Slashdot Mirror
MP3.com Archive Not Lost (1.7 Million Songs Saved)
macdaddypunk writes "We all remember last December's grim news: MP3.com closed its doors, warning thousands of musicians that 'all your content will be deleted from our servers.' However, as the Wall Street Journal reports today, most of the original MP3.com archive was never deleted! Two companies, GarageBand and Trusonic, claiming to have a legitimate copy of the archive, are now enabling former MP3.com artists to visit www.MP3isBack.com and recover their MP3.com music, instantly re-generating their artist pages with just a few clicks. Trusonic, itself a Vivendi spin-out, focuses on licensing music to retailers for in-store airplay. GarageBand, like a HOTorNOT for music, offers free mp3 downloads and claims to host the definitive charts of independent music."
PureVolume.com is a much better alternative to garageband and mp3.com. What I like most is how simple and clean each bands interface is. Check it out! http://www.purevolume.com
Also, many of the artists on purevolume have, or had started with mp3.com.
Life is like pants... fit in or you don't fit in.
Some great no-name artists work were saved.
Good news.
Sounds like a decent offer for artists. Their service sounds rather good, and it's a decent offer (3 songs for free). And unlike P2P, it provides promotion capabilties essentially allowing people to keep track of a band they are interested in.
P2P is just hosting. People still need to find it, and figure out where to find more about the band.
This looks like a decent service. I could see some small bands with websites linking to their page on the service. A good way to organize your bands online promotional info and let fans keep up to date.
I'd personally rotate the songs every so often (if they allow that, which I think they do). Let people keep coming back to hear new songs.
Just my $0.02. It looks like a decent site. I hope some bands will make good use of it.
The truth is 90% of the people can't tell 256k mp3 from the original cd track.
/ /www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusiccla ssical/mp3test.html
http://wso.williams.edu/~jmaster/shnmp3/
http:
Google turns up plenty of listening tests. What good does SHN do through a $2 sound card DAC and 2 inch pc speakers?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I love archive.org but I have a serious question. Before posting this I went there trying to find how they get the cash to support multi-terabyte databases of info and all the bandwidth needed. I want to donate to this worthy project. It took me a long time but I finally found this page. From the looks of it they have collected just over $2600. Archive.org says that they are a registered non-profit so they must be getting donations from other sources.
Think about it for a second. They "are now enabling former MP3.com artists to visit www.MP3isBack.com and recover their MP3.com music, instantly re-generating their artist pages with just a few clicks. " Sounds pretty clear to me that they aren't allowed to redistribute the music without permission of the orginal artist due to the mp3.com orginal TOS, but they could pass on the files without right of redistribution. And if the artist reauthorizes the distribution on the new sites, they have the files and the permission.
501 Not Implemented
I am sure this is impractical, but humor me. Right now, archive.org uses a mass of rackable server in a central(or multiple) locations.
is it at all possible to write a distributed filesystem over the internet? Using ssh, if possible? I mean, it would have to have many multiple redundencies(google has 3 copies of everything they use in their googleFS), but could they use a 80-120 gig drive on few dozen/hundred/thousand peoples computers to host the archive?
Then it lends itself to a p2p system... which then lends itself into a freenet with better long-term caching features.... Aww, one can dream.
I thought I was the exclusive copyright holder of my own material. How is it that they are able to get away with charging me for my own material that I had been assured (by mp3.com) was already deleted? And @ $7 usd at that?
Seems a series of well thought out loopholes made all of this possible.
//i have as many lives as people i know.
After the collapse of MP3.com, a lot of artists went on to cut out the middle man, and now sell their own music from their own sites.
The same support systems that existed for MP3.com still exist for independent artists doing their own thing. The same message boards, same chats, same artists, pushing and supporting each other's music. But now instead of passing on the latest MP3 scam, they share the information that helps others to build their own sites and sell their music directly to their audience.
We had an MP3 site. We made a nice bit of cash while they were doing pay-for-play, which immediately stopped when people were frauding the hell out of them. My favorite, which wasn't exactly fraud, but was a great idea was "if you play this song, you'll get a long porn movie after the song". We never resorted to this, but we did get quite a bit of free porn this way.
This actually worked, but needless to say, MP3's charts weren't always the way to find the best music. Pushing your own site is a lot harder, but we've found ways to do it, and we average about 50 - 100 downloads, per artist, per day on our site. Even more after our artists perform at a local show. All it took was a few flyers on the college campuses in our hometown and some car mags bought cheap from Vista Print. (All our artists have one for Nattytown and one for themselves; so simple, so easy).
It may not sound like a lot, but everyone can't make iTunes money, and we know we're not going to do it with unknown artists. But it's more money than they were making sitting on undistributed cd's. And even if it's a dollar a day, that's $1 we didn't have the day before.
If we can do it (and believe me, hubby and I are only step removed from being Joe & Jill end user), then anyone can. Of course we are hoping that one of our artists will "blow up", but I think we have more of chance doing that our own way (and we're still making money meanwhile) than by using an MP3 spin off.
I doubt we'll go that route again. Why should we spend $99 for their service when we can upload music to our own site for free?
Sites like Buy A Beat.com and our own Nattytown.com, don't need MP3, their clones, or their copies, or "partners" any more. I hope other people wake up and don't get sucked into using a remake of MP3's crappy service when even the worst of sites can keep their money with a little bit of effort.