Tuesday, January 08, 2008

"Exchange of goods for goods. that might be money for a CD, it might be a chicken for a blowjob."

Shawn Gordon


Unfortunately we are facing with a person that we cant find words to describe. For 2 weeks we have been attacking by a record owner who even dont hesistate to see his own artists as meta of his economy. In one month lots of the prog/psych communities shutdown with the pressure of this person.
During 2 years we sent approximetely 1000 albums and we get "0" negative feedback. Instead it becomes a place of listeners & artists that met in many comments. We believe like many other blogs, this place garanted a piece of love to undiscovered/uncommon music, from all over the world. If there exists any unhappy authorized owner of the albums that we sent, they can always send a message for the abuse.

We believe artists should free from economic things, but none of us want this to happen with cold rules.

WE ARE OFF TO THE LABELS & ARTISTS WHO HAS POTENTİAL TO PUT THEİR LISTENERS IN AN ILLEGAL POSITION.

Regards
-naha

240 comments:

1 – 200 of 240   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

I can't believe "our" Deleter (Mr. @sshole) in the PNF - Forum is a record dealer or artist or the like.

I by myself have only noticed that the "Rattles" and the "Alpha to Omega" Links were gone within in a day. Records over 30 years old and not so big a business here.

I'm sure he/she must be quite new in the forum and has visit at least these both topics (maybe more - you know better than I). Because there are not so many views there you will have at least an idea if checking the Log-Files. Track him/her down !!!

Maybe we have another Hans ...

twee4one

OsvalDooM said...

what a shameful mind must be behind this.

I'm so terribly sad 'cause of the lack of vision of this people that can only messure things in money and cannot even conceive the idea of someone doing something without a reward.

On another subject, I'm almost positive that this same person already downloaded material, from prognotfrog, and even other blogs and sites.

you are not only a disgrace to this gender of music, you are a worthless bastard low life *********************

guess the rest .

all yours, OsvalDooM

Love=Hell, Space=Acid said...

As long as we stay united we will fix this. I have not been on this blog for such a long time but I have recived maybe ten e-mails from members from groups that have been posted here, and it have only been kind words. And they are suprised that someone still cares about their old albums. Prog not frog have also helped some groups to spread their music around the world. And people ask us to help them spread their music. So if he/she wants to destroy the oppertunity for these groups. I can only say this:
Come on, make my day punk!

Anonymous said...

This gentleman should spend more time promoting his artists rather than trying to stop PnF and other blogs.

I have not heard of one of his artists on his roster.

Slobodan Burgher said...

I'v ebeen blogging for over 2 years and during that time I have been asked to delete music posted by artist maximum 5 times (which I obviously did without a seconds hesitation). During the same period around 20 different bands and artists have written to encourage me in posting their material. I have also had all my files deleted many times from various hosts from Rapidshare.DE to rapidshare.com to Divshare to Megaupload and pretty much all of them - but I am almost certain that the deletion was due to automatic bots and/or the fasthosts themselves (because I never pay for services but chose to use the free service, they delete this to encourage people to pay for it).

Stay true to your scene and keep doing what you are doing if you enjoy it - the internet will always be a little bit shakey but we can work around problems like you describe for example by having multiple mirrors, by not posting inappropriate material or about 100 other good alternatives

Happy 2008 - The year the Blogosphere will mature and rise above!!!!

:)

Anonymous said...

Oh you guys crack me up, you're starting to believe your own lies now it seems.

First off, check out progagainstpirates.blogspot.com - the people with their names on there is about one thousandth of the people involved in the current effort, I'm only dealing with my own label, what you're seeing is the net result of a lot of people pissed off at having their material pirated and doing something about it finally, but we all started at the same time.

Second - only out of print? you buy it after you try it? That is total crap and I'll juse an example from last week on the pfn forum. Someone was a Sylvan fan and asked for 2 of their albums, Sylvan is on my label and the releases are current. I told him he could find them both at the bands site because the band would make more money that way. I was jumped on about how this site wasn't about buying stuff, it was about downloading it. So there goes that argument right there.

Most of the guys in Sylvan work as school teachers so they can live because people are stealing their albums. You aren't helping the band when you steal their material. Now if you want to work with artists and labels to post legal copies of songs, take a cue from www.evergrey.fr - he was an illegal sharer and when confronted, he realized what he was doing was wrong and went a more productive route.

Do you realize your anger and indignation at having your illegal files pulled down is NOTHING compared to the anger and frustration the artists feel by having it there in the first place?

Now we'll see if nahavanda has the balls to allow an honest debate to take place or will try to supress it.

OsvalDooM said...

well, the only reason cuase they are stil working as school teacher(not that is in anyway wrong, hi mom ^^), is because you and your record company people not doing your job well. Its because of blogs like this one that mopst of this records can reach the ears on thousands of people , wich couldn't be achieved by other means.

prog rock must be spread, you cannot live on the record sales alone, and even worst, you cannot pretend to sell a record of a band that no one knows.

artists deserve respect, but i've got the feeling that we respect moree the bands than you do.

Anonymous said...

I hope things will work out for PNF!

Regards,

Armute

nahavanda said...

i gave you an answer from the forum, you read it several times, but you didnt care to reply it! Thats true that a forum member requested sylvan, and another forum member told in comments its an upto date album and its not good to request it.. then you wrote something and you provoke my german friends in forum..and one of them send the whole discography because of you! because you provoke people with treating them as a pirate.


from your words:
"let me also tell you that I was coding internet applications since before Internet Explorer existed and since most of you were breast feeding. I'm part of a group that represents thousands of albums and no one wants their material posted for free. I see a lot of you guys trying to obfuscate your links by putting !! in the HTTP, or using lix.in or linkprotector or by storing the links in a text file that is on a service like rapidshare, or using sharebee and its ilk. I'm just gonna let you know that it doesn't matter, we've got technology that crawls all the links back and it goes to the copyright holders and if they choose, they have their material removed and complaints filed. there is really nothing you can do to stop it, we've already coded around anything that anyone has tried."

well it has examples of technologies which passes captchas mimic input types, and software infrastructure to crawl. but our cheap forum software shows you are the only crawler. Mr. agent Gordon
If you find any other ways of http 200 requests feel free to expertise your knowledge with us.

Those were the days mr. agent Gordon.Tell me what was the code of checking the mouse button? was it something like o: btst #6,$bfe001 bne o rts
Maybe you live your first experiments with 4channel 8bit old pro(!)trackers..Maybe without knowing what progressive rock is you grow with the melodies of turrican (chris hüelsbeck) eh? on those days i was called fcc, having somefun around ;) kids grow. thekompany.com waw! you were late to adopt technologies man. like your itunes clone. you try to give forum members some capitalist lessons..umm you have rights on this..

big fish eats the little fish.. unfortunately your a little wish! check servers like emusic.com rhapsody.com alexa. and check yours :) so that i can understand your advertorial show with blogs :) and i am wishing you all the best. No matter you also gonna be a meta of last.fm oneday! you know very well, artists with your company has no faith, i hope in later instead of the care of sites like us, you better care your artists.
we are going for a new king! with small widgets like http://mainstream.vincentahrend.com/ http://www.musickum.com/omi/ they even found a way to add more and more tags,artists labels. you know what i mean? ;)

here is the writting that i wrote to you at forum:


"I think you like to be at the alternattive side smga3000, but anyway you are very welcome

and i must say with some ways i 100/100 agree with you..
take marillon for example.. http://www.marillion.com/band/upload.htm

those guys are just arrogance? or they are telling the truth?

they are telling the truth!
for the creation of their 1 album..at least 1000 guyz work together..artcovers to posters..concert lights to ticket design..fan t-shirts to hats..video producers to video recording studios.. maybe you may think they are just consist of 3-5 guyz, they are like a company..at least 1000 people earn money because of them..anf if this guyz suffer from "illegal" sharing they have full rights to suffer.. in concerts of them you watch something like a magic..like david copperfield present..and this kind of things really need big moneys.. so i understand their situation 100/100.
but at the same time if you write to google that simple 2 words: marillon rapidshare
in first page you will see at least 5 places to download this album.. this is not my problem..imho and those places including blogs shouldnt serve them..

i have some thousands of vinyls and some thousands of cds at home, but in real life, i cant speak more than dream theater, pink floyd etc with my friends. people love to talk about the music they taste, and people love to talk about music that they CAN talk about with others..telling someone about X band wont effect anyone..he plays it and he says its good! than turn back to the classic ones..because it has a feeling value, it has a collectivist value to talk something common..

i am worrying a lot for those blogs, because most of them try to break the lines..they try to bring an alternative taste..most of them closed because of "common bands" that you can even find them in first page of google query..But hey they serve lots of rarities & undiscovered music too..they garanted a piece of love to uncommon music..it was an existence for indie labels even..i am worrying for this ones..

Do you know who is most worried one about the close of demonoid.com?
microsoft i had an email for 5 years ending with microsoft.com
vista sellings goes incredibly low..and they dont activated the protection..they shouldnt destroy their home user pool..but the sellings goes low..so the first thing they must do: they must create a "need" to download and populize the things. got the idea? let we turn back to marillon example..people need a meta band to discuss on it..so they must also create a "need" for the album! microsoft didnt destroyed demonoid..cria was..even microsoft could do this with one letter to the hosting company... at the low level and high level you see the same persons on job

not more than 5-6 years later: microsoft will give their upcoming operating system for free..am i am nostradamus? no..wait and see

at the other side...........
linux..

this is same for music too --> was listening this for a week http://www.lusyd.co.uk/Bands/Rixsta/Rixsta.htm

feel free to download and share as much as you want..that guy doing super music..and he wont blame you to share his music

well i tried to tell you some from my side with my bad english.."

Anonymous said...

reminds me of the argument someone had on Direct Waves blog last summer with Gary Mundy. many artists and label owners don't seem to comprehend that we are their fanbase, we are the ones who buy their records, and it's us they're attacking. directly so. blogs like PNF serve to expand the listener base beyond anything previously possible. now you can hear about an obscure artist, pop their name into google, and even odds you'll find a way to hear them immediately.

i'd never be the musician i am now without the open access that the internet has brought to music, and i'm afraid i'll never understand the mindset someone has when they open up a webpage, see that someone has enjoyed their album enough to have posted it with a recommendation to others, and become angry. do you feel angry and humiliated when fans cheer at concerts? or when they invite friends? do you get frustrated if people are excited about the music as it's being performed? what about live bootleggers, who want to save the show so they can re-experience and share it? would you like to destroy their equipment to prevent them from doing it again?

the two issues that we disagree on, anonymous, would firstly be the fact that album sales are encouraged by downloading. that's reflected in studies, especially for independent labels. if you're as interested in filesharing as you seem, I can only understand your unfamiliarity with the subject to be willful ignorance.

secondly, you're just absolutely refusing to acknowledge that the person who asked for Sylvan albums may very well have gone on to buy them, or already owned them. you're alienating your fans (and potential fans, might I add) by assuming they're all thieves and accusing them of such. insulting them personally, as a matter of fact. Be honest, have your album sales gone up since the advent of filesharing?

finally as for the school teachers, what sort of an idiot gets into prog rock (or teaching) for the money in this day and age? if they expected the life of riley they surely deserved their wakeup call.

Anonymous said...

I see you didn't post my last comment, let's see if you post this one.

I couldn't read your response because you did it on the unitedsounds thread that you had blocked me from, I only saw it later when someone cross posted it to the Sylvan thread. You never jumped in to the Sylvan thread when I suggested they purchase the album and was laughed at, and to be honest, I can hardly understand your response here, I understand you aren't a native english speaker, but I can't understand enough to even comment.

So let's see then. Someone who steals music gets insulted when he is called a thief, so he steals MORE music? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

Be glad I gave you as much fair warning as I did about how inneffective all the things you do are to avoid having your pirate files found. You all originally did good things, now you're just thiefs and now you have the attention of a lot of pissed off artists and labels and you're going to see it all go POOF pretty damn fast. Check your own site, I see lots of dead links, and it is only going to get worse. Seriously, I suggest trying to go a legal route like evergrey.fr did.

nahavanda said...

i hope you and your artists success for the future :)

Anonymous said...

I make CDs. I have a 16 track digital studio. I work as a mechanical engineer. I love music. I do not wish to make money from the thing I love. This is (I hope) the future.
Teachers?...make music but be teachers!
Titus

Anonymous said...

Fans are great, people who have listening parties are great, people who buy the albums are great, people who steal them are not. In case you didn't read what I said closely, the person that asked for downloads was a Sylvan fan and got pissed when I suggested he purchase he got pissed off.

Between myself and the other 2 dozen labels in our group, we have plenty of empirical evidence that pirating is absolutely killing record sales, it just is, you can pretend all you want, but it is. I'm the first to admit that not every pirate copy is a lost sale, but when I see 20,000 downloads of an album and 1,500 sales, then I know something isn't right. When I see an established band putting out their 5th album with more promotion and more distribution and better reviews than they've ever had before and they sell less, then I know it is pirates. It's pretty simple. We are obviously not against fans and those that purchse the albums, we're against the people who are fans and never purchase the albums.

Let me relate a recent story from the band Pendragon (who really got this recent movement started). They were doing a free concert and a "fan" came to the merch table and was gushing over how much they loved the band and had everything they had put out, the merch clerk asked where they had picked it up to get a sense of what channels were working and the guy admitted he had never paid for anything, just downloaded it all but Pendragon was his favorite band. He didn't even pay to see the concernt and didn't even buy a t-shirt. That is not the kind of fan the bands want.

Anonymous said...

Bands only want fans that pay them money. Haha.

Anonymous said...

Hey Mr. anonymous,
sure, maybe the bands on your roster don't want their music shared on-line for free. That's their choice [not yours!], and with good blogs like this one they only have to say something and the download links will be removed.
But you have to understand that there are a hell of a lot of artists out there - especially people whose output is from decades ago, is obscure and/or is not current - who either don't mind, or actively encourage people to share their stuff. These people recognise that most musicians will never make a real living off of their music, no matter how talented and skilled they are, and they are showing us that they play music for the love of music and for the pleasure of turning other people on, and profit is not an important motive.
I've been a musician for over 15 years, and I make damn good music in my opinion - but I don't want anything to do with the music industry and I have no illusion that I'm going to make any worthwhile money out of it. I do it because I love it, and that leaves me little choice. If a blog like this were to help people hear my music where they otherwise would never have even known it existed, then that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.
Unless you're going to sell your soul to some record company exec you're never going to see much cash flow out of being a musician, so learn to live with it...

Anonymous said...

Yet another person that is clueless on the industry. Ask for permission to post music, not forgiveness if you happen to be caught.

Anonymous said...

The record company owner harassing blogs has no clue what he is talking about. These obscure artists are not known. period. they are not promoted, this is music that will never make money. its not mainstream, and cannot generate enough sales to support 1 member of a band, let alone several, and leave enough for the record company owners, LOL. Its people like him that are pissed off because they spend $1000's to make CD's or vinyl reprints, and cant make thier money back. It has nothing to do with sharing online. SHARING ONLINE IS THE NEW WAY OF MUSIC DISTRIBUTION. Its word of mouth on social networks, and blogs just like this and many others.

