Wilco on P2P, Digital Music and the Internet

Saint Aardvark writes "As if Wilco wasn't the coolest band in existence anyway, Wired has an interview with them about their relationship with P2P, the Internet, and their fans. For example, they were contacted by fans who'd downloaded A Ghost Is Born before it was released. Lead singer Jeff Tweedy explains, 'They wanted to send money to express solidarity with the fact that we'd embraced the downloading community. We couldn't take the money ourselves, so they asked if we could pick a charity instead -- we pointed them to Doctors Without Borders, and they ended up receiving about $15,000.' Many other choice quotes make this a fascinating read."

Comments

How nice for the fans to donate money

[Neil Blender]

Now, if they did that for all the albums they stole, we could end world hunger.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, if they did that for all the albums they stole...

These people just downloaded the music from the Internet. They didn't steal CD's from a music store.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[mrchaotica]

AARRGGGHH!!! It's "copyright infringed," not "stole!" How many times do I have to tell you people??!!??!?

[and I mean that in the nicest way possible]

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[Taladar]

If the copyright owner (the band) says it is okay to download this then it is neither.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[Anonymous Coward]

In nearly all instances the copyright is actually held by the label and not the band. The artist retains performance rights, which is why Dave Matthews can allow tapings at his shows without interference. But I'd wager the album is "Copyright 2004 Nonesuch Records" and not "Copyright 2004 Wilco."

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[mrchaotica]

I know, but the OP talking about people downloading all the other songs.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[burns210]

Hell, we could turn ethopia into an inudstrialized super power.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[Anonymous Coward]

The result is the same: a product ended up in their possession that was not intended to be distributed freely.

And, no, it doesn't make a difference that "they're not actually depriving them of ownership of the physical CD so it can't be stealing". That's a lame excuse response, not an actual argument.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[glasse]

How nice for RIAA to donate money to bands that they make money from! (12 cents per CD sold goes to the band, is that correct?) If they stopped destroying artists, we wouldn't have to end RIAA.

Ethan

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[seaniqua]

Unfortunately, the band is usually not the copyright owner. It is becoming standard business practice for labels to require that their bands hand over copyrights to all published songs.

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing was stolen. Stop being a more1

Re:How nice for the fans to donate money

[schtum]

Without having RTFA, this is probably why Wilco "couldn't take the money" themselves. They would be doing an end-run around the label, using its marketing dollars while keeping the sales profits.

Note: this is in no way a defense of modern music label practices, just pointing out that Wilco knows better than to bite the hand that feeds.

Is Slashdot just hotlinking Fark?

[kevin_conaway]

This is the second story today (the first being the Pixar) that has been taken off the front page of Fark.

This isnt the first time, just the first time I've bothered to pay attention

Re:Is Slashdot just hotlinking Fark?

[MikeMacK]

hotlinking Fark?

Is that a Heinlein reference?

Re:Is Slashdot just hotlinking Fark?

[Saint Aardvark]

As TFS, I can tell you I got it from the ISTS news from yesterday, as linked to at the Internet Storm Center. However, if I hadn't caught it there I probably would've seen it later on when I checked Wired directly.

Re:Is Slashdot just hotlinking Fark?

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on, it's not like Fark doesn't rip links off from slashdot every once in a while.... where's the love?

Doctor's Without Borders?

[Anonymous Coward]

That sounds like a much better charity than the RIAA's Lawyers Without Ethics.

Re:Doctor's Without Borders?

[Zonnald]

Or bands who support RIAA Musician's without Balls

Re:Doctor's Without Borders?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have always thougt that Spin doctors is a great name for a group. This new band - Doctor's Without Borders - may not be bad too, although the name is little bit sick. But since Wilko supports these young musicians, I might buy some their album. I have never heard about RIAA's Lawyers Without Ethics though, and if you say they suck...

Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[Saint Aardvark]

...in Vancouver on the 9th? God almighty, they were great. I'd never realized it before, but Jeff Tweedy has a wicked sense of humour. If they're nearby, treat yourself and go -- it'll be a long, long time before you see another live act this great.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[(54)T-Dub]

I did hear an interesting piece on npr talking about the 'Numbers Stations' phenomena. Appearently they got the name for their albumn "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" from a CD compliation of these number stations.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[Saint Aardvark]

Yep. Used to listen to those stations when I was a kid and big into SWL.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[Anonymous Coward]

Retarded people are easily entertained. Glad they could requisition a short bus for you that evening.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[wrongnumber]

...in Vancouver on the 9th? God almighty, they were great. I would of known this if I had not been grabbed by some thugs, stuffed into a dumpster and beat with no mercy. All i heard of the concert was my sniffles...

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[yopu]

Yeah, I was there. Best Wilco show I've seen since San Francisco 1997 ("Being There" tour). Jay who? One of the great current bands. Points out how screwed up the music industry is--there is no radio format that would play Wilco. Chris

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[christopher240240]

I got to see them at the Auditorium Theatre in Chicago on 10/30. It was remarkable.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[sys$manager]

I was at Social D next door at the commodore. Now THAT was a concert.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[SophtwareSlump]

For anybody interested in a Numbers Station / Shortwave Radio compilation, check out the 4 disc 'Conet Project'.

It can be legally downloaded for free at Archive.org.

It's an amazing release. It even comes with a huge PDF booklet explaining everything. Very cool.

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[Dickolas Wang]

No, but I saw them at the Commodore in 2002. That was just an AMAZING show. It was shortly after Jay Bennett had left, and they were touring YHF. I just refused to believe that without Bennett they could possibly do the YHF material justice, but man was I wrong.

Choked I missed the Orpheum show, though... lousy being a student in another country :P

Re:Anyone else see 'em at the Orpheum...

[Bertie]

Spies? One time pads? Pah. I reckon it's just a giant game of bingo for sailors...

Watch out

[Folmer]

Now RIAA will attack them for condoning piracy...

Re:Watch out

[Anonymous Coward]

This is nothing, Ween is creating their own p2p app.

Re:Watch out

[hackstraw]

This isn't much of a revelation. Wilco, like many music artists that work for a living (ie, play live gigs), don't depend on record sales for their paychecks, they get it from working.

Its these bubblegum music manager creation "artists" that cannot play (eg, Ashlee Simpson), but have canned lyrics that appeal to a large number of people that depend on record sales for their income. Actually, its more of the music manager's and the labels that depend on the record sales for income. The artists get a token commission which provides them enough money to feel rich for a period of time until they have to get a real job.

From Wilco's website:

wilco does permit audio taping and trading of live performances wherever it does not conflict with venue or other restrictions beyond our control. we do not allow direct soundboard patches. we also do not allow videotaping.wilco supports the free trading of live recordings for non-commercial purposes.

I would bet that any other taper friendly band would not care about p2p or whatever, because, again, these bands work for a living, and they know they will make money when they are working.

Re:Watch out

[totipotentsoul]

Why do we always assume that bands should be able to make money from touring? It's all fine for Bob Weir or Wilco to advocate, but some bands just don't sound as good live, especially when they use a lot of electronics in the process. Now this can include digitally manipulated voices like Ashley's, but it can also include a lot of the innovative rap and electronica. I look forward to a future of innovative music, and it shouldn't neccesitate the artists shaking their ass for me.

That stated, I'm a proud pirate. I could tell you a bunch of things about the band never seeing one bit of profit, which are true, but all these ideas about tours and tip jars, sheesh - I just see the world as being overall better for me and the people I care about when I pirate, and probably when everyone does.

Re:Watch out

[Hatta]

I would bet that any other taper friendly band would not care about p2p or whatever, because, again, these bands work for a living, and they know they will make money when they are working.

I could fucking care less if everybody downloads our album off the Internet. We're not in a position to be screwed by that at all. We have the one thing the Internet can't touch-live music. If you can actually go out and play your fucking instruments, you won't be replaced by the Internet. If you're a good live act and you put on a good show, people will buy a ticket to see your show.
-Jon Fishman.

