Elton John joins anti-P2P brigade
p2pnet news view | P2P | Music:- Elton John has joined Lily Allen in attacking people who share music with each other online.
“For what it is worth, I am of the view that the unchecked proliferation of illegal downloading [even on a 'non-commercial' basis] will have a seriously detrimental effect on musicians, and particularly young musicians and those composers who are not performing artists,” Times Online has him saying.
Says the intro »»»
Elton John has become the latest high-profile musician to enter the debate about internet piracy after writing to Lord Mandelson to pledge support for the peer’s proposals to disconnect people who persistently flout the law.
The music industry is riven with internal division over the Business Secretary’s proposal to suspend the internet accounts of those repeatedly caught sharing music, after an influential group of artists wrote in The Times that the proposals were “grossly disproportionate”.
Grossly disproportionate is also a phrase which can be applied to France’s decision, yesterday, to once again try to force a piece of entertainment cartel-inspired anti-P2P, anti-file sharing legislation into law.
The group referred by The Times is the Featured Artists Coalition whose members include Billy Bragg; The Boxer Rebellion; David Gray; Fran Healy (Travis); Howard Jones; Tom Jones;Mark Kelly (Marillion); Annie Lennox; Ross Millard (The Futureheads); Nick Mason (Pink Floyd); Kate Nash; Lucy Pullin (The Fire Escapes); Radiohead; Hal Ritson (The Young Punx); Robbie Williams; Dave Rowntree (Blur); Sandie Shaw; Master Shortie; Sia; KT Tunstall; and,Josh Weller, among others.
The entertainment industry claims files share equal sales lost, a patently ridiculous proposition they’ve never been able to even come close to supporting.
The assertion is nothing more than a smokescreen for their efforts again complete and exclusive control of how ‘product’ is distributed online, and by whom.
Says the artists’ group on file sharing »»»
There has been much discussion over the past few weeks regarding the Government’s proposals to combat the challenge of copyright infringement through the suspension of the internet connections of individuals alleged to have illegally downloaded copyrighted material.
Statements made in opposition to this idea by members of the Featured Artists Coalition have been taken to imply that we condone illicit file-sharing. This is not the case and never has been.
We wish to make it clear to all parties that we believe the creative work of artists should be paid for by those who enjoy it and that whenever our music is used, royalties should be paid.
However, we seriously question the wisdom of seeking to deal with this problem by terminating the internet connections of individual music fans. We are not referring to websites that reap commercial benefit from file-sharing: seeking to make money from giving our songs away. We want the industry and Government to come down on those thieving rascals with all the weight of the law.
The focus of our objection is the proposed treatment of ordinary music fans who download a few tracks so as to check out our material before they buy. For those of us who don’t get played on the radio or mentioned in the music media – artists established and emerging – peer-to-peer recommendation is an important form of promotion.
The industry recognises the value of this unpaid-for-promotion and regularly uses free downloads as a marketing tool: for example, there are hundreds of free tracks available on the NME website, including music from Speech Debelle, White Lies, Little Boots and many others. By demanding blanket suspension powers from the Government, the industry is in danger of cutting-off a promotional tool that is of great use to fledgling artists who seek to create a buzz around themselves yet don’t have the financial support of a major label.
We believe there is a lack of accurate, independent research on file-sharing and we call upon the Government and Ofcom to commission some objective research into the subject, and investigate the real value and detriment of the varied effects of substitution and promotion arising from file-sharing.
The potential for self-promotion will be severely hampered if every packet of 1s and 0s sent across the internet has to be searched by the Government for “unauthorised” material. We also believe that such Government intervention, and a corresponding power to demand suspensions of accounts, is only achievable through a wide-scale invasion of personal privacy which we believe would result in a dangerous reduction in the rights to protection of the individual. Putting this power in place would reduce the civil liberties of every one of us in the country in order to afford a disincentive threat to a small minority of ‘egregious offenders.’ We believe this would be both disproportionate and unenforceable.
All this begs the question, ‘so if we don’t suspend those who download illicit material how are we going to make a living?’ This brings us to the crux of our argument. The FAC was formed earlier this year because we are concerned that decisions are being made within our industry without input from, or in consultation with, the artists who are on the front line of this debate – decisions that will seriously impact on the ability of all musicians to make a living in the years to come.
