Slashdot Mirror
Blog Torrent: Downhill Battle Interview
scubacuda writes "In this GrepLaw interview, Downhill
Battle's Nicholas Reville describes the success (and takedown) of SP2Torrent.com,
alternative ways to buy music, what indie musicians think about filesharing,
and real ways to counter threats to creativity and an open culture. Those excited
about the possibilities of Bittorrent
will especially appreciate Downhill Battle's Blog
Torrent, an easy-to-install program that will dramatically simplify the
creation, posting, and seeding of new torrents."
So just how long will it be before BIG GOVERNMENT forces the Internet to be FCC regulated (for US citizens)? With deep pockets of the RIAA and greedy polititions, it's only a matter of time. Follow the money trail boys and girls.
Life is not for the lazy.
Bob has 2Gig of mp3s. Jane has 5Gig of mp3s. If they share via 1Gb/s (local) ethernet, they will quickly both have 8Gigs each.
In a few years that Gigabytes will become Terabytes. When one person can have a copy of nearly all music in existence, they will never spend a dime on it. It's too late. Content producers are fucked. Only niche markets will survive.
Downhill battle wants to prove that P2P has "legitimate" uses, but they should not fall into the trap of trying to defend the all of these new technologies. Quite the contrary, the RIAA and the MPAA should be constantly on the defensive. They should prove to us that they can move with the times and are not just obsolete obstructionists.
Test 1 2 3 4
No it's not. It's music, movies, books, art, science, ... . It's our entire culture that large corporations want to own and commodify.
Hey, it's only fucking music, why are we getting this worked up over it?
I don't know, why are you getting all worked up?
Test 1 2 3 4
its called downloading LEGAL music:
http://bt.etree.org
Excellent legit application of p2p to distribute legal music.
I have been filling up dvds left and right once i found out i like a lot of those bands.
I wont buy music from any RIAA member, except bands that allow legal trading of their music. that is kind of a toss up. do i support the band that "gets it", and support the industry heads that dont.
well i dont even download RIAA members music anymore. but i am not buying it either, guess i must be a pirate, hurting their sales.
so they can assume all they want that i am a pirate because i am not buying their trash, my conscience is clean.
I think music is not a product but an artform. People should pay to go to concerts, people should pay for CDs, but music should never be something which is treated as intellectual property because its an art. Artists don't even make money from copyrights on music so whats the point of defending it?
It doesn't help the cause that their google ads are 4 or 5 variations on the theme of:
Download Unlimited MP3s,
Music, CDs Movies, Games,
Software and More!
Geez...
"If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
Actually, primates sang long before we spoke, and "music for the masses" was precisely what music was for most of human history.
In fact, the idea that music has monetary value is a very recent aberration from the normal way humans have treated music for millenia.
You know how Mozart got famous in Vienna? He visted the Vatican, heard Allegri's Miserere Mei once (it's about 20 minutes long), and wrote out from memory all of the music to it when he got back so the Vienna choir could sing it. He also changed a few things he didn't like about it.
That's how music used to be: people sang, people played, people listened. When they heard something they liked, they took it; when they heard something they thought they could improve, they improved it. This whole notion that an artist, or worse yet, a publisher, "owns" music is a novelty and, hopefully, won't last too long.
Under the modern copyright system, Mozart could not have written half of his symphonies and almost none of his chamber music or operas. Ditto Haydn, and much more so Beethoven. And Bach... well, Bach pretty much wouldn't have a portfolio left except maybe a few keyboard pieces. Composers "pirated" each other rampantly, and the result was some of the greatest art mankind ever saw.
Hmmm... how many great composers have we had since music publishers started inventing this idea that they "own" music? Can anybody think of one? John Tesh? Andrew Lloyd Webber? That's the tone-deaf crap we're left with when we all buy in to the lie that it's "just music" and that copying other musicians is "theft".
