Slashdot Mirror


Two Blanks Against the Trend

skdffff writes "German band Eisbrecher has decided to make a statement for its fans and for music consumers in general and is releasing their album ("Eisbrecher") including a bonus DVD with 2 blank CD-Rs which have the same label as the CD itself. Alexx Wesselsky (singer and head of the group): 'We are of the opinion that the music buyers are criminalized enough and have been made responsible for the wretched state in the music industry. We are giving them the chance to make 2 legal copies for private use with "official blanks".'"

65 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. bah by Tirel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this is just a publicity stunt.

    remember, the USA is the country where your discontent will be sold back to you.

    1. Re:bah by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I see it as a concept that may make people understand the idea of 'copyright'. It stuns me to see how many people DON'T understand the idea. A case is on my web site I have an area where people can download music. It's also copyrighted music.

      I've lost count of the number of times I've been emailed about it, from anonymous do gooders making sure that I know they know I'm serving copyrighted goods online, and that it's illegal, and that I could get in some great trouble. Even had one guy argue with me until he broke down into swearing and abuse insisting the RIAA would have my balls on a platter.

      The punchline? It's music I've written, I've recorded, I hold copyright over, but as part of that copyright I allow my music to be downloaded.

    2. Re:bah by swordboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      this is just a publicity stunt.

      And it worked.

      I'm going to buy this album and I've never even heard of this band. Sooner or later, the music industry will realize that the old ways are dead. Pretty soon, McDonalds and Taco Bell will be record labels of their own, selling new releases with the purchase of a value meal.

      What did you think that those Wifi installations were for anyway? New cell phones will have WiFi and Bluetooth by the end of '05. It will be easy.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    3. Re:bah by Bigman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, it is. But it might just illustrate to the music industry that there are other marketing models to adopt other than the grab-control-and-screw-it-for-all-its-worth model that they currently adopt. The band is clearly making a political point about home copying. It would have been cheaper for them to put three copies of the album in the case and say to give the other 2 away.. instead they gave away CD-R's because that immediatly evokes the image of home copying and also points out that every blank CD-R is not the same as a lost record sale.
      Perhaps if this CD sells because of its notoriety and because loads of people like the idea of getting a couple of free CD-R's with the logo on, maybe they might get a clue that there might be ways of exploiting the free (as in beer) exchange of copyright material for their own profit.
      If they did that, then they may stop looking like a load of sad King Kanute's and start looking like a bunch of people with brains and flair.

      --
      *--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
    4. Re:bah by teklob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      only on slashdot would a comment 2 posts into the comments section restating a single factoid from the article be moderated informative

    5. Re:bah by Snowdog668 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree with you on this. I can take it one step further, I had on old host go in and totally erase my band's site back when the RIAA first started ramping up their attack on Napster. No phone call, no e-mail, no warning what-so-ever, the site just disappeared. Apparently they were afraid of being the next target so everyone that had any mp3's on their site was a pirate until proven otherwise. Once I sent them a fax of my copywrite I find out the damn fools didn't even have a backup of my site so I had to go back and re-upload everything. I wouldn't have minded so much because I keep a current version on my own computer but I'm on dialup so it took a couple of hours to recover. Needless to say I moved to a new host right quick.

      --
      I wouldn't say I'm a bad gambler but the last time I went to Vegas I even lost a buck on the soda machine.
  2. I'm so conflicted by CompWerks · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bad Music - Great idea

    --
    If you can read this sig - the bitch fell off.
  3. About time by Polkyb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember thinking to myself... If only the artists and the consumers got together to fight the evil music oppressors, we all might start getting somewhere.

    This looks like a very good start

    --
    I've never shoed a horse, but I once told a donkey to piss off!
  4. great idea by sinucus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's a great idea that artists are trying to fight back against the RIAA. Sure they're German and sure they aren't that big, but it's a stand. Every journey starts with one step!

    1. Re:great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Since they aren't in America, I don't think it's the RIAA they're fighting against

    2. Re:great idea by Angstroem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whether RIAA or GEMA (the German counterpart) doesn't really matter. It's just different names for the same illness.

    3. Re:great idea by he-sk · · Score: 4, Informative

      The German counterpart of the RIAA is the IFPI Deutschland and not the GEMA.