We have made a stand over suspension because we want to have this debate out in the open amongst the creative community and in consultation with the labels, publishers and the internet service providers who distribute our work. It is our belief that all of us need to work together in order to convince consumers that music makes a great contribution to quality of life and as such should be paid for. This cannot be achieved by a few retrograde slogans that recall the ‘home taping is killing music’ campaign of the eighties. If we hope to educate the public to pay the artists that make the music they love, then we, as an industry, will have to make some changes in the way that we remunerate artists.
We have negotiated in good faith with the labels all week, but they remain wedded to the idea of suspension of accounts. We remain steadfast in our belief that making threats against individual music fans is not an effective way to resolve any problems associated with file-sharing. So while we will willingly collaborate together on many levels of our business, in respect of this particular issue, we have agreed to disagree. We wish to continue to discuss the issues with the labels as matters unfold and we look forward to participating with them in negotiating the implementation of any eventual legislation regarding this matter or any other of similar importance to our industry.
Although we disagree with certain labels over the issue of suspension, we welcome the involvement of the UK Government in helping us to make the transition from an analogue to a digital music industry. We call upon Government agencies to support us in our battle to close down those sites which are giving away our music for their own financial gain.
Adds the FAC:
“Lastly, the FAC calls upon its fellow artists, irrespective of views or age, to join with us in discussions with labels, publishers and ISPs so as to ensure that the next generation of artists are able to exploit the technological potential of the internet to make a decent living doing the thing they love most –- making music.”
Say tuned.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Lily Allen – Lily Allen – ‘It’s Not Me, It’s You’, September 18, 2009
Times Online – Elton John backs Lord Mandelson’s move to disconnect illegal file sharers, September 22, 2009
anti-P2P, anti-file sharing- France okays Three Strikes censorship bill, September 23, 2009
artists’ group on file sharing – FAC Position on File-Sharing, September 21, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:29 am
who’s elton john? is he upset that no one is sharing his stuff? should we give him a hug? come to think about it, nae….
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:48 am
Old enough to remember when he actually was good, and his transition to
the black hole of suck.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:49 am
Strange how the biggest screamers against file sharing always seem to be
has beens, or never will be’s.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:53 am
Sir Elton John has been in the industry too long. He hasn’t read enough on his own, only read what his labels feed him, which of course is biased. Reading from the labels is akin to watching Fox News for an unbiased view of the “war” in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Poor Elton, I actually like a lot of his music (older stuff that is, the Disney music doesn’t work for me).
September 23rd, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Elton Jhon is a pederaste and his songs are pieces of crap.
I can not believe that some people like this stuff.
Really! Did they forgot what artists where doing during the 19th Century?
Or may be they do not know and have better to take a big deep look.
Why do we have to accept crapy lyric crapy music and people looking like Elton John who need to dress like chiken to hide their mediocrity?
Enougth of this! Let’s burn all his feathers!
September 23rd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
” Elton Jhon is a pederaste and his songs are pieces of crap. ”
This is another piece of propoganda that really needs to be put to rest.
Elton John is Homosexual.
Homosexual is not the same as pederasty.
It is wrong and downright HARMFUL to compare the Homosexual community
with Pederasty and other forms of child molestation.
I am not homosexual, but I really HATE to see any group painted as something they are NOT.
Go watch some more FOX news.
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Elton John and Sergey Penkin
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:05 pm
” Elton John and Sergey Penkin ”
Yes.
What about them ?
Please cite credible sources.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Elton John’s message is clear! I’m going to go download more music.
September 23rd, 2009 at 8:38 pm
“This is another piece of propoganda that really needs to be put to rest.
Elton John is Homosexual.”
Ya! but his songs are still pieces of crap he is still ugly and he is our enemy.
Sorry!
September 23rd, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Who is this Elton John? There is a man with that face whose birth name is Reginald Dwight… he wouldn’t have been so disrespectful to his family name that he would change it just to get ahead in the music business, right? Right?
September 23rd, 2009 at 9:44 pm
NEWSFLASH TO SIR JOHN: David Furnish’s Nephew Downloads tons of illegal music using the ipod THEY BOUGHT HIM FOR CHRISTMAS.
HYPOCRIT HYPOCRIT HYPOCRIT. Im going to do my best to get a hold of the guy to let him know his uncle’s partner is making a HUGE mistake!!