Re:Watch out

[okpgreg]

Radiohead has relied on electronic equipment for much of their last 4 albums and still sound great live. DJ Shadow and RJD2 are DJ's who are still able to put on a great show, and The Roots are among the best performers, in hip-hop and outside. Why shouldnt a music artist be able to put on a good performance?

Re:Watch out

[totipotentsoul]

While I agree that it doesn't neccesarily mean they won't be able to put on a good performance I believe it limits the capabilities of the artist. I think Outkast is/are great musicians, but thought they sucked live. I saw Skinny Puppy put on a great live show. Maybe the electronica thing was a mistatement - but I do think the use of various instruments can limit crowd appeal. I just think a band's profits shouldn't depend on their ability to put on a great show. Supplemented, but not depend, and I think certain artists are more vulnerable that are not neccesarily bubblegum pop.

Re:Watch out

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank god the Beatles retired before folks like you came along. Otherwise I never would've heard Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, which was recorded a year or two after they gave up touring for good.

Re:Watch out

[Anonymous Coward]

Its these bubblegum music manager creation "artists" that cannot play (eg, Ashlee Simpson), but have canned lyrics that appeal to a large number of people that depend on record sales for their income. Actually, its more of the music manager's and the labels that depend on the record sales for income. The artists get a token commission which provides them enough money to feel rich for a period of time until they have to get a real job.

It's also most "electronic" artists who are dependent on recordings and, although it's changed somewhat, many hip-hop artists. To forget them when discussing business models and that paying for recordings is unimportant is terrible. Some music just doesn't carry over to a live act and if there system were changed so people couldn't make money off of recordings, music from Aphex Twin to Orb may well have never existed as they wouldn't have been able to support themselves.

Re:Watch out

[Anonymous Coward]

...a large number of people that depend on record sales for their income

this is the biggest problem I have with the RIAA/MPAA - the distribution of wealth associated with these industries is not of the norm. Instead, it is a VERY small number of people (think record execs, actors, etc) making huge amounts of money, instead of many people making livable wages. That is why I can never feel the least bit guilty for downloading.

Re:Watch out

[16K Ram Pack]

I've heard this a number of times said here. And yet, I've also heard that bands like U2 break even on touring.

My impression was that touring was often a promotional tool and the big money is in the songwriting.

Re:Watch out

[dave-tx]

I would bet that any other taper friendly band would not care about p2p or whatever, because, again, these bands work for a living, and they know they will make money when they are working.

Unfortunately, one example to the contrary is the Allman Brothers. They do permit taping and trading, but insist that that trading take place the old fashioned way - one-to-one snail mail trades.

I think it's probably a result of a combination of the fallout of the napster fervor and a misunderstanding of the online legal trading commuity.

Re:Watch out

[pjp6259]

I remember seeing this on the chocodog website, but I didn't really understand the impetus. Why would you use this p2p app? Wouldn't it be easier for ween to just say, "we don't care if you guys share our live music", and just let people use some already existing p2p app?

$15,000... to the IRS...

[MosesJones]

So by most "cash in hand" business they probably raked in about $300k :-)

Maybe this is why the RIAA is publicly moaning about P2P... its raking it in, but doesn't want the IRS to investigate!

Lost Sales?

[fembots]

Selling entertainment is like selling perishable fruit, you need to do it while it's still fresh and desirable.

For example, I quite like Scissor Sisters' "Take Your Mama", so I paid for the CD and listened to it. But I must admit you can only listen to one song for so many times until you're sick of it. So now the enjoyment from this song is long gone, but I have already paid $20 for this now-known-as piece of plastic and song that I no longer enjoy.

I believe any potential "lost sales" are from people who, on one hand, don't want to pay for the music, but on the other, want to enjoy that particular music.

Will this be considered "Lost Sales" if someone told you:
"Nah, this shitty movie is only worth watching it once, why would I pay for the DVD/Movie?".

This person could pay for the DVD/Movie and watch it once, or download it from the Internet and watch it once. Either way this person got one unit of enjoyment out of this, but it's not quite the same to capitalist.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Neil Blender]

I believe any potential "lost sales" are from people who, on one hand, don't want to pay for the music, but on the other, want to enjoy that particular music.

I bought a New York steak at the store for $10.00. I ate it and enjoyed it quite a bit. However, at this point it is a worthless log floating somewhere in the sewer system. Should I have stolen the steak instead?

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

Two things:

1. You could have bought the track on iTMS (pick your store of choice) if you wanted just the song.

2. you can still sell the CD on eBay or something. Many smaller record stores also buy used CDs.

If you do both, it would be all legal. You could keep your song and sell it too.

Re:Lost Sales?

[JoseFilipe]

If you were only interested in that particular song, maybe you could have bought it from iTMS or even the single. If you bought the single, you would get some rare tracks!

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

you can only listen to one song for so many times until you're sick of it

Hey, that's why I only buy Hendrix albums, they never fade ;)

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

Should I have stolen the steak instead?

Bad idea. I don't know exactly what your plan is but there's probably a substantial chance of getting caught. If you get caught then there's a great deal of social stigma attached, whether you get prodecuted or not. You want to explain at work how you got banned from a store for shoplifting?

Theft isn't an every day socially acceptable thing like parking on yellow lines or copying music.

Re:Lost Sales?

[fembots]

Yes, that's what I'm trying to get to. If you think that piece of shit in the toilet isn't worth $10, you shouldn't have paid for it, or eaten it without paying.

However, if you think $10 is fair price to buy the initial 10 minutes of juicy, tender chewy feeling in your mouth, then you should've paid for it, not eaten it for free and backed up your action by suggesting its final destination in the sewer.

I can't see anyone can get away with going into a movie theatre, watched a movie without paying and said "Hey, there were empty seats anyway, so what's the harm that I just went in and watch it for free? I didn't sit on the seat, and I even bought popcorn from your counter!"

Or jumped onto an empty bus for a ride without paying, and since it doesn't cost the bus company any more by carrying zero or one passenger, are we all entitled to free bus ride provided it's not full?

In certain area (intellectual property in particular), maybe it's more about if the receiver benefits from the service, not if the provider suffers any cost.

Re:Lost Sales?

[imogthe]

It has been pointed out repeatedly, here on slashdot, and elsewhere: When it comes to digital media the word "steal" is somehow lacking. We may use the word "steal" when we deprive someone of something through illegitimate means.

However, when we "steal" digital media, the original media remains unchanged and still in the posession of the owner. Therefore, the media has not been "stolen", but duplicated.

The movie and music industry likes to label people who "duplicate" media as "thieves" and liken their activities to the "stealing" performed by "thieves".

I do not dispute that under current law the "duplication" of digital media may or may not be legal. However, please use the correct terminology when discussing this important matter.

Should all digital media ever created be free (as in beer)? I don't think so. When people are not required to pay money to experience another person's creative work (be that music or film or whatever) the incentive to create these forms of media disappears.

The solution? Find another way to compensate the creators for their efforts. They did after all make something worth while should you decide to get a copy eh?

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

When people are not required to pay money to experience another person's creative work (be that music or film or whatever) the incentive to create these forms of media disappears.

That really depends - money is not the only incentive in the world to people! Many people would rather reach the widest possible audience with their message in their art. That in itself is motivation for much of the greatest art in the world.

If anything, the current system gives an artificial advantage to art created by the selfish over art created by the altruistic.: People say "but without copyright many artists wouldn't want to release their work at all!". I say fine, let them wither on the vine. Their choice. Without the copyright, art created by the most willing to give freely would dominate our culture, and the world would be a better place IMHO.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think that piece of shit in the toilet isn't worth $10, you shouldn't have paid for it, or eaten it without paying.

You want me to pay to eat a piece of shit?!?

Yes, it's amazing how much of a difference proper sentence structure can make.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or jumped onto an empty bus for a ride without paying, and since it doesn't cost the bus company any more by carrying zero or one passenger, are we all entitled to free bus ride provided it's not full?

