Anyway all the rules in our societies stand because there is a consensus. I there is no consensus a rule can artificially survive for a little while but eventually disappears. Nothing for exemple will or can stop us from going into a store and jack whatever we want. Nothing! Yet 97% of people go to the store and pay for their stuffs because they agree to this. They know that if they jack things for free too many time the store will close.

There is no consensus concerning the exchange of music and movies files and as long as the entertainment industry behave like terrorists this situation will remain.

maybe this FAC was too hastily put together without knowing the facts, and allowing the likes of Lily Allen to speak on the behalf with the words of the RIAA.

FAC sounds too political, too Bush-era.

what about the UN-Featured Artists – those not in the top 5% who earn all the money?

A coalition? like a coalition government set up in iraq by bush/cheney? yeah that’ll get a lot of people behind it.

a more appropriate name is MAC (Musicians Against Cartels), or MAKK (Musicians Against Korrupt Kartels), or MARIA (Musicians Against Recording Industry Associations)

The first one remains pretty straightforward and difficult to fuck-up. Even so, it’s still subject to cartel control in some places.

The second one is completely fucked-ed up due to mass hypnotism. This is achieved by the contemporary indoctrination on the part of the archaic guild known as the publishing industry that has fooled everyone into believing in their 18th century privilege called copyright – that only they should be able to distribute and make copies of music recordings, and if anyone else does, it’s immoral and constitutes theft.

Software engineers, having to deal with the fundamental fabric of information on a daily basis eventually twigged that some bastards had brainwashed them into believing that copyright could spookily control whether information could be copied at a distance. This being physically impossible meant they soon realised it didn’t mean that the copying of the information could be controlled, but that they (notionally responsible for the information being copied) were supposedly subject to another’s control (so their lawyers told them). Their natural right to liberty, their freedom of speech, their freedom to copy and distribute information in their legitimate possession had been suspended by an anachronistic privilege created in the era when slavery was still legal. Well, that privilege may well be supported by the wicked for as long as it earns such people money, but the software engineers who recognise such corruption can at least neutralise it on anything they produce. Hence the formation of the free software movement and the GPL license that renders copyright impotent. Those in that movement reject the power given to them by copyright and patent to control what other people do with the software they publish.

Software engineers may well be the first to wipe the scales from their eyes, but they won’t be the last. It’s only a matter of time before other artists gradually realise they’ve been conned, that 99%-100% of all revenue goes to the publisher and not themselves, and that their audience isn’t being sued for not paying the artist for their music, but for not paying the publisher for their copies. And as we know, the audience is quite able to make copies for themselves. Kids and their grannies can do it.

So, let’s help FAC realise that we’re just trying to de-fuck that second business model. It’s been done for software, it can be done for music. Everyone, for we are all artists and art lovers, has the natural right to share and build upon mankind’s cultural commonwealth, for love or money. That isn’t theft, but what comes to people naturally. Theft is burglary and obtaining someone else’s private property without their permission, not making copies or derivatives of one’s legitimate possessions. The latter is only an infringement of an unethical monopoly called copyright, and regarded as theft only by those still hypnotised to believe in its holy sanctity.

Artists with art and audiences with money can do an exchange without needing to suspend anyone’s liberty or artistic freedom. Publishers will be without a monopoly and its massive revenues, but then who still needs a publisher to distribute and produce copies?

you damn right. when oink was shut down (which was when i got into this discussion in the first place), we always figured that they could’ve just bought out the idea and they would’ve generated money from it. i would gladly pay a good amount of money – more than i would to spotify premium, for sure – to download the very same music i could on oink. it had standards, it used the latest p2p technology, and while it wasn’t free to maintain, it was slick, effective and beautiful. the only thing that wasn’t 100% cool about it was the little fact that it was illegal.

i’m also glad bragg is intent on using a subscription fee rather than paying for each song. like itunes does it. pirates aren’t used to itunes. pirates are used to oink.

Exactly. Mike Masnick over at http://www.techdirt.com has been explaining just this point over and over. Something can still be of great value, but have no price and you *can* compete with free. Digital copies take virtually no money to make. The fucking labels effectively want a licence to print money.

It IS free now.

Suppose the customer is wrong if he/she wants everything for free?

Well then, I say that the SELLER is wrong if he/she wants to put a price on something that is ALREADY free.