      --
      Free Manning, jail Obama.
    4. Re:great idea by sporty · · Score: 5, Funny
      Every journey starts with one step!

      Didn't Wile E. Coyote fall off of many cliffs due to this?
      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    5. Re:great idea by dfn_deux · · Score: 3, Informative

      I may be incorrect, but a friend of mine in Germany told me that this is not as unusual as it sounds, it seems that German copyright law defines fair use in such a way that it is perfectly legal to make "personal" copies of recordings for friends and family members as long as you don't charge a fee.

      --
      -*The above statement is printed entirely on recycled electrons*-
  5. That's clever, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whoever came up with this idea is clever. But, he/she similarly totally misunderstands the point of copyright laws by playing "bright lining" games (as do, in my experience, many slashdot readers).

    (the term "bright lining" means doing some activity with a full knowledge of where the law or regulation is and doing something right up to this regulation, this living up to the letter of the law, though, the implication is, not the spirit.)

    Copyright is a socially constructed concept. Basically, copyrightholders are entitled to a monopoly of sorts for a limited time on their work. most people agree that the primary reason for this is to encourage more creation of works.

    When people talk in terms of "it's legally okay to copy a song from the radio" or "it's legally okay to copy three pages, but not the whole book", then they are basically referring to PRAGMATIC copyright interpreations and rulings based on past technological and social circumstance. as technology and social circumstance change, it may become necessary to change (usually tighten) what is allowed in order to best preserve the spirit and intention of copyright, which, again, is to encourage authors.

    here's a really obvious sign of when the spirit of copyright is broken--i call it the "extrapolation" argument. basically, somebody takes an existing interpretation and tries to "scale it up":

    * sharing music with your kid sister is ok, so sharing music with everybody's kid sister is (Napster)
    * photocopying one page is ok, so let's set up a distributed system via amazon's new full-text thing by which everybody downloads one page and somehow they are combined again (slashdot/amazon)
    * MIT has a blanket license for analog music / copying music from existing analog sources of music is ok (radio - unscheduled recordings, includes ads, not complete songs), so let's play a clever trick by which people can get whatever they want in a high quality, but analog format (MIT)

    All three of these will work, in the short term. And all three will generate stricter interpretations and a clamp-down, because they are so clearly against the spirit of the socially beneficial copyright law (oh, shut up already, completely-anti-copyright anarcho-libertarians - go and do a little historical research about every attempt to do away with copyrights and patents completely). The end result of this will be stricted interpretations and more bitching and whining on slashdot. What is the root cause of this? The evil RIAA and MPAA? Yes, they occasionally go overboard (the mickey mouse extension act is pretty egregious), but generally they are in the right.

    The root cause is those who think that they're being clever by bright-lining copyright interpretations without realizing that they are interpretations that are subject to reasonable modification as circumstances warrant, not god-given cast-in-stone truths. or, in other words, more technological sense than social understanding.

    Disagree? reply, not mod down.

    1. Re:That's clever, but... by timbloid · · Score: 5, Funny


      Bart: Uh, say, are you guys crooks?
      Tony: Bart, um, is it wrong to steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving
      family?
      Bart: No.
      Tony: Well, suppose you got a large starving family. Is it wrong to steal
      a truckload of bread to feed them?
      Bart: Uh uh.
      Tony: And, what if your family don't like bread? They like... cigarettes?
      Bart: I guess that's okay.
      Tony: Now, what if instead of giving them away, you sold them at a price
      that was practically giving them away. Would that be a crime, Bart?
      Bart: Hell, no!
      Tony: Enjoy your gift.

    2. Re:That's clever, but... by NixLuver · · Score: 5, Informative
      I agree with much of the factual explanation here, but I disagree, to a large extent, with the conclusions. The copyright laws were never intended as a means of establishing a media empire on one idea. The copyright laws were intended to allow someone to profit from their idea, but not to own your memories (think Disney).

      The spirit of that decision, I think, can only be observed in one of two ways; short duration, strong copyright laws, or long duration, weak copyright laws. The problem with the egregious Disney extensions is that they apply to other copyrights.

      The ridiculous result is that Disney now owns a large percentage of what's in my head. They have relentlessly pursued copyright violations that were completely tangential to their trademarks and intellectual properties in order to establish the "don't fuck with the mouse" mindset, thus setting an example for everyone.