Not true. The combined weight of passengers contributes to fuel consumption.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't see anyone can get away with going into a movie theatre, watched a movie without paying and said "Hey, there were empty seats anyway, so what's the harm that I just went in and watch it for free? I didn't sit on the seat, and I even bought popcorn from your counter!"

actually, movie theaters don't make money on the tickets. They make money on the food. Just ask anyone who works in the accounting office a major theater chain. So quite honestly, a movie theater doesn't loose if you end up spending 10.50 on drinks and popcorn. if everyone brought their own snacks and drinks, the movie theaters would loose money big time.

to me, the real issue isn't the semantics of "theft", but the fact that RIAA and MPAA treat the audience in an antagonistic way. The majority of the people enjoy paying for something they consider "valuable". Sending out a ton of lawsuits against young children is the wrong way to go about it.

Re:Lost Sales?

[lennarth]

"So now the enjoyment from this song is long gone, but I have already paid $20 for this now-known-as piece of plastic and song that I no longer enjoy."

A product, like a compact disc, is not decidedly going to be worth less with time. Instead of getting tired of a song after hearing it twenty times, I might like it twice as much. If that then means that this piece of plastic is worth $40, I got a pretty good deal on that CD.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

"For example, I quite like Scissor Sisters' "Take Your Mama", so I paid for the CD and listened to it. But I must admit you can only listen to one song for so many times until you're sick of it."

Eh? Tell that to all us Dark Side of the Moon / Tommy / Surrealistic Pillow / Ziggy Stardust / Sgt. Peppers fans who've been listening to those albums for quite some time. Me, I bought them about 5 years ago, more or less, and have gotten many hours of enjoyment out of them. Its these shake-n-bake entertainers who lipsync their way through their shows who release disposable music, that has a two week shelf life... at best!

The last decent album I picked up from a new artist was Christina Aguileras "Stripped". It may not be Pinball Wizard, but it was worth my $12.00... few and far between, though.

Re:Lost Sales?

[totipotentsoul]

the maker of the motion picture profits from ticket sales and not the food, so you're still screwing someone.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why on earth is it selfish to want to get paid for your work? I hope you are so principled where your own efforts are concerned. I'm sure you're boss, for instance, would think the world a better place if you refused to be paid. But I'm not certain you would.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

copyright allows people to get paid over and over again for the same work. There should be a "doctrine of first communication" - once you pass on information to someone else, you shouldn't have any say over who they pass it on to (yes, I disagree with privacy laws too).

Re:Lost Sales?

[rainman_bc]

Actually, here in Vancouver, bus drivers are told to let people on if they refuse to pay because it reduces the violence towards bus drivers. Just an fyi...

Re:Lost Sales?

[ZB Mowrey]

I call bullshit. There are so many forms of art and so many artistic wonders that *never made the artist a dime* that you could choke on a list of them. Art is one of the core parts of being human. We will not walk away from it simply because there is no profit in it.

Yes, there will be less crap. But there will be a corresponding rise in the integrity of artists, and a drop in the amount of money the consumerist masses waste on entertainment. Maybe some of the leeches we call entertainers would figure out that they're not really that important after all.

Re:Lost Sales?

[shawb]

movie theaters don't make money on the tickets

Close. Basically, ticket sales are about enough to pay for the use of the film to show the movie. Take away ticket sales and the movie theater loses money, eventually going out of business.

The reason the popcorn/etc is so much is because that is what the theatre uses to pay for the facilities, employee wages, utilites, advertising, etc that go along with running a theatre.

Re:Lost Sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

To only watch things once, you should hope your local video rental place stocks it and rent it.

"We couldn't take the money ourselves"

[damiangerous]

Why not? The article never says. It's not like there was some tangled rights issue. They article does say they had the rights to do whatever they wanted with it after Reprise dropped them, and they obviously had the rights to give it away, so why couldn't they take money for it?

Re:"We couldn't take the money ourselves"

[Anonymous Coward]

b/c they were already resigned to nonesuch when they made a ghost is born.

Re:"We couldn't take the money ourselves"

[xThinkx]

It's most likely a record label issue, while record labels (usually) can't prevent you for doing things for free, they DO control all money you receive for sales of albums, merch, etc. That's why bands that make gold records often make more off of non-record-company related deals (like interviews, photo shoots, hosting MTV shows, modeling contracts, movies, etc.) than actual album sales (not that the album sale profits rae anything to laugh at).

Re:"We couldn't take the money ourselves"

[Zonnald]

I think they do own everything you produce. So they can sell what you produce - or just hold on to it to make it sought after in the future "unreleased" tracks album.

Re:"We couldn't take the money ourselves"

[JoseFilipe]

In an interview given to a portuguese magazine, Manilla Road's vocalist, Mark Shelton, said that they kept the publishing rights. Apparently that's what keeps the money pouring =) As I understand it, any label that wishes to release their albums, needs to pay the band. BTW, Manilla Road is an american metal band. Any corrections will be appreciated.

Re:"We couldn't take the money ourselves"

[damiangerous]

I reread the article and answered my own question. The record they chose to release after being dropped was Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. The record fans were attempting to pay for was A Ghost Is Born, their newest album being released by the label Nonesuch, which had been leaked onto P2P extremely early. They couldn't take money for A Ghost Is Born because Nonesuch obviously had publishing rights.

unlikely

[ed.han]

both fark and slashdot have very large readerships. but remember that here at slashdot, stories submitted need to be vetted by editors: at fark, i get the impression that it's just drew reviewing the links.

ed

Re:unlikely

[doublem]

Drew reviews them first????????

DAMN. And here I though all he did was just dump it all in and use a dart to decide what's on Fark, and what's on TotalFark.

I thought we could download this a long time ago?

[paulschroeder]

Hasn't Roger Wilco been available for download for a long time?

playing a little devil's advocate...

[jxyama]

while this is very nice, does this make "traditional" musicians "evil"? are volunteers always better than those who charge for their services? could majority of contributors to OSS afford to do so if they had no external income to support their "hobbies"?

don't we all have to make money somewhere to live and could we "fault" those wanting to? if you can make a living via hobbies, more power to them... but is it wrong to make a living?

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[Linux-based-robots]

It's not wrong to make a living as long as you're ethical about it. Phishing or spamming may be a way to make a living but it's not ethical. And neither is suing your fans or restricting the sharing of published information such as music. And before someone goes "blah blah blah, how will there be an incentive without all the $$$ that comes from restricting people", just remember that the entire Renaissance got along just fine without copyright laws.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[sordid_mammal]

no one is saying "traditional musicians" are evil. this is an example of something that should be obvious. the internet is a new distrubution channel. just because someone can get your music for free on P2P doesn't mean your going to go broke and not be able to make a living. if anything you'll get more exposure and make more money. i'd never heard of wilco before yankee hotel foxtrot. now they're even bigger.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[garcia]

while this is very nice, does this make "traditional" musicians "evil"? are volunteers always better than those who charge for their services? could majority of contributors to OSS afford to do so if they had no external income to support their "hobbies"?

They are mainstream artists getting mainstream play, mainstream press, and apparently making mainstream money yet they just seem to have the attitude of "woah, cool" instead of "woah, not enough money made".

Well, to me, that makes the "traditional musicians" money hungry fucktards. Obviously, if your music is good and you are willing to work with the fans they are willing to work w/you back. You think I am going to feed money to some jackass that fights with their fans who are only interested in listening to the music? Nope.

It's obvious that you CAN and WILL make money even if you support free distribution, GASP, what a novel idea.

Sadly, some refuse to believe that and continue to attract shit fans, make shit music, and pretty much end up as a stain on the wall of the memory of everyone (Spears has been married twice, annuled once, and may be pregnant with "Aurora" -- your fading away into irrelevance).

The Grateful Dead never made ANY money allowing the free trading of their music, nope, no way. Neither did Phish or DMB. Nope. Oh wait they even have LOYAL fans! Crazy.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[celeritas_2]

You know there was a time that art wasn't about money. Google gives everything away and they still happen to be making just a little bit of money. And, I don't recall there being a similarity between "making a living" and having more money than most small African nations. There are still such things as concerts [impossible to reproduce experience, not piratable] which I would be willing to pay for.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[UWC]

just remember that the entire Renaissance got along just fine without copyright laws

Wasn't the Renaissance all about patrons supporting the artists so they didn't starve? I don't think there was much marketing done once an artist found someone to feed him. Add to that the fact that Gutenberg didn't make his printing press until the Italian Renaissance was apparently underway, and copyrights didn't seem all that necessary. Even the later northern European renaissance wasn't exactly the deluge of popular media that exists today. Much of that was either rich guys with time to ponder things trading ideas or, again, people with patrons/sponsors suporting them while they thought about things.