It should have started this way. But you see there is 7 corporations of parasites who started to try to terrorize the public and trampling our democracies in the process. We don’t negotiate with terrorists, such as Zarkaoui, Ben Laden, Cary Sherman, bainwholl, Negre or Lameignere. The problem is taht as long as these corporations of parasites are on the ground no discussion is possible and no solution can be found. Eradicating this entertainment mafia is the priority number one. This industry is full of thieves, killers, rapers and pederasts anyway.

Now Billy Bragg must chose if he is for the people or only for himself like so many others in his “industry”. If this is the latter we will have to solve the Billy Brag problem as well.

The tools are there, until the labels shut them down or buy them out.
Those tools are excellent for non-label artists to be seen and heard,
right next to label offerings. Once the labels clamp down on those,
that’s fewer easy access routes for non-label artists.

Think about that, then maybe you might understand the real reason they want
sites like that gone or under their thumb, and it has nothing to do with
‘lost revenue’ .

since you seem to be “new” to the p2p scene, you should check out some torrent listing sites that do help indies and creators share their works for free.

one good site to begin with is mininova.org that has a very good and useful policy of allowing content creators access to share their works at no cost to you. it gets highlighted and noticed by millions of people every day.

another sight is demonoid.com which also – i think – does something like that. well, i think they have some way of promoting content creators. but at the moment, demonoid has been offline for technical reasons, but hopefully will be back soon.

and of course, there’s the piratebay.org which is always happy to help indies distribute their work.

so you see, the tools are there. p2pers help each other. the Kartels help no one, except themselves, to YOUR money and work.

first, sampling.

many people – myself included – use p2p to sample music or video before deciding to buy it. i’ve been disappointed so many times after buying an album only to find just one or two songs on it that i like, or a dvd of a film that turns out to be crap. why should i pay for something i don’t like?

i’ve been away from the USA for almost 20 years now, so i don’t know if this is done: when i left and moved to yurp i found that every music store allows customers to listen and sample music. i can sit in a record store all day and listen to as many cds as i like – for free – and not buy a thing. or i might buy one out of the ten i sat and listened to.

have i stolen something? no. but the music is still in my head and i can sing it all i want, or learn to play it on a musical instrument or create a midi of it on my pc at home. so what did i steal? nothing.

that’s what p2p is for many people. you wouldn’t buy a car before test driving it, would you?

i don’t know if music stores in the US do this now, but i doubt it.

*****

the second thing – going indie and leaving the cartels in the dust:

twenty-odd years ago, Robert Redford created the Sundance Institute, a place for aspiring film directors and technicians to learn and practice their craft from professionals who donated their time and effort to the institute.

after some time, the students of course needed actors to direct, and so the word went out. and the students learned how to direct actors. then the film festival was born so they could show off their work.

then more actors came. and more directors and technicians came. then the hollydud studios became interested, and a lot more outside financing came flooding in.

of course, this didn’t all happen overnight. it took years to get to where it is now. but it had to start someplace.

paul mccartney set up a music school.

i think the musicians and technicians in the RIAA, BPI, RAC, etc. should band together, pull their resources (money, time, effort, talents) into setting up institutes like Sundance in the USA and europe. to be truly and completely independent. teach artists how to create music, be a technician (including IT technicians for music distribution, etc.), how to set up an indie label, how to distribute their works, and showcase them in live concerts.

also, teach them how to keep their finances in order.

break away from the labels and be your own bosses. don’t lean on them. when you’re successful, they’ll come knocking and you’ll be calling the shots, as it should be.

it takes time, but Redford proved it can be done with film. and it can be done with music, too.

I look forward to reading about the progress after my morning race.

Billy has been very good and kept cool. He’s earned some respect from the initial start of the conversation. He’s definitely not a shill.

Though to be honest, I don’t know any of his music, so maybe after all of this, I will look him up. How’s that, you engage with the audience and you gain publicity and a wider audience! And who knows, if I like what I hear, I’ll check him out live.

I think we’re about to make some progress.

I’ll be doing a post tomorrow.

