Slashdot Mirror
Musicians Get Together For Anti-RIAA Concerts
DarkZero writes "The Sacramento Bee is currently running an article
about several different bands getting together for five concerts to raise money for the Recording Artists Coalition with the express purpose of fighting the RIAA and the
unfair treatment of its musicians. The acts lined up include Elton John, Billy Joel, Ozzy Osbourne, Stevie Nick
s, The Offspring, The Eagles, Weezer, and plenty of other bands. Good for them. (And for those that are wonderi
ng, the RAC's site, ArtistsAgainstPiracy.com, is actually an anti-RIAA and somewhat pro-Napster site, not what you would immediately expect it
to be.)"
Only if they're on hand to suck Elton's cock.
Special people have long socks, ride short buses, & invent witty sigs.
>Money raised from the concerts will help fund an offensive against the major record labels for allegedly denying musicians a share of royalty earnings.
;)
Not to downplay the fact that alot of artists *do* get the shaft by the record companies, but considering the -- erm, financial success -- of these artists, wouldn't it be more fitting to hold some benefit concerts to
-feed the homeless
-make a wish for a terminally ill child
-donate gifts to a low-income family
-donations to Amnesty International to keep the newly founded Afghan regime under control. One warlord for another right? Just give it 10 years, you'll be hearing from them again soon.
It *is* nearly Christams after all.
Now, I'm not a big xmas fan at all, and I've actually lived in some seriously shitty areas, so I have my criticisms of the poor and needy. However, I really don't think it's appropriate to be tossing money at Music Artists to help offset their court costs so they can fight the big bad RIAA. Let them foot the bill themselves, with funds from their own industry group. If $ARTIST wants to take his/her cut from my concert ticket to buy some coke, or put in for their court fees, that's their business. Just don't masquerade it as a "benefit".
<crotchety Old Man voice>
And another thing! Like hell am I'm going to go see that aging, worn-out fucking cokehead Elton John dance around with some homophobic little angst-ridden punk sonafabitch (like you have it so hard, go work in a sweat shop in China you fucken LA Burb refugee), all so they can whore their asses a little more to get me to buy their silly-ass brand name shoes.
In my day, we had to actually do WORK. You know the kind; shitty, unpleasant, unfulfilling jobs 8 hrs a day, 7 days a week, 12 months a year, no vacation, no benefits, the kind of job you dread so much you don't wanna wake up it's so fucking soul-destroying, just so we could get sold to a larger comapany and get layed off.
I only wish I got paid to dance around and curse like a MOFO next to jigglies, calling my mom a fucken biatch. And get paid to do it to! If you got fucked by your record deal, deal with it and join the club pal, because we are ALL getting fucked by the system.
<crotchety Old Man has stroke and shuts up>
Update: I just re-read the article and realised that the concerts are to be held the night before the Grammys. I have no idea when the Grammys are held, I never watch them. But my original point still stands.
Elton, if you're reading this, take those Lion King royalties (your $$ not mine) and sue the ass off the RIAA, that way you can make everything you've done since 1983 dissapear
"At first we had napster, the CD sales increased. Somehow the RIAA didn't like this, nobody knows why. "
CD-sales dropped over 20% when Napster showed up.
"The RIAA spent more money on copy protection and lawsuits than they will ever get back from it. "
Many artists doesn't like RIAA because they take to much of the cake but that doesn't mean free-loading is a good alternative.
If broadband gets faster and adopted by more people many artists will have a very hard time to make a living. Despite the load of bullshit lying floating around here on slashdot the truth is that CD-sales are very very impotant for most artists.