RECORD COMPANIES ARE A DYING BREED . You are an old dog that now mus t learn new tricks, just like all the big dogs are doing now.

The promotions are now, and will be done by the artists themselves, on blogs just like this and on social networks.

Artists no longer need record companies to front money for CD's and have a budget for promotion. We can reach millions of people for free online, and this makes you stew with anger thus your childish backlash on blogs for sharing music without a cost.

At the end of the day, you will be apologizing, and artists will be thanking the owners of blogs like this and so many others for the amazing promotion they have allowed your artists. You just dont have control over it, you dont have access to the analytics data of who is interested in your artists from GOOD promotion by these blogs.

Get with the times man. Time to re-think how you are doing things :)

Anonymous said...

What is your economic proposal then? What is the business model? It can't be giving away music and make it up on touring, it's almost impossible to get a live gig. So tell me mr. genius, what is the business model?

Anonymous said...

You own a calulator, don't you, and use it regularly? You have a calculator bundled into your operating system for free, don't you? Whatever happened to those poor souls who used to make slide rulers? By using a calculator, you have contributed to the demise of an entire industry. They had a viable business model, until people like YOU came along. Why don't you feel guilty about this?


So... you want free advice? So what? What's in it for us? That would involve giving away something for free. You have no right to expect that of anyone, do you now?

Since you need us to tell you how to run your business, shouldn't we be running it?

Anonymous said...

I am a musician. My music is available for free on various blogs. If someone approached me and said I was their favourite artist and that they had downloaded all my albums I would be very pleased. Why are Pendragon so different? Why don't you all get proper jobs? The music industry has destroyed so much creativity & individualism. All recordings should be free and only live performances paid for. I know loads of people who record music in their leasure time. In 99% of cases the more money an artist makes the poorer their product becomes.

proghog said...

Dear PNF,
Just lay low for a while... make it look like you've shut up shop... these enterprising self policing dickhead/s will move on...to find fresh meat...
I wonder how much of the rap and dance blogs are being hit...??
As that is the future music of mind control I'm sure it's getting a free reign against these people.... music such as what you post forces people to look at things other than the mundane...
Hope it works out for you....
Cheers
SC

Anonymous said...

Actually, the greatest example of your own hypocrisay is that you felt you had to ban my one public account on your message board (I've got over a dozen others). Since the only thing I'm concerned with is my own material that is being illegally posted and you claim you only want to preview music, and all my music is available for free preview at Mindawn, it is clear by your own actions that you aren't interested in previewing music, but rather in pirating it. Any other argument is irrelevant because I can't do anything about any material other than my own.

Anonymous said...

ORWELL UPDATED

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Sharing is stealing

Anonymous said...

no, stealing is stealing - by saying "sharing", you are trying to soften what you do. If you don't own it and give it to someone else or take it for yourself, you are stealing. If I give your car to another person without asking your permission, what would you call that? If you say it is sharing and is ok, then please give me your address so I can lend your car out.

Anonymous said...

OK it's Troy Tempest
C/O Marineville

Anonymous said...

If you COPY my car and give away the copy to another person without asking my permission, I'll never call that "stealing" bacause I never said that I have "all rights reserved" over my car, included copying. Our society as a whole is going towards Star Trek technology with replicators, but you'll never see them 'cause you're blinded from your sweet memories of a dead past. You may say I'm a dreamer, but look here and make 2+2 if you can:
http://www.economist.com/theworldin/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10105016&CFID=2407574&CFTOKEN=d5ff24058a934ed8-5DB09D5A-B27C-BB00-0143F1123567D901

Anonymous said...

"There is talk of machines that will print from powdered gold and shake up the jewellery-design business."
Hey Shawn, any jeweller between your friends? ROTFL!

Boogie said...

Hi folks,
90 percent of this discussion is about morals. But our society isn't run by morals (hi Mr. Bush). It's run by profit, personal profit, also called business. Music once was a well running business. What we see now, is the decay of the music business and the rise of internet business. Nowadays there's more money in DSL than in CDs. Without DLs nobody would want to pay for high speed DSL and Terabytes, and for this reason nobody will be able to stop DLs. Forget about all the morals, open your eyes. Music was a business yesterday, bytes are the business today.

Anonymous said...

Or to put it another way... how about that slide ruler? Do the people who used to make them have a right to harrass you and/or demand reparations, because you joined the 20th century and bought a calculator?

emptyfree said...

Hate to say it, but this is an unfortunate side effect of having a popular MP3 blog that distributes stuff through rapidshare.

Unless you want to provide the bandwidth for your music yourself, you're at the mercy of this one asshole.

Lost In Tyme said...

"X" is my favorite band !
I have all their albums but only on mp3...as i can't pay 200 US dollars on e-bay to get a used copy (this is not piracy ?)

That accord to "dead artists"
Now lets see about the "living artists" :

Your company have a clone of my favorite "X" band.
There is at least 10 labels with a clone of my favorite band...
So I want to listen all those, to see if the are good enough to spend my money on them.
(note : I don't have only one favorite band)
Your sampler previews are not enough for me.

So. the next step is to download the albums from net. (edit "to steal")

Can you imagine what I'm saying ?
You try to sell me a clone without give me the chance to listen before.
Because there is not promotion on radio, nor TV or magazines issues about your bands, because you spend your time and money trying to stop file sharing (edit : "stealing of your music")
It's not your music, actually music don't belong even to the artists.

Music is the result of a man who is trying to express himself with notes to the people.

If you're talking for different kind of music (commercial) then you are not talking to the correct people.

startlingmoniker said...

The dude mentions that when he sees "20,000 downloads and only 1,500 sales" that he knows it's due to people pirating the album instead of paying for it.

While this is a possibility, it's also equally plausible that people simply dislike the music.

Prior to downloads, it was a lot more difficult to judge what a new band would sound like-- all you had to go on was the cover art. For underground artists, you could forget hearing them on radio, or often even seeing a review in print.

Naturally, record companies loved this. They could sell a record purely on the strength of a cool-looking cover. Well, now 20,000 people can download the damn thing and find out if they like it or not based on the music. If the stuff on your label doesn't make the grade, too bad.

GhostHorse said...

Come on mister prog rock records owner. EVEN THE GREAT GORAN BRECOVIC answered with flattering comments about the internet sharing 'fashion', in a recent interview. He said that he can see no wrong in those actions and added smiling that only the big greedy music corporations complaining about it. The artist also said that he can afford to live just with the money from live shows and that he love the idea that a boy from the far away China (an example) has this invaluable oportunity to enjoy his music for free.

So, as you see mister owner sooner you get the new marketing rules faster you fulfill your expectations. Learn to be friend with people who love the music you produce, learn from them and let them teach you the modern world of internetocrasy. Don't make your posistion worst assaulting the only people who can support you.


GhostHorse

Anonymous said...

Blog and forum owners: you do realize that the ones being hurt with your behaviour are solely the artists, don't you?
Instead of illegally offering albums here, you should be promoting these albums with 1 or 2 free mp3s or samples, in order for fans to really help the bands by BUYING their cds. You do know that most bands do produce their albums with THEIR own money don't you?
I you really like music, you know what to do.
As an artist I feel ashamed by your behaviour. Please help us by buying the cds.

GhostHorse said...

Dear anonymous artist, no we realize nothing because our behaviour cause nothing but good. We listen to old burried and often overlooked gems that everybody forgot (even the so called caressing record companies that you guys (artists) seem to praise so much). We give them value and the proper respect listening and talking about them. If those blogs were not around those bands would be lost forever because noone could ever find them in vinyl.

Now, for the new artists as the user 'Lost in Tyme' mentioned above, we listen and we buy what we like. And for your informing, in most countries is extremely rare to find prog rock records in regular stores. So we have to looking online paying a great amount of money for shipping and such. Well, it is not that easy for a student you know. But we still do that for the records we like! If we didnt have the luxury of blogging we couldn't know for certain if we like enough the band to buy it, so we wouldn't buy it!

Are you so ignorant to try persuade the people that they should buy your music even if they don't like it?

Anonymous said...

Ahahahaha, the guys over at progagainstpirates.blogspot.com DELETE EVERY COMMENT THAT IS NOT STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR VIEWS. So much for an "open dialog", eh? I guess it's just okay to have dialog where it won't make them look like a minority...

Anonymous said...

We could go on forever to discuss the right or wrong with fans putting out bands CD for downloading in blogs and torrents. There are 2 sides of this problem. Mr / Mrs Blogger wants to help the band and get their name more know, this is a good idea. On the other hand, we have the record labels and bands that see an increase of their sales due to this. Both categories are music friends, but at this point bitter enemies, and no one understands the other.

There is a potentional in the ones who uploads these albums, as they seem to know alot about music, and really like the bands they put up for downloading. I see no way of profiting on this, except for those asking for donations, which is like asking to get paid for what someone else did.

I did run a label myself around 1 year ago and put out a few albums. I did not earn any money from this, and was not expecting to do it either. All I wanted was the money back I put into the projects. In my oppinion, I helped out a few bands by doing this. But 1 year ago I passed by the rateyourmusic site, and found one of the bands i put out in a really high rated position, and by looking at the ratings, they got extremely good grades, 4.17 or so, and thought this was really fun. It was fun until I saw how people owened the music. 70 % was on digital format, and there was no option to download it legally, so it had to be done from blogs & torrents. So I started to check some bloggs, torrent sites, and did find the album downloaded around 6500 times. This made me a bit depressed, as I realized that people will just not pay for music anymore, and I put my label down. I met the “praised” band around 2 months ago again, and asked them what they did, and there was simply not any interest to record anything new material, since it had become really hard to find a label these days that were willing to work with them.

So if you ask me, downloading certainly not only caused the death of my label, but also the death of 7 bands who were out of anyone who helped them out with money to record, master and press the final CD’s.

I think more will follow my example soon.

R.I.P.

gh said...

"This made me a bit depressed, as I realized that people will just not pay for music anymore, and I put my label down"

You have drawn a false conclusion. Just read this interesting article, entitled "Radiohead Album Available for Free, But Fileshared Anyway" : http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1215

Also, the last album I shared was "Deep Live" by the band " Bi Kyo Ran". Just for fun, try to see what are the options to get it legally, and at what price...

GhostHorse said...

It will be great if you could sign your texts people, so we can discuss the subject more specifically. The story above in my opinion is an exception or an experiment that gone bad because of wrong managment. There is no way a new promising band can't sell its records because of the torrents and blogs. Did you have an online store that could deliver the cd worldwide with normal shipping rates? Did the people of prog community knew about that web site? Did you ask the owners of the blogs to take out the links? Did you try to promote your label to the prog communty?

Sorry for the continuant questions but i think blogs have became the present scapegoat

Anonymous said...

"So I started to check some bloggs, torrent sites, and did find the album downloaded around 6500 times. This made me a bit depressed, as I realized that people will just not pay for music anymore, and I put my label down."

The thing is, that's not 6500 lost sales, that's 6500 people that never would have even heard of this band if it wasn't for the blogs. I'd bet that a good number of people who actually owned the album first heard them from a music blog as well. It's the best publicity a minor label can possible have.

Anonymous said...

We didn't post your comment because it consisted of "oh, these are 4th tier bands and they were influenced by Yes and Genesis, so they are ripping off those bands, and no one wants their music anyway". Well, all those bands have had their material pirated on blogs, that's why they are in the group, as is Musea Records, who has about 1,000 CD's. If you want to make an intelligent contribution to the discussion, then we'll post it.

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times. If someone gets it for free, they aren't going to pay for it later in 99% of the cases. Most people hear about bands from review sites and other social networking sites, or they hear them on internet radio, at least the ones that buy CD's.

Regarding promotion and shipping rates. You can buy a CD at my shop right now for between $10 and $16 and shipping to Europe is about $4. So say worst case, that is $20 which is less than 14 euro, a pretty good deal. Our releases are reviewed and advertised in virtually every magazine and web site around the planet and we issue press releases to many other places.

I'm concerned with emerging technology, that's why I developed Mindawn and I made it with no DRM, I made it so you can listen to any song in full up to 3 times, and I made it with CD quality files (real CD quality) and I made it so it works on Linux, Mac and Windows and with any portable device. I did these things becaue I saw the problems with the existing systems and I was addressing the common excuse for illegal downloading, so if you really just want to sample it and not steal it, we provide that.

Shawn Gordon
President
ProgRock Records
Mindawn

ps. come one, the line about trading a chicken for a blowjob was pretty funny, admit it.

Anonymous said...

Funny! I worked in the music business area for many years and tried to sell stuff like Bi Kyo Ran in music store like Virgin Megastore or HMV. You know what? The music business won't accept anything else than mainstream music. Ordering online? No way. Getting the music I lke has always been uneasy (hard-to-find, hard-to-sell, expensive, seldom, etc.,). Now, I'm done fighting. I download it and I'm grateful to blogs like PNF to share unknown and amazing oscure bands from remote countries.

Bi Kyo Ran? 25 euros a piece!

Regards,

Armute

Anonymous said...

http://www.arlequins.it/pagine/articoli/corporetro.asp?chi=43

Here you'll find an interview to Rain where he's saying why he is thankful towards file sharing ad how he managed to get a profit from it.
Incidentally, just before the interview to Rain there's another interview to a certain Mr. Shawn Gordon, so that Mr. Gordon should know better when he says that every single illegal download is a loss and every single illegal download is a theft and bla bla bla. I think that blogger should leave alone the greedy liars like Mr. Shawn Gordon, Pendragon etc. and should legally promote artists like Rain and Alhambra, instead.

http://www.flyagaric.it/alhambra.htm

Here you'll find a legal download of a full album by Alhambra, take it and spread it and just let die who treats you like an enemy asking money from you at the same time.

Anonymous said...

god, you're such a bloviating idiot it is hard to continue to respond when you obviously know NOTHING about what I've been saying.

I've very clearly said that each illegal download isn't necessarily a lost sale, but that figure is rising exponentially over the past 3 years. Also, if an artist wants to give away their music, then that is THEIR decision, not yours.

Our only concern is with people who download it because they want it but don't pay for it because they can get away with it.

Anonymous said...

""What is your economic proposal then? What is the business model? It can't be giving away music and make it up on touring, it's almost impossible to get a live gig. So tell me mr. genius, what is the business model?""

You owe it to yourself to read the latest article addressing this very issue in Wired magazine Jan 2008 edition. David Byrne, Radiohead, and a few others have some interesting input on this very subject.

Get used to the fact you cannot make a living off selling plastic discs anymore. Those days are over. Its up to you and me and all other producers and musicians to find a way to make money doing music. But its no longer going to be done by selling units, i promise you that. The internet as a concept destroyed those days :) And its a really good thing.

The result of record labels and advertising agencies controlling artists music and image has created the TERRIBLE state that music in general is in. The majority of people that buy music buy what is PRESSED on them, not by what is "good" Record lablels and ad agencies have pushed so much crap into everyones eyes and ears that they have in turn "reset" the lines of good and bad.

Putting music distribution and promotion into the hands of artists online has revolutionized the entire industry and is enabling people to get music that is truly good, not what is being sold at the music store.

