5 ms·

I'm wondering if the backlash might actually be a good thing. If this sort of backlash becomes common, there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with

I'm wondering if the backlash might actually be a good thing. If this sort of backlash becomes common, there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense. Perhaps the system will adapt such that prosecutions like this would be eliminated.

aes256 14y ago
> If this sort of backlash becomes common, there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense. Unfortunately this is the last thing on artists' minds when they're about to sign a deal with a record label, and that isn't going to change anytime soon.
- algorias 14y ago
  That's true, but established artists might have some leverage. If they get fed up enough, they will start looking for alternatives.
potkor 14y ago
Latest spin from the .fi copyright mafia is "this demonstrates how we need legislation enabling softer measures for enforcement", cue 3 strikes etc badness.
csense 14y ago
Maybe people will stop buying music from the MAFIAA
billirvine 14y ago
> there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense Why would a creative person who's primary method of feeding the family are checks from publishers not want their publisher to diligently protect the revenue model?
- __david__ 14y ago
  Because they understand that "protecting the revenue model" distinctly different than confiscating 9 year olds' laptops.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  Because "protecting the revenue model" is destroying the whole market. Instead of "protecting" the existing model, the music industry has to innovate. Doing what they're doing might squeeze out a little cash in the short term but it's a sinking ship and when an alternative breaks out, every artist that isn't part of the new model will be left out just as great bands are left out of the current model now.
spindritf 14y ago
> there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense No, there won't be. The recording companies will keep doing what they do and the artist will occasionally tweet how awful it is but they can't do anything about it since it's the big bad corporation. The company will take the blame along with its cut.
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  I've mentioned it before, and I'll say it again: hold the artists accountable. They are the one these organizations are speaking on behalf of. Call them out on their tweets about how they support this directly.
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    Or do more than call them out. If all the people who posted a useless message would instead avoid buying/watching/listening to anything that involved a certain artist, if we could somehow destroy one big artists career, then no artist would want to be involved. Basically, use old media's strategy against them: we can't touch the big guys, they're too big. But if we could destroy someone they depend on it would eventually kill them too.
    - jasonlotito 14y ago
      Well, by hold them accountable, I thought it was clear that you would also not buy their products. Regardless, I still think calling them out would do more than simply not buying their album.

aes256 14y ago

> If this sort of backlash becomes common, there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense. Unfortunately this is the last thing on artists' minds when they're about to sign a deal with a record label, and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

algorias 14y ago
That's true, but established artists might have some leverage. If they get fed up enough, they will start looking for alternatives.

potkor 14y ago

Latest spin from the .fi copyright mafia is "this demonstrates how we need legislation enabling softer measures for enforcement", cue 3 strikes etc badness.

csense 14y ago

Maybe people will stop buying music from the MAFIAA

billirvine 14y ago

> there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense Why would a creative person who's primary method of feeding the family are checks from publishers not want their publisher to diligently protect the revenue model?

__david__ 14y ago
Because they understand that "protecting the revenue model" distinctly different than confiscating 9 year olds' laptops.
flyinRyan 14y ago
Because "protecting the revenue model" is destroying the whole market. Instead of "protecting" the existing model, the music industry has to innovate. Doing what they're doing might squeeze out a little cash in the short term but it's a sinking ship and when an alternative breaks out, every artist that isn't part of the new model will be left out just as great bands are left out of the current model now.

spindritf 14y ago

> there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense No, there won't be. The recording companies will keep doing what they do and the artist will occasionally tweet how awful it is but they can't do anything about it since it's the big bad corporation. The company will take the blame along with its cut.

jasonlotito 14y ago
I've mentioned it before, and I'll say it again: hold the artists accountable. They are the one these organizations are speaking on behalf of. Call them out on their tweets about how they support this directly.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  Or do more than call them out. If all the people who posted a useless message would instead avoid buying/watching/listening to anything that involved a certain artist, if we could somehow destroy one big artists career, then no artist would want to be involved. Basically, use old media's strategy against them: we can't touch the big guys, they're too big. But if we could destroy someone they depend on it would eventually kill them too.
  - jasonlotito 14y ago
    Well, by hold them accountable, I thought it was clear that you would also not buy their products. Regardless, I still think calling them out would do more than simply not buying their album.