The Chumbawamba Factor

putko writes "Chris Dahlen has written about BigChampagne, a company that looks at peer-to-peer downloading to provide marketing data to record companies. By analyzing what folks are downloading, when and where, BigChampagne can tell the record companies what people like, what other records they like and other information critical to deciding how to allocate marketing dollars. As mentioned in the article, record companies started using this information (secretly) even as they were trying to stop filesharing via the courts."

Comments

Whoops, no time!

[Willeh]

I'd comment, but i have to download some Wesley Willis. Did you hear that, BigChampagne people? WESLEY WILLIS. http://www.alternativetentacles.com/bandinfo.php?b and=wesleywillis

Oh yeah, down with the RIAA!! How dare they profit from something illegal! Rock on Chicago, Rock on London, Rock over RIAA.

Re:Whoops, no time!

[mmkkbb]

"Rock on Chicago, Rock on London, Rock over RIAA."

Shouldn't that be "RIAA sucks a llama's nuts"?

I get knocked down

[Alex P Keaton in da]

Well, I guess we get knocked down, but we get up again! They ain't never ever ever gonaa win!

Win win situation

[wlvdc]

Both users and providers get what they want, illegally.

Eat Your Cake

[mfh]

First off, for those of you who have no idea, or only a vague memory; "Chumbawamba are a band from the UK who use their music to promote anarchist ideas."

So the RIAA et al are trying to put an end to P2P, while hypocritically using P2P stats to know what's hot; they have crossed the threshold from tyranny into absurdity. What judge, knowing this, will still side with the RIAA in the future? Does this not set a precedent that the RIAA sees value in P2P?

The RIAA is reacting to a market change; P2P. They are learning that P2P has value to them, perhaps more value than loss, in that they can get a real consensus on what people want. Furthermore, the RIAA can no longer deem P2P as an immoral behaviour that corrupts society, because the fruit from the tree has poisoned their self-professed purity.

Re:Eat Your Cake

[garcia]

So the RIAA et al are trying to put an end to P2P, while hypocritically using P2P stats to know what's hot; they have crossed the threshold from tyranny into absurdity. What judge, knowing this, will still side with the RIAA in the future? Does this not set a precedent that the RIAA sees value in P2P?

Because they are gaining stats in something that's not acceptable in the United States? Would a judge not side with the police getting stats on drug users to see where they congregate and what kinds of drugs they prefer?

It's the same thing to them.

To us, yes, it's shady and yet another reason you shouldn't support them or the music they promote.

P2P as an immoral behaviour that corrupts society, because the fruit from the tree has poisoned their self-professed purity.

They can claim whatever the fuck they want to claim as long as no one stops them. Unfortuantely no one will stop them because they have started to win the publics' (and the courts') opinion that this is "wrong".

Sad but true. Listen to free music by bands that don't need the RIAA.

Re:Eat Your Cake

[Sponge Bath]

Chumbawamba are a band from the UK

Thank you. I thought it was the sound Ewoks make.
You explanation makes more sense.

That explains so much

[Walkiry]

Lots of crap music that sounds mostly the same keeps being marketed by the suits. One of the most heard phrases when it comes to justify downloading copyrighted music off the net: "I just download the crap that's not worth paying for."

Hmmmmm...

Charts

[WebfishUK]

Does this mean that at last we can get charts which really reflect what people are listening to?

Re:Charts

[screevo]

I think the sad fact that you are missing is, the Billboard charts do accurately reflect what people are listening to.

Let us weep together for youth.

wrong correlation

[airuck]

Wouldn't this market analysis reveal which music people are willing to pirate rather than purchase?

Re:Let me just say that... In response...

[GecKo213]

why in the hell is the music business so fired up to make nothing but hit records instead of providing people with access to music with artistic integrity?

You happen to have answerd part of your own question. They are, after all a businesses and they exist to make money.

Regarding artist integrity. When was the last time you heard an artist really singing about artistic impression and look at the lyrics of any popular song and hear or feel any of that? The new hip-hop artist of the day for example. All they sing/rap about is how many Hoes they can or have slept with and how much money or "bling" they have. Most of the music out there is about the same things. Why? Because that's the kind of music people are interested in.

musicians who actually create the stuff should be making at least as much as they do because without the artist, the business is nothing.

Have you seen how many of the artists out there write their own songs? Not too many. Artists are the expendable part of the business. You've got song writters and producers that are doing all the behind the scenes work. The artist themselves are just the pretty face that has to go on tour and loose their "private life" to people like the you and me that want to know everything about them. I'd like you to find a songwritter (mostly nameless and faceless to the general public) who has done songs with popular artists that donesn't have any money. If Brittney Spears decided never to return to music, they'd just find another pretty face to sing all the same songs.

Ahh, my rant is now over. That's my 2 cents for what it's worth.

The Chumbawamba Factor

[ayjay29]

The Chumbawamba Factor...

He gets a Manics song
He gets an Elvis song
He gets a Roses song
He gets a Beetles song
He rips the songs that remind him
Of the good times
He rips the songs that remind him
Of the better times:

Ripping the night away
Ripping the night away

I get DCed
I get on line again
You aint ever gonna keep me down

I get a trojen
I get installed again
You aint ever gonna gonna keep me down

I get Metalica threats
But I get wise again
You aint ever gonna keep me down

I get RIAA email
I get IP Spoofing again
You aint ever gonna keep me down

'Don't cry for me
RIAA...'

Re:Textbook example

[Iriel]

The only problem with that idea is that it makes another point for the RIAA to look hypocritical. The record companies KNOW that a good number of P2P downloaders buy CDs from artists they download (I'm not saying everyone does to defend them, so don't flame me for all the actual media pirates). I just think that our lawsuit craven culture supports more excuses to sue little Cindy-Loo-Hoo out of her lunch money.

If the RIAA was really serious about getting rid of all p2p, they wouldn't have ANY part in it. You can't fight to abolish something while getting kickbacks on it (at least not ethically, but that doesn't seem to stop too many people lately).</toungeincheeck>

The large music companies are dinosaurs

[stefanlasiewski]

You can clearly see that BigChampagne is only looking from a mainstream perspective. From their limited point of view, Chumbawamba is a "one-time punk band".

Reality is far different-- Chumbawamba is one of the most successful punk bands in existance. They've been around for 25 years, released 20 albums & EPs, individual members released another 20 or more and have one of the largest followings of any non-mainstream bands. Their styles range from English Rebel Songs from 1381 to their modern pop-punk hits.

BigChampagne makes the same mistake as the big record companies-- they only look at the most popular bands, and are completely ignorant about the success of smaller bands and smaller labels.

The small band segment of the music industry is growing, and the mainstream music industry seems to be shrinking -- they keep complaining about reduced sales every year.

They are a dinosaur.