Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Metallica May Follow In Footsteps of Radiohead, NIN

Posted by Soulskill on from the reconsidering-the-options dept.

fireheadca writes "Metallica, once strongly opposed to file-sharing, has hinted at going 'free' in the style of NIN and Radiohead. Having heard success stories about releasing music online, Metallica has decided it wants a piece of the action. Radiohead, as a pioneer of online 'pay what you want' music, has shown the world it is possible to profit by releasing music online, but would not post those profits. NIN, on the other hand, has reported at least $1.6 million in revenue. In hindsight, many people remember Metallica as the band that helped shutdown Napster. I purchased the NIN album, after many years of free downloads of the NIN collection, to help support the band. Would you buy a Metallica online album despite their former views?"

6 of 673 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Informative

    And besides, Metallica hasn't put out a decent album in the better part of 20 years. Why would anyone want to pay for their crap, or even listen to it for free?

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  2. they weren't against it per se by tommeke100 · · Score: 4, Informative

    In the documentary "some kind of monster", Lars was explaining that he wasn't against the whole file-sharing thing per se. What the lawsuit was about, was that someone leaked their album (or a song, don't remember) out of the recording studio before it came out AND distributed it through file-sharing. But suddenly, the story grew over their heads, and it became this big Metallica Vs. Napster thing, when it was really about Napster (or ppl through the Napster p2p network) distributing a song that they didn't release yet.

  3. Sure except.... by NIckGorton · · Score: 4, Informative

    Would you buy a Metallica online album despite their former views? I actually have more respect for someone who is willing to say "Yep, I fucked up. Lets do it a better way."

    However I wouldn't buy their album because their music sucks.
  4. Metallica never said they spoke for all musicians by hackiavelli · · Score: 4, Informative

    You've got to remember that they tried to stand up and speak for all musicians. No they didn't. Lars explicitly said it should be up to the artist to decide: "I don't have a problem with any artist voluntarily distributing his or her songs through any means the artist elects-- at no cost to the consumer, if that's what the artist wants. But just like a carpenter who crafts a table gets to decide whether to keep it, sell it or give it away, shouldn't we have the same options?"
  5. Re:That's funny. by willyhill · · Score: 4, Informative

    Note that "inTheLoo" and "gnutoo" are the same person. I have no idea why twitter feels the need to shill up his own posts, especially something as tepid as a joke about Metallica. Sorry for the offtopic post, but anyone posting in or moderating this thread should be aware of that.

    --
    The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
  6. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Informative

    Bjork is cooler than you know, first getting her start in the early Iceland punk scene and playing with the post-punk group KUKL, touring with Crass and Flux of Pink Indians before switching to a more ethereal sound later in her career. She's no Britney, and would have no real problems with a Grindcore remix of her material.

    (I'm actually not really a fan of her work, but she's in the category of people I really respect even if I don't get into their work that much. Almost wish I liked it more than I do.)