Some thoughts on communist activities...
Hi commuzunist,
it's nice seeing that you are alive and well. I remember reading your posts at the beginning of the year when you discussed these matters with HansZun. Poor guy, I hope he did not kill himself :)
I understand your arguments and of course you're right. If you go for the principle, one can't argue against anything you say.
But look what is posted here and on all the other soundtrack blogs. It is often music that either never got a release or is long out of print. So what harm is done if 100 or perhaps 200 persons (the file with my 25 favorites tracks was downloaded 75 times) download such a file and enjoy a music that the industry does neglect totally ? Most of these film scores do not get a release because the big companies don't care at all.
My blog has three intentions:
1) feature the music of film composer Lalo Schifrin, which I like since 30 years (look out for the article two months ago).
2) bring unknown music to the attention of music lovers. If you look at my postings, the files offered there will not hurt the music industry much. Did you ever hear of the records I offer ?
3) to present just discovered links of the wide world of the Internet to my readers
If you think any of the files I've listed is against your principles, please tell me which and I will delete it.
I hope you will understand that the persons who run and visit the soundtrack blogs are all collectors who spent a lot of money on their collections (I have a collection of 6.000 CDs and 8.000 LPs, all paid by me). But being the fans and completists we are, of course we want to hear everything. So we will download a lot of scores, but I don't think that hurts the industry so much. As for me, I can say I download them, listen (perhaps) once to a track and then it's stored on a hard drive. It's nice to hear them, but if I won't, that's o.k. for me, too.
Last year I didn't download anything because I did not knew anything of music blogs. But I did not buy the new records either.
I give you an example: "Apocalypto" is new in the cinema. I like James Horner a little bit, so I wanted to hear the music. Accidentally I found it on a blog, downloaded it and listened to 20 minutes of it. It's not my taste so I stopped listening and since then it's blocking my hard drive. But you can be assured, if I would not have found this file, I would not have bought it, either, because I know that most film music of today is not my taste anyway. So ok, I downloaded a new record that's in stores right now but where's the harm done ? The big store here offers a possibility to hear all CDs before you buy them, so that's more or less the same.
I discovered at the Naxos website a possibility that you could listen to ALL of their records (thousands !) in complete form for a fee of about 15 $ a year. This music has far more quality than most film music records composed in the last years. So if tomorrow the whole music blog scene would collapse, I would just register there and could hear enough till the end of my life. Naxos releases more CDs each week than I could ever hear. Also there is enough music on the net that is so old that there is no copyright anymore on it, I posted such a link for 300 classical records some days ago. What about that ? Should they stop their activities also just because it's for free ?
Let's face it: you're legally and morally right. But there's no way to fight the internet and its users. The blogs are there, and for every file that is deleted 10 new pop up. It's the same as using a revolver against 1000 zombies. So why not have fun with the internet ? I hope you understand my oppinion and will enjoy your visit on my blog. Many thanks for taking the time and posting comments.
it's nice seeing that you are alive and well. I remember reading your posts at the beginning of the year when you discussed these matters with HansZun. Poor guy, I hope he did not kill himself :)
I understand your arguments and of course you're right. If you go for the principle, one can't argue against anything you say.
But look what is posted here and on all the other soundtrack blogs. It is often music that either never got a release or is long out of print. So what harm is done if 100 or perhaps 200 persons (the file with my 25 favorites tracks was downloaded 75 times) download such a file and enjoy a music that the industry does neglect totally ? Most of these film scores do not get a release because the big companies don't care at all.
My blog has three intentions:
1) feature the music of film composer Lalo Schifrin, which I like since 30 years (look out for the article two months ago).
2) bring unknown music to the attention of music lovers. If you look at my postings, the files offered there will not hurt the music industry much. Did you ever hear of the records I offer ?
3) to present just discovered links of the wide world of the Internet to my readers
If you think any of the files I've listed is against your principles, please tell me which and I will delete it.
I hope you will understand that the persons who run and visit the soundtrack blogs are all collectors who spent a lot of money on their collections (I have a collection of 6.000 CDs and 8.000 LPs, all paid by me). But being the fans and completists we are, of course we want to hear everything. So we will download a lot of scores, but I don't think that hurts the industry so much. As for me, I can say I download them, listen (perhaps) once to a track and then it's stored on a hard drive. It's nice to hear them, but if I won't, that's o.k. for me, too.
Last year I didn't download anything because I did not knew anything of music blogs. But I did not buy the new records either.
I give you an example: "Apocalypto" is new in the cinema. I like James Horner a little bit, so I wanted to hear the music. Accidentally I found it on a blog, downloaded it and listened to 20 minutes of it. It's not my taste so I stopped listening and since then it's blocking my hard drive. But you can be assured, if I would not have found this file, I would not have bought it, either, because I know that most film music of today is not my taste anyway. So ok, I downloaded a new record that's in stores right now but where's the harm done ? The big store here offers a possibility to hear all CDs before you buy them, so that's more or less the same.
I discovered at the Naxos website a possibility that you could listen to ALL of their records (thousands !) in complete form for a fee of about 15 $ a year. This music has far more quality than most film music records composed in the last years. So if tomorrow the whole music blog scene would collapse, I would just register there and could hear enough till the end of my life. Naxos releases more CDs each week than I could ever hear. Also there is enough music on the net that is so old that there is no copyright anymore on it, I posted such a link for 300 classical records some days ago. What about that ? Should they stop their activities also just because it's for free ?