      In short, I would quite agree with you if our copyright laws were still as originally written; I cannot agree based on current law.

    3. Re:That's clever, but... by mivok · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While I agree with your comments, I don't understand how the group referred to in the story are playing 'bright lining games'.

      If a person wants to give every customer who buys their song a license to make 2 backups for private use that is their perogative. They're not saying 'here, take these blank cd-rs and make some "legal" backup copies of all your metallica albums', they're not saying 'make a copy and distribute it to your friends'. They're saying that music they produce should be able to be backed up as per fair use, and they're giving people a helping hand doing it.

      Perhaps I simply disagree with you that the spirit of copyright law should force those who have damaged media to have to pay twice. Or that the spirit of copyright law should forbid people to be able to transfer music between different media such as mp3/ogg/aac players. The extrapolation argument you said is okay, but nowhere do I see Eisbrecher advocating that people break the spirit of copyright law as you said.

    4. Re:That's clever, but... by liquidsin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You seem to be missing a crucial point here. All of the instances that you cited were of the general populace trying to weasel through loop holes in copyright law, and the laws were rightly changed to accomodate for this. The instance we're discussing here is a band who is distributing two blanks with their own cd, which one would assume is to encourage people buying the cd to share a copy with a couple friends. This is NOT the same as finding loop holes in the law. They are extending the basic provisions of copyright law the same way as someone releasing code under the GPL is. I would seriously doubt that any sane judge is going to tell you that you can't make extensions like this on materials that you own the copyright to.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    5. Re:That's clever, but... by rafael_es_son · · Score: 5, Informative

      Chapter 8 ("The Financial Advantages of Anti-copyright " - pdf) of "Digital Resistance" might interest you. It debunks some of the more persistent capitalist myths behind the idea of "copyright for the protection of the artist".

      I find CAE's other books quite interesting as well. It's quite hard for me to find well-written material related to the intersection between technology and culture, any pointers?

      --
      HAD
    6. Re:That's clever, but... by prakslash · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I agree. I, too, see this from time to time where people interpret the law "too literally" - and smugly think that can use technology to safely break what is essentially a social rule necessary for proper functioning of the society.

      You cited cases where people are not actually breaking the law "as written" but they are breaking the "spirit" in which it was written.

      Thankfully, I have not found this tendency among the various High Court and Supreme Court Judges. They do seem to fully understand the spirit of the law and will perobably take the appropriate actions to maintain that spirit.

      By the way, I also see the opposite happen i.e. people trying to live up to the law too much. For example, in my company, there are rules regarding Software Development such as requirements to produce various types of documentation. Sometimes I see clueless Project Managers going overboard with obsessively following these rules. They insist on a trivial 2-minute bug-fix going through 2 weeks of approvals and reviews and another 3-weeks of documentation changes. Instead of streamlining the process, the too literal interpretation of the rules ends up wrapping the whole process in red-tape.

      Anyway.. Intelligent post. You didn't have to post as AC.

    7. Re:That's clever, but... by PortHaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry...

      I disagree with you. I believe society can now handle a "patentless/copyrightless" society.

      I do NOT believe they are beneficial in their current form. Most artists and inventers receive next to nothing in compensation when corporations and associations gain all th economic benefits.

      And at the same time, these rights have been so extended (both in time and in scope) as to be unconstitutional...

      Frankly, I think it's time some damage is done. However, I believe said damage should a) not harm life or limb, b) not harm non-combatants (such as myDoom virus)

    8. Re:That's clever, but... by Simonetta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Copyright is a socially constructed concept. Basically, copyrightholders are entitled to a monopoly of sorts for a limited time on their work.

      The giant media corporations have destroyed the idea of copyright themselves by bribing legislators in the USA to change the copyright time period from limited to indefinite. Since they refuse to release copyrighted material into public domain (by permanently extending the copyright period), the consumers refuse to acknowledge their ownership of the copyright by using new digital technology to make extensive and widespread copies.

      Corporations don't understand the idea of 'social compact' and never will. In the long run, they will dissolve themselves due to inability to control digital copyright, but they will send many random people to prison to set examples and will destroy many works by encrypting them and refusing to release the decryption keys or allowing the sale of the product.

