How about it being illegal to smoke in your own home? Or if you're not a smoker, or worse - someone who has quit and is now like sanctimonious prick about tobacco - how about the woman being busted for swearing at her own toilet in her own home?

Yes, land of the free alright...

FunkyJ

It fails to take into account an artistic creator's right to control how his or her work is disseminated. Radiohead chose to distribute In Rainbows that way. If an artist chooses to - gasp! - demand payment for a sound recording (or concert, or whatever), or to sell a portion of that right to another entity, that should be their right as the creator of that piece of art.

SAShepherd

troybulldogs21

troybulldogs21

I have never used a torrent, but I have used websites like simplemp3s.com all the time. (Which brings to mind another question: is that traceable? I had always assumed that it would be extremely difficult, but I actually have no idea.)

blobby

ESPECIALLY with the Radiohead release being what it was - Pay what you want (can)

SabreFanCS

sleuthee

Take the free download trial to see if you want to buy the music idea; You have an idea of the music and the actual music, all without ever paying the artist. Now, look at the idea of writing a review (like Idolator), you have the idea of the music, but you still have to seek out the music (legally, illegally, telepathically, etc.) to have the music.

The didn't provide a server that links you to others from whom you can obtain the music. They stopped providing direct downloads of things deemed questionable so there was no copyright infringement, and thus illegal downloading from their site.

Yes, they provide a link to where you can obtain the music, but at that point, anyone who wanted the music (and reads blogs) could've found the music in <1 minute of searching.

If you're attacking them for writing reviews of albums before they are released to the public, you're actually attacking the institution of music criticism, which often releases reviews of music before it is available at Best Buy.

And if turning people onto new music because they downloaded stuff they would never hear if they didn't have to buy it is such a great thing, why are music profits still declining? The music is still available digitally, physically, and in just as many (if not more) concert choices as earlier periods when music was far more profitable, but profits are declining. Just because the recording industry may not be using the best business model does not explain this loss of profits (Potential profits could be greater, everyone agrees on that, but actual profits should not decline if people are being turned on to more music, no?)

troybulldogs21

mackro

I have an old issue (April/May '06) of Magnet lying around where Jason Lytle talks about the breakup of Grandaddy, and while there were myriad reasons, one of the major ones was simply that the band could not support itself. The band was not smart with its finances, but still, think about it: a relatively successful band on V2 with merch, touring income, songs in movies and $75,000 from a Honda commercial still went broke and broke up. I don't see any reason to think this phenomena isn't going to become more common. Downloading did not kill Grandaddy, or any other band, but I believe to some extent it exacerbates the difficulties inherent in the independent framework, where 5,000 in sales can make a big difference. To some extent, the music itself is what's at stake here. A long-term free-music model is simply unsupportable. And I'm pretty sure if you can afford high-speed internet, you can afford CDs or iTunes downloads.

Until the collapse of the last vestiges of the label/crit/media/advertising monoculture and the fracture of music culture into numerous isolated sects, paying for music is a lot like voting: a noble, impotent, idealist gesture.

ddb4

chim_richalds

1)Album art, lyrics, etc. -I have vivid memories of ripping the packaging and devouring booklets, the thank-yous, etc. I know not everyone is this sentimental, but I am.

2)From a collector perspective - Something to be said about having all your CDs/Vinyl displayed and calling out for play. You can touch, feel, see what you own. Also, not prone to disappearing if your hard drive dies.

3)Cost & Value - Though big-time downloaders often toss out claims of $20 CDs, I don't know who sells CDs that expensive. Amazon, big-box retailers, etc. all are in the $8 - $15 range. An iTunes "album" costs $9.99 and you get pesky DRM constraints. Why would you pay the same money for less? I don't get it.

I think downloadable albums should either be much less than CDs, or give you the option of getting the artwork somehow.

Swankster

dippinkind

The music is all that matters and it stands alone in my mind. I don't need to hold on to a physical copy to feel a closer attachment to the artist.

SabreFanCS

OH COME ON!!!!

dentist

Anybody who is truly "into the music" will spend the time (and money) to actually seek out and buy physical copies of ablums, singles, or an ep. Personally, downloading an album does not feel the same as owning a physical copy. True fans will always seek out physical copies of their favorite music because over time that's what really resonates, not computer files.

The Van Buren Boys

SabreFanCS

SabreFanCS

If you really think that your "art" should only be heard by the rich bourgeois that has all the money to throw down on every obscure act/cd, then so be it - have fun playing to empty shows and earning just as much money from your cd's as you would have if downloading didn't occur in the first place.

You can't really be an artist in this day and age and not understand this concept.

SabreFanCS

Lucas Jensen

Nicolars

Shoot, judging from the comments, I'm the only one here who's never downloaded music (though I have some mix CDs from friends that have suspect provenance). IMO, there's even one album that should be downloaded illegally: Chinese Democracy. No joke. I'm stealing the fu*k out of that. You hear me RIAA?

janine

Hallux Valgus

SabreFanCS

janine

this is the funniest comment i've read all day. thank you!

Maura Johnston

Maura Johnston

Swankster

janine

I think Idolator has done quite a bit more than simply "try to create some "basic self-awareness" amongst oink users". It's quite apparent that they never understood the community and what it meant to any of those involved and how it REALLY influences the larger picture.

Instead of taking this arguement into the larger picture (isn't that what you claim you try to do?), each sucessive post on here seems as if it was written in about a 5 minutes reactionary spiteful fit of anger - instead of analyzing or even attempting to understand what the community was about or understanding it's larger impact on the music world. Sorry you aren't as into the music as the oink users who wanted to find every out of print ep or single from their favorite old bands or those who wanted the ability to download some obscure act that may be playing at pianos that night just so they could see a show or hell, just wanted to explore a new scene.