Let's face it: you're legally and morally right. But there's no way to fight the internet and its users. The blogs are there, and for every file that is deleted 10 new pop up. It's the same as using a revolver against 1000 zombies. So why not have fun with the internet ? I hope you understand my oppinion and will enjoy your visit on my blog. Many thanks for taking the time and posting comments.
posted by Omega at 3:23 PM
2 Comments:
I tend to believe that a forum where rare needs are met and "shares" are exchanged probably does little harm. A blogger who posts out of print material only is also likely to cause mininum damage. Maybe...maybe. If the blogger is sure that album is never going to be re-issued and won't take money from the artist. Some sharing doesn't do much harm and it would be an awful police state if every infraction was met with a Gestapo boot.
But the sheer level of blogging now is going way beyond the bounds of what anyone could consider "comfortable." It's the difference between shoplifting and looting.
The day is ending when some damned bloggers post massive lists of future shares to drive soundtrack leechers mad (Bacharach, Tiomkin, Hisaichi, Zimmer, Rosza, etc.), then upload dozens of albums a day giving away more music than anyone could ever listen to. It's like precious clean water spewing from an open fire hydrant into the sewer.
God damn, you can be sure the singers, songwriters, store owners and record company employees don't call this "giving." They call it an act of theft, and there's nothing righteous about it. Yet The Blogger feels he's doing an act of love, an act of Christian "sharity." And just like the person who won't read about the polar ice caps melting, this giver of Christmas music will insist everyone in the entertainment industry or retail industry is a millionaire and nobody's hurting.
How difficult is it to know right from wrong, and knowing this, resist temptation? Lord knows it is difficult.
"I think that we perhaps naively hoped that the Christian teens would have been taking the moral high road," says John W. Styll, president of the Gospel Music Association. "Among teens, they just don't see it as a moral issue. Ninety percent of them don't see illegal downloading as wrong. It may be illegal, but everyone is doing it." The number of self-avowed Good Christian teens pirating music on the Internet turns out to be the same as the headbangers, rappers and Marilyn Manson crowd.
The Gospel Music Association has mounted a campaign with this slogan: "Music Piracy: Millions of Wrongs Don't Make It Right."
Styll defends his words and adds more. "It's more than just illegal. It's immoral. It's breaking the laws of the land, and it's stealing from people, and you shouldn't do it," he says.
He must realize that part of the problem is that the parents are doing it, too. Some of the worst bloggers out there are old enough to have children and grandchildren, but they'd rather get a "thank you" from a downloader than a "bless you."
The L.A. Times recently reported that many a Christian teen, like "Matthew, a 13-year-old who attends Red Hill Lutheran Church" does not believe piracy is wrong: "No, because the artists are making billions of dollars anyways."
It is hard for children, and child-like adults, to know or to care about right or wrong. Whether it's keeping the planet free of pollution, or keeping the Internet free of corrosive and illegal activity, many are just too selfish to do the right thing. Many actually throw as much music as possible on a blog because they get higher traffic for a Google ad, or might make a few bucks with a Rapidshare or Megaupload reward plan, or a Paypal donation. They're selling out the musicians they love real cheap, but are too blind to see it that way.
Now, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I am not damning all bloggers or all people who download and upload. Not at all. Not everyone is near a library and not everyone has a lot of music-owning friends who will burn an extra CD. A little bit of "sharing" is not such a mortal sin.
What I am saying is that we can't be SAINTS but we're in need of RESTRAINT. Why can't a blogger offer one song, and not the whole album? Why can't a blogger use a 64 bit-rate if it's really "a sample" of the music? Why can't a driver choose a fuel-efficient car over a gaudy gas-guzzler? Why not do the right thing? Is it ego or cheapness? It's either one or the other, isn't it? The pathetic incorrigible blogger wants the ego gratification (Thanks., Attaboy., You da man!) of having a successful blog at the artist's expense, or wants to be part of the conspiracy saying "you upload a ton of your stuff, I'll upload mine, and nobody buys anything."
Some Christians believe that offering up Christian music for free, or Christmas music, isn't a sin because it's "spreading the word." This is nonsense as an excuse, but we all commit little sins, white lies and minor thefts. "We are all conflicted, it's true," says Styll, but he knows that paying for music is the only way to assure its future development.
The bottom line is this: like you but much more powerful men talked nonsense about how they couldn't be stopped and theirs was the way of the world - Capone, Gotti, Hitler, Pol Pot - and each said, "Why not just go along with the program?"
Honest men said "no!" to them, and enforced their will against a man who terrorized Chicago; who terrorized New York; against a man who slaughtered seven million men, women and children; against a man who slaughtered fifty millions.
Against honest men, can internet pirates stand?
So you are a "hard core" guy who knows what is right but who doesn't want to do it?
You have a wake-up call due you. Let's see whether Mitch Bainwol can help you with that.
Some other religious people (not only christians) thinks it's a sin to make money.
And by the way, if you want people to download less oop music, as to record companies to release stuff!!!! Have you ever try to found The Black Cauldron or Spartacus on a cd store close to you? I spent €25 for a record of Spartacus, and i chose the cheaper one! For The Black Cauldron, i'm lucky to have a friend who was able to bought this for me! And by the way he's also the one who rip all my 45/33 rpm, because i couldn't do this.
And let's talk about all the unreleased stuff! Any way to found The Journey Of Natty Gann, or the score for The Haunted Mansion? No, because of business' ideas of the records companies.....
So before saying we're "sinners" (or anythig like this), try to think a little bit like US!!! If you could think......
Post a Comment
<< Home