Works during the Renaissance tended to be either hard to reproduce or of severely limited interest to most people.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the quotes? No one said "traditional musicians" were "evil." (Unless I missed that...)

The problem really is that traditional musicians are usually in no place to bargain when they sign their deals (and they're usually very young and dumb, or at least inexperienced.) Plain and simple, they get routinely screwed. They're producing a commodity that is potentially worth a lot of money and more often than not see very little of it in the end, not to mention have little control over the marketing etc.

If more bands follow Wilco's suit-- and perhaps if more bands realize in the beginning they don't have to sign that deal as it stands, that there are other ways to protect their "art"-- that's a good thing.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[Anonymous Coward]

What a bunch of hokum. Google doesn't give everything away. They sell advertising. And, I believe, they charge other sites to use their search functionality. How do you think they pay their staff, and buy servers?

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[m50d]

No, but it's wrong to make a living doing something unethical, even if it's legal. Just like we despise telemarketers as evil even though they have to make a living, we can also despise "creative" people who won't let their creations be redistributed.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[aonifer]

WTF are you talking about? Wilco makes money the same way Metallica does. Their last CD debuted at number 8 on the Billboard charts.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[cozziewozzie]

while this is very nice, does this make "traditional" musicians "evil"?

That's a bit stretched. The traditional musicians (before the Britney Spears explosion and the like) used to (and still do) earn their money from playing live, selling merchandise, as well as selling records. Don't confuse the talentless boobs-on-legs who sing stupid songs the music execs composed for them and then sit on their asses and parade themselves in teeny magazines for traditional musicians.

Actually, many bands (like Metallica) only got popular due to piracy, and they had nothing against it while they were small. Because back then, just like always, the corporate media were ignoring anything that wasn't mainstream. It took them four albums before getting a song on the radio, even though they had millions of fans by that time. Compare that to the 'stars' of today, who get on MTV before anyone's even heard of them.

There are very few artists today who have the ability to negotiate a good deal with a record company. Most of them still live from live gigs, attended by people who heard their music from a friend, or downloaded it off the internet. The bottom line is, if you want to support your band, see them play live (ticket price, once the touring costs are taken away, are pure profit), buy a T-shirt at a gig (pure profit) or buy a CD from them at a gig (less profit, because they have to buy their own CDs from the record company at high prices, but still a lot more than buying it from a shop).

99% of all artists NEVER see any money from the CDs they sell. This myth should die already.

Re:playing a little devil's advocate...

[16K Ram Pack]

That's the REAL story here.

This album which could be downloaded very easily and it sounds like was shared all over the P2P networks gave Wilco their highest ever chart position.

yup

[Anonymous Coward]

"yankee hotel foxtrot" is a sound bit sampled from one of the recordings on the conet project. they sampled it in their song "poor places" and recently just settled a law suit for it.

Computer Nerds

[clinko]

Gotta love a band that uses computer terms on their album covers:

Wilco is less-than or equal to a ghost is born

Re:Computer Nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad they don't put out good music. Granted, it sounds better than the crap TMBG puts out, but this stuff is pretty whiney and simplistic. It makes me want to drown each member of the band in a tub of acid.

Re:Computer Nerds

[kgbspy]

Heh, priceless.

While I have nothing in particular against Wilco per se, I posit that Supergrass are the coolest band to have graced this planet over the past ten years.

Re:Computer Nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

it's more of a math symbol than a computer term

Re:Computer Nerds

[Al Dimond]

I agree that they can be whiney. Wilco is a band that can write very catchy tunes while sounding like they're trying their absolute hardest not to. And this probably stems from the fact that they often use simple, poppy melodies covered up in a gazillion wacky effects. Ain't nothin' wrong with simple poppy melodies (Elvis Costello forever!) but often there doesn't seem to be any reason for the wacky effects.

where's "download" button?

[Janek Kozicki]

I tried to download music from their site, but I can't find this button. Am I blind?

its not up anymore

[Anonymous Coward]

they don't leave everything up all the time. however if you go to "roadcase" right now you can stream one of their recent concerts i believe.

Then they need to......

[wolf31o2]

We couldn't take the money ourselves

Somebody needs to show those guys how to setup a paypal account. At least the money definitely went to a good cause rather than some RIAA lawyer's wallet.

Re:Then they need to......

[Ravadill]

I think it was more a contract based limitation (i.e. agreement with their record company not to sell stuff behind their backs) wheras they may have gotten around the clause by "giving" it away for charity.

Wilco

[blackmonday]

Thing is, Yankee Hotel Foxtrot is such an amazing album, that even if the album hadn't been released online, I still think it would have been succesful. (I'm for it though!) Great music spreads by word of mouth and CD-R and P2P, regardless of who made it. My buddy made me a copy of YHF and that's how I got into that band.

By the way there's a great documentary of the band making the CD, its called I am Trying To Break Your Heart. I highly recommend it. Shows the whole process of being dumped by your label then getting picked up by another label, both of whom were owned by the same umbrella company. Strange stuff, today's music business.

Wilco's ethics are very punk rock, even if their music belongs on its own planet. If you haven't heard YHF, do yourself a favor and pick it up.

Re:Wilco

[utexaspunk]

My buddy made me a copy of YHF and that's how I got into that band

You're in Wilco? I didn't know they read slashdot! What do you play? Can I have your autograph? Do you think maybe your buddy could burn me a copy of YHF so I can be in the band, too?

Re:Wilco

[Anonymous Coward]

they're alt.country. go pick up some Uncle Tupelo. oh, and buy a clue while you're out.

Re:Wilco

[HavokDevNull]

It works both ways AC: geeks find so called normal, so called political correct, SUV driving, and afraid of trying something new people inane, boring and worthless.So quit your bitching and get back to your absurd, asinine, birdbrained, daft, ditzy, driveling, empty, fatuous, flat, foolish, frivolous, futile, harebrained, idiotic, illogical, imbecilic, innocuous, insipid, jejune, jerky, lamebrained, laughable, meaningless, Mickey Mouse, mindless, pointless, puerile, ridiculous, sappy, senseless, silly, trifling, unintelligent, vacant, vacuous, vain, vapid, weak, wishy-washy, worthless, life.

Re:Wilco

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's the cgknoxyz, smart guy?

Re:Wilco

[vallette]

Something ironic about YHF. Wilco 'borrowed' the audio of the woman repeating 'Yankee Hotel Foxtrot' from the Conet Project http://www.irdial.com/conet.htm without permission and were consequently sued. The money was used to bring the otherwise dead project back to life. Has Slashdot ever done a story on number nstations?

Re:Wilco

[willpall]

This is so timely for me its scary. I got YHF off P2P and ended up buying it solely because of that. I can gaurantee you that had it not been for that download, I would not have bought that album. Oh, and the only reason I heard about it was because of a lawsuit from some guy who made the original recording of the "Yankee. Hotel. Foxtrot" voiceover in the song Poor Places.

Re:Wilco

[Drakonian]

I second that recommendation. YHF is one of the most unique, daring albums of the last few years. My friend thinks Wilco might be the next Radiohead - limited radio play but huge following.

Re:Wilco

[okpgreg]

they all but left alt-country on summerteeth, and there isn't much "country" left in them anymore. if you are a fan of the "country" part, pick up some Uncle Tupelo(the group Jeff Tweedy & Jay Farrar(bassist) came from), no depression is a good one, or wilco's earlier work, A.M. or Being There. If you like the "alt" part, anything from summerteeth on will suit you well.