Like I said in my previous message to you, get used to the fact the days of the Record Label are done.
Instead of fighting the people that are honestly HELPING you by promoting your music, you need to JOIN them, and find a way to meet a middle ground, which is going to include giving artists music away for free.

Again, read the article in Wired magazine Jan 2008 about this subject, you will see things in a clearer light, and see what you are doing is wrong, and the people promoting artists music on this site for free are doing the right thing.

Anonymous said...

No, you're not helping, that's the point, it doesn't help the band in any way to have a bunch of people with their music for free if that is the only thing they are selling. I repeat, there is no commodity around you can point to, or a business model, that involves giving something away.

I've read Byrnes article and the wired article, I'll address Byrne since I have it handy. Byrne is in a unique position being a top selling artist that gives him an unrealistic view. there are some just blatantly false statements he's making.

* It's basically free to record an album.
- Not really, although it is a lot cheaper than it use to be, but if you were to build your own HD recording studio with all the appropriate hardware and software, you will still spend $20,000 on it, now if you amortize that over multiple albums, then it gets cheaper, but just because you are able to record doesn't mean you are able to produce, mix and master, not to mention something as mundane as recording drums, this isn't easy, or cheap, to do right, and then there is learning how to use all the hardware and software, often times it is cheaper to pay someone else who already has the expertise.

* Distribution is free
- Well, not really, as digital still only accounts for a small percentage of the overall sales of music. Believe me, I'm on board with the whole digital thing (obviously) and it will move that way almost entirely in the next 5 years or so, but by doing this we are creating a whole generation that are the opposite of an audiophile. These are people listening to 128k MP3 files with earbuds. I bet if you put them in a room with surround sound and an album they were really familiar with you'd blow their minds. For now though, you are going to be doing physical packaging for some time. There is even a resurgence for vinyl recently that really surprised me.

* Artists handling it all themselves
- I've signed a number of established artists over the years simply because they don't want to deal with all the promotion, fulfillment and crap. Now if an artist could just record a couple songs, send them to the digital propagators and sell a bazillion copies without doing any promotion, that would be great, but it also isn't going to happen. People need to know it exists and they need to be able to easily acquire it despite their preferred method of acquisition.

It is NOT the responsibility of anyone to entertain you for free. For the love of god, give up Starbucks or McDonalds once a week and spend the money on a CD, we're talking $10 to $15 here, what the hell is wrong with you people that you are so cheap and so self deluded? The result will be no new music - basic fact, end of story. No one is going to do it for free, and sooner or later it is going to be your favorite band.

The_Lurker said...

Anyone who shares music for free that an artist is trying to sell, WITHOUT that artist's (and label's) permission to do so is breaking the law. You want the music, you pay for the music, it's that simple. There are plenty of places to sample it for free before you buy (myspace, youtube, mindawn, cdbaby, etc.).

Anonymous said...

Prognotfrog, you really don't get it do you? YOU ARE STEALING US, THE ARTISTS DOING THE MUSIC. We are joining forces to make sure that the SHARING OF MUSIC FOR FREE WITHOUT OUR PERMISSION isn't possible! Would you like to spend 2 years making an album to see it being shared, copied, without a dime being made? RESPECT THE MUSICIANS AND THEIR WORK PLEASE.
And, if you aren't sure if you wanna buy it, come on, just listen to free mp3s and samples.

Anonymous said...

YOU really don't get it, do you? It's out of your hands. This is the 21st century. You don't get to decide what is "possible."

I have bought and paid for literally hundreds of CDs, and hundreds more LPs. Storage is a serious issue. If I never bought another piece of music and made a project out of listening to every last one of them, it would be years before I'd worked my way through everything I already have. I'm at a time in my life when I have to think once, twice, three times before I can justify laying out $15 for ANY piece of music--unless I'm certain there will be at least a dozen or so occasions I'd want to play that before my relatives get to paw through my collection someday.

Nobody uses a fountain pen anymore, or a rotary phone, or pays 25 cents to play a round of Space Invaders. You seriously believe you can succeed at bullying anyone into paying $15 for a piece of plastic they don't even want? Darwin be with you.

Anonymous said...

Out of Print stuff should be blogged.
..never reissued LP's are that camp too.
Likewise, cassettes and other mediums...

Press vinyl, it sounds better.
And..... no one can upload in 3-D (lol).

Personally, if I like a d/l, I get the record... it's that simple for me. If it's not available on LP, so be it. Also think about pretty much the only way I ever buy CD's: used. Many people do that too; no extra profits there.

Just because someone gets an album online does not mean that they would EVER have bought it anyway! Realize this aspect mitigates a portion of that argument. Not blogged sometimes equals unlistened, period, end of story.

Creative Commons should be on the rise soon enough. Attribution is power. If no one buys your shit, make better music. With almost 10,000 albums in many a format, LP/CD/TAPE/CD/MP3 there is little room (and/or time) for crapstacks, baby! And that's not even counting my lady's other, different hordes of thousands of CD's and LP's..

...so, make something that lives longer than the pockets you are trying to make stronger. Dunno, I have this nagging feeling that lots of other things will keep getting played past being my 90 years old - much of it, probably less like these protectors of the copygate.

ONE VERY IMPORTANT POINT:
*Many* people in other, non-"first-world" countries can't afford your luxury; think about them also. As a matter of fact, also think about the poor parent barely making a living, anywhere, who could use a respite. Perhaps some disenfranchised kid and/or young adult who might have to choose between music and food or something. Somehow, somewhere, the universe is watching and giving you blessings for enriching their lives with music, whether they paid for it or not becoming irrelevant. Music (and money) is energy passing through the cosmos - thank the heavens that some of you (musicians, artists, other facilitators to making said future artifacts available) bring us closer to a godhead state through sound.

Anyway.. Martians and other aliens could give a flying fork about petty human money troubles and continued feudalist living tactics in this modern era. They just want to eat you, after the blowjob.. :)

I am not going to argue.
These are my personal opinions.
I may or may not ever reply again.

- - dEvolution

Anonymous said...

Correction:

LP/CD/TAPE/CD/MP3
should read as
VINYL/CD/TAPE/CDR/MP3

Too bad I don't have any 8-Tracks..
..or reel-to-reels.. or wax cylinders.

- - dEvolution

Anonymous said...

Ahem... out of print AND not available!
These are NOT the same thing.
Lots of OOP titles can still be had easily.

Carry on..

- - dEvolution

Anonymous said...

Here they can...! And other places, if this one were no longer available. Suppress one blog and a dozen others will spring up.

Anonymous said...

Good idea the sticker, but please look here (I'm doing copy/paste from above):

>Shawn Gordon
>President
>ProgRock Records
>Mindawn

So from the last line you see we need another sticker against Mindawn. That's what I was saying in a comment above: if Mr. Gordon and his musicians are all together against file sharing, and if they think that acting this way their income will grow, well, let's see if they are right or they are wrong by standing against them all together and BOYCOTT THEM! After all, we're a bunch of thieves and they won't miss us, aren't they? We're not customers, we're only pirates, and bla bla bla. OK, leave them alone and let's see what will happen.

Anonymous said...

"god, you're such a bloviating idiot it is hard to continue to respond when you obviously know NOTHING about what I've been saying.

I've very clearly said that each illegal download isn't necessarily a lost sale, but that figure is rising exponentially over the past 3 years. Also, if an artist wants to give away their music, then that is THEIR decision, not yours.

Our only concern is with people who download it because they want it but don't pay for it because they can get away with it."

Yes yes you're right, I'm an idiot and I can't even read - and by the way, if you're so honest and clean then why on earth don't you admit that musicians like Rain and Alhambra exist and make a profit from file sharing? "If an artist wants to give away their music, then that is THEIR decision, not yours" - here you're desperately trying to minimize something, aren't you? I never heard of someone willing to be robbed, so if some artist want to give away their music that means something, and please let this idiot explain that something to you: FILE SHARING IS NOT 'STEALING' AT ALL. You got it?

Anonymous said...

"I've very clearly said that each illegal download isn't necessarily a lost sale, but that figure is rising exponentially over the past 3 years."

That's like saying that each perfectly legal reading in a public library isn't necessarily a lost sale in a book shop, but if that figure was rising exponentially and we had millions reading in public libraries then the book sellers should put up a lobby and that brand new lobby should make public libraries illegal.

ROTFL!

Anonymous said...

Now Mr. Gordon will say that public libraries pay a little fee to book publishers - and that's true, just like in file sharing the first uploader pays a not-so-little price to have a legal copy of a cd. So what? Is he entitled only for "personal use"? And what if he doesn't agree? You'll prosecute him at the risk of losing a customer (millions of customers like him will follow) or try to find a compromise?

a-g said...

I guess this whole thing ends up in a single issue: the music record market trust to keep prices high and the inability of the average heavy consumer in that market to be able to afford to buy all the records he want.

Not to say the less fortunate who hardly can make it to buy the two/three CDs a month that they wish. What's their option? Stop listening so much to music? Speaking of third world countries most have no chance to buy even ONE single (officially released) CD per month. Ask me about it, I happen to live there.

So, there's some change needed here, somewhere, cos file sharing and pirating is not gonna stop, rather the reverse. And the loss of the music record market have to meet dynamics as to its pricing in order to be able to catch up again. Either the market rethinks price issues, including official mp3 download sites, or it will continue to see further setbacks from file sharing and pirates.

In this whole thing, though, also rests the position of the involved musicians. Maybe primarily the issue of professionality and its connection to the financial interests of the record industry. This, of course, will be heavily affected by this process.

Anonymous said...

yes, the old business model is done but is this the only way to solve it? i've read this thread and some of the comments only endorse shawn's pov that all this sharing is stealing. if there is no profit, there is no incentive. a hobby is one thing but a business, even one as noble as producing music, still needs access to capital to produce the stuff. its not like the blog invested any $$ to make the cd available in the first place, so there is that shot to the gut. however, the notion that because downloading is so successful it must be bad for business is missing the point. somebody is already monetizing off these downloads...

1 - the isp like verizon, comcast etc that could not sell broadband w/out content
2 - blog hosting sites sell advertisements space and links
3 - file sharing sites ditto

the above 3 appear to have done quite well, so whats stopping us from getting in on the act? i still maintain a digital library for all copyrighted material that charges a nominal monthly fee on top of your broadband bill should do quite given the millions thast have monthly access. if you required them to pay $5 month for this access, given the tens of millions of customers, then i think an arrangement can work out. but the blogging has gotten out of hand - esp when i see big-labelled stuff on the blogs as well.
folks like to download, its instant gratification, but there should be a price of some sort.
folks say here they buy stuff, maybe so, but then the attitude offered by some is that we can do what we want because its the internet seems haughty & dismissive. i don't think shawn is being that out of line as it is his business and he has every right to defend it. the copyright holder has the right, no maybe even the obligation, to exert his rights over his work less they fall into public domain. but i think relying on just cd sales to save the industry is swimming upstream.
my wife is a laid off sony music employee from their cd processing facility in southern nj. i can't say blogging cost her job but we are $35k poorer that maybe we would not be if there was a better system.

Anonymous said...

"yes, the old business model is done but is this the only way to solve it?"

Agreed with everything said above. While I love the blog and finding rare, oop and otherwise forgotten and neglected music I find myself as repulsed by some of the comments defending 'sharing' as I am with Shawn's heavy-handed (but understandable) defence of his interests. Posting an entire, in-print discography to 'teach someone a lesson' for objecting to sharing material they probably invested a few hundred dollars or more in is a pretty reprehensible and childish move. There also seems to be quite a bit of self-delusion going on in all sides of the argument.

I'm an underground musician and I like my stuff to appear on blogs from time to time. I sell my cds cheap and also mp3 them for free when they're sold out. If someone buys them as a result of hearing it on a blog or p2p network then I think it's a nice bonus when someone buys music from me as a result of this (akin to buying me a pint, lending me money for the week's rent or buying me or my kids a meal). I have no aspirations to make music my sole income and in this way consider myself a "folk musician". However other people do aspire and equipment doesn't come cheaply, nor does the time one has to invest in making music come without its own cost (e.g. lost earnings through other more regular streams of income - e.g. a steady job... sometimes I wish I had a regular job instead of sacrificing so much for music making time). Basically a lot of you folks seem to be saying "Get a real job!" - like the straightlaced, short-haired parents of some 60s hippy! - and that's not cool!

Anonymous said...

Further to my above comment - is the main argument that Shawn's actions are putting users of PNF in an 'illegal position'? I'm afraid the law, as generally accepted, stands on his side - it's music released and copywritten by him. Saying "We're distributing this music without permission to help!" , "You're old - you don't understand!" doesn't really justify ones actions as the law currently stands. Wouldn't it be easier just to remove the files, forget about it and get back to the music that matters, opposed to getting all mad over a few second-rate bands? Just don't endorse Shawn's labels and bands and get back to being one of the best weird/prog/jazz/folk/whatever blogs on the web!

Anonymous said...

One thing that strikes me is that in one of Mr. Gordons posts he braggs about how he and his "legion on moffo's" came up with a program to track the files up for download so he/they can delete it. Isn't that some sort of Hacking/Virus spreading? I thought that an action like that is also ILLEGAL, so what makes his actions more justfull then sharing some hard-to-get, never-heard albums by long forgotten artists?

Anonymous said...

If you put here a google advertisement, this will be an auto-generated music ad because of the music content.This is how the things work for music industry for Shawn like dogs. He is happy with his calculator to calculate whole music industry profit.

ps. digged it

m2ml2 said...

First Demonoid, then Oink, today prognotfrog... What's next? Prog's not dead!

Anonymous said...

Big man, pig man, ha ha, charade you are
You well heeled big wheel, ha ha, charade you are
And when your hand is on your heart
You're nearly a good laugh
Almost a joker! :D

Anonymous said...

This brings back OINK memories. Man I miss it. Anyway, here's an insightful article recommended to everyone, especially whatshisname...Shawn?

Here it is:
http://www.demonbaby.com/blog/2007/10/
when-pigs-fly-death-of-oink-birth-of.html

This sums up my feeling quite nicely. I am a college student, and I'm also a child of the digital age. I don't have the money to spend $20 on a piece of plastic every time I want one album. That's what? One hour of listening on average. There's simply too much music. Look, I'm more than happy to support artists, especially local artists (jazz ensembles etc, is a recent example) through buying their reasonably priced cd's $5-$10 or going to see them live. There is absolutely no incentive, however, to buy an overpriced CD, in which all of the profits are mostly going to big/primary, leeching, greedy, corporate, son-of-a-bitch record lables/industries anyway, when I could download it free. If you want to talk ethics (how its wrong for people to "steal"), tell me how its right for the greedy record industries to do what they do today. Believe me, and all the readers here know this, its not about the music and art to these recording execs. Its about profits. They want money. And that of course, was never what good music was about. Its like Don Kirschner in the 50's and 60's. Music is manufactured.

The bottom line is this (as explained in the article I posted). The Record industries refuse to change with the times, and they're now suffering (fairly suffering) from it. They're hurting themselves, and it's their own damn fault. Really, you cannot defend them, especially with the recent commotion over label studio engineers boosting all the frequency volumes to suit the music for radio/laptop play (whatever). This of course ruins dynamics and destroys the quality and art of the music. Does that piss me off? Hell yes. Anyway, all those that are out to persecute "pirates" like they're terrorists or something fail to understand that those they torment are ordinary people who are simply fed up with paying outrageous sums of money for a music collection when they can just download the album and then go see a show or buy a t shirt. It is also illogical to say that the internet has not spurred a certain vitality into the spread of music/art.