    9. Re:That's clever, but... by quintessencesluglord · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Question: When the Smashing Pumpkins gave away their final album (against their record company's wishes), was this in the spirit of the law or the letter of the law?

      When another band I am fond of released a "bootleg" copy of an album that had gone out of print, was this in the spirit of the law or letter of the law?

      While most argue about the ability to profit from a piece of work, one aspect is overlooked: control.

      The other side of the coin is a manufacture who refuses to purchase rights from an individual, waits until the patient expires, and then proceeds to use said idea in their product (the case I'm thinking of dealt with sweeteners, but the details escape me now). The problem is the manufacturer would not have even known about sweetener without the patient. Why bother with a patent at all?

      It is to give the creator a reason to present the idea. Imagine I had created a cure for cancer and left it to rot on some dusty shelf. What good is a patent now?

      In the case with the Smashing Pumpkins and the other band, that is precisely what the copyright law has done; allowed the works to rot. By pushing the pragmatic aspect of the copyright, they have actually moved closer to the spirit of the law; they have maintained control of their work. The German band is no different.

      Stricter interpretations will only incite more flagrant violations: the more laws you have, the more criminals you have. The more egregious the law, the more egregious the crime. The current trespasses on copyrights should perhaps serve as a warning that the current laws are inappropriate instead of a reason to pass even stricter laws.

      More importantly, the creation of new works. It is hard to understand how stricter controls will somehow lead to a greater dissemination of an idea. The logical extrapolation is no access to any ideas. This is a dangerous precedent.

  6. Difference in laws between Germany and US by Mr+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While I applaud the effort, I still think this could promote the false notion that they have to give permission in order for private home listeners to make backup copies for their own use. This is the real source of debate, whether or not I can copy the CD I own onto my own mix CD and let a friend borrow it.

    The *AAs focus on the macro-scale because they know the argument is much more convincing if they try and say the average user is 'stealing' and 'distributing' to thousands of people. Instead, the average person is most likely willing to pay for a song if the price is right and the restrictions aren't too severe. iTunes seems to be doing fine, and the competitors are springing up.

    1. Re:Difference in laws between Germany and US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There is actually no debate whether I can copy a CD I own and give it away to (close) friends. I can even borrow a CD, copy it for me and a friend and return the original. This is explicitly allowed and the reason why we pay a surcharge on every blank (GEMA-Gebuehr). The number of copies is also not limited to two (but the audience is limited to relatives and close friends). On the other hand we are not allowed to circumvent copy protection, so the concept of "fair use" copies is quickly becoming a moot point.

  7. Hell, I'll buy it by RESPAWN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, I've never heard of this band, but I'll buy this CD. Maybe it's just a publicity stunt, and maybe I'm falling right into their trap, but I don't care. Because publicity stunt or not, maybe the RIAA will take notice if this album sells extremely well. Even if the band stands to gain from this stunt, I think we as the music buying public do as well. By buying this album we can send a message to the RIAA that we don't like being treated with contempt by them, and that we really do care about fair use.

    --

    If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    1. Re:Hell, I'll buy it by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder if it will be subject to blank digital audio recordable media levies? You know, the ones which go into the hands of the enemy :-)

  8. Of course it is a stunt by emo+boy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The purpose of a stunt such as this is to get publicity. Perhaps the only reason they did this is to push their new album, but at the same time they are helping to bring light the situation that we have here which is about copyright laws. I think we all have moved beyond the issue of destroying the music industry. We need to move on to what we can do to fix the issue of moving our music from medium to medium (i.e. record to tape to cd to computers) Once we figure out what is acceptable and fair to music makers then we can begin to focus on what's important: making better music with better quality and therefore better entertainment.

  9. Comparing business models by shockwaverider · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You see this is exactly what is needed - A changing music business model, combined with a tolerant "lets not be evil" policy

    The trouble is that the business model of "Litigate until you show a profit" is somewhat self-perpetuating whereas this new one is risky...

    --
    Remember kids! Guns don't kill people - Americans kill people.
  10. Shock horror! by Channard · · Score: 5, Funny

    this is just a publicity stunt.