Re:Wilco

[Dickolas Wang]

I agree that YHF is good enough that it would have been a success either way. But I think that's why streaming the album helped Wilco. They don't get nearly enough radio play, at least where I'm from, but they had always been critically successful. Streaming the album IMO allowed people who would otherwise not get a chance to hear them, and not want to shell out $15 for an album of songs they'd never heard, to try before they bought. In the article Tweedy says something to the effect that "not every download is a lost sale." I agree, but I'd also say that he and Wilco are in something of a specific situation, since they have a real solid body of work that needed exposure. It's hard to imagine that the same would have been the case if Wilco had already been making platinum records, though.

Re:Wilco

[philipgar]

I know this isn't too relevant, but oh well. I've been following Wilco for years now (think i picked up my first wilco cd in 97 or so). anyhow, I must say I'm proud to be a fan of a band that sees the internet as a tool and not as damning them.

While I haven't followed Wilco too much in recent years (i do still own a ghost is born and YHF, but sometimes find it a bit too experimental for my tastes), I am a huge fan of being there, and an even bigger fan of tupelo. If only I was born earlier and could have seen some of those shows... Or to have seen a Golden Smog show back when Tweedy still played with them. Its kinda weird seeing them with all this fame. The new albums are good, but kinda weird. Sorry to slam any fans of the band, I still love them, and would take a ghost is born over 99% of the crap out there, but I miss having Wilco, and not simply Tweedy and company.

By the way, if anyone wants to reccomend other alt-country bands to me, feel free to send an email. I'm always looking for more to get into (although there's a good chance I'm already into them).

Phil

Re:Wilco

[16K Ram Pack]

It's more about quality will spread by word-of-mouth. This is why a lot of true artists in the music world don't fear it.

What I think a lot of bands understand is that if the music is good enough quality, P2P is a viable marketing tool. You can either spend millions on promotion or spend considerably less and get it out on P2P. Now, a lot of people are going to just leech it, but a lot will convert it to a CD sale.

If Britney Spears didn't have video and image and had to just sell on the strength of an album, do you think that people (even kids) would be buying her?

Re:Wilco

[mattdm]

Thing is, Yankee Hotel Foxtrot is such an amazing album, that even if the album hadn't been released online, I still think it would have been succesful.

That's the point exactly -- you're right, but the A&R reps sure didn't think so and demanded that Wilco re-record the album and make it more demographic-friendly. The band said no, bought out the rights to their own stuff, and released it online. And then, surprise, not to long later, record labels are beating on their doors wanting to sell the album.

Article's on fark.com too

[EZmagz]

Just got done reading the interview, and it's nice to see that some musicians are still pretty grounded and down to earth. By far my favorite quote in the article is this:

WN: Your critics might say that it's easy for you to say that, given that you're already a commercial success.

Tweedy: I'm grateful that I've sold enough to have a house, take care of my kids and live decently. But that's a gift, not an entitlement.

Those last three words blew me away. Although I'm not a huge Wilco fan, I definitely appreciate where they're coming from. To me at least, they embody what a True Musician consists of. Somebody who plays music for the sake of making music. Somebody who if they make enough money playing at clubs and hawking CDs to make a living, then GREAT! But if not, they'll still be playing on the weekends and at nights when they're done with their 9-to-5.

Now contrast that with Britney Spears or Ashley Simpson. Think they'd be singing in their garage if their "music" career never took off? Fuck no. Since they only care about entertaining and not making music, they'd probably be just another coked-out stripper on the LA Strip, telling you how they're going to make it big and be somebody between lapdances and serving you a $10 cocktail.

Regardless, it's glad to know there's still a few bands out there who are in it for the love.

Re:Article's on fark.com too

[El]

Regardless, it's glad to know there's still a few bands out there who are in it for the love. There are a lot of bands that are still in it for love. A lot of them are into Bluegrass, Blues, Acoustic, Celtic, Classical, etc. and not into mainstream pop. And probably 99% of the good artists never get that Record Company deal, many because they are unwilling to sign away all rights to their songs in exchange.

I bought Yankee Hotel Foxtrot mostly to support Wilco... I have yet to decide if it is really good, or just weird... but then, I feel the same way about Brian Wilson's Smile, e.g. "Is this guy a genius or a madman?" But at least it is different from the formulaic pop most companies are churning out now.

Re:Article's on fark.com too

[Elwood P Dowd]

Since they only care about entertaining and not making music, they'd probably be just another coked-out stripper on the LA Strip, telling you how they're going to make it big and be somebody between lapdances and serving you a $10 cocktail.

Damn. I was worried you weren't going to be able to work any misogyny into that post.

Saved it at the end. Close one.

lossless codec downloads

[dokebi]

I'm glad more musicians are seeing the benefit of online distribution. I just hope more of them release songs in lossless form, without DRM. Magnatune.com works this way (and artists get %50 of sale price) and I hope more artists choose to follow this model.

Re:lossless codec downloads

[shark72]

"I'm glad more musicians are seeing the benefit of online distribution. I just hope more of them release songs in lossless form, without DRM. Magnatune.com works this way (and artists get %50 of sale price) and I hope more artists choose to follow this model."

You bring up a good point. Magnatune is the epitomy of what many Slashdotters want from a record label, yet their catalog and sales are virtually non-existent compared to enterprises like the iTunes Music Store that eschew the "payment optional" model.

"Once big-name musicians disover the mighty power of Internet distribution, the record labels will be finished" is a bromide that's been uttered for five years now. Yet the record labels are making tons of money via iTMS, companies like Magnatune barely register, and even in 2004, when a somewhat-well known band like Wilco leverages the Internet for distribution, it's still news.

Re:lossless codec downloads

[Lifthrasir]

also have a look at cdbaby. they have a lot of indie artists, and from their about page:

Cool thing: in a regular record deal or distribution deal, musicians only make $1-$2 per CD, if they ever get paid by their label. When selling through CD Baby, musicians make $6-$12 per CD, and get paid weekly.

Good chance to put your money where your mouth is

[serutan]

When I read this article (on Fark, yesterday), I immediately went to Wilco's site and ordered a copy of their CD "A Ghost is Born," and if they swing through Seattle I will take in their show. Band promotion through free downloads instead of record contracts is the future of music, and is the key to getting the record industry off our backs before they buy enough legislation to keep us from accessing our hard drives without their permission.

Fame and fortune have been the carrot on the stick which the record industry has been able to dangle in front of musicians for the past century. When a few bands demonstrate that it's possible to succeed without signing over their lives to a big label, others will follow. Reaching #8 on Billboard is one of the first cracks in this wall. Help it spread!

Listen like theives

[maggotbrain_777]

From the article

"Treating your audience like thieves is absurd. Anyone who chooses to listen to our music becomes a collaborator."

So, let me see if I've got this right. Is Jeff the anti-Lars? or is Lars(Ulrich) the anti-Tweedy?

Re:Listen like theives

[FuzzzyLogik]

METALLICA GOOOD.. NAPSTER BAAADDD

do you have your metallica cock ring?

Its good someone gets it

[CrazyJim1]

Eventually all our media with be categorized by user for download, and you can see/hear/learn things that interest you.
Its a global library and it will happen.

God spoke to me:
www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA

makes you realize the size of the market

[museumpeace]

given the dismal % yield on most charity soliciting, getting 15000$ form total strangers is a good showing. This is just an anecdote from the war raging between copyright holders, major labels and file swappers but it does make me think: The size of the market if you include all who file-swap and download must be vastly greater than the market that only counts those who buy CD's or are on the fence about a CD purchase. If a band could get a few pennies/track each from the larger market and nobody was peeing away millions on promotion, it just seems possible they could earn a living by their art and not soak their fans in the process. If downloaders thought of themselves as "supporting the band's future work" rather than "buying this song" ,which they could just as easily swipe, maybe they'd pay a little and not mind. Is that the paradigmn shift thats gnawing away at the mass marketing of music as we now know it? Given the huge exposure potential of freely available streamed samples, why would you need to spend on poromotion anyway? For years we have had shareware vendors giving away one version of a program in hopes that users would be pleased enough to pay for a better version. How similar is that model to what Wilco is doing?

Re:makes you realize the size of the market

[NerveGas]

given the dismal % yield on most charity soliciting

That's just the problem, their soliciting. You can't give money to a single charity without forever being flooded with a hundred other charities calling you for more money.

