tiny share? Can't they create some sort of union that would give them bigger negotiating power? Or just sell the music on the internet? I wonder why market mechanics don't work here.

tomp 14y ago
Because they usually licence their music before they become famous. Contrary to popular belief, music labels are NOT (for the most part) middle-men (i.e. content distributors). In reality, they are INVESTORS. They bet on a number of artists (providing them with managers, tour opportunities, studios, promotion), and only a small number succeed. It's actually quite reasonable for them to expect a huge payoff (= a large cut of the profits) from the ones who do.
- netfire 14y ago
  The current model seems unnecessary with the internet though. Seems like artists, if they are good, should be able to become famous selling their music direct to consumer through some distribution service like iTunes without a long term contract. Once someone has made a name for themselves, it would seem perfectly reasonable for a label or a venue to approach them about doing a concert or a tour and taking a cut of the proceeds. Perhaps the problem is that bands or artists want to fast-track their road to fame. In signing with a label, it seems like they are giving up a lot to get there faster. The question is, can artists who are willing to work their way up more slowly or organically able to, or are certain doors closed because they aren't signed with a label?
  - tomp 14y ago
    Distribution and getting listeners/fans is only a part of the problem... Getting a studio and a professional to edit your music is the real cost that new artists have to deal with. I have a friend that makes music on a computer!!! and he's been wanting to produce a professional recording for more than a year (needs $$$ for studio/editing/mixing/I-have-no-idea-what).

zampano 14y ago

I have no idea if what he's trying to do here will actually work out for him, but I went ahead and donated $5 because I have to respect him for at least trying.

dmix 14y ago

The album mentioned in the post "Soundtrack To A Vacant Life" came out a couple of years ago. So this post might be old. Also, that's an excellent electronic/idm album to work to.

zevyoura 14y ago
Yeah, this text file was included with torrents that Benn Jordan (the guy behind The Flashbulb and the founder of Alpha Basic Records) "leaked" himself to trackers when the album was first released. I'm surprised to see it get so much attention years later.
- Skroob 14y ago
  That explains the complaint about DRM-ed downloads. I don't believe that's true anymore for any of the major services.
  - Morg 14y ago
    What's the difference, they're all still trying to ask ten times what they'll give the artists, for no reason and while taking 30% profit on a download that's at most worth one ad showing.

uptown 14y ago

Before they determine who stole their music, they should figure out who stole their stylesheet.

acuozzo 14y ago
> Before they determine who stole their music, they should figure out who stole their stylesheet. What's wrong with the current style?

sdfjkl 14y ago

This is exactly the way I want to buy media and other "soft" goods. I wish it was widely adopted already. I want to know what I'm buying and iTunes previews, shareware trials, demo versions, movie trailers or what have you aren't nearly good enough to decide if I like something or not. Or someone just drags an MP3 on my Skype icon: "Hey, did you hear this song? It's really good!" -- "Wow, yes it is." (I'm a naughty pirate now, but if it weren't for piracy I'd never have listened to that song). So when I do find something I really like, be that music, software or a TV show, I often _want_ to give the creators some cash. And it's incredibly frustrating to do that. Maybe the band is on iTunes, but that album with the nice song isn't (and as they pointed out, you'd end up giving cash to people who contributed nothing to the process of creating the stuff you like). Or the movie isn't available as digital download and you're supposed to buy a little plastic box with a disc in it that you have to dust off regularly and modern computers don't even have a slot for anymore. Plus, you already have the damn thing anyways, so all you really want to do is throw some money at people to show that you appreciate their work and want them to be able to pay the rent so they can keep making cool stuff. So why not make it as easy as possible to give you money? Speaking of easy, my only problem with the above page is that I have a beef with PayPal and would greatly prefer them not profiting from anything I do (well, actually I would prefer for gaping holes to simultaneously open underneath their offices and suck them down straight to an equivalent number of burning, spiked pits in hell, but that's another story). So maybe provide some options here. Other than that, best of luck, and please let us know how it works out.