    Which, of course, is a real surprise coming from the record industry. I bet you feel a right tit. (boom boom)

  11. Nice, but it's been done before by plumby · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Dead Kennedys did something remarkably similar years ago with the tape version their "In God We Trust Inc" album.
    The statement that they had was 'Home taping is killing big entertainment industry profits; we left side two blank so you can help'

    1. Re:Nice, but it's been done before by Jin+Wicked · · Score: 4, Funny

      I guess they were hoping you would copy side one to side two and then give side two to one of your frie... oh, wait. =)

      --
      My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
  12. Brilliant distribution scheme by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This doesn't work if your band is counting on millions of sales in order to recap huge ad costs -- i.e. Backstreet Boys, etc. But it works wonders if you need higher distribution, and just want exposure. What a great idea to help distribute music!

    --
    stuff |
  13. Maybe I'm missing something by tsg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    but why don't they just give you two extra copies of album instead of CD-Rs?

    --
    People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
    1. Re:Maybe I'm missing something by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful
      but why don't they just give you two extra copies of album instead of CD-Rs?
      It's a symbolic gesture. Call it a gimmick if you want :-) They specifically want to make a statement 'not all copying is evil', and make the news with it. Giving away 2 extra prerecorded discs would not make as strong a statement, nor would simply issuing a press statement stating that they endorse copying of their music.

      This is a nice way of saying "Giving away copies of our work can be good for us, too".
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  14. Legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IANAL, and I know this isn't happening in the US, but wouldn't the two blank discs intice a US consumer to break US laws? Aren't we allowed on one personal copy?

    What are Germany's laws in regards to this?

    1. Re:Legal? by BabyDave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd expect German law (and US, along with probably every Berne signatory) says "you've been given permission by the copyright holder(s) to make the two copies, so go ahead.

    2. Re:Legal? by dave420-2 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The copyright holder has given you the ultimate legal weapon to copy those CDs - the fabled explicit written permission :)

      Basically, they said you could, so you can make 2 copies, legally. You could do it in front of a judge, and he'd just have to sit there, grooving on it.

  15. That's Nice -- Wrong Trend by _xeno_ · · Score: 4, Insightful
    We are of the opinion that the music buyers are criminalized enough and have been made responsible for the wretched state in the music industry. We are giving them the chance to make 2 legal copies for private use with 'official blanks'.

    I was unaware that the music industry had been doing much complaining about people making copies of CDs for personal use. I could have sworn they were much more upset about people either A) giving out mix CDs or B) downloading illegal files.

    I don't see how this move will really effect anything. You can give out two copies to a friend, I guess (although that's illegal), and it will have the official CD logo. Or something.

    Of course, the CD-R won't last as long as the real CD anyway and nothing would have prevented people from copying the CD anyway. This is just some dumb gimic to grab attention, and it seems to have worked.

    If this were a band offering free MP3s for download, that might be interesting. It isn't, it's just a band saying that they don't mind people using fair use rights. (Or whatever they are in Germany and the EU, I don't know.)

    I guess I don't see what the big deal is.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    1. Re:That's Nice -- Wrong Trend by MooCows · · Score: 5, Informative

      If this were a band offering free MP3s for download, that might be interesting.

      Check out the link in my sig, www.magnatune.com
      Those artists are offering free MP3s of their albums.
      Plus they get a 50% cut of what you decide to pay for the album. Great idea imo.
      You buy the albums through the internet by the way, downloadable in different formats (WAV/OGG/MP3/FLAC)

      CDBaby is also doing something like this. (although they sell real CD's, not downloads)

      --
      The path I walk alone is endlessly long.
      30 minutes by bike, 15 by bus.
  16. hd... by Iwojima · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't need no stinking cd's .. the original CD IS the backup. Next time .. feel free to include a pendrive for the "personal backup" :P

  17. Why bother with blanks? by dave-tx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wouldn't it have made more sense to just include two extra copies of the CD instead of two blanks? At least then you wouldn't end up using the blanks for something you REALLY want extras of, like Fedora Core or Led Zeppelin.

    --

    >> "What would the robut do? Frame someone!"

    1. Re:Why bother with blanks? by vidarh · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Of course pressing a music CD costs much less than 1 or 2 euros in reasonable volumes... As an example, for USD 1.45 - 0.77 per CD (in volumes of 1000 or 10,000 respectively) I found pressing + jewel cases, cover and distribution via Amazon and Barnes and Noble, or if you just want to press discs, $1.65 per disc for a volume of 250 to 0.65 at a volume of 1,000 and 0.40 for 10,000.