In my last house, someone with the previous number had once given money to the Veterens of Foreign Wars and the local Police charity. It did not matter how many times I told them that I would never, ever give them a penny because they called so often, they never quit. And neither did the hundred other charities with whom the donation lists had been shared.

I really wouldn't mind giving money to more charities. I just wish that they could see it as a kind, benevolent act, and be thankful for it without pestering me for the rest of my life.

steve

Re:makes you realize the size of the market

[Technician]

I really wouldn't mind giving money to more charities. I just wish that they could see it as a kind, benevolent act, and be thankful for it without pestering me for the rest of my life.



Change the name from charities to magazines, and you've hit the biggest reason I won't consider getting another magazine subscription, even for free.

I'd rather pick up a magazine once in a while at the supermarket that interests me than submit to the telemarketing via a subscription.

I'm not getting publishers clearinghouse sweepstakes offers any more. I quit my subscription and moved twice to do it.

Re:makes you realize the size of the market

[Jherek Carnelian]

If downloaders thought of themselves as "supporting the band's future work" rather than "buying this song" ,which they could just as easily swipe, maybe they'd pay a little and not mind. Is that the paradigmn shift thats gnawing away at the mass marketing of music as we now know it?

Bingo! Paying for the production of music/art is like an internet-enabled modernization of the old system of patronage. It is inevitable that such a market develop. There are already people working on the mechanics - google up "street performer protocol" for some info.

Eating steak, and stealing it

[E IS mC(Square)]

Sure, after all, eating steak is definitely considered 'entertainment' in some part of this planet!

Re:Good chance to put your money where your mouth

[maggotbrain_777]

You just missed them (as did I). THey played a sold out show at the Paramount on the November 10th.

Cool?

[Anonymous Coward]

"As if Wilco wasn't the coolest band in existence anyway,"

Wilco is a lame band. Awful. YMMV

Re:Many good quotes from Tweedy.

[borkus]

Stop trying to treat music like it's a tennis shoe, something to be branded. If the music industry wants to save money, they should take a look at some of their six-figure executive expense accounts. All those lawsuits can't be cheap, either.
and
Treating your audience like thieves is absurd. Anyone who chooses to listen to our music becomes a collaborator.

People who look at music as commerce don't understand that. They are talking about pieces of plastic they want to sell, packages of intellectual property.

I'm not interested in selling pieces of plastic.

I think people are disgusted at the RIAA (and the music industry in general) not only because they trod all over the rights of listeners, but because they don't serve the needs of artists either. Whether you're a musician, fan, retailer or broadcaster, the industy is out to screw you. Unfortunately, it's also a cartel that does everything it can to quash channels that are more favorable to musicians and their audience.

Re:Nonproprietary format?

[Anonymous Coward]

ed2k://|file|Wilco_A_ghost_is_born.rar|90691532|7c 84d7b925594c598805a599ec6ab8e7|/
Here's an ed2k link.
you might need to remove a space

Re: Not that hard to come by

[Paladin144]

Regardless, it's glad to know there's still a few bands out there who are in it for the love.

Actually, you can find tons of bands who do it for the love of music. Check out your local scene - you'll find a bunch of guys in their 30s and older who are not going to be on MTV anytime soon. But, if your scene is anything like Minneapolis scene, those guys are making some kickass music that hardly anybody has heard. It's a crime, I tell ya!

Re:I thought we could download this a long time ag

[siliconjunkie]

Yes it has.

Interested in real alt-country?

[dhakbar]

If you actually want to broaden your musical horizons, try to find some Slim Cessna's Auto Club or any of Jay Munly's solo work.

Now that shit's original.

Re:Interested in real alt-country?

[Hank Scorpio]

Oh yeah! Slim Cessna's Auto Club is excellent! Also check out their friends from the Denver scene, 16 Horsepower. One of my favorite bands ever, and one of the most original voices in modern music.

Re:Good chance to put your money where your mouth

[cens0r]

I missed them too... I heard they were very, very good though. I instead went to see the magnetic fields on the 12th.

Medecins Sans Frontieres

[Magickcat]

"Doctors without borders" are correctly called by their French name "Medecins Sans Frontieres".

Their site is here

Re:Medecins Sans Frontieres

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll keep my Freedom Fries, thank you.

Re:Medecins Sans Frontieres

[/dev/trash]

In France. This is America.

Re:Medecins Sans Frontieres

[Magickcat]

No, this is cyberspace.

Re:Medecins Sans Frontieres

[/dev/trash]

Shouldn't that be:

Non, C'est space de cyber?

Re:Medecins Sans Frontieres

[Magickcat]

Je dirais que le nom correct de l'organisation est bien suffisant. Sûrement Français n'effraye pas vos susceptibilités d'expression Anglaise.

Conflation

[AllenChristopher]

It's a pity you think that's misogyny. You do women a disservice.

Grandparent is saying that specific people are just selling their bodies, rather than selling music. He/she suggests rhetorically that if the music industry weren't available, those people would still sell their bodies elsewhere.

It says nothing about women as a whole. The fact that they're women isn't particularly relevant... imagine the same post rewritten around a boy band or some latin music stud. The post would then talk about how they'd be working as gigolos or some such. It would remain essentially intact.

A dislike of objectification and of prostitution is nothing like a hatred of women.

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

It's a pity you think that's misogyny. You do women a disservice.

Not really.

Grandparent is saying that specific people are just selling their bodies, rather than selling music.

No, he said they were just interested in entertainment rather than music. You've interpreted it that way, but that's not necessarily what he was saying.

I simply think that he's factually incorrect: If these idiot performers were never famous, I do not think that they'd be doing lapdances instead. I think that there would be... many other likely paths for their lives to take. I think the only reason he could leap to this conclusion is because they are women and their popularity is largely based on sexual attractiveness, and for some reason that indicates that they are bad people.

I've been wrong before.

The fact that they're women isn't particularly relevant... imagine the same post rewritten around a boy band or some latin music stud. The post would then talk about how they'd be working as gigolos or some such. It would remain essentially intact.

I think this is incorrect too. The same post would not be written about a boy band and talk about how they'd be working as gigolos. It could be, but would not.

Re:Conflation

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course not. Boy band members would naturally be working as "rent boys" (male gay prostitutes), not gigolos.

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

Seriously, though.

Re:Conflation

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? It's actually pretty serious: many "boy bands" are told to "cater to the pink pound" in Britain, actually, and many are sucked into the rent boy trade.

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

I was agreeing. Boy bands would be maligned for being effeminate and homosexual, not for being gigolos.

Re:Conflation

[mrtrumbe]

Fuck this.

From dictionary.com:

misogyny, n.: Hatred of women

I can understand saying that the original poster was incorrectly stereotyping women. But that he HATES women? That's a stretch. I think the word misogyny is way overused these days. People mistake ignorance for hatred and the application of the word misogyny is the result.

Anyway, I interpreted his statement as saying that these women's only marketable feature is their beauty. No (or very little education) education. No REAL skill in their trade. Just looks.

And I don't think he was saying that made them bad people, just that there are limited options for those in this world wanting to make a living from their looks. If they are super-lucky, MAYBE they'll land a modelling, acting or singing gig which brings them fame and years of waelth. More likely, they'll struggle along in some less-than-ideal career position. One of those alternatives could well be in the sex industry in one capacity or another.

You act as though the mere mention of the fact that women hoping to get by on their looks MIGHT end up in the sex industry makes him a bad person. Whatever.

Taft

Re:Conflation

[mrtrumbe]

BTW. I think this is incorrect too. The same post would not be written about a boy band and talk about how they'd be working as gigolos. It could be, but would not.

This is preposterous. You are trying to say that the only reason that a person wouldn't say this about a boy band is misogyny (or more correctly, negative stereotypes of women). Nope.

Another equally valid reason why a person might be more likely to say a woman might end up in the sex industry is that women are more likely to end up in the sex industry. This doesn't make women "bad people." This doesn't mean they have lower moral values than men. It's because of gender roles and market demand. Boys and girls are generally conditioned from a young age to conform to certain societal roles. For girls, a very common conditioning is for them to place disproportionately high value on looks. For boys, a common conditioning is for them to be strong, tough and not to cry.