September 23rd, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Recognize this punk Sir Elton John or David furnish? http://www.sayradio.net/assets/images/2008/Furnish.jpg
Because hes related to you and has likely downloaded tons of unauthorized copyright materials I know for a fact he used kazaa when we were in hockey!
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Rob Furnish downloads copyright material and he doesn’t pay for it !!! omg put him in jail your own nephew!!!
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:31 pm
” Ya! but his songs are still pieces of crap he is still ugly and he is our enemy. ”
Because of his stance on filesharing .. yes.
His other preference is irrelevant.
There isn’t any need to make up shit about him.
Leave the lying to the RIAA.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:53 pm
I’m never surprised when one of the corporate media’s pampered pets starts coughing up RIAA hairballs.
After all, they’ve been made “celebrities” to the point where they THINK everybody else hangs on their every word.
So, why WOULD they challenge the system that makes that possible?
Your average “celebrity” hasn’t been conscious in any sense of the term, for years: either they’re still relatively “fresh”, in which case they’re surrounded by bodyguards, screaming fans, and assorted industry lickspittles, or they’ve become “established”, by which time they’re so hopelessly out of touch with anything even resembling reality that their views on ANY subject — much less p2p — are hopelessly suspect.
I stopped taking ‘celebrities’ seriously the day Sonny Bono said he thought copyright should last “forever minus a day”.
Far be it from me to say anything that could be misconstrued as homophobic, but:
It’s a wonder Sir Elton could manage to say *ANYTHING* about file-sharing, what with the giant corporate DICK crammed so far down his throat!
(Sorry!)
September 24th, 2009 at 12:05 am
Dont worry Elton i promes with all my heart that ” I WILL NEVER EVER IN MY LIFE TIME DOWNLOAD ANYTHING THAT YOUR GAY ASS CREATES “
September 24th, 2009 at 12:54 am
Elton who?
September 24th, 2009 at 3:04 am
Is it weird that I never heard about several of those named “artists”? That incl. that Lilly something. Actually I did catch up, and watched/ listened to some of them; decided they are not worth my bandwidth. Sorry people, I share good music only. Copywronged, or free.
September 24th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
“Because of his stance on filesharing”
No. His song were and are piece of crap and his lyrics never made any sense regardless of his stance on file sharing.
This is the case for most of these “music stars” by the way. The recording industry does not care about quality because quality and genius are too rare to be profitable. They were just interested in making money.
And the human sheep follow each over to the mediocrity of the brain washers dressed as clown with chicken feathers.
Why we can not have the same quality as what was produced by a Mozart a Beethoven or a Brukner for the music, a Byron, a Poe for the lyric?
Do you know that a single symphony of beethoven contain enough good tunes to make at least 100 hits RIAA standard?
Does things are not supposed to become better with time not worst?
Byron and Poe certainly took a lot more than five minute to write any of their poems unlike Elton John and his “lyrics”.
Do you know how many pages of score contain the Mahler resurrection Symphony?
There is no doubt that John stuff will be completely forgotten as soon as the generation exposed to him passes.
September 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
” No. His song were and are piece of crap and his lyrics never made any sense regardless of his stance on file sharing. ”
Quality is subjective, opinions vary.
I am actually quite fond of EJ’s older stuff ( I have ‘Captain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy’ on vinyl ).
As for newer stuff, I share your opinion … it’s crap.
I think that many of us older regulars fee the same way about his stuff.
Unfortunately, EJ is wearing the same rose colored glasses that American Idol contestants are wearing when
they audition on the show, and are shown the door because they suck. From years and years of being told by
friends and relatives how ‘great’ they are they are incapable of realizing that they just aren’t any good.
EJ has the same problem.
After many years of putting out some quality work, and constantly getting bombarded by sycophantic praise
even when it is not deserved, he can’t force himself to believe that his creative well has simply run dry.
The only explanation he can accept is that it’s the fault of the ‘Filesharing’ scapegoat.
It’s really sort of sad and pathetic.
So, if you think it’s crap, don’t buy it .. The labels will only blame file sharing as the cause for his crap
not being purchased, even though the real reason people are holding their nose it the smell.
September 24th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
” There is no doubt that John stuff will be completely forgotten as soon as the generation exposed to him passes. ”
Naah.
My kids like his older stuff too.
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:33 pm
site best
October 14th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
These people make enough money as it is. If your going to bitch about it then lower the prices or just start passing out checks to people. They didn’t make the Mp3 file.