      Even in volume prices on CD-R's those prices are competitive.

  18. Grrrr by JTunny · · Score: 5, Funny

    Goddam record companies forcing me to pay for 2 blank CDrs that I don't need. This is what happens when you have a monopoly.

    I'm going to download the tracks off p2p in protest.

  19. Because... by RMH101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...if they had, it'd just be a three-for-the-price-of-two-as-we-can't-sell-all-th ese-cds-we-pressed bargain bucket release, rather than a feelgood, slashdot-friendly option that gets them a load of free publicity.

  20. Re:Info about the band by Burlynerd · · Score: 5, Funny
    they're one of the top bands right now in the german rap scene
    The "german rap scene" ????
    Hitler must be spinning in his lake of fire!
  21. It's been done beofre by Walkiry · · Score: 4, Informative

    And again, by someone whose music doesn't really interest me. Maria Jimenez, a singer from Spain, included a blank CD with one of her latest releases so that people wouldn't feel guilty about making copies for their own use. She only asked in return that people did buy her CD.

    This is the only comment I found in English (last paragraph).

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!
  22. Re:Info about the band by cozziewozzie · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, hip-hop is by far the most popular music style in Germany now. It's a part of a larger fascination with 'black' music, where 'black' music covers stuff like rap, soul, RnB, reggae etc.

    There are many German rappers singing in German, too, but it's too slow, watered down and bland for my taste.

  23. A most excellent first step! However... by Maelstrom696969 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Being in a band myself and having released some EP's and a full album, we always tell people to go ahead and make as many copies of the music as they want, and distribute the songs however they want.

    We do this because we're a bar band. We're not with a major label. We have no distribution besides selling our recordings by hand at our gigs and maybe garnishing a wee bit of counter space at a local Mom&Pop coffee shop or two (not to mention, of course, giving them away as presents and sharing online via P2P). We do this because we figure the more our music gets out there, the more of chance that somebody from a label will hear us and like us and we'll finally be able to just do what we really love for a living - making music.

    Now, let's assume that our dreams come true. We makes lots of cash solely by making music. Well, we've all agreed that as soon as our first contract expires, we would only sign another one that allows people to distribute our music freely. Why? Simply put, we've already started making a living at what we love, and we know that people will continue to buy our CD's, whether or not they can get our music for free! This is a proven fact!!!

    Sure, we might not end up being as filthy rich as other music stars, but who cares? Greed sucks. Allowing the most amount of people as possible on this planet to enjoy what we, too, enjoy more than almost anything else (sound familiar to any of you Linux programmers?) - now THAT would be AWESOME!

    -A witty .sig proves nothing.

  24. Re:Info about the band by ahillen · · Score: 3, Funny

    The "german rap scene" ????
    Hitler must be spinning in his lake of fire!

    Well, maybe. But if he could look at todays Germany, the fact of there being a rap scene or not would only slightly alter the rotation speed... there's too much other stuff that would make him spin... ;)

  25. This is hardly new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Over here in the UK, a socialist singer/songwriter called Billy Bragg did this with audio cassettes. He released an album that was entirely recorded on the 'A' side and the 'B' side left blank and unprotected with the label 'Confuse the enemy - bootleg the Bragg'.

    It seems to me all Eis-brecher are doing is the same thing, only brought up-to-date.

    Please remember socialist != communist.

  26. Just a statement by AtlanticGiraffe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A few posters seem to be criticising this thing as if it were supposed to be practical. Of course, as anyone can see, this is not supposed to be practical.

    The CDs are blank, probably to avoid extra payments to copyright holders. Although the CDs are empty, they've been printed on, and therefore earmarked for this particular purpose. Of course this is impractical, but it's supposed to be. It's just a statement, and a good one too.

  27. Audio CD-R or CD-R for the PC? by NoSuchGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you buy an audio CD-R (8 Euro) you pay royalties to the GEMA (society for musical performing and mechanical reproduction rights). That's about 16 Euros or about $20 (+labeling) for this PR stunt.

    Normal CD-R cost only 0.40 Euro that's about $1 (+labeling) for the 2 CD-R included in this CD.

    --
    Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
  28. Bright Tunes v. Harrisongs by tepples · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's music I've written, I've recorded, I hold copyright over

    Are you sure? What way have you of knowing that you didn't just subconsciously copy substantial portions of someone else's copyrighted work? George Harrison got in trouble for that.