Further emphasising this problem is market demand. What percentage of steel mill workers do you think are women? Farm hands? Etc. Etc. Now, what percentage of total strip clubs have male dancers? Why do you think there are more strip clubs with women dancers than men? Why do you think there are more men in the steel industry than women?

A big part is demand.

There are simply more men than women out there who want to look at porn, making the femal form highly prized in porn purveyors. And steel mills prize a "work horse" attitude from their employees, which makes the male form more desirable (as it is more able to provide the work they need).

So given the demand for porn featuring the femal form, OF COURSE there is going to be a lot of people willing to use (or exploit, given your POV) women to peddle porn. And given that demand is higher than the demand for porn with the male form, there are more female sex workers than male. Which means it is more likely that a women would enter the sex trade than man.

What use this knowledge is is of some debate. And OF COURSE some qualification based on INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES of different women is always more useful. And this is, like any statistic, a form of stereotyping. But the underlying logic is there.

Taft

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

But that he HATES women? That's a stretch.

Our only example of his opinion of women is what he thinks of these two female performers. He doesn't seem to like them. His example of how low he thinks they'd sink is to show how he thinks their morals are bad in comparison to Wilco. The only evidence I think he has for his conclusion (that they would become strippers) is that they are women.

Anyway, I interpreted his statement as saying that these women's only marketable feature is their beauty.

That's fine. It's not what he said.

And I don't think he was saying that made them bad people,

It's pretty clear that he was comparing and contrasting them with Wilco, whom he approves of, and these female performers whom he does not approve of. It was completely clear that he was using this as example of what made them bad people. What makes you say otherwise?

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

This is preposterous. You are trying to say that the only reason that a person wouldn't say this about a boy band is misogyny (or more correctly, negative stereotypes of women). Nope.

I wasn't only trying to say that. I was saying that "you could say this about boy bands too" is not a reason for it not to be misogyny. There are a myriad reasons why the original poster would not (and did not) say that. I do think that misogyny is one of them.

Re:Conflation

[mrtrumbe]

The only evidence I think he has for his conclusion (that they would become strippers) is that they are women.

Where do you come up with this stuff? He has plenty of other evidence: their actions between when they hit it big and now. Go watch the Ashley Simpson show and tell me you don't construct some picture of who Ashley Simpson really is outside the fact she is a woman. You seem to be saying a person's public actions should be ignored or are ignoring the fact that these people (esp. the Simpsons, but also Britney) are celebrities whose every public action for the last 5-10 years has been closely tracked. Hell, People does most of the work for anyone interested in what Britney has been eating (or dating!) for the last month.

That's fine. It's not what he said.

You're right, he said they are only interested in "entertaining." Have you ever been to, or seen on tv, a Britney Spears concert? You do know that sex plays a BIG part of her act, right? Think Madonna. You are trying to artificially restrict the definition of the word entertainment. Sex, sexuality, beauty, and image are all actively sold by these artists under the general heading of "entertainment."

It's pretty clear that he was comparing and contrasting them with Wilco, whom he approves of, and these female performers whom he does not approve of. It was completely clear that he was using this as example of what made them bad people. What makes you say otherwise?

You are using pretty loaded language. "Approve of" isn't really appropriate. It is implying he was making a moral judgement on their behavior. I don't see that. Rather, he was saying HE doesn't value their behavior. That is VERY different than saying their behvior is "bad" or to be condemned. I could view his statement as much as a lamentation of what society currently values as it is a moral condemnation of their behavior.

Taft

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

You seem to be saying a person's public actions should be ignored or are ignoring the fact that these people (esp. the Simpsons, but also Britney) are celebrities whose every public action for the last 5-10 years has been closely tracked.

Are you telling me that it follows logically that Ashley Simpson & Britney Spears would be coked out strippers if they didn't make it big?

You do know that sex plays a BIG part of her act, right?

That is obviously the case. Does this mean that Britney Spears have otherwise wound up a coked out stripper on the LA strip?

You are using pretty loaded language. "Approve of" isn't really appropriate. It is implying he was making a moral judgement on their behavior.

I didn't intend to use loaded language. I was trying to say as simply as possible that he is making a judgment on their behavior. They are doing something that he thinks is bad, in comparison to Wilco whom is not. That is obviously what he is trying to say. Your original post acted as if he's not passing judgment, when he is. He is commenting on how much better Wilco is than Britney, and why. There are other reasons and arguments he could have picked. Some of them are even valid.

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

Wait a second.

It is implying he was making a moral judgement on their behavior. I don't see that.

Are you fucking kidding me?

Rather, he was saying HE doesn't value their behavior. That is VERY different than saying their behvior is "bad" or to be condemned.

He says neither of these two things. He says that they're not "True Musicians", and "Since they only care about entertaining and not making music, they'd probably be just another coked-out stripper on the LA Strip, telling you how they're going to make it big and be somebody between lapdances and serving you a $10 cocktail." He doesn't say whether he values their behavior, nor that it's bad, nor that it's to be condemned. He is, however, in my opinion, using this imaginary example as proof that they are bad people. I could be wrong, but I don't think I'm jumping wildly to conclusions either.

I could view his statement as much as a lamentation of what society currently values as it is a moral condemnation of their behavior.

If you play telephone long enough, you could view it as he started the goddamn Chicago fire. Now that don't necessarily make it fucking so.

Re:Conflation

[mrtrumbe]

I completely agree that it does not follow logically that they would have ended up stripping on the strip, all coked up.

And he is passing judgement (though not necessarily a moral judgement--the world isn't bad vs. good to everyone). He is saying he likes Wilco's behavior more than Spears'. Fine. But does that mean he dislikes women as a whole? Does that even mean he dislikes Spears, as a whole? Not unless you make some serious assumptions.

What he did was to pick an extreme possible outcome to use as a hyperbolic example of what their lives would be like had they not made it big. Where I took offense was that you used that fact to label him misogynistic (ie. you said he hates women). It is COMPLETELY unfair to say he hates women based on that one hyperbolic statement. How the fuck do you know? Because he chose one hypothetical example over several others, you can safely label him a misogynist? Bleh. It's a guess you are making, plain and simple, and an extremely presumptuous one, at that. Maybe he just dislikes Britney Spears. Does his dislike of ONE FREAKIN' WOMAN make him a misogynist? Hell, I dislike Spears, but I'd be respectful to her if I ever met her, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean I hate women or am a misogynist.

It's the hyper-PC attitude that I hate. Anything said which is remotely stereotypical gets labelled as "hate speech." I see your attitude as an extension of this.

Taft

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

Where I took offense was that you used that fact to label him misogynistic (ie. you said he hates women).

But I didn't do that. I said that he "worked some misogyny into" his post. I have myself, many times, said something that was misogynistic. I am not a misogynist. Hopefully, neither is whatsisname. But I maintain that his comment was misogynistic. There is still room in that statement for him to be a good person, and to love women.

It's the hyper-PC attitude that I hate. Anything said which is remotely stereotypical gets labelled as "hate speech." I see your attitude as an extension of this.

Why? What attitude. I'm being completely reasonable. My original comment was supposed to be funny, and I still think that it was. So please, consider why my comment sent you into a tizzy.

Re:Conflation

[mrtrumbe]

I actually thought your original comment was funny. It was when you started defending it as something other than a joke that I took "offense." (I'm not really all that upset about it)

So if it was supposed to be a joke, you might want to think about why you felt you had to defend it as true.

Taft

Re:Conflation

[mrtrumbe]

He doesn't say whether he values their behavior, nor that it's bad, nor that it's to be condemned. He is, however, in my opinion, using this imaginary example as proof that they are bad people. I could be wrong, but I don't think I'm jumping wildly to conclusions either.

Well then, it looks like we have a good ol' fashioned difference of opinion. Where you see an imaginary example as proof that they are bad people, I see him saying their work has less value than that of Wilco, because they are selling much more than music. Both of us are implying our POV from what he said, not reading it from the page.

