Slashdot Mirror


Metallica May Follow In Footsteps of Radiohead, NIN

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?"

26 of 673 comments (clear)

  1. Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by ThinkingInBinary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would you buy a Metallica online album despite their former views?

    No. They totally missed the point before, and it sounds like now they're just trying to latch on to an idea that helped others. The point of being a musician, or another kind of artist, is to share the art, not to make a profit. There's nothing wrong with expecting to make some money off of it, but that should not be the focus.

    1. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I couldn't agree more. Too little, too late, I say. A bit like how MS decided the Internet wasn't going to be anything major and focused on proprietary MSN which never really became a market leader. Metallica not only picked the wrong model, they behaved atrociously to their fans on top of it.

    2. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by Macthorpe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. They totally missed the point before, and it sounds like now they're just trying to latch on to an idea that helped others. The point of being a musician, or another kind of artist, is to share the art, not to make a profit. There's nothing wrong with expecting to make some money off of it, but that should not be the focus. At the same time, if you're trying to push that viewpoint to the masses as the way music should be, would it not be pragmatic to support them?

      Yes, they were dickheads before, but if they're really going to shift to this business model that's a fucking big name endorsing it.
      --
      "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
    3. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have to disagree with you there. It is precisely because they want to make better profits that this "turn" should be endorsed and supported.

      Metallica was acting as the RIAA's puppet, brainwashed into thinking this is how they should 'protect their own profits.' But now that they have seen that perhaps the RIAA has been protecting its own profits and the expense of the groups' earning potential, it is one less nail in the coffin of musical art.

      Let's not forget that Metallica supported "the dark side" but instead use it as evidence of the real dark side's failing business model. If Metallica can turn, they can all turn. Before long, there may be several bands with names like "The artists formerly known as..."

      If Metallica fails in trying to get free, it will serve as a sign that other artists and bands should not stray from the comfortable dark place they exist in now.

    4. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its called 'selling out'. They sold out decades ago. Now that they realize they screwed up with the napster shut down assist, and participated in making the p2p market what it is today they want to capitalize on it as complete 2 faced hypocrites.

        I still think that if the RIAA hadn't gone after napster, with the help of bands like metallica p2p would have never made it into the mainstream and become what we know it as today. They CREATED the problem the industry is having today due to their shortsighted holier then thou attitudes. They shouldn't be allowed to participate in it now.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    5. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by darkcatalyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their "big name" is so tarnished that it would be more harm than boon if they were to hop on the bandwagon. Not to mention that their music has been on the decline since Master of Puppets. I think Alex Skolnick said it best about St. Anger:

      "There is no unity or cohesiveness to the songs. Some of them are downright funny, as if 'Saturday Night Live' was doing a skit making fun of them. This album represents what they are now: a sloppy mess. And the heart of the matter is that this is not a good METALLICA album. I speak only as a fan. Sure, it's noisy and angry but something is seriously missing. It seems to represents a decline in the standards of this modern day and age, when we are bombarded with so much information we forget what true quality is."

      Ouch.

      --
      This is what entropy is for.
    6. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dude, you can't possibly be making the "it's popular therefore it's good argument"?!?

      GP has it right. After ...And Justice For All (1988), it was all a downhill slide from there.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    7. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Insightful


      Dude, you can't possibly be making the "it's popular therefore it's good argument"?!?

      No, he's trying to make the "it's popular, therefore people paid for it".

      Whether it's "good" or not is irrelevant. This discussion is about money, not artistic value.

      --
      AccountKiller
    8. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by cliffski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      said by someone who presumably has a day job that pays the bills. Why is it ok for some people to have high paid jobs in IT, or sales or law, and enjoy listening to music thats free, whereas the people who actually make the music are forbidden from earning the money generated by their work?
      is this some way you are dreaming up to 'punish' people whose talent happens to be making music rather than configuring routers? I don't see why people split society in two halves., the 'creative' types who are forced to work for free (or low wages) to entertain the rest of society, who apparently can happily enjoy all the fruits of capitalism and be rich as hell.

      Take a look at the UKs sunday times rich list (1,000 richest people in the UK). hardly any of them are musicians, yet the internet mentality is to treat the musicians who make money as evil capitalist scum, but the guy who is a multi billionaire from making milk cartons gets buy with just a slap on the back and a thumbs up.

      I'd buy metallicas album if I wanted to own it. Whether they are penniless or billionaires doesn't affect my enjoyment of it.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    9. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by rob1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why isn't this modded Flaimbait?

      Got something against opinions that don't match yours?

    10. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by _Swank · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > but not liking a song you