Suffocation...Thoughts on this video...

Well, the dude's certainly got a point, however I think this video is a day late and a dollar short. In 2013, is there anyone that doesn't get it that illegal downloading it wrong? Who does he think this is going to change?

Folks that are going to support the bands are already doing it. People that illegaly download are not gonna stop.

And I'd like to add that going into an overpriced, poorly stocked FYE at the mall is doing more harm than good for his cause. I get it. He's trying to make a point. But he's buying a sale-priced cd at $16.99? Yea, that's a way better option than FREE.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

. But he's buying a sale-priced cd at $16.99? Yea, that's a way better option than FREE.

Seems somebody wasn't paying much attention The regular cd was $11.99, dude bought the cd/dvd combo pack at $16.99.

He said he went to that particular store due to it's proximity to his home.

Dude could of sat at home and filmed himself purchasing the cd online for cheaper someplace and made a point about using the computer for more than stealing music and watching porn But chose to make the point in that manner.

I can't comprehend the action of going to a website and getting something for free that if I didn't own a computer and have internet at home....I'd have to do what dude did in the clip, drive to the mall or wherever and open the ol' billfold. That's just me

MetalGuy71 wrote:

In 2013, is there anyone that doesn't get it that illegal downloading it wrong? Who does he think this is going to change?

Many, many people not only think it's not wrong, they don't even understand how it could be wrong. It's on the internet and it's free, why should I pay for it? All you have to do is read some of the comments on YouTube under the video and see that people feel they are entitled to have the music. It's art and it should be free.

James B. wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

. But he's buying a sale-priced cd at $16.99? Yea, that's a way better option than FREE.

Seems somebody wasn't paying much attention The regular cd was $11.99, dude bought the cd/dvd combo pack at $16.99.

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention. I was ordering cds online and watching porn in other tabs I had open at the time.

Quote :

Many, many people not only think it's not wrong, they don't even understand how it could be wrong. It's on the internet and it's free, why should I pay for it? All you have to do is read some of the comments on YouTube under the video and see that people feel they are entitled to have the music. It's art and it should be free.

I'm not knocking the guy, I just think it's too little too late, that's all. But hey, if it convinces some kid to go out to the mall this weekend and buy some cds, more power to him.

Quote :

All you have to do is read some of the comments on YouTube under the video and see that people feel they are entitled to have the music.

I just went and checked out the first few. It'll make your head spin for sure. Do yourselves a favor and DON'T read the comments. Just watch the embedded video here. It's like the retarded brother of the Blabbermouth commenters.

ultmetal wrote:

It's art and it should be free.

Yeah try going to the museum and pulling a painting off the wall and taking it home, Maybe some sculpture too ? That is taking a somewhat liberal viewpoint and running with it. Kinda/Sorta similar to my neice who feels that since she is in school studying "art", it is the job of the government/taxpayers to pay for not only her schooling, but housing, food, and transportation as well. Why ?.....because it's art and it should be free.
She actually believes this heart, mind, body, and soul. She says so do ALOT of students in her school.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention. I was ordering cds online and watching porn in other tabs I had open at the time.

.

At least you were paying for the music and not stealing it.

I think the fervor against digital piracy by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown. I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

Believe it or not, there are actually some bands who advocate people downloading their music off the internet(Trent Reznor, Limp Bizkit, System Of A Down, Rammstein) because according to them, fans usually download 1 or 2 songs for free and if they like them, they buy the whole album.

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't advocate digital piracy, but I do think the fervor against it by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown. I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

FYI...that site is still illegal. Your 10 cents goes to the company coffers and the artist still gets 0. So not only is the artist not getting anything, YOU are paying 10 cents to boot. You'd be better to just find an illegal download.

SpectreFate wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't advocate digital piracy, but I do think the fervor against it by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown. I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

FYI...that site is still illegal. Your 10 cents goes to the company coffers and the artist still gets 0. So not only is the artist not getting anything, YOU are paying 10 cents to boot. You'd be better to just find an illegal download.

It is? Did not know that.

Yes it is.

There is nowhere online you can find a LEGAL MP3 for less than 99 cents.

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't advocate digital piracy, but I do think the fervor against it by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown.

I dunno'bout that.