rglullis 14y ago
Out of curiosity, have you used/tried flattr?
- sdfjkl 14y ago
  I like the idea of Flattr, but I think it lacked the ability to donate a specific amount to a specific person/thing. So it seems to be more of a cash-backed "Like" button, which is nice too, but different from "I feel this Software is worth £40".
alainbryden 14y ago

mjlyons 14y ago

I'd be much more likely to donate money for a track/album if I had some automatic way of tracking which I had donated to. One way to do this would be a website that let you donate a suggested amount for a song or album. For each song/album you donate towards, you get some signed key that says you supported that song. There's some interesting things that you could build off of this: - Media players could show a little badge whenever you're playing a song you've donated to. They could also remind you (if you wanted) when you listen to a song frequently but haven't supported it. - Hook into Facebook - when someone downloads a song, they can see which of their friends have donated to it. - An additional metric for music suggestion services. What better way to show you like a song than by putting your money where your mouth is?

jlarocco 14y ago

Can somebody explain how a donate button like the one on this page complies with the PayPal TOS? I looked into adding one to a site, but the PayPal terms seem to make it pretty clear they're for non-profits or giving money for a specific cause. If you get >$10k in "donations" they can/will even hold your money and require "proof" it's going to the cause you tell people it's going to. I've seen the buttons on a number of sites, and they rarely seem to match up with the PayPal TOS for donations. Does PayPal not enforce that requirement? In my case, I've decided to go with a small, one time signup fee, but I'm still curious.

tomash 14y ago

Excuse the shameless plug, but pages like these ensure me that launching musicrage.org was a good idea.

kittxkat 14y ago

This is why I love bandcamp (for example http://ohdaughter.bandcamp.com/ http://ohdaughter.bandcamp.com/). The first couple of downloads (I don't know how many, maybe the first 100) of a track/album are usually free, and after that you pay for the music. So when you suddenly go all Lady Gaga as an Indie artist you get at least something out of it, but when nobody knows you the can have a free listen. If the free downloads are out, you have to buy the music. Some artists have a steady price like 8-10$ per album or 3-4$ for an EP (which I find very reasonable and am totally willing to pay if it goes directly to the artist, and it mostly does!) and some let you choose the amount you want to pay for the music. And if that wasn't enough, if you have paid for the download, you get the audio files in almost every possible format existing. Ah, bandcamp. Music distributing done right. /edit: Some more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandcamp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandcamp - Pricing model: Set by artists - Available audio formats are MP3, FLAC, AAA (aka .m4a), Vorbis and Apple Lossless and even more - About 4 million songs online, including music from Sufjan Stevens, Amanda Palmer (Dresden Dolls) and Coer de Pirate, and game soundtracks from Minecraft, Machinarium and Plants vs Zombies And last but not least: http://bandcamp.com/faq http://bandcamp.com/faq (yes, they do cover all questions who could possible arise) (And no, I don't work for them. I just love them, as do many others: http://bandcamp.com/testimonials http://bandcamp.com/testimonials)

elektronaut 14y ago
As an artist, Bandcamp is fantastic. When someone buys an album, the money goes to our Paypal account immediately. Not only is the sales stats updated in real time, you can even play Defender on the graphs. Other digital retailers like iTunes take months just to get a sales report, let alone get paid. I'd say 90% of our digital revenue comes from Bandcamp, which is surprising.
Morg 14y ago
I like the idea, but 10 bucks for an album is a total steal. It's the same price as a CD if you count out one and a half links in the retail chain. It's expensive enough to make one hesitate. IMO it should cost what it brings the artists today, +15% for distribution and everything would be fine, we'd all buy tons of music @ 1.15 bucks a CD and everyone would be happy.

mindstab 14y ago

YES

zobzu 14y ago

Heh I know. Donate isn't a very good model. Etc. I don't even especially like their music. But I clicked the link. I read it. No fancy HTML. Strong points. So I clicked donate anyway. It might not be much, it won't last, and I wont donate to them every month, but hey, for me it's more of a way to say "I support your point of view".

bobsy 14y ago

I am surprised more labels aren't doing this. How much is a label spending combating piracy? How many labels have actually prevented an album become available via bit-torrent? Few albums actually flop because they can be pirated. I think a viable strategy is for the label themselves to upload the album with a message like this. Its going to be pirated anyway. These people aren't going to go to iTunes or buy the CD. Why not just have a simple message which says something like: "If you enjoyed this album please consider making a donation to the artist. The artist will receive 85% of your donation. The other 15% helps cover the cost of production." I mean, its worth a shot isn't it.

cm-t 14y ago

Framablog, a blog about free software, net neutrality and popularizy these philosophie just published a french translated version http://www.framablog.org/index.php/post/2012/05/24/salut-a-toi-pirate http://www.framablog.org/index.php/post/2012/05/24/salut-a-t...