Cheers!

otherwise, we’ve heard a lot of crap from paid RIAA trolls, shills, and paid-off politicians.

and we’ve heard from some indie musicians who genuinely have been fucked over by the labels who stole their copyrighted works.

we’ve also heard from a few indies who wouldn’t have any career at all if it wasn’t for p2p.

we here at p2pnet (not just jon and us other writers, but the readers and commenters, too) have been trying for literally years and years to “engage” with the labels and the artists.

the responses we get/got from the labels and shills are lawsuits, threats, harassments.

the responses we get/got from the performers are all of the same lame PR nonsenses handed then to spout by the RIAA and RAC.

the responses we get/got from the lamescream media are nothing but name-calling (thieves and pirates) and rhetoric.

the truth Billy, is that pirates actually steal your stuff, then sell it and make money. filesharers do no such thing. nothing is stolen. no cash or services are exchanged. just the free movement of 1’s and 0’s along the internet. just the freedom to do what one wishes with what one has legally purchased. and if that means sharing it – like cassette mixtapes which the labels and artists don’t seem to have ever been concerned with – that’s the right one has.

because then your works are being heard by people who may not have ever heard of you, and then they decide to go buy the CD or concert tickets. without free p2p, you wouldn’t have those fans.

i know there are people here who don’t/didn’t know you from adam, but now you’re here and actually speaking intelligently with the customers, and certainly gaining new fans which will generate more money for you.

i hope you understand that filesharing and trading will never ever stop, no matter what proposals are put into effect. and so it really is a losing nattle the labels are fighting – against both the customers and the performers.

as you know, the labels are fucked. they only want to control you, the money, and the distribution.

as a longtime reader/writer for p2pnet, and having been involved with p2p since the mid-90’s, i can tell you that the customer is fed up – FED UP! – with the crap the labels do. the way they treat the artists and customers is despicable.

p2pers are on the side of the performers – NOT at all on the side of the labels. and this will never change. the situation has gone on far too long and it’s time for the artists to bolt far away from the labels. be your own boss. set up your own indie labels. put your stuff online for free (as much or as little as you want), and you’ll soon have more fans, CD and ticket sales than you’d ever expect to have if the labels still controlled you.

They’re not interested in ‘engaging’ us unless we show we already agree with them.
No dissent is tolerated, no other opinions are valid.

MC comes in here with fists already balled up, BB tells us how it is.

Gee, I wonder why no agreement is forthcoming ?

Let ME tell you how it’s going to be.

Keep on treating us like crap, and ( already happening ), no one will BUY
anything, even if the artist is sympathetic, as long as they are label owned.

No amount of legislation will stop it.
Close the net, it will go to the street.

There are not enough law enforcement people in the face of the
planet to even put a dent in the sneakernet you will create.
And once the internet is locked down, and still no one is paying,
who will you be able to blame ?

At that time the villain will be obvious, and it won’t be the
former fans.

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/4813

copying and trading have been going on since the invention reel to reel tape recorders.

but in more modern times, cassette tapes have made it possible to record mixtapes and carry an entire album around in one’s pocket – as shown in the recent BBC program “Electric Dreams”, wherein the BBC encourages making mixtapes – even instructing people on how to do it.

then of course SONY, improved on the portability by inventing the walkman. btw, SONY, a member of both the RIAA and MPAA, continues to harrass, threaten ans sue it’s customers solely because they use their products in the way they’re meant to be used – recording, sharing, camming.

then the CD came. then the pc made it possible to create copies before a cd became too scratched. then the mp3 player – most notably ipod – made it possible to carry around thousands of songs in one’s pocket.

as we all know, the record labels only want money. that’s all. “art” isn’t in their vocabulary.

it’s been proved over and over that musicians do not need the major labels and their out-dated and biased contracts. most musicians make their money from concerts, and until they’ve repaid the labels, most of that still goes to the labels. and after they’ve been paid back, the performer is still under contract because they’re still being “promoted” by, and used by, the labels.

not having a contract with the majors is the best thing a musician can do for him/herself. no middle man. all profit.

putting their own tracks online for free is the easiest and most inexpensive way to get the works distributed – which ges them free publicity that translates directly into CD, merchandise, and ticket sales. this is a proven fact.

even studio performers not connected to any one band or performer can do this in order to drum up more work. setting up a web page is fairly simple and inexpensive. myspace, facebook and twitter are not recommended as firstly, there’s too much hype for these websites, and secondly, unknowns get lost in the crowd of big names being pushed by the labels.

putting their music into p2p networks with a text document included to give information and urls is much better. again, it’s all free and the labels have no control of this. any income earned is earned solely by the musician(s).