You gotta give Lars 'n' company credit where credit's due, they were the first major band to speak out on how file-sharing/downloading had the potential to devastate entire music industry. They did their best to warn the labels about it, but nobody seemed to care.

They said "This genie is already out of the bottle, if you ignore it you're never going to get it back in," and the industry sniffed some more coke and went, "What? This, whadyacallit, interweb thing? Music on computers? Please. It's a passing fad, it'll never catch on."

Of course, everybody thought Metallica were just being spoiled rich rock star dickheads at the time but history has pretty much proven them right, cuz here we are a dozen years later and the record labels are sayin' "Hey, where'd everybody go?"

James B. wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention. I was ordering cds online and watching porn in other tabs I had open at the time.

.

At least you were paying for the music and not stealing it.

And I only "borrow" the porn.

Quote :

I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

Is that place legal? I don't know anything about it, but sounds kinda shady if you ask me. Which of course you didn't.

EDIT: Nevermind. Spec explained it all in easy to read word-thingies.

SpectreFate wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't advocate digital piracy, but I do think the fervor against it by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown. I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

FYI...that site is still illegal. Your 10 cents goes to the company coffers and the artist still gets 0. So not only is the artist not getting anything, YOU are paying 10 cents to boot. You'd be better to just find an illegal download.

Artists don't actually get very much money from CD sales, they can sell millions of CDs and not see one single cent(like Lyle Lovitt, who has sold 4 million albums and hasn't made a profit) because of how much the record labels screw them over, as described herehttp://www.cracked.com/article_20256_5-things-record-labels-dont-want-you-to-know-they-do_p2.html

I still have very little respect for Lars, I think he was acting like a spoiled brat at the time, plus the band didn't do themselves any favors with Death Magnetic, as many people claimed the pirated version was of much better quality then the official release was(due the Loudness Wars), kinda hard to preach against downloading music illegally when the official version of your latest release is of inferior quality.

Vexer6 wrote:

SpectreFate wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't advocate digital piracy, but I do think the fervor against it by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown. I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

FYI...that site is still illegal. Your 10 cents goes to the company coffers and the artist still gets 0. So not only is the artist not getting anything, YOU are paying 10 cents to boot. You'd be better to just find an illegal download.

Artists don't actually get very much money from CD sales, they can sell millions of CDs and not see one single cent(like Lyle Lovitt, who has sold 4 million albums and hasn't made a profit) because of how much the record labels screw them over, as described herehttp://www.cracked.com/article_20256_5-things-record-labels-dont-want-you-to-know-they-do_p2.html

So we can put you on the side of "FOR ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING" then? It won't be much fun to discuss this if we all have the same opinion. For every "con", you need a few "pros" or it gets boring.

Vexer6 wrote:

Artists don't actually get very much money from CD sales, they can sell millions of CDs and not see one single cent(like Lyle Lovitt, who has sold 4 million albums and hasn't made a profit) because of how much the record labels screw them over, as described herehttp://www.cracked.com/article_20256_5-things-record-labels-dont-want-you-to-know-they-do_p2.html

All the more reason for the consumer to pay for music, so the artist at least sees SOMETHING.


That's like saying a girl who is sexually abused at home by her father might as well get raped by other guys.

So, Lyle Lovett signed a bad deal and the label took advantage of it. His fault for not having a better understanding of his contract.

That's why some of the bigger name acts have taken control of their music completely and sign distribution contracts with labels or with a particular distributor. That way the artist retains sole ownership of their masters.

The Eagles signed an exclusive deal with Wal-Mart for their "Long Road Out Of Eden" album. They were going to release it via a record label initially but the best deal they could get was $1 per album sold. By going with Wal-Mart they were able to get $4 per album sold. They were smart enough to shop around and find the best deal for them...and they sold 3.5 million copies.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

SpectreFate wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't advocate digital piracy, but I do think the fervor against it by people like Lars Ulrich (with that whole Napster thing) is WAAAAAAYYYYYY overblown. I use the website MP3VA, as there you can buy songs for only 10 cents each.

FYI...that site is still illegal. Your 10 cents goes to the company coffers and the artist still gets 0. So not only is the artist not getting anything, YOU are paying 10 cents to boot. You'd be better to just find an illegal download.