Oh well. I guess we can't all see the light.

SabreFanCS

most people who illegally download don't have a strong political or moral framework (half-baked or not) for their actions - they just like music and continue to get it for free because the chances of getting caught are very slim. perhaps the evil empire that is the record industry makes them feel a little less guilty, but that shouldn't be confused with some kind of mission statement that applies to most users of oink.

taking positive byproducts of oink and characterizing them as pathetic excuses is equally twisted. mock the "turning people onto new bands" concept if you will, but the fact is that more music reaches more people as a result of services such as oink. and many of these people support bands by going to shows and (gasp!) actually buying records that they like. it isn't justification for file sharing, but this particular effect is a good thing no matter how you slice it.

meanwhile, idolator remains suspiciously quiet about the origin of their "leak of the day" albums...

chim_richalds

We're coming up on 1 million people on the federal no-fly list, and there's serious debate in congress to require government approval for citizens to take domestic flights.

Yeah, smell that freedom.

mullingitover

Again, there is NOTHING revolutionary about downloading music for free. Nada. Zip. If someone wants to call me a pro-RIAA/major label/big business freedom hater, so be it. This stuff is really cracking me up.

Captain Wrong

If you are shopping for a HDTV (music) at Best Buy (record store) it costs $2000 ($12.99).

If you know a shady dude who sells stolen merch out of his van (OiNK) you might get the HDTV (music) for far less...maybe $500 ($0).

Clearly a lot of people will go with Stealer McThief and his van, but 1) No justification of "sticking it to the high prices of Best Buy" (RIAA) make it right. and 2) you didn't fucking get the stolen merchandise to make some political statement, you did it because it was cheaper (free).

-- -- --

I like to think people are not so stupid enough to ignore the fallacy in their/these arguments, but each day more and more crap gets posted that I question any previous assumptions of intelligence.

Swankster

You lost me with "u.s. in particular has ever-more become a police state/capitalist paradise"

Puh-leeze. Overly dramatic perhaps? As a card carrying member of the Liberal party of America I can't stand when such inane statements are made. Police state? Really? It's the equivalent of a right winger saying abortions are performed freely and daily in Times Square.

Anyway...Like Flux said, have some self-awareness people.

Swankster

How did OiNK mainstream music downloading in such a powerful way? Does everyone actually believe the RIAA hype that this is going to curb anything? It may curb some torrenting for the next month or so, but once people calm down it will be non-business as usual.

OiNK was just a place on the internet to trade music. There will be another one. Soon. Probably one that already exists will step up its tech to include some of the great OinK features and claim the throne.

OiNK is a symptom. We all know the causes, there are about 1,000,000 different ones. Busting a big dealer doesn't take away the demand for drugs. Someone else will come. Seriously.

To make one last point: there is justification to say downloading from OiNK is civil disobedience. If that service was legit, and legal and for profit, I would gladly pay for it. Labels have to understand really well organized and community based torrent sites are a BUSINESS MODEL, and one they are competing with. Free sites right now aren't just free. They provide a better product for free than what is offered legitimately. Create an OiNK killer and you will have many customers back.

noamjamski

These half-baked counter-culture arguments have to stop. I'm sorry, but if you think using OiNK is an adequate criticism of capitalism you are incredibly naive - and, dare I say - hopelessly bourgeois. And that's the scary thing here - that this does seem so much a rerun of the 60s, when people tended to assume that narcissistic consumption equated revolution, but now we don't have the bracing actual social and political liberation of the 1960s.

The Mozfather

sleuthee

[30frames.blogspot.com]

Though I will say that my poor social skills and hygiene do leave me out on the actual limb alone a good bit of the time.

30f

I'm not for the fucking RIAA, and I'm not for a lot of the more crooked practices of the record industry. I don't think anyone who is arguing against assumptions of the culture of entitlement that just happens to be exemplified by Oink this week is in favor of any of that. If you're going to extrapolate that from the arguments put forth by myself and Maura/Jess and whomever else, you're not paying much attention because the point we're arguing -- the ONLY POINT -- is that it's ridiculous to pretend that a self-serving action is in fact some form of political rebellion. We're not asking anyone to stop, we're just asking for some basic self-awareness.

Matthew Perpetua

Paula

pissy elliott

sleuthee

beta.rogan

Nicolars

clarknhilldale

pissy elliott

Vague, poorly informed conspiracy theories are the new ironic slogans.

Bob Loblaw

Dickdogfood

Dickdogfood

Ahh! Jim lad!

the bestest of the best: "Only a delusional moron would say that the person who chooses 'free' over 'pay' is making an evil decision, or is stealing something." Choosing what's best for you in the context of the market is what capitalism is all about! Paying for something you can get for free is practically a communist precept." Remember that when your car totally isn't where you're sure you remembered parking it.

Hallux Valgus

pissy elliott

Yes, and I prefer the times with the hot fucking and better drugs and the idea that counterculture should consist of more than having your fucking consumerist needs slavishly enabled.

I am taking an Internet break. This is too much.

King of Pants

I don't know if I want to weep tears of blood or put that on a t-shirt. Vague, poorly informed liberal cliches are the new ironic slogans.

Bob Loblaw

Ugh. I think this speaks for itself. First he rails against people for siding with 'the government' or 'The Man', then he praises capitalism and goes for a 'red scare' argument...

AL

SabreFanCS

mike a