Why should a musician, much less a publisher, have a "right" to make money selling a license to hear their music? I say, kill all copy restrictions on music. Let those who are in it for the quick buck get forced out when it's not profitable anymore and leave making music to those of us who do it because we love it. People will keep making great music: they did for thousands of years before they started charging money for it. They'll keep doing it.
All's true that is mistrusted
...for this. Look at the caption on the second and the last pictures. If you're going to throw moral/ethical stones at the RIAA, get out of the glass house.
I appreciate the humour in what you said but I truly believe we should all pay for our music, but instead of getting it on a piece of plastic, it should be delivered the way music was intended, i.e live.
Live performances are the only way to ensure that the artist gets both the money and recognition they deserve. Sadly the art of the live performance, barring a few notable exceptions, is one that's been foreign for mosts of todays 'artists'.
All I can say is that if you like a particular band or singer then get out there and go see them play. Only then will you get the get the true feel for what talent they have.
For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
That is a nice excuse for you being a moron unable to create. While it is true that everyone builds upon what came before them, they do exactly that, build. You create something new. Just because you can't do something, doesn't mean you should brng the rest of us down with you. I am going to come take all your possesions tonight, because after all, you didn't earn them. Or is it different when you are the thief versus when someone else steals off of you? Something tells me that you would quickly change your tune if someone started taking credit for something you made, or claimed rights to your property. All of a sudden it would become yours, and not "everyones to share" like it is when you are the one stealing.
Eh? Why do you think they want to shut down p2p networks? They're not stupid; they know downloads help their sales.
They shut them down precisely to keep musicians from releasing our own music for all to share. That is what really scares them: not "piracy" but the fact that people like me are able to get exposure for our music without going through their tollbooth.
We don't need music middle-men anymore. We don't need A&R execs telling us what's good enough for us to hear anymore. We don't need million-dollar studios to produce studio-quality audio anymore. The music industry is an industry that no longer has a purpose. Let the artists create and try to sell their stuff and get famous. I don't need someone between me and the musician anymore.
All's true that is mistrusted
Well, if you happened to have a good number of people DLing your music, and happen to like it, there's a good chance you won't be playing to 5 people anymore and have more people to buy your merch at the shows.
- I got my free iPod and a free Nintendo DS....why not
Bzzt, wrongo. Who made you quit your job and join the band? Why is it a belief of any retard out there that art is money making proprosition? Ever considred that a band is just a bunch of people who got together for the purpose of making a "killing" on something that is a scam in the first place? Mozart created art. Your idiot band creates derrivative noise at best. And yet it is you and your half-wit pals who dream millions, 50 foot yachts and private islands as soon as you manage to partner with some media monopoly to promote you and get teens to buy your crap. The whole attidude you represent is the best argument for abolishment of copyright.
If you were to create art, and were an actual artist as opposed to wanna be con-man, you would not care for monetary rewards and use your music as a form of expression and would be content to reach as many people as possible (and would actually like idea of P2P). So much for your argument. Get a real job and stop trying to rip us all off while fucking the entire human race so that you can make an undeserved buck.
BitTorrent is good, DownhillBattle's idea of making BT easier for a larger audience is good, but their proposed technique has problems. The "Blog Torrent" site says....
"One good way to do this [avoid excluding a large portion of users] is to attach torrent files to an executable client."
Directing unsophisticated users to download custom EXEs from any random site offering big media they want would be a dangerous step backwards, encouraging a very unsafe practice that's likely to get their machines infected with various kinds of malware, sooner or later.
I'd suggest instead improving the installers of well-respected BT clients, and encouraging users to get them from well-known sites.
It loses a little in terms of instant gratification, butbut is instant gratification worth it if it also risks instant victimization?
No. I contribute under an alias and the only thing I care for is that someone does not mess things up and claim it was me. If they take credit, well, that just relfects badly on them not me, and I dont really care. I use GPL only because GPL is a defense against copyright loving jerks. That is, someone could take my work and then try to sell it back to me. If copyright were to be abolished, all licences, icluding GPL would be superfluous. Then noone could be trying to sell any piece of software to anyone else and the problem would go away permanently.