  29. Ironically.... by TimTurnip · · Score: 3, Informative
    Their record company has agreed to the idea...

    ...so long as they don't sell more than 5,000 albums. :) "Eisbrecher's record label ZYX Music supports this action and will deliver the first 5000 albums of the group with 2 blanks each." -Turnip

    --

    Chicks dig my good /. karma.

  30. The Rosenbergs by RainbowSix · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Rosenbergs did a similar thing in 2001. They included a second copy of the CD, dubbed the "Napster Copy"

    http://www.livedaily.com/news/2625.html

    --
    --------
    It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
  31. a good start, indeed by musiholic · · Score: 4, Insightful
    but will it spread? That is the question I'd like to see answered, and hopefully in the affirmative. Let's hope that more bands pick up on this and run with it.

    With the relatively high demand for portability, I wonder if a band would be willing to pre-RIP their songs into MP3s or AAC or whatever format directly onto their CDs for personal use... just a thought on similar lines.

    --
    One Can Never Own Enough Musical Instruments...
  32. Dead Kennedys by esnible · · Score: 4, Funny

    Twenty years ago The Dead Kennedys album "In God We Trust, Inc" (cassette tape version) came with the notice:

    "Home taping is killing big entertainment industry profits, we left side two blank so you can help."

    I believe the album was released in 1981.

  33. US Copyright Summary by condition-label-red · · Score: 4, Informative

    I recently ran across a good, concise discussion of US copyright laws with timeframes of when content becomes public domain here at Project Gutenberg. Looks like we will see some PD works next in 2019.

    --
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
  34. Re:Info about the band by dasmegabyte · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some German rap is very good. Remember, hip-hop is urban culture, and Germany has plenty of urban areas. So do France and Great Britain, both of which also have hot hip-hop scenes. And what's great is that each area is adding its own influence to the genre, not just reiterating Reverend Run rhymes in low German. Although, the band mentioned in this topic is just noise, some of it is really good.

    It's the integration and unity of races that is growing in modern urban areas that increases the angular velocity of Herr Adolf. The fact that there's some modern clicks and whistles coming out of their Blaupunkt speakers would probably not increase this outrage.

    --
    Hey freaks: now you're ju
  35. Re:Fantastic by Joe+Normal · · Score: 5, Funny

    (Joe Normal doesn't read this website)

    Yes I do!

  36. Re:Info about the band by Jeff+Kelly · · Score: 4, Informative

    1. If you refer to eisbrechers music as being rap then you either never heard a song by them or your definition of rap is quite unusual. In your definition wumpscut, rammstein, Das Ich or such bands would also count as german rap ;-)

    Best chances to hear one of their songs is at one of the many wave/gothic clubs in germany. Most probably during one of their industrial/noise sessions. (Mind you those genre names mean slightly different things in europe)

    Both members have excellent track records making goth music and producing other bands of the genre. Before Eisbrecher they were rather succesful with their band Megaherz.

    2. As far as I know they aren't on top of any german scene let alone the rap scene. Their debut has only recently been released in germany and they are currently not listet in the german 100 and aren't even listed in the german alternative charts. So I would not say they are top in germany at the moment.

    Greetings from germany

    Jef

  37. Artists release dual mode CDs by Simonetta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A local Portland Oregon folk artist, Lew Jones, released a new album several years ago with most of his older work included on the CD in MP3 form.
    This was a mixed-mode CD where the audio came first and then the data. Placing the CD in an audio player gives the sound, so there is no blast of noise when the data is placed on the CD first.

    Also there were a few selections of other artists from the same small label on the CD in MP3 form.

    This is pretty neat and is an example of the RIAA companies should be doing to address this issue. It's too bad that these companies are all run by bozos who have let all the cocaine, limos, bimbos, and rock-star celebrity cloud their business sense.

    Another idea would be is to have the original mix tracks on the CD in MP3 form along with a program that allows the buyers to remix to songs differently. Remove that irritating guitar solo, add more reverb on the bass, things like this.

  38. Re:Info about the band by jacoby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Early hiphop was heavily influenced by Kraftwerk, esp. "Trans-Europe Express". That the birds come home to roost surprises me very little.