As far as the obscure musicians - thats one of the reasons I chose engineering over a music major...heh. I love to play guitar, but it'd be admittedly difficult to earn a living, unless you're really, really good. Even then, you must deal with how the record labels want you to sound.

I'm not saying that obscure progressive acts don't deserve profits. On the contrary, I'd love for them to make money, but realistically they have an inclination not to based on the current format of the industry. Most of the music posted here is out of print anyway, meaning the music's already been payed for. There are virtually thousands of band I would not have heard about otherwise without websites like this (music blogs, progarchives etc). Rant over.

Fancy Pants

And please, please read that article.

bolloxi mizz said...

"If I've said it once, I've said it a million times. If someone gets it for free, they aren't going to pay for it later in 99% of the cases."

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times - pigs can fly! Oh, wait, there are no flying pigs outside, no piles of pig crap on top of my car, no Vs of pigs migrating to Florida for the winter. So I guess no matter how many times we repeat things, they're not necessarily true? (Also, pretty much IRRELEVANT with regards to PNF, who specialize in almost impossible-to-find or unreissued recordings - but at least you're helping guys making money by the hundreds of dollars/pounds/euros by keeping those albums unheard, thus coercing people to bid on ebay auctions if they want to hear - merely HEAR - said albums. Way to go.)

"Most people hear about bands from review sites and other social networking sites, or they hear them on internet radio, at least the ones that buy CD's."

I've downloaded 100s of albums from mp3 blogs over the past few years. I've bought over a thousand CDs since 2005, many of them BECAUSE I DOWNLOADED THE ALBUM FIRST AND ENJOYED IT. My apologies if people download your artists' material, say "UGH/ICK/BEURK!" and delete it from their hard drive... that's down to you and your A&R department.

Face up to it: you're not going to make a living at playing prog rock, if a time ever existed where you could it was 35 years ago. It's a hobby now, especially for backwards looking bands like, well, your roster.

PROGGO said...

"WE ARE OFF TO THE LABELS & ARTISTS WHO HAS POTENTİAL TO PUT THEİR LISTENERS IN AN ILLEGAL POSITION."

What does this mean?
It doesn't make sense at all.

Illegal downloading is illegal.
Labels and artists are not putting anyone in an illegal position.

It's the one's who upload the music and spread it illegally who put themselves in that position.

The strange argument above along with the silly sticker is the wackiest justification I've ever seen.

Lost In Tyme said...

It's the one's who upload the music and spread it illegally who put themselves in that position.

Then tell me when someone uploading music which is available for free, is this illegal action ?

If someone uploading something that isn't available or oop is this illegal ?

And btw if an artist/lebel want from someone to remove his music from his blog the only that he needs to do is to send an email to the blog's owner.

Anonymous said...

Obviously if something is legally available for free, then it isn't illegal (duh), but it isn't the responsibility of the artist/lable to hunt down the illegal copies and ask for them to be taken down, it is your responsibility to make sure you honor the copyright and not post it in the first place if it isn't legal, and that includes oop items.

We've tried talking to blog owners, most of them tell us to pound sand, so we just go direct to blogspot with the complaints now. It's you're own activities and attitudes that have created the current situation.

Anonymous said...

I see and empathise with where you are coming from Nahavanda-I agree that this pirate has no right whatsoever to be deleting material which doesnt concern or effect his greedhead privateering-I wouldnt even be surprised if he is the same shmuck who has threatened 'Lost In Tyme' with action from the 'Chilling Effects' enforcers and deleted material from the 'Krautrockteam' boards...I really dont care how he attempts to dress this up as a moral crusade-it just aint,and cannot be viewed as such-its just a tawdry attempt on his part to gain a bigger slice of the market by an attempted dismantling of existing networks which share music freely...I'm a musician and share a large percentage of my own output on the web for free-It doesnt do me any harm-all I've experienced so far is a widening of the numbers of people showing an interest in my output,and made a whole lot of new friends too!-Sales are up in fact!-and that is precisely why I would NEVER surrender the rights to my creative output over to control and distribution by any unimaginative anachronism such as our crusading friend-The marketing strategies of bands such as Radiohead and all others following the same model of distribution are just so obviously fearful to these monomaniacal parasites that they will continue (at least for a while) to attempt to assert their influence by these no-brainer bullying tactics...might is not right and by all that exists-it never will be..A little give and take will always take you that one step further..BTW.Shawn,-you can go keep the chicken and the blowjob too..maybe you could find some self-satifying method of combining them both into a singular activity!
What bothers me...Well I'm not particularily technically proficient,but I do remember hearing sometime back that many people on the web got very riled over the despotical antics another group were up to ,so they went and distributed point-and-click software all over the shop so that people who felt the same way could express their annoyance and dismay by overloading and closing down the websites of the offending individuals-I think its called 'smurfing'..sort of a denial of service attack...So I'd be real worried if any of those godbrained tech heads out there might get a little upset with this guys behaviours,they just may decide to get in the way of his plans,major-and hey,that just wont be good at all for bizniz...well just a thought Shawn,-please dont anybody go taking me too seriously now,I'm definitely NOT advocating this method of response,its merely an observation on how these kind of conflicts do inevitably escalate.....It really isnt a good idea to go throwing your weight around and upsetting a whole bunch of people without first considering what attributes and strengths they might be able to muster against affront and attack,and what potential harm one might incur upon ones own reputation,ambitions and aspirations by doing so.
I for one will never do business with our in-house deleter.
I encourage all others to do the same.

Anonymous said...

You're not doing business NOW you schmuck, that's the point. Telling us you're going continue to not do business is hardly a threat, and what amazes me is you are threatening people who are protecting their own rights and having their own material removed. If you want to give away your material, that's your business, but no one in our group wants their material given away. The more you guys talk, the more all your justification arguments fall away.

I'm honored that you all think I'm so powerful that I'm the only one out there removing their material, but I really am a busy guy running 3 businesses and I'm a musician myself. You just don't get it.

Anonymous said...

Dear Shawn,
En contraire-I AM doing business,very healthily thanks! You apparently are not,or you would not have the time to persue your crusade!
No Shawn,I dont think youre the only shill out there-but you are the only one stupid and self-aggrandizing enough to announce himself..Maybe its high time to roll out the point and click software and let the people decide huh?

Lost In Tyme said...

"We've tried talking to blog owners, most of them tell us to pound sand, so we just go direct to blogspot with the complaints now. It's you're own activities and attitudes that have created the current situation."

So we have a confess ?
That's very good !!!

Do you know anything about fraud complaints ?
My lawyer knows and it's already up to this case.

Wait for my actions against you mr. president.

You may are the owner for some copyrights, but not for everything.

Rochacrimson said...

I love music,i play progressive rock.
Music is my first love and it's true,like John Miles sings in his first success.
Music is a passion to me and it will be forever in earth and in heaven.

Anonymous said...

so first you complain that I don't say who I am, so then I do say who I am, but as a thief you of course don't say who you are.

And Mr. Lost in Tyme. Confess? Yes, I confess that I have filed copyright complaints where anyone I represent has had their copyright violated. I welcome anything you think you can try to do, I KNOW you aren't the copyright holder, so I don't know what action you think you're going to try and do. In the US the current law allows up to $150,000 penalty for each download of a file you make available where you are violating copyright. Recently a woman was fined about $250,000 for making 20 songs available, and the case has been upheld. You guys should be thankful we're not going the legal route and we're just removing our files.

doug said...

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9847788-7.html

googled this old fangled idea of an isp tax and i see it is making some traction in canada and artists like trent reznor. this is my freaking idea - i should get a freaking copyright on it i've mentioned it so often - but it appears that something that is so simple, that would channel lost funds into the artists and their production teams - that this should be the end of all this sniping. i hear what shawn is saying, copyright holder trumps all and as i stated actually has to my knowledge an obligation to enforce that right. the ability to monetize thousands of downloads that would otherwise be lost is imho a golden opportunity to bring everything in line.

Anonymous said...

Hey Shawn The Sheeple...
Just had a look over on 'Lost In Tyme' to see which files had offended your tender sensibilities-I was unaware that you represented Daevid Allen and G.A.S.? I'm sure Robin Ayling and Daevid would be real pleased to know you were taking legal action on their behalf..I've taken the liberty of letting Daevid know about this,just in order to get their take on the matter-
I really think you are just a sad chancer who is trying his luck at this sick game..But even sad chancers can be traced through a 'whois' search and addresses and phone numbers can be located and distributed around the web..Just so everyone has a fair chance to ventilate their feelings!
You must be SO popular by now!

Anonymous said...

And Mr. Lost in Tyme. Confess? Yes, I confess that I have filed copyright complaints where anyone I represent has had their copyright violated. I welcome anything you think you can try to do, I KNOW you aren't the copyright holder, so I don't know what action you think you're going to try and do. In the US the current law allows up to $150,000 penalty for each download of a file you make available where you are violating copyright. Recently a woman was fined about $250,000 for making 20 songs available, and the case has been upheld. You guys should be thankful we're not going the legal route and we're just removing our files.

Well Mr.Asshole-
You DONT represent Gong,Daevid Allen,Gong Appreciation Society,Acid Mothers Gong or any of the other Gong family hybrids-
Go on...WHAT YOU GOT TO SAY TO THAT?

Anonymous said...

I really don't understand all this pointless battle of words. My friends, it's very plain and simple: just stop to give your money to ProgRock Records and Mindawn. If enough people are going to boycott him, Mr. Shawn will have to change his mind - and nothing else could ever make him change his mind, I assure you. Just take your money and give it to someone who deserves it, not to someone who uses it against you. Full stop.

BlackwatchPlaid said...

Blogger has been notified, according to the terms of the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that content in your blog:

unitedsounds.blogspot.com

allegedly infringes upon the copyrights of others. The content in question
is located in the following posts:

http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-trolls-concerto-grosso-3-seven.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-trolls-concerto-grosso-n-1-n-2-1971.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/sbb-anthology-disc-8-of-22-amiga-1977.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/sbb-anthology-disc-7-of-22-follow-my.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/sbb-anthology-disc-6-of-22-jerzyk-1977.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/sbb-anthology-disc-9-of-22-welcome-1979.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/08/sbb-anthology-disc-22-of-22-wicher-w.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/10/trace-white-ladies-1977-flac-vbr-205.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/06/zaal-la-lama-sottile-2006-320.html
http://unitedsounds.blogspot.com/2007/06/le-orme-contrappunti-1974-320.html
The notice that we received, with any personally identifying
information removed, will be posted online by a service called Chilling
Effects, and we will send you the link of this notice. We do this in
accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).


So tell me, what exactly did Mr. Rick Van Der Linden (copyright holder to Trace albums) have to say about his album being posted. I must hear this...

proggo said...

"Then tell me when someone uploading music which is available for free, is this illegal action ?"

Of course not. What kind of silly quetion is that?


"If someone uploading something that isn't available or oop is this illegal ?"

If someone owns the rights, yes.
How do you know they are not planning to release it?
Did you ask them?

"And btw if an artist/lebel want from someone to remove his music from his blog the only that he needs to do is to send an email to the blog's owner."

As Shawn said: You are forcing us copyright owners (musicians, composers) to spend lots of time with looking after our material. There is no reason why we should have to spend our time with sending you e-mails. You should be the one sending e-mails to the bands, asking them if you can put their music up for free distribution.

Anonymous said...

Proggo said it all. As musicians ourselves, this is the right way to do things!

Anonymous said...

It's sooo simple and helpful, if you could PLEASE change just a bit this blog into something good. Put on a few mp3s, and more samples, and drive people to buy the full albums. We should be joining forces here instead of fighting. As you know, we are several musicians asking for your understanding on this matter. Thank you!

Anonymous said...

T am the Wicked Pirate
I sail the cyber sea
I search for music old and new
For which I pay no fee

I never buy official
My rips to me are real
I am the Wicked Pirate
And I have come to steal

BlackwatchPlaid said...

Piracy involves making a profit from others' material.

still waiting for an answer to this:

So tell me, what exactly did Mr. Rick Van Der Linden (copyright holder to Trace albums) have to say about his album being posted. I must hear this...

this should be a whopper...

Oh, and there were several Kevin Coyne albums removed. What did Mr. Coyne have to say about all this as well.

These should be enlightening answers...

Anonymous said...

Dont duplicate yourself agent!

BlackwatchPlaid said...

And I am sure Klangwelt (Berlin School electronic artist) has contacted you to have his album removed as well. Yea, that's probably exactly what happened there...

BlackwatchPlaid said...

So YOYO records (label for Infected Mushroom) is also one of your affiliates, and you felt the need to remove links for that one as well because Ezren and Duvdev contacted a prog rock label.


gone from watchdog to troll. It must feel so good to get stuff deleted...

so good.....

Lost In Tyme said...

""And Mr. Lost in Tyme. Confess? Yes, I confess that I have filed copyright complaints where anyone I represent has had their copyright violated. I welcome anything you think you can try to do, I KNOW you aren't the copyright holder, so I don't know what action you think you're going to try and do.""

I also know that you are Not the copyright holder too. You act in behalf of other peop le without their knowledge and this is forbidden also (in US).


""In the US the current law..... You guys should be thankful we're not going the legal route and we're just removing our files.""

In the US the current law applies to the US citizens and not to citizens of all planet. (or you will send me the Navy ?)


""If someone owns the rights, yes.
How do you know they are not planning to release it?
Did you ask them?""

I have been contact from labals many times to remove material from my page and i had no prmlem to remove the albums.
They have also contact me and saied that the planning to reissue something so I also remove it.

But if someone makes DMCA complaints can't give me the chance to remove the links (you can say that the links will be removed automatically) but this is not an issue you know.


""As Shawn said: You are forcing us copyright owners (musicians, composers) to spend lots of time with looking after our material. There is no reason why we should have to spend our time with sending you e-mails. You should be the one sending e-mails to the bands, asking them if you can put their music up for free distribution.""

What are you talking about ?
That they don't have the time to do this ? or that i should start lokking for artist that act in late 60's early 70's to ask them if it's OK to make their album available ?
Most of them sure will says : "I'm glad that someone still like our music ! Do it !! But I'm not the owner of the rights because some F*ckers rip of me when i was younger"

What you have to say about this ?

And I will tell you something more.
If you need a war, blogs are not your enemy.
You enemy my friend is the programs that have online more than 4-5 million users.
A blog in better of the cases can have 3-4.000 users. And of course this is not 3-4.000 downloads.

But you fighting blogs because you believe that it's a easy target.
(Allow me to laught here)
As i said before the only thing that you can win, is to make me spend some money and leave blogger for a server outside US.
And then what ?
How you will hunt me mr. president ?

I suggest you to contact me if you are the owner of copyrights that you want me to remove, and not make this silly complaints.
You leave in US and your fraud actions are under the US laws.
You will have the problem at the end of the day.

proggo said...