Artists don't actually get very much money from CD sales, they can sell millions of CDs and not see one single cent(like Lyle Lovitt, who has sold 4 million albums and hasn't made a profit) because of how much the record labels screw them over, as described herehttp://www.cracked.com/article_20256_5-things-record-labels-dont-want-you-to-know-they-do_p2.html

So we can put you on the side of "FOR ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING" then? It won't be much fun to discuss this if we all have the same opinion. For every "con", you need a few "pros" or it gets boring.

Let's just i'm neutral on the issue. Some of the logic people use to argue against piracy is flawed. The most common argument I hear is "you're stealing money from the artist"! Well unless it's an independent release, it's from the band's own record label, or it's a special deal like the one with The Eagles, then no, odds are you're not stealing any money from the artist if you don't buy their CD. Record companies and the RIAA is who people should be really pissed at for their draconian practices.

SpectreFate wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Artists don't actually get very much money from CD sales, they can sell millions of CDs and not see one single cent(like Lyle Lovitt, who has sold 4 million albums and hasn't made a profit) because of how much the record labels screw them over, as described herehttp://www.cracked.com/article_20256_5-things-record-labels-dont-want-you-to-know-they-do_p2.html

All the more reason for the consumer to pay for music, so the artist at least sees SOMETHING.


That's like saying a girl who is sexually abused at home by her father might as well get raped by other guys.

That's a pretty extreme example Usually I do try to pay for music, I mainly only used MP3VA for albums that were too expensive/rare to acquire legally, like Icon-An Even More Perfect Union, which sells for no less then 50 dollars. I love the band, but no CD is worth THAT much money.

Fair enough.

I'm against the illegal downloading myself and like to think I'm supporting the musicians, but I've also heard the argument that because I buy 95% of my cds used from second parties, I'm essentially stealing from the artists too.

So does that make me as bad as a downloader? I dunno. If someone here wants to point out how wrong I am for buying used instead of new, direct from the label/artist, have at it. Much like the video posted above, I don't think it's gonna make a bit of difference. It's not gonna change my stance on that.

Vexer6 wrote:

Some of the logic people use to argue against piracy is flawed. The most common argument I hear is "you're stealing money from the artist"! Well unless it's an independent release, it's from the band's own record label, or it's a special deal like the one with The Eagles, then no, odds are you're not stealing any money from the artist if you don't buy their CD.

Stealing is stealing regardless of semantics.

What you fail to realize is that even if a band gets 5 or ten cents to the dollar for each cd sale. The "other" money the record company gets from the sales helps the artists cover recording and touring costs that the record company fronts to them.

So it seems somebody elses logic is flawed

Vexer6 wrote:

That's like saying a girl who is sexually abused at home by her father might as well get raped by other guys. That's a pretty extreme example

Roll your eyes as much as you like, but that's the same logic you are using to justify downloading illegally.

Vexer6 wrote:

I mainly only used MP3VA for albums that were too expensive/rare to acquire legally, like Icon-An Even More Perfect Union, which sells for no less then 50 dollars. I love the band, but no CD is worth THAT much money.

Or you can just go without....but I know that isn't an option to people these days.

The viewpoint that a musician just makes music and doesn't need to be paid is just absurd to me. Even if it is 2 cents an album, that eventually adds up.

I checked around the internet, and it seems there are varying opinions on whether MP3va is actually illegal or not(the site tells you that the songs you download are for private listening ONLY and not to be uploaded elsewhere), and iTunes has actually sold songs for less then 99 cents in the past.

Almost all of the CDs I DO buy are used anyways.

SpectreFate wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

That's like saying a girl who is sexually abused at home by her father might as well get raped by other guys. That's a pretty extreme example

Roll your eyes as much as you like, but that's the same logic you are using to justify downloading illegally.

Vexer6 wrote:

I mainly only used MP3VA for albums that were too expensive/rare to acquire legally, like Icon-An Even More Perfect Union, which sells for no less then 50 dollars. I love the band, but no CD is worth THAT much money.

Or you can just go without....but I know that isn't an option to people these days.

The viewpoint that a musician just makes music and doesn't need to be paid is just absurd to me. Even if it is 2 cents an album, that eventually adds up.

No it's not, comparing RAPE to digital piracy is disgusting and makes it very hard to take you seriously.

Plus Icon aren't around anymore, so even if did buy the CD, they wouldn't get any money from it anyways, so what sense does it make to go without it in that instance?