I still don't see this "they are bad people" attitude in his post. Why are they "bad" people? Because he doesn't value what they are selling as entertainment? I can't even imagine the logic that conflates "acceptable" entertainment with commentary on their moral being.

Taft

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

It was funny and it was true.

Re:Conflation

[Elwood P Dowd]

Why are they "bad" people?

Because if they weren't unjustly famous, they'd be two bit whores. I don't see how that isn't clear. I don't see how saying "they'd be two bit whores" isn't a judgment on someone's moral being. Are you playing dumb?

I can't even imagine the logic that conflates "acceptable" entertainment with commentary on their moral being.

That's ok, because it's completely irrelevant to our discussion.

Re: Not that hard to come by

[EZmagz]

Heh, funny you mention that because I actually live in Minneapolis. Born and raised, baby! You're right though. There's definitely an assload of talent in the metro area. Unforunately I'm unemployed atm so I usually don't have the cash to go hang out at the 400 Bar, Triple Rock, First Ave and 7th Street Entry (between intermetient closings) and other places where decent acts can be found for $5 covers.

Talent is definitely abound though. One needs not look any farther than seeing Atmosphere live or listening to old Husker Du records to see that.

Re:Good chance to put your money where your mouth

[Drakonian]

If you don't like AGIB, give YHF a chance. It'll blow your mind.

Tweedy voiced some of the best pro-P2P arguments

[Bun]

WN: What are your thoughts on the RIAA's ongoing lawsuits against individual file sharers?

Tweedy: We live in a connected world now. Some find that frightening. If people are downloading our music, they're listening to it. The internet is like radio for us.

WN: You don't agree with the argument that file sharing hurts musicians' ability to earn a living?

Tweedy: I don't believe every download is a lost sale.
--
WN: What if the efforts to stop unauthorized music file sharing are successful? How would that change culture?

Tweedy: If they succeed, it will damage the culture and industry they say they're trying to save.
What if there was a movement to shut down libraries because book publishers and authors were up in arms over the idea that people are reading books for free? It would send a message that books are only for the elite who can afford them.
Stop trying to treat music like it's a tennis shoe, something to be branded. If the music industry wants to save money, they should take a look at some of their six-figure executive expense accounts. All those lawsuits can't be cheap, either.

Amen.

The Case for Major Labels to Embrace P2P

[allwaysmusic]

Yea... I agree this was an interesting read. I blogged about it yesterday. I think Wilco makes a strong case for Major Labels to embrace P2P. When asked how successful efforts to stop unauthorized music file sharing would change the culture, Tweedy said, "If they succeed, it will damage the culture and industry they say they're trying to save."

Anyone tell me where to get...

[James Wells]

Greetings, Anyone have a URL for a non-iTunes version of these guy's music? Never heard of Wilco before this article, but seeing a Band that appears to get it about the Internet makes me want to check em out. For a long time now I have been following the whole 'Music Sharing Is Evil' fiasco and every time I hear the BS about lost sales, I thin about Baen Books. For those of you not aware of it, Baen books publishes all of their books online, (www.bean.com) for free as well as regular purchased hard copy. One of the things that Baen has proven over the last couple of years is that their online books have actually improved their total sales of hard copy books.

Re:Anyone tell me where to get...

[okpgreg]

you can download some of their shows in mp3 from http://www.the-grotto.com/

other people made this record aside from Wilco

[VoxCombo]

It's great that Wilco wants to give their music away, and I would have no problem with that, if it was only their to give away

BUT

They decided to enlist the help of a record label to help them market their music. While Wilco may make a nice living off touring and see their record only as a promotional tool, records are all the label has.

So if Jeff Tweedy thinks it's great to steal his music, maybe he should ask Mary who works in the Promotions department at Nonesuch records, or Barry who works in IT, or Richard who sweeps the floors, or Jamie in packaging, or the countless other stakeholders in Wilco's records.

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[Anonymous Coward]

or poor little voxcombo and his barely visible dick

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[AlinuxNCSU]

Except the record company dropped them because Wilco wouldn't make music the way they wanted. That means Tweedy and the rest of Wilco were free to do whatever they wanted, including streaming the album on the Internet.

But I mean, come off it man. You sound like those silly MPAA trailers before movies.

I guess I should know better than to feed the trolls.

-Alex

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[shark72]

"But I mean, come off it man. You sound like those silly MPAA trailers before movies."

He's correct. I know it's fun to engage in a little schadenfreude when we read of record companies laying off hundreds of people -- that will teach the greedy bastards for overpricing CDs! -- but while it's enjoyable imagine those hundreds of people to be Mercedes-driving executives with cocaine addictions, the reality is that it's usually Mary in IT or John in promotions or Fred who sweeps the floors.

To be clear, you don't owe Mary or John or Fred a job. It's the record company's job to deal with the effect of piracy. If you want to get that CD on Kazaa, go for it, but if you're doing so to avoid buying it, it will ultimately mean less money for Mary or John or Fred.

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[r_benchley]

You're assuming that people downloading Wilco's music is costing them sales. When Yankee Hotel Foxtrot was released, the sales were something like three times the sales of their previous album. The word-of-mouth that was generated by the free downloads on their website BOOSTED sales, instead of diminshing them. Instead of treating their fans like criminals, they're offering them easy access to their music, and assuming that the fans will hear the music, appreciate the good will, and it will translate to increased sales. P2P sharing of music files is similar to when the record industry was howling over radio play of music. Radio play of music didn't hurt the record industry, it helped it. If the record industry was smart, they would get on board and take advantage of P2P networks.

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[Anonymous Coward]

unless you have some inside information on their recording contract, you're making a lot of assumptions about its terms.

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[aonifer]

So if Jeff Tweedy thinks it's great to steal his music, maybe he should ask Mary who works in the Promotions department at Nonesuch records, or Barry who works in IT, or Richard who sweeps the floors, or Jamie in packaging, or the countless other stakeholders in Wilco's records.

Most of those people were paid long before the album was released. Also A Ghost Was Born sold 81,000 copies in its first week and debuted at number 8 on the Billboard charts. Furthermore, Nonesuch Records didn't stop Wilco from streaming it off of their website, so they apparently are less concerned about people "stealing" Jeff Tweedy's music than you are.

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[HyperCash]

"it will ultimately mean less money for Mary or John or Fred."

Not unless the record company goes out of business. Mary, John and Fred are basicly commodities and are going to make the same piddling amount no matter how much the company makes.

--HC

Re:other people made this record aside from Wilco

[shark72]

I'm guessing you haven't yet worked in corporate America. When times are tough, layoffs can and do happen. Even if a company manages to avoid layoffs, it often does so by freezing salaries (meaning that nobody gets raises, even for cost of living -- I've had to go through a few years of this) and hiring freezes (meaning that if Mary, Fred or John have been laid off from another company, it's that much harder for them to find new work).

My point stands: if you pirate something rather than buying it, it will ultimately mean less money for somebody in that industry (classic micro economics here), the vast majority of which is made up of people who make the same amount as you and me or less. However, as I said in the GP, you don't owe them a job, so if you want something for free, pirate away.

Dollars per Unit of Enjoyment?

[PetoskeyGuy]

This person could pay for the DVD/Movie and watch it once, or download it from the Internet and watch it once. Either way this person got one unit of enjoyment out of this, but it's not quite the same to capitalist
Remember though, if you keep increasing your units of enjoyment, eventually the fairy of happiness will let you carry up to 50 bombs at once.

Who pays $20 for a cd anymore?

[Anonymous Coward]

nt

Baen and free books

[Anonymous Coward]

On the http://www.baen.com/library/ site, Eric Flint, the co-ordinator, says something the Recording Industries should make note of:

The only time that mass scale petty thievery becomes a problem is when the perception spreads, among broad layers of the population, that a given product is priced artificially high due to monopolistic practices and/or draconian legislation designed to protect those practices. But so long as the "gap" between the price of a legal product and a stolen one remains both small and, in the eyes of most people, a legitimate cost rather than gouging, 99% of them will prefer the legal product.

Baen...

[Drantin]

Does NOT publish all their books online for free...
just a great many of them at the author's choosing.
They do however, have the rest for SALE at webscriptions