""As Shawn said: You are forcing us copyright owners (musicians, composers) to spend lots of time with looking after our material. There is no reason why we should have to spend our time with sending you e-mails. You should be the one sending e-mails to the bands, asking them if you can put their music up for free distribution.""

"What are you talking about ?
That they don't have the time to do this ? or that i should start lokking for artist that act in late 60's early 70's to ask them if it's OK to make their album available ?"

Yes.
It's reasonable that you should ask the owner first instead of just taking their work and hand over the responsability for your actions to others.

Do you really don't get that?
Come on. Don't pretend you are stupid.


"Most of them sure will says : "I'm glad that someone still like our music ! Do it !! But I'm not the owner of the rights because some F*ckers rip of me when i was younger"

How do you know that?
You are guessing here.

Maybe you are right. Maybe they will agree to let you do it. You should ask them. If you can reach an agreement everyone will be happy.

You can not just do what you feel with others work. You must ask for permission. This is just common sense.

In some ways blogs like yours can be of good but, I repeat, you must ask for permission first.

proggo said...

"So tell me, what exactly did Mr. Rick Van Der Linden (copyright holder to Trace albums) have to say about his album being posted. I must hear this..."

If you want to know you should contact the label who released the Trace albums, or maybe Rick van der Linden himself.

Anonymous said...

In the page you are looking for now, i read many albums requested from their owners! They deleted too. Does your crawler works real cool bigbro? Fuck Ya!

BlackwatchPlaid said...

Rick van der Linden (b. Badhoevedorp, August 5, 1946 - d. Groningen, January 22, 2006) was a Dutch composer and keyboard player. Van der Linden became famous as a member of Ekseption, but played in several other bands including Trace, as well as solo. His compositions were often inspired by classical music by Johann Sebastian Bach and Ludwig van Beethoven.

He grew up in Haarlem, and started with learning to play piano when he was 13 years old. He performed with several symphony orchestras. He took his musical education at the music school in Den Haag and graduated with honour for piano, church organ, harmony and counterpoint. After his graduation he became music teacher at the Haarlem music school.

With Ekseption, Van der Linden toured through Europe, and was also successful with his other band Trace. As a soloist he released several albums, principally classical music. He worked with artists like Joachim Kuhn, Deep Purple, Phil Collins, Vangelis, Jack Lancaster and Brand X. In the band Mistral he cooperated with Robbie van Leeuwen (ex. Shocking Blue), and had hits in the Netherlands.

Rick van der Linden was struck by a CVA, and was partly paralyzed as a result. He died on January 22, 2006 in Groningen, and was buried in Hoogeveen.


Yea, I'll have to ask Rick himself I guess....

Get off it dude, you have gone power-mad with this deletion stuff. Getting blogger complaints from dead men and having you tell me to ask said dead men for permission...

Get real.

Lost In Tyme said...

************"That they don't have the time to do this ? or that i should start looking for artist that act in late 60's early 70's to ask them if it's OK to make their album available ?"

Yes.
It's reasonable that you should ask the owner first instead of just taking their work and hand over the responsability for your actions to others.

Do you really don't get that?
Come on. Don't pretend you are stupid.************

No I'm Not but what about you ?
If you read that again you'll see that i'm talking about artists that most of them are not "with us" now.

************"Most of them sure will says : "I'm glad that someone still like our music ! Do it !! But I'm not the owner of the rights because some F*ckers rip of me when i was younger"

How do you know that?
You are guessing here.************


I'm not guessing here.
I have more than 100 comments/mails
from artists that thank our blog because help them with our posts to reach new audience (sometimes bigger that the one had in their days)


************Maybe you are right. Maybe they will agree to let you do it. You should ask them. If you can reach an agreement everyone will be happy.
You can not just do what you feel with others work. You must ask for permission. This is just common sense.
In some ways blogs like yours can be of good but, I repeat, you must ask for permission first.************

The problem is that mr. president try to close my blog without think that blogs like mine help artists (even without their permission)

But i never ignore someone that feel offended by my posts.
If artist have the time to digging on myspace then sure know about blogs and if they had problems with us be sure that they send us a mail about that.

proggo said...

I don't see why you are upset.
Just get the frickin agreements from the righ owners.

Is it too much work for you?
Do you think it's better that the bands and labels spend their time chasing for these illeagal uploads?

You obviously feel that it's not too myuch too ask for from them so why don't you be responable enought to contact the bands?

Or, why don't you do like this.
Start your own record label where you release this nearly forgotten gems, then you can put up a site where people can choose if they want to download it for free, or if they want to but the album.

Then you could do that as you would then be the right owner.

This should be easy for you to do as you have 100's of bands that would be happy about it.

Lost In Tyme said...

Did i'm look like i'm upset ?
i'm not, why i should be ?

I'm wasting my time with you brainless proggo.
When you find what you lost from your head make your next comment.

""Do you think it's better that the bands and labels spend their time chasing for these illeagal uploads?""

You know that the band don't have problem with that...You have this problem.

Lost In Tyme said...

"Just get the frickin agreements from the righ owners."


You probably Not one of them mr. president.

proggo said...

"Did i'm look like i'm upset ?"

Yes.

"i'm not, why i should be ?"

Because you are complaining.

"I'm wasting my time with you brainless proggo.
When you find what you lost from your head make your next comment."

Why are you being unpleasant?
Are you not prepared to put your life and personal economy on the line for the music you love?

Are you not even prepared to spend time with getting in contact with thr right owners?

You suggest that the right owners shall do the work for you. Why don't turn it around and do the work yourself? You are the one who want to run a blog.

""Do you think it's better that the bands and labels spend their time chasing for these illeagal uploads?""

"You know that the band don't have problem with that...You have this problem."

I am one of the many band members out there who do have a problem with it. If you beleive that Mr Gordon is the only one deleting files then you are a bit naive.

Haven't you understood yet that there's a rising movement of musicians who are getting really tired of being robbed of their work?

I'm not trying to be unfriendly here. If you want to help the bands in the way you indicate, then you should start some kind of legal way to do it. Start a record label. Or get agreements from the bands that you can give away their wor without paying them.

I don't care what you do as long as you are not violating the bands.

You have no reason to act in a plump way towards me.

Why are getting hostile over the idea that you could run the blog legally?

Lost In Tyme said...

Your conclusions about me shows who you are. You believe something for me and you're trying to prove that.

At least ridiculous way of thinking.
I'm not playing your game anymore.

You don't deserve my time.

Anonymous said...

Hey Pat, glad to see you come out of the shadows a bit. Let's see, you and your girlfriend had what, like 1,000 albums pirated and you pick one guy that is dead as your example? It just so happens that Musea Records (who is part of our group) puts out SBB, Gong, Like Wendy, etc., they have over 1,000 titles and they have agreements with the copyright holders.

I did notice that despite multiple requests, you and your girlfriend continued to give copies of Camel away, despite the fact that Andy Latimer has a very serious medical condition and is in need of expensive medical treatment, and he relies on his royalty payments to pay for his health care, but that doesn't bother you thieves at all does it.

If you really have emails from people praising your work, you should post them on your blog and only have that music where the bands are happy about what you are doing. The bottom line is that there is a group of artists and labels who are not happy with you stealing their works and will stop it, on the other hand, if you have bands and labels that want to work with you, then we certainly aren't standing in your way and we encourage legal cooperation, but all I'm hearing from you guys is that we're gonna steal it no matter what because we are under the misguided and misinformed opinion that it helps the band despite any and all information to the contrary.

Shawn

doug said...

look bloggers, its very simple, copyright holder entails that they have certain rights - akin to rights of privacy that you all value highly - that will trump any of the anarchist thought swirling around. there maybe bloggers that actually work w/ the labels and remove stuff when notified but when you see links deleted that get reupped only because folks missed before they received complaints, then you lose the high ground in any event.

Anonymous said...

It's naive to assume that because an anonymous complaint was made, that complaint was legitimate.

Anonymous said...

This is bollocks-Neither you or your sister company represents Gong-I know that for fact-You are quite simply a cretinous troll.If you are so 'within the letter of the law'-Why piss about,go ahead and exersize the maximun penalties you can against bloggers and uploaders-Go on spoil yourself-You are just an empty bag of threats Shawn the Shit!

doug said...

re: "let them sue " comment....

you guys are just inviting it aren't you?

Anonymous said...

Trust me Doug-If he could-He most certainly would-And he cant!

Anonymous said...

If this arsehole was capable of raining shit on our heads he wouldnt waste his precious time crowing and moralising on these boards-We dont need his bullying and polemics,or re-educating for that matter-He needs to be told where he gets off....

vuutiprog said...

hi pnf! maybe that one is better
http://i12.tinypic.com/6wyjj1z.jpg

Shawn Gordon's Psychiatrist said...

My patient has missed his last 6 appointments, and has stopped taking his chlorpromazine. Come back to me Shawn! Schizo-Affective disorder will not go away without treatment!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Gong - http://musea.musearecords.com/ext_re_cat_con.php

If you had read anything I've written about piracy in the past year, you'd know that I think the RIAA answer by suing everyone is wrong and I prefer a campaign of education, but in the case where people willfully and continually thwart the law, I think they should be sued. I've won 2 cases so far, one in Sweden and one in New Jersey, both of which was only after I'd spent a ton of time trying to get the people to do the right thing.

Now some of you are in countries I can't do anything about, but Pat and his girlfriend live together in Pennsylvania and subject to US laws, he's actually lucky his blog got taken down, he was liable for millions of dollars in damages had he been pursued. The RIAA is just itching for some easy to win cases like that.

I'm not by nature a litigious guy. All we're doing here is getting our own stuff removed, I don't even know what you all are talking about with half these rambling diatribes. If you claim to be such big music fans, then respect the artists wishes and don't pirate their stuff. If you're all so sure that what you're doing is legal, then post your name and address on here, let's see what kind of balls you really have.

Oh yea Pat, Gary Wehrkamp asked about you yesterday, he was disappointed you never got back to him and said he would have been happy to give you some special samplers you could have legally put on your blog.

doug said...

oh heck shawn; just sign everyone up to mindawn where we can sample the entire album up to 3x and then even buy it for less than $7. if after the 3rd time you still don't like it, its gone.
now that is truly sampling, tasting , whatever that if you like the album you can afford it and if you don't, you only cost yourself an hour of listening.

Anonymous said...

I think it's rather sad when you have to rely on deleting stuff from blogs, in order to struggle on with your business, mr. Gordon. My tip: release in very small quantities so you don't have to sit with a lot of unsold stock anymore, sell it for a decent price (no more than 10 US), and aim for the peops WHO WANT AND ARE ABLE TO AFFORD the real object the CD is, with genuine printed cover etc.
My 2%.

Anonymous said...

You're under the mistaken impression that my business is doing poorly, it isn't, it is doing great actually, but part of what we are contractually obligated to do for our artists is to protect their interests, and stamping down illegal copies of their albums is part of that.

We have $10 CD's on our site, and for the first year I sold everything at that price, but once we got in to stores, we couldn't do that because we had to have the same price. Your main problem is you

#1 - have no clue what expenses go in to recording and releasing an album, the manufacturing is trivial compared to that and promotion.

#2 - have no clue how retail chains work or the ecomonics involved.

I'd love to sell everything direct at $10 a copy, but the reality is most people buy from their favorite reseller, so as soon as you get in to those resellers, you have to set your price to match the MSRP, even though they can discount it, but it's the nature of the business.

Anonymous said...

I admit it. I screwed over Andy Latimer needed health care royalties by downloading the first Camel album without buying it. Of course, then I went out and bought 'Mirage,' 'The Snow Goose,' and 'Moondawn' from my local record store (the debut was not in stock). I doubt I ever would have done this had I not tried out the first record through downloading.

Anonymous said...

err.., "Moonmadness." Sorry, my Camel CDs are in close proximity to my Klaus Schultze CDs.

Anonymous said...

And what kind of royalty payment did he ever see from that, after the middlemen have all been fed? What did it buy? A bottle of aspirin?

doug said...

"And what kind of royalty payment did he ever see from that, after the middlemen have all been fed? What did it buy? A bottle of aspirin?"

a totally different topic....
royalty rates are so whacked but from what i know, they usually get a better rate / unit sold on a botique label v a big label, the difference is in number of units sold. so theoretically, a downloaded album from a small label probably costs more to the artist than from a big label.

Anonymous said...

Doug is at least saying something sensicle, but you other two I can't figure out if you're actually stupid or are pretending to be stupid to be provocative.

Camel has like a dozen albums out, in my research I've seen between 20,000 to 100,000 downloads of each album. So at the top end we can assume they get $3 per album and 1.2 million downloads for a total of over $3.5 million dollars, at the bottom end we can assume $1 per album (figure Statutory rate on Mechanicals as a minimum which they get regardless of their royalty agreement) and 20,000 lost sales and you still have $20,000. This isn't about one guy that downloaded it or one guy that downloaded it and then bought a few copies, you're talking up in the millions of dollars potentially (and realistically).

this is what I'm talking about when I say you don't understand the economics or the scale of the whole thing because most pirates tend to think of it in their own personal microcosm and not the big picture where tens or hundreds of thousands of illegal downloads are taking place. We've actually spent the time looking at it, when all you've done is worry about your own gratification.

Anonymous said...

And for whose gratification do you run your business? Not mine, so somebody else has to look out for that. I nominate me.

Your problem is that your business model will either adapt or die, but it cannot survive in its present form given the technology freely available to perhaps a billion people. It's not anyone else's job to tell you how to do it, either. THAT's the macrocosm. Somehow, your deleting an album from a blog is going to rectify this?

There's a new thing out. It's called bit torrent. You may need to look into it, rather than grubbing after lost pennies on blogspot. And once you've attempted to deal with bit torrent, someone among those hundreds of millions of users will come up with something even more efficient and less centralized. And there will be something else after that. I will live to see the day when I can carry an entire genre of music in my wallet, if I feel like it.

As for Camel, or whomever--what if I bought the LP thirty years ago? What if I want that for my MP3 player, and don't have the time or the wherewithal to rip the vinyl and convert it? How many times should I have to buy the same album over again? I can name some I've purchased three or four times over in various formats. My money's already in the till, thank you very much.

Of course, if I bought that vinyl or CD used, the band never saw a penny and I'm perfectly within the law. Have you done the research on how much revenue you lose from that stream, vis-a-vis blogging? Has the industry tried to do anything about it?

Well yes, they did try. And failed. I've seen them try and fail over and over again. They fought against LPs being played on the radio. They fought against any records being played on the radio, back when radio was young. The technologies change and the rationale is always the same--"if they can hear it for free, they won't pay for it." They are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history.

They wanted to tax blank tape. I can't recall if they did push it through; hardly matters now. I believe they do get a cut from Music CD-R sales, and this is supposed to be distributed to the artists who "lose" income from home CD burning. Why not tap into that fund?

Has it occurred to you that the economy is in a recession? I have bought and paid for hundreds of CDs. When I have to choose between buying a couple of yours (assuming I'd even want them) or putting gas in my car? Vroom, vroom, vroom.

doug said...