trying to threaten, harass, cut off internet access, and sue customers will absolutely not help your cause and will not create new fans. it will make you lose fans (your meal tickets).

either get out of your label-controlled contracts as soon as possible and go indie (legit), or don’t even go near a label if you’re just starting in the bsuiness.

the RIAA, BPI, and all of the other corrupt associations like them are dinosaurs. you don’t need them. complete their extinction now. you can work hard on your own and keep what you earn. not everyone will become the new Madonna or Britney whatsherface, ot even the new Billy Bragg. not everyone can, or should.

if you aren’t getting your due royalties, it’s because the corrupt labels are lining their pockets with it.

where i live, and also in canada and other countries, tarifs are put on blank media, mp3 players, pcs and other forms of electronic deviced. these tarifs are to be paidto the labels who are supposed to pay you, the musician. if they aren’t paying you – sue THEM!

i’m definitely not wealthy (i’m just bearly above the poverty level), but i don’t mind paying a few cents more for a blank cd or a few bucks more on an mp3 player as long as the money goes where it’s intended to go.

those are a few of the things i’d say. if i were invited.

*****

PS to Billy Bragg:

we – the people who pay your salaries – HAVE been tying to “engag” you for years, but we’re either ignored, sued, or told by the lamescream media that we’re all thieves and pirates.

for some years i’ve been trying to “engage” RIAA mouthpiece Sheryl Crow in a real dialogue here on p2pnet. i’ve written her open letters here, which have been emailed to her management, as well as being posted on her web page (not by me).

Open letter to Sheryl Crow:
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/4449

she and her management have consistently ignored all invitations for “engagement”. where’s MY diamond engagement ring?

If you know here, please tell her i’m still waiting for a reply.

BB, you’re “The Milkman of Human Kindness”, right? so how about that extra pint now, and really engage instead of telling us “what’s what”?

Perhaps it would be easier to ‘engage us in debate’ when phrases like

‘Thief’
‘Stealing’

and this peach …

” The customer is always right’ unless the customer wants everything you’ve made for free,”

Are dropped out of your rhetoric library.

The assumption that ‘everyone just wants something for nothing ‘ is just incorrect and reprehensible,
completely untrue, and exactly the attitude you and yours portray the minute you walk into a debate.

Stop walking in with the belief that you are just going to talk to a bunch of thieves, and just maybe
you will get a little bit more than a ‘Fuck You’.

As it sits you sound full of the same misconceptions and assumptions that you’re masters sell to paid
for lawmakers. You sound like a programmed lapdog.

Talk to fans and customers, instead of thieves and freeloaders.
It might go a little better.

If you could be there, what would you say?

Cheers!

i’ve loved your music for years – and yes, i have bought your albums (cassettes as they were).

it seems this week has been your first visit to p2pnet, so welcome.

if you haven’t seen it, i invite you to read my interview with “The Commitments”, who’ve become good friends of mine. perhaps you know them too, at least in a professional relationship.

The Commitments have been around almost as long as you have. They’re independent and still work. And they have job security. As you’ll know, they’re rightly recognized as “The World’s Hardest Working Band”.

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/5911

please take note of these and other comments:

“Dick:
The point is…if only one or two people buy the album, and it scatters across the internet, and people download it only from one or two people, well then the artists are in big trouble. But at the moment, I don’t think the artists are in big trouble because that’s not going to happen.

Ken:
Who really is making the argument here? Is it the artist that’s making the argument, or is it the record company? Because, don’t get me wrong here…the lion’s share of all of that goes to the record labels. To be honest with you, the last person, or persons in the pecking order, and to get the residuals, is the artist. The lion’s share goes to the record companies, so they’re the one’s who’ve got the biggest gripe. And if the artist went ahead and said to the record companies, “Hey, I don’t need you as a record label. I can sell over the internet”, the record labels wouldn’t be happy with that either.”

Ken:
“…the record labels aren’t interested in artistic endeavor, or the music or anything. They’re interested in the money.”

i’d like to know your comments.

take it ez.

catflap
p2pnet

“email address is at the bottom left”

Yup. I’ve already been there, but I’d rather hear back from him directly to confirm the post was his.

“Are you likely to share it with us soon?”

Sure! If and when I’ve had a chance to discuss what I have in mind with Billy.

Cheers!