"Has it occurred to you that the economy is in a recession? I have bought and paid for hundreds of CDs. When I have to choose between buying a couple of yours (assuming I'd even want them) or putting gas in my car? Vroom, vroom, vroom."

this is the type of thread that only adds more credence to shaun's argument. there is nothing re: artistic merit, its just i want it and i don't care how i get it. if you thought you were sampling before you wrote that, you are make no bones about it that you are stealing.
nobody is arguing over used cd's..i think shaun has an idea who i am and that i built up most of my lp collection getting used stuff. there are used cd outlets as well. personally, if you traded a cd with a buddy, i say that's fair use.."guilty as charged" but that it is acceptable to think that because we are in a recession, or ghas is too high, exscuses you from any guilt is preposturous.
the more i read this thread, the more i lose any sympathy for most of you.

Anonymous said...

"you don't understand the economics or the scale of the whole thing because most pirates tend to think of it in their own personal microcosm and not the big picture where tens or hundreds of thousands of illegal downloads are taking place. We've actually spent the time looking at it, when all you've done is worry about your own gratification."

Excuse me dear Shawn, I'm really stupid and I admit being so but I'd like you to explain to us why Rain was successful in selling his CD in spite of file sharing. Was it a divine miracle or maybe there's some economics in which you're not so expert and you're bypassing them when you say that "stealing is stealing"? I'll ask you again: if fil sharing is simply stealing and nothing more needs to be said about it, then why someone should be willing to be robbed, as Rain did?
Ok, I'm so terribly stupid, but are you saying that Rain is stupid too? Is stupid everyone who doesn't agree with you? That's what your're saying?

doug said...

few of you are getting it...the copyright holder has the right to do whatever he wants to do w/ his work. as much i agree that digital distribution is the wave of the future, i'm under no spell that says there will be no copyrights. if a blogger asked to allow him to share a work from the artist - nobody is arguing that. what we have here are folks trying to assume that they know what is best for the artist. if the artist wants to shoot hiomself in the foot and not be blogged, so be it. but the responsibility falls on the blogger just like it fell on radioactive records to get permission first.

Anonymous said...

And your sympathy is worth what, exactly?

I don't believe Shawn controls a single CD that I would have been inclined to buy...or even sample. He presumes an entitlement to income from sales he simply cannot make.

It's intellectually dishonest to refer to those 20,000 downloads as 20,000 lost sales, as if 20,000 people would have suddenly run to the record store and coughed up $15 for Camel's debut album. If it's no longer available on a blog, what have you achieved thereby? Please roll the footage of crazed consumers beating down the doors to the record store to get their Camel CDs, now that their downloading option has been ripped away. I'm waiting. Camel should be able to rack up 20,000 more sales in....no time at all, mmmmmmm?

That's the logical conclusion of your crusade, given the premise that these downloads represent "lost sales," and these people would have paid cash money for that Camel album if only, if only, if only.....

The dirty little secret here is that people download albums they never even get around to listening to. They download the OPTION of listening to something, simply because they can. If I walk into the record store with $100 in my pocket, I have the OPTION to buy pretty much everything I lay my eyes on. I may walk out with one CD, two, three, or none. And when I do, 500,000 potential but "lost" sales go with me. It's a wonder they didn't go out of business years ago, if that's their concept of mathematics.

People may download entire discographies, possibly because they want to compile their own best-of, and the official greatest hits album omits half their favorites. In what universe would they ever have walked into a store and bought a dozen Jefferson Airplane CDs?

20,000 lost sales? A few thousand of them already own the album in one format or another. 15,000 more read a review of Camel, made a few mouseclicks, and may or may not pursue it any further than that. Some of them might just buy a CD. Or not.

What's at stake? Millions and millions of imaginary dollars, floating down the drain!

Meanwhile--back in the real world, where people have to spend actual dollars for tangible commodities.... you have my sympathy.
Vroom, vroom, vrrrrrroooommmm.

Anonymous said...

If we the artists don't get at least some money back for our efforts, then you the fans won't get new music at some point. So you are killing future new musicians incentive to record new music for you. Unless you can tell me that many new musicians are going to spend thousands of dollars on recording gear to record things for you for free, and not get any money back from it because you people steal. The only reason we have the classic prog groups of the past is because PEOPLE PAID FOR THEIR MUSIC. so, no buying music = no music made. All you proggers will never get new prog one of these days because you kill the artists incentive.

Anonymous said...

"All you proggers will never get new prog one of these days because you kill the artists incentive."

Maybe you're true, but don't you think that you musicians and you publishers are killing the customers incentive by treating them like thieves and by giving them less and less rights? You have no NATURAL right over EVERY copying process. The copyright law originally (in USA) said you had a 14-years monopoly - starting from first release - over COMMERCIAL copies. Never talked about NON COMMERCIAL copying. That 14-years period was a good compromise between publishers/authors rights AND customers rights. Now, thanks to publishers lobbying, you have a copyright duration (in USA) up to 95-years monopoly starting from EVERY author's death. What about customers rights? Do you care about them? Not at all, aren't you? But doing so you are turning your customers into enemies, and enemies won't give you money no more. that's for sure.

Sakalli said...

My blog was shutdown by blogspot a few weeks ago. I've opened a new blog to post a notice and ask for help. Would be glad if you could publish this post and update the new link in your sidebar.

http://sakallimusic2.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

At the end of the day music is an industry that sells product. If you don't want to pay for the product, you don't have to. I am not aware of any basic human right that suggests you should be allowed free music. Music is not air or water, you don't need it to survive. I am sure there are some artists who are happy to see their albums on a blog, but I'm more than positive there are artists who don't want them on here either. It amazes me that people get upset when asked to remove content, and throw their arms up as if some injustice had just occurred. Unless you have somehow obtained master tapes or lost demo's not released on any format, someone somewhere spent money in an attempt to sell the music, and successful or not it doesn't give anyone the right to "share it".

In regards to "death to labels" and this celebration had by many, I'm not sure they realize they are celebrating the demise of music as we know it. If you think there isn't much creativity now, wait for a few years when low profit margins prevent companies from taking risks on new and original artists. It also makes me laugh when people defend downloading by suggesting that they use blogs to "discover" and "find" new music. Do they not realize this is what labels do? Labels go through hundreds of demos hand selecting which ones should be released. Anyone who comes to Prog not Frog and discovers “music” should be hoping labels survive, as it’s obvious you need someone to take you by the hand and help you learn about music. My entire life I have purchased albums blindly. My first copy of Toncho Pilatoes. My first copy of Aguaturbia. My first copy of Tom and his friends. Yes, I purchased many terrible albums, but I also found gems well before any reissue or blog existed. This is what people do who actually buy music. We discover for ourselves. If you don’t, then be thankful for labels. They are doing the job for you. Labels are supposed to make money, it's a reward for the investment and risk taken. For every story regarding an indy band that is using the internet to gain a fan base, there are 1000 or more bands that are dying because there is no longer an environment that requires people to purchase music.

I'm all for Prog not Frog, but I don't pretend that when I download an album is it legal. I have been fortunate enough to work in the music industry for many years, and the situation is much worse then people think. I have made a very decent (but modest) living as an independent artist, but even people like myself who tour various countries and small cities see's an end to my lifestyle. I question how I can make money, as shows aren't as easy to book, cd's are next to impossible to sell, and even the vinyl market seems to be drying up.

Anonymous said...

There will always be music, and there will always be somebody willing to pay to hear it. The labels and the star system may well collapse. So what? Historically, it's a blip on the screen that anyone could hope to make a living playing pop music. Getting rich doing that is out of the question for 99.999% of musicians. 100 years ago, it was out of the question for 100% of them.

Labels as we knew them may not survive that much longer. True, they used to sort, select and reject music for release. Their judgment was no better than anyone else's, and often worse. (Or the Beatles would have signed to Decca.) The A&R department is useless in an era where people make their own decisions. It never was particularly competent, which is why 90% of the albums you bought on a wing and a prayer were garbage. You had to do the A&R's job yourself, even after they had done theirs. So what good were they ever?

As you said, music is a luxury. Industries do die. The oldest cliche is that the customer is always right. Who is the customer? Anyone who might--or might not--spend their money on your product.

We've already dispensed with the "lost sales" argument. Industries that alienate their customers die first.

It's comforting to have a scapegoat. The absurdities of copyright law (as it is currently written) make it so much easier.

People no longer light their homes with whale oil and kerosene lamps, and eventually they won't be using gasoline either.

That's the lesson of history. Adapt to the reality around you, or go under.

Anonymous said...

"All you proggers will never get new prog one of these days because you kill the artists incentive."

not us but you!
you are trying to distort the meaning of prog.

prog will gone? it is already gone because of the bosses like you!

kingpossum said...

Hey deleter,
When you sold your Corolla, did you send some of the money you got for it to Toyota? I didn't think so.

Bloggers don't profit by posting music. They give exposure to it. And that's the first thing that has to happen for musicians to profit. Labels that leave the stuff in the vaults are the ones who deny income to the artist--not the blogger.

As for in-print titles--again, bloggers promote these, which is good for the artist. Before somebody can buy something, they have to know it exists.

Too much of the time, labels view their artists' back catalogue being more valuable as collateral so they can get favorable loan rates so they can buy themselves new cars. How does that help the artist? It doesn't.

How do you help the artist by deleting and denying them exposure? You don't. You're in the same camp as the labels.

Only with a larger amount of loathsome, unmerited self-importance.

Rock on, Frog

Anonymous said...

"Bloggers don't profit by posting music."

How come so many ask for donations ?

Anonymous said...

To break even.

doug said...

"Bloggers don't profit by posting music. They give exposure to it. And that's the first thing that has to happen for musicians to profit. Labels that leave the stuff in the vaults are the ones who deny income to the artist--not the blogger."

but you are not the copyright holder. it is up to the copyright holder to determine how he sees his work diseminated. are there inequities when items disaapear from public, oh yes, but is it up to you to decide? i'm not that much of a hard-ass on oop stuff, i kinda with you on that one as the digital age creates perpetual inventory such that nothing should ever go oop, but in-print stuff, if you don't have that ok and its deleted, let it go.

Anonymous said...

"but is it up to you to decide?"

Yes, it is. Customers give money, so ultimately it's customers choice. If you don't like a musician's or publisher's behaviour, simply don't give them your money and they'll be forced to reconsider.

Anonymous said...

Hello? We're well into the 21st century. The phrase "copyright holder" already means something very different than it did in the late 20th century. For too long, the pendulum swung too far one way. What we see now is the inevitable correction of the excesses of the recent past. The courts will play catch-up soon enough. This may require a generational change to work its way through the system. If this is the case, then that change will last for at least a generation.

In other words, get used to it.

The words, "king," "duke," "marquis," "viceroy," and "thane" don't mean what they used to either. More to the point, most of them don't mean anything anymore. "Copyright holder?" What is that? What did it used to mean, and why? It doesn't anymore. It was some bizarre abstraction, not unlike papal infallibility. In the real world, we all know this. We have known it for years and long since moved on. Elvis has left the building.

As often as not, 100 years ago, pop music never even got a copyright because it wasn't worth the bother. Get used to that, too. Everything old is new again.

Anonymous said...

http://sigfrid.wordpress.com/2008/01/07/decriminalize-file-sharing/

Anonymous said...

I don't see how anyone can defend PNF by suggesting the music is "lost" or "old". I'd say close to 80% of the music on this blog is taken from a CD reissue. If you guys were ripping vinyl lp's it would help your argument, but they keep upload CD's and reissues.

We also have people on here suggesting copywrite holders and the laws are no longer valid. lol

For a second, I'll be just as ignorant.

I think your SS # or your credit card information should be "shared" online. I think we should share everything. Why not? If someone can be ignorant enough to think copyright laws are no longer valid or should be re-written, I say anything on the net should be free of penalties also. lol

Any idea pertaining to inventions, original ideas, technology etc.. should be open to everyone to copy and steal. Operating systems registration, software keys and dongles, and video game protection should be illegal. All software should be free and shared on the net.

I should be able to create a running shoe and call it Nike without having to pay any royalties

Any technology developed within the USA should be shared free to China so they can develop it cheaper, and destroy the US economy.

Anything on this planet should be shared. I'm sure this will make the world a better place.

Anonymous said...

You are the only one that destroys US economy. jerk

Billy Mitchel said...

I’ve read a little bit about a certain individual taking measures to delete links on several prog themed music blogs.

After reading that a few individuals have decided to stop posting I would encourage all bloggers being subject to deleted links on sites like rapidshare to switch to torrent-based distribution.

There are a few options. First, sign up to a private tracker and set up a prog community within the tracker, giving album info etc in the comment section of a posted torrent. You could even link back to your blog. The downside is that sometimes private trackers are difficult to sign up to.

Second option is to use a public tracker. This option will allow you to keep your blog and simply post a link to the torrent file on your blog. Anyone who downloads the torrent can access the files, as long as they are seeded.

Both of these methods are impervious to link deletion and will let the music reach an even larger audience.

I am really so sick of these industry/label types trying to ram their failed business models down our throats. Sharing is a great way to discover new music, the internet has been an incredible tool for archiving lost music. Lets keep these great blogging communities going.

proggo said...

Why don't you bloggers contact the bands and labels and make agreements with them?

Anonymous said...

"Why don't you bloggers contact the bands and labels and make agreements with them?"

Because you sacred and beloved copyright law says that we should contact EVERY SINGLE RIGHT OWNER as long as the 75th year since EVERY SINGLE ORIGINAL AUTHOR DEATH is not passed. You see, it's not always that easy to find EVERYONE OF THEM, in fact it would be a full time work. Talking of laws that benefit culture...

Anonymous said...

Aaaaarrrrrrrrhhhh!
Just let me get me wooden leg on and this damned parrot off me shoulder..All you scurvy dogs are a disgrace to piracy! I dont mean you Shawn,I'm talking about these poor excuses for pirates postin' on these boards,they goes around stealin'music off the web,lining their pockets with the profits of record company executives (never mind the meagre percentage left over for the struggling artist)..and then,when they're cornered-they gets all guilty like,justifying yerselves and then starts acting like frightened rabbits..Well they should all be made to walk the damned plank,all the way down to Davy Jones 500 gigabyte locker! Yer all a disgrace to your profession!I mean,youre here for stealing music and downloadin'aintcha?..Then yous all pirates-be proud of it and be damned! That there Shawn fella,he should be given the black spot for his outright impudence-fancy,walkin' into a den of pirates and throwin' his more than ample weight around..aaarrrrhhh Wheres me buck'nears?-whaddya mean there on me buckin' head????

Anonymous said...

Shiver me timbers!..Have none o' you bilge rats got anything to say for yerselves? Arrrrgggggghhhhh!..That damned parrots gone crapped in me rum! Thats the third time hes done it this week-I blame you Shawn-Hang him from the yardarm lads!

Anonymous said...

http://www.p2pconsortium.com/index.php?showtopic=15274

Anonymous said...

Arrrr! Thanks for the link Jim Lad...But I's not interested in any parties see,unless they involves Shawn paying for the rum and theres lots of booty and mp3s to steal,come to think of it...I doesnt even like music,unless its sea-shanties (That album by Khan wasnt all that bad I suppose!)I'm just here for lootin' and thievin'-after all thats what us pirates does! Aaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

Anonymous said...

Of course sharing is not forbidden!!! When I buy a CD and want to hear it (this means SHARE it) with a friend (or with 100 friends) and enjoy it together, there is nothing illegal. The blogs make the same - we are a community of friends and we hear and like the same music. WE SHARE IT!
Ivan from Bulgaria

doug said...

i don't think sharing and making copies for friends is an issue so thats a red herring. putting up material for anyone to copy and then they can do the same is distribution w/out compensation.

Anonymous said...

This argument is repetitive and tedious and really doesnt look like its winning any new converts.
Next step?

Anonymous said...

Next Step - let's get back to stealing music!

Anonymous said...

Aaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrr!!!!!!
Thats MORE like it!

The6070Rock said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The6070Rock said...

I agree with the guy who said:

"Anything on this planet should be shared. I'm sure this will make the world a better place."

Sounds good...

But i think its not a original idea (pirated idea ???). I read some like that in an ancient book, write over 2000 years ago.

Yeah, its a good idea, anyway.

ROCK ON

progric said...

"Of course sharing is not forbidden!!! When I buy a CD and want to hear it (this means SHARE it) with a friend (or with 100 friends) and enjoy it together, there is nothing illegal. The blogs make the same - we are a community of friends and we hear and like the same music. WE SHARE IT!
Ivan from Bulgaria"

It IS illegal. It is uploaded against the bands will. That someone calls it "sharing" just to make it sound like a friendly thing to do does not change that.

You can call it whatever you want, but it is illegal and it IS to steal.

progric said...

"Anything on this planet should be shared. I'm sure this will make the world a better place."

Sounds fine to me. Please share your money with me 'cause I could really use it. What about sharing your income with me? 50%? Ok?

6070Rock !!!! said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
6070Rock !!!! said...

You dont need to promise me you'll share love, peace, friendship, human heat, light and faith. I can share over 50% of my "income" with you anyway.

But pay attention, bloggers got no money. Its just for pleasure.
Its my "income". Still wants ?

ROCK ON

Anonymous said...

I've been visiting several blogs (including PNF) for quite some time and I think the best solution is to post only rarities from the past, because those rarities are the ones that in any other way perhaps would never be known. I think posting music from less-than-unknown artists or albums released in the last few years makes the site more likely to be attacked and even closed (see what has happened in the last few days with such great blogs as Lost In Tyme and HeavyRockSpectacular)

Is sharing music illegal? Maybe. That's why I prefer downloading music from decades ago (music from artists I have never heard in the first time) or music from the last years from non-U.S. and non-english artists, because if you go to a place like amazon perhaps you won't find that music there. So, I allow some "illegality" myself to know some artists that in any other way I'll never know of them.

If I want to adquire an album from a band that I already know, like King Crimson, I'll just (try to) buy it. If I find on the net an album from a forgotten band that I don't have a clue of their music, probably I'll download the album and give it a try. Would I purchase their albums later? Maybe yes, maybe not. That's the margin of "illegality" I allow myself.

So, is it illegal to download music? I think it is, as illegal it was to tape cassettes from LP's (and from CD's) in the past. But people always takes advantage from those "leaks" that technology permits (the same happened with cassettes) and that strictly speaking are against the law, so every blog user decides how much of this "leak" he/she will take advantage. Regarding to me, I'll buy some albums and download some others (mostly rarities). Though I buy at least one or two CD every week, it's almost impossible to buy in years all the rarities you can download in weeks.

So, my point is to stick to unknown bands (preferably from the past) and rarities to avoid attacks to the blog.

Anonymous said...

I agree.

Anonymous said...

As a matter of fact, IT IS legal to tape albums in the US. The legal precedent goes back over thirty years. The Supreme Court ruled that in the 70s. You never were breaking the law.

The record companies got their underwear in a bunch, and launched a campaign around the idea that "home taping is killing music."

Sound familiar?

Anonymous said...

making a tape for yourself or even 10 friends can hardly be compared to putting an album on line where a billion people can download it. With tapes, there was still expense involved in the media to put it on, with downloading, you rip it, upload it and tell your billion friends to come and get it.

Anonymous said...

In other words, it is your belief that you would be a billionaire if no blog posted your album.

How very... quaint.

Anonymous said...

are you actually stupid or just pretending to be stupid. Do you honestly not understand the analogy? I can try to do it with stick figures so it makes sense, just let me know.

Anonymous said...

Scroll up. We dispensed with the "lost sales" argument several days ago, among others. Are you actually stupid, or just pretending to be stupid?

There is nothing to be learned from one who suffers from some delusion that a computer, broadband access and blank discs can be had for free...particularly since it wouldn't matter even if they were.

It makes very little difference how many people download the thing. Some of them already own it. Many of them may never even listen. Some will shudder and delete it if they do. Some remaining fraction are potential customers.

More to the point, they were.
Then came the children's crusade.

musewarp said...

Uploading/downloading without the permission of copyright owner is a crime. It does not matter how much you justify yourselves with this or that argument.

It's a crime.

You are putting yourselves above the law and, most of all, you are stealing from the bands when you do it against their will.

Is that so fucking hard to understand?

Anonymous said...

"The recording industry constantly asks, 'What's the difference between downloading a song and stealing a CD?' but their own numbers reveal the difference. If I steal a CD, then there is one less CD to sell. Every taking is a lost sale. But on the basis of the numbers the RIAA provides, it is absolutely clear that the same is not true of downloads. If every download were a lost sale - if every use of Kazaa robbed the author of his profit - then the industry would have suffered a 100 percent drop in sales last year, not a 7 percent drop. If 2.6 times the number of CDs sold were downloaded for free, and yet sales revenue dropped by just 6.7 percent, then there is a huge difference between downloading a song and stealing a CD."

Lawrence Lessig, "Free Culture", chapter 5.
Free and legal download here:
http://www.free-culture.cc/freecontent/

Anonymous said...

Oh no, not that stupid argument again. Nobody ever said that every single downloads = a lost CD sale.

I repeat:
Uploading/downloading without the permission of copyright owner is a crime. It does not matter how much you justify yourselves with this or that argument.

It's a crime.

You are putting yourselves above the law and, most of all, you are stealing from the bands when you do it against their will.

Is that so fucking hard to understand?

Anonymous said...

I'm reminded of "Joe's Garage." The government felt that if everyone was a criminal, everyone would be under their thumb--so they made music illegal.


The argument that "stealing" takes place was dispensed with awhile ago as well. Nothing is missing from your inventory. The fact is, nobody needs anything of yours. Whether or not you make a sale is entirely at the discretion of the customer. Piss them off and they're gone forever. It works out very well... for your competitors.

Laws vary from place to place, and from time to time. The law is morally neutral. Everything the Nazis did was within the law; they were very meticulous about that and took pride in it. The law is as relative as any other thing in the real world.

Here are some laws currently on the books in Texas:


*It is illegal to sell one's eye.

*A program has been created in the state that attempts to control the weather.

*When two trains meet each other at a railroad crossing, each shall come to a full stop, and neither shall proceed until the other has gone.

*It is illegal to take more than three sips of beer at a time while standing.

*Up to a felony charge can be levied for promoting the use of, or owning more than six dildos.

*It is illegal for one to shoot a buffalo from the second story of a hotel.

*It is illegal to milk another person’s cow.

*A recently passed anticrime law requires criminals to give their victims 24 hours notice, either orally or in writing, and to explain the nature of the crime to be committed.

*The entire Encyclopedia Britannica is banned in Texas because it contains a formula for making beer at home.


There isn't a human being alive who hasn't put their self "above the law" in some capacity or other.

Prohibitions historically are unenforceable and counterproductive. The law you cite made sense in the conditions that obtained 75 years ago. So did some of the ones just mentioned. In the not too distant future, laws against file sharing will turn up on lists such as these. They are no sillier than laws against wearing shoes to bed.

Anonymous said...

YOU dispensed with the lost sale argument because it is inconvenient for you to accept that what you are doing is costing sales, it is costing sales, it is a simple fact. The only thing agreed on is that there isn't a one to one correlation between a stolen copy and a lost sale.

Anonymous said...

Agreed upon? Outside of your own head, you have failed to establish that any copy has been "stolen."

It was posited earlier that ("on the low end") 20,000 downloads equal 20,000 lost sales, and a dollar figure was put upon the "damage" done thereby. The underlying silliness of such an argument was thoroughly explored and summarily dismissed.

This may well be inconvenient for you to accept, and harassment of blogs is costing sales. It is a simple fact.

Anonymous said...

Uploading/downloading without the permission of copyright owner is a crime. It does not matter how much you justify yourselves with this or that argument.

It's a crime.

You are stealing from the bands when you do it against their will.

Is that so fucking hard to understand?

makro said...

"This may well be inconvenient for you to accept, and harassment of blogs is costing sales. It is a simple fact."

No it's not.

Anonymous said...

To upload music against the will of the bands or the copyright holder is a crime.

Anonymous said...

"...unauthorized copying, hiring, renting, public performance or broadcasting of this recording without permission is a violation of applicable laws..."

Labels very similar to this one appear on most or all commercials Cd's and Lp's. Technically speaking, not only uploading/downloading music to/from a blog is a violation of the law, but also burning CD's from friends or relatives, taping cassettes (when they were used) and even performing songs on a radio station (airwave or Internet) without permission of the authors.

So, in a way or another, almost everybody who consumes or had consumed music is or has been a little bit criminal. :-)

This is a criminal world indeed!! :-)

Anonymous said...

To avoid spending endless hours debating illegal downloading we decided to write this.

First of all everyone must accept as fact that illegal downloading, bloggers that upload entire albums for people to download for free and torrents doing what they refer to as "sharing music" is really a disaster for the artists financially.

There is a direct link between the increased illegal "free" downloading and the decreasing amount of music being sold. That is a fact. No matter what arguments downloader's like to use to justify what they are doing, the facts are there.

Here are some typical arguments from those who think it is a good thing to offer other's music for free (not many have thought about the fact that it is other's music - they created it). Under these you will find our response.

1) We are only doing the bands a favour, making them more known.

Well, in a way, yes. They are more known to people who don't pay for
the pleasure of listening. They are not getting better known to the people who buy the music. These are usually not visiting these places - blogs, torrents etc -
where the stolen music is found. They have other ways to find out about new music they want to buy and listen to.

2) It is only the evil record companies who lose money.

Hmmm. Let's think some about that statement. Let's see. Most record companies pay the artists an agreed royalty per sold CD, so if the music is given away for free then it must be that the artists will get paid less. So therefore it is also the artists who lose money from this.

And let us think some more. If the record companies don't get any money from CD sales they can not afford much promotion, so, hmmm let's see...oh, then the bands will not get exposure to their potential audience, they won't know about the artists work. This must lead to the fact that if people buy the CD's they are helping the artists to get better known.

This maybe leads to: So, if the record companies work to make the artists better known and pay them for their work...can it then be that they are actually helping the artists? Could it actually be that the artists like to work with the record companies? Could it even be that most of the people running these evil record companies are doing it because they love the music and want to do something good for the artists by making to possible for them to have their music released
without needing to take care about all the administration work? Can it also be that the artists are happy about the fact that the record companies invest money - and thereby are taking financial risks - in their music? Well, it seems that the record companies working this way are not so evil after all, but we do recognize that there has been abuse in the past by the large and established labels, this isn't true typically with the smaller labels, however this is still no justification, it is for the courts to decide.

3) The record companies are stealing my money when they charge me $18
for a CD. It only cost them $1 to produce a CD.

Is that so? Is that the actual cost for a music album? Let's have a look at the costs.
The CD does cost about $1-$2 to press.
But there is some thing's that must be done before one can press the CD.
Something called "Glass master" costs about $800.
The mastering session normally costs between $1000 and $2000.
Creating the artwork for the booklet and CD can easily cost $2,000 to $5,000
Mixing costs from $5,000 to $10,000
What about the recordings?
To rent a high quality studio with a professional sound engineer is what all artists dream of.This gives them the opportunity to focus on the performance.
Here the costs can be between $5000 up to $100000...or more.
So, therefore many bands buy their own equipment and do it by themselves.
Sometimes with a very good result but most often the end result would
have been even more enjoyable if they could afford to rent a studio and
pay a professional studio technician.
And there are more costs involved. In most countries one must pay for
publishing rights.
And...to pay the bands of course also must be considered as a cost.
Promotion copies being sent out are another cost. Advertising is another cost.
So, what are we looking at here.
Well, for the first pressing it is more like $6 per CD.
And then they are sold to distributors at $7 or $8 + shipping costs.
The distributors then sell them at about $11 - $12 + shipping costs.
So, when retailers sell these at $16 - $18 they do not earn very much per CD.
The band gets some little and the record company earn almost nothing
on the first pressing.

For the second, third etc pressing there is some money coming in, but
many releases do not sell enough to do these pressings. Considering
that the staff at the record companies need to get paid to make a
living these titles are losses, so the ones who do sell a bit more
must make enough to make ends meet.

Where is the greediness? Where are those evil people who run the business?

Can it be that it's the illegal downloaders who have invented these characters to justify their immoral and illegal actions when they are taking the music, getting pleasure from it without giving anything in return for it? Because this is what they do! They enjoy the work of the artists, who are helped by their record company, without giving anything in return! Is that being a fan? Is that a good way to show appreciation?

Oh, and a CD costs less now in real dollars than they did 20 years ago, if you adjust for inflation, they cost a lot less.

4) How shall I know what to buy if I can not download and listen to it first?

Well, this makes some sense. There are a few out there who use free downloads for this purpose and that is of course perfectly ok, but also a slippery slope. However these people make up about 1% of the people downloading, so we are forced to say:
"Sorry, there are too many people out there stealing the artists
work so we can not allow it".

On the other hand, there are plenty of opportunities to find some of the songs from the albums available as legal free downloads on the artists and record companies websites. Labels and artists are trying to let you try before you buy in as reasonable manner as possible, but to give away entire albums does not work, people just are not likely to pay for something that they've already gotten for free.

Former IQ keyboardist Martin Orford says: "Just imagine going into a supermarket and eating whatever food you like as you go round. If challenged
you can just say that you're trying before you buy and if any of the products
appeal to you then you might consider spending money on them one day.
Of course the supermarket would quite rightly take you to court."

The same must apply to music.

5) I live in a poor country and can not afford buying CD's

The world is far from perfect. Life is not fair. Most of us on this planet wish it was differently. But it can not be right that the record companies should be the one's
responsible for changing the future of this planet. The arguments for "giving something back to the artists for enjoying the music" can in this case be applied as: Even if you live in a country with a bad economy, please at least do what you can, after all, you're paying for your internet connection so it can't be that bad. Buy at least a couple of downloads and take the music that is put up legally. These two things together should give you many hours of music pleasure. The
artists would very much appreciate if you do what you can to support them. And perhaps you would feel good about it yourself, knowing that you are a true fan. Artists and fans should work together.

6) It's just data, I'm not stealing a physical CD

Well, let's say that I electronically get in to your bank account and empty so I can use the money to buy things I can't afford. It's a similar principal again, I didn't actually steal your wallet or purse and the money in it, I just moved some data out of your account and in to mine, which is only fair because I can't afford all the things I want, so you should help me. Pirates like to say this isn’t a fair argument, but it is exactly the same, you’re being deprived, electronically, of money/income.

7) Oh yea? Well what about when people taped albums and shared them?

There is a significant difference in ability and cost to make a cassette copy of an album and give that to some friends, you’re going to be limited in how many you could realistically do, let’s call it 20 copies. If those people make copies and hand them out, the quality degrades with each generation, you can only go a few times. With a digital copy and the internet, you make a perfect copy (more and more people are using CD quality fidelity now, which also destroys the “I’m just checking it out” argument) which can be downloaded millions of times by millions of people, if only 1% of those people are prevented from purchasing because they were able to get it this way for free, that’s a lot of sales.

To sum up, we don’t want you to put our material up for “sharing” without our permission

Anonymous said...

Well quite long. My eyes hurt.

Here's another list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pro_and_anti-warez_arguments

I feel really guilty now and instantly deleted 200000 mp3s from my harddisks.

Oh I forgot to delete the backup...

Anonymous said...

"7) Oh yea? Well what about when people taped albums and shared them?

There is a significant difference in ability and cost to make a cassette copy of an album and give that to some friends, you’re going to be limited in how many you could realistically do, let’s call it 20 copies"

1 copy, 5 copies, 20 copies, 100 copies, 20000 copies. I think according to the law, any number of copies is illegal.

That's what I say the problem is not whether downloading is "illegal" or not (drugs are illegal too, but a lot of musicians use them and nobody complains). The problem is how downloading affects record sales, isn't it?

That's how the problem should be focused, not on the "criminality" of it.

Anonymous said...

Gimme names! who are them?? i will delete them from my collection.lol

Anonymous said...

You find the lomg comment here:

http://progagainstpirates.blogspot.com/

Mostly boring Neo Prog Bands like Pendragon, Flower Kings, Sylvan, IQ.

Anonymous said...

"1 copy, 5 copies, 20 copies, 100 copies, 20000 copies. I think according to the law, any number of copies is illegal.

That's what I say the problem is not whether downloading is "illegal" or not (drugs are illegal too, but a lot of musicians use them and nobody complains). The problem is how downloading affects record sales, isn't it?"

Yes. True.

That's how the problem should be focused, not on the "criminality" of it."

It is immoral, unethical, in no way any help to the bands AND a criminal act. As long as the bloggers are not asking for permission and post only agreed upon music, it is a crime.

Anonymous said...

Lousy criminals - we heard that often - too often.

We learned that those PAP bands are in fact mediocre POP bands.

You can leave a comment which Prog bands a real pirate should hear at:

http://progforpirates.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

"Lousy criminals - we heard that often - too often."

Criminals usually don't like to be called...criminals. They prefer to be called "filesharers" but they are criminals just the same.

Anonymous said...

Thanks shawn gorgon!, you bagbiter. By you closing the blogs, now we have all found underground places and are sharing lossless cds like never before. Everything backfired on you :))) Oh, and yeah, none of us will ever buy a stinking CD from any of your artists again :))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

justanothersucker said...

dear friend of music, artist, listener, producer, blogger ...

it seems to me that the old days are gone! this little company from redmond made it happen. and now we're in deep shit. the old roules don't work anymore. we're lost, in a twilight-zone. I love it!!!! the whole business is tumbeling. amazon is DRM-free now, the stones qitt EMI, Raidiohead did it - and they made $4 per download - and I think that's a fair price (in the western? - developed?? - civilized??? world) for a CD! can someone (company) have patents of genes, medicaments, arts?
as I said, we live in funny times and I'll be glad to see what happens next.

greetings from absurdistan

Anonymous said...

So, tell us proggo, how long have you been blowing Shawn Gordon??

proggo said...

This is redicolous.
Do you really beleive that Shawn Gordon or the other PAP members are the only one's responsable for deleting files and making complaints to blog companies?

Have you not yet understood that there is a movement going on, maybe to some extent influenced by PAP, which simply are tired of having their work stolen?

Another truly redicolous thing is comments as the one above.

Anonymous said...

shut up! you were the only deleters! from the beginning! DCMA sends and asks kindly to remove content! You are frog mafia!

so tell me honestly, which band label are you in proggo?

We We We... dont hide at Wes'!

Anonymous said...

"This is redicolous.
Do you really beleive that Shawn Gordon or the other PAP members are the only one's responsable for deleting files and making complaints to blog companies?"


http://melosprogbazaar.com/index.php?topic=8218.msg58697#msg58697

:)))))))))))))))))))

proggo said...

"shut up! you were the only deleters! from the beginning!"

You have the right to beleive what you want. Nevertheless, you are wrong.


"DCMA sends and asks kindly to remove content! You are frog mafia!"

Frog mafia?
Isn't that what you guys are?

hansi said...

Hello Anonymous,

I see that you have choosen to point to one of my comments at Melo's Prog Bazaar in order to prove that PAP is behind all the deleted files.

Sorry to have to inform you that this is not valid. What we have done is that we are deleting the albums of which we are the owners.
Other labels are deleting the albums that they own. Bands themselves are deleting their stuff.

There is no need to delete all files. In fact, only a few illegally uploaded files is enough reason to have it shut down.

The only way to not get shut down is to not upload copywritten material without permission.

What you should no is this:
Even though we feel that it is wrong that we should have to spend our time with contacting the blog owners to ask them to remove our releases, we did.

This is how it started. We kindly sent out notes to the blog owners but...no one - not even one - did respond by removing the files. Not even one.

So, we decided to do it by deleting the files and sending DMCA complaints.

And why?
Because neither we or the bands do agree to having our work given away without our permission.

As I said many times. We think that bands and fans should work together, but not on the premisses that anyone can just take our work and do whatever they want with it.
Because that is a situation were only the bands or labels are working without getting anything in return.

It must be a 2-way thing.
As long as the bloggers/downloaders mainly work on the basis of taking whatever they want without asking (and not even removing the files per request) it is a 1-way situation where the downloaders want it for free without giving anything back.

We do not agree on those terms.

If you have any creative ideas of how to do it in the fashion so that it becomes a win-win situation you are welcome.
But, please respect that we are already doing our best to maintain a win-win situation and that we know all about costs and other things, so, please don't be disappointed if your idea is turned down as "unworkable".

Yet, your ideas are welcomed because brilliant ideas might pop up from anywhere.

All the best,

Hansi

Lost In Tyme said...

""This is how it started. We kindly sent out notes to the blog owners but...no one - not even one - did respond by removing the files. Not even one.""

I get 2 DMCA complaints and 0 mails or comments for removing something...
(well, i had 2 or 3 in the past and i had removed the links...)

What you have to say about this ?
Who's gonna believe you ?
I'm not this one who can listen to your lies.

Be responsible at least to yourself.

Anonymous said...

Hansi you dont have respect to yourself! Who are you Hans Zun?
Dont hide your nicks assholes!

Anonymous said...

PNF put god fear to their hearts :)

you can fool some people sometime
you cant fool all the people all the time!

Anonymous said...

Aaaaarrrrrrrrr!
It be high time for us pirates to fire a broadside at the likes of old Hansi and Shawn...Show em' who really rules the cyber-seas!!
Wheres them hackers?
Keep on sharin'me lads-hold firm now!

Capt.Vivian O'Blivion.

Anonymous said...

cheers Hansi!

http://rateyourmusic.com/artist/cross

hansi said...

"Anonymous said...
Hansi you dont have respect to yourself! Who are you Hans Zun?
Dont hide your nicks assholes!"

This was posted by "anonymous".
It speaks for itself doesn't it?

Naha,

I understand that english is not your native language, but please do your best to get things right.

I gave you a perfect explanation and you still try to use my comment at Melo's as some kind of "proof". It's not valid.

When I say "we" I mean the many bands and labels that are involved in PAP. There are many of them deleting and reporting. Not all of them dare to be on the list due to downloaders harassing them.

Yes, that's how it is.
Downloaders are harassing musicians when they don't agree to give them their music for free.

They are doing their best to force musicians to give them their works wothout getting paid.

That is not what I wpuld call being friendly.

As I said: The reason we are deleting and reporting is that you have not asked for permission.

I can also tell you that, as far as I remember, have not found any of our releases on PNF and therefore have not deleted any.

You are way out of line when you are hanging me out like this, trying to make me "guilty".

You are talking about being friendly, but I see nothing of that here.

I repeat:
"Anonymous said...
Hansi you dont have respect to yourself! Who are you Hans Zun?
Dont hide your nicks assholes!"

This was posted by "anonymous".
It speaks for itself doesn't it?

I will not respond to more thing's at this forum.

nahavanda said...

hans i am not like you

Anonymous said...

I have not followed all the posts that have been sent on this subject, but it is obvious that there are two very polarised opinions. On the one hand there are those who want to share the music they like and believe that in doing so they are helping to promote bands who would otherwise remain unknown. On the other hand there are artists and record companies who feel that they are being robbed because their music is being given away. Both arguements have strong valid points, but there is a middle path which could make everyone happy.

First I want to say that MP3s can sell CDs, and I say this from my own experience. I have been to many artists and record company web sites where MP3 files are available. I've downloaded a batch, written them to CD and then played them at home or in the car, and when I've found a band I like I've ordered the CD. As a sales tool it can work. But I am not going to order the CD if the whole album is available for free and to be honest I don't think many people would. However, the most important part of a download is the "Bit rate". If files are available at 128Kbs or above then to my ears they sound good and I wouldn't buy the album. But at say 96Kbs you have something that is listenable but is definitely not CD quality.

I would suggest that the answer to the war that seems to be raging would be some kind of Code of Behaviour. If you want to share good music then how about these rules:

1) No complete album to posted at any bit rate above an agreed value . I suggest 96Kbs but the exact value could be debated.

2) If high quality bit rate tracks are offered then no more than 2 per album where that represents 10 % of the albums playing time.

3) Vinyl burns , with all their crackles and pops , should be allowed, at high bit rates, as there are still so many albums, and singles, that have never been issued in CD format, and let's face it, if you like an album and it is available on CD then you will want to get the clearer sound offered by CD.

The internet is a wonderful way to access music that you might otherwise never hear. Would it not be better for Bands, Record companies, and Fans if a compromise could be reached ?


Anthony Harland
UK

P.A.P. said...

Hello Anthony,

All your suggestions are spot on.
There is actually 1 such site up now. www.evergrey.fr

The guy running it has permission form the labels to put up between 1 and 3 tracks from each album.

A Code of Behaviour or Code of Honor is what we are trying to achive. Unfortunally we have found no interest whatsoever from 98% if the downloaders in such thing's.
But...we are experiencing more and more people who are turning around and start to reason like you.

Feel free to visit our blog:
http://progagainstpirates.blogspot.com

Best regards,
P.A.P.

Anonymous said...

There already was some level of consensus, at least among the sites I enjoy. There are tens of thousands of blogs, and anything can or could happen on them--but on the ones I might be inclined to visit more than once, there are or were certain standards.

Posting recent, brand-new or not-yet-released is frowned upon.

People are encouraged to buy the CD if they like it, and sometimes I've seen links directly to amazon or elsewhere.

Vinyl rips? Happens all the time. For older stuff, some actually prefer the vinyl. If they didn't find it on a blog, they'd buy it used. (I love the sound of ancient blues 78s, personally.)

Bitrates? There's a dirty little secret here. Some bloggers have been known to post material in 320 that really isn't. They may have it in 128 or 192, then they run across it on another blog in VBR or 256. What to do? They re-rip their CD burn at 320 and post that. The resulting file may gauge at 320 but the sound quality isn't, in fact it's a bit less than the original.

Point being, not everything you see in 256 or 320 is CD-quality or near to it, as some of us with high-end stereos can attest. Take it with a grain of salt.


It's not unreasonable that if a band member asked a blogger to remove a listing, the blogger should do exactly that. More than one of them have said here that they have done exactly that. It's only common courtesy and common sense.

That said, I believe the number of blogs that have recently gone under is disproportionate to the number of bloggers who wouldn't do so.

What do you think the attitude of those bloggers will be in the future? They will be back, after all. They may find they prefer torrenting. Having done what was asked of them and been screwed anyway, there may well be certain titles... artists... labels, even.. that they make a special project of seeding and re-seeding for years on end.

If there is to be some code of ethics, then there needs to be one for the NetNannies among us as well. Take the case of lost-in-tyme. He received two complaints just recently. He duly complied. Not long after that, his blog "went private"--a polite way of saying that if he didn't pull the plug on it, the site's name would have been looted from him too.

A good blog is not just a website, it is a community. Harassment and attack are counterproductive. The result is not intimidation but greater solidarity. The community will regroup, it will be militant, and you find yourselves with a bigger problem.

I do not speak with or for lost-in-tyme and have no idea in what form he may wish to reconstitute his blog. It doesn't matter. The fact is, it was very popular. It specialized in music you never knew existed, and his taste was unerringly good. Along the way he generated a lot of CD sales. Whether you are willing to admit it publicly or not, that is the truth of it. It was a resource, and it was a bright spot in thousands of lives. And it was there one day, gone the next. Somewhere among those thousands of visitors, the knives are out for whomever is responsible.

My best guess is that the offending albums will be "available" for a very, very, very long time. If not on blogspot, then elsewhere.

This is not an argument, as someone suggested on the PAP site. (If it were, he would've been able to come up with a counterargument.) It's not even a threat. It's reality. I've witnessed it on more than one occasion. Sweet reason prevailed in the end, and the aggressor(s) realized their time was better spent in the real world they'd been neglecting all along.


I realize that most or all on PAP would consider themselves to be the community under attack. This presupposes that bloggers are the cause of their problems, and if the blogs went away they'd all be making money. I don't believe a strong case has been made for either point, particularly the latter. Some continue insisting that it has, and that all counterarguments are nonsense--as if repeating a thing could make it so. I'm sure it feels good, but it does nothing for your business climate.

The bottom line is, the audience for this music is not large. Blogs have done much to increase it in recent years. Bloggers, however, are not your employees. Neither are your listeners. Neither are your customers. All of them make their own decisions, and none of them will be bullied.

You wish all your listeners to be customers? So does Britney Spears. Not gonna happen.

You say you want more of them to be customers? Then it's time to rethink your present tactics. What effect do you honestly think they are having?

Somewhere on the PAP site, somebody said "hey, you have options, go to Mindawn," as if it would be a good thing for Mindawn that they got a plug from people who boast about all the blogs they've shut down. "Oh, why yes, that's exactly what I will do. I will go to Mindawn then. Anything to make you happy, boss, you bring so much joy into the world. I thank you for your guidance. What's good for you is good for Mindawn. I'll be remembering THAT name! I will do all my shopping there, forever and ever. Yes! Yes! Yes!"

It's a shame, because the Mindawn concept is interesting, and the site looks as if it would respect my intelligence and autonomy. However, your endorsement just kills it. I won't be herded there. Thanks for trying, but no.

Do you seriously believe that because you shut down a blog they enjoyed, more of your listeners will be motivated to buy? I can think of several reasons people aren't buying your CDs. The very existence of the PAP site adds one more.

Your product can easily disappear from the blogs, if it has not already done so. And then what? Sales will go up? You think so? I'm game. Let's test that theory. I'm sure there are some fine musicians up to their necks in this particular fubar. For their sakes, I hope the lesson to be learned here isn't learned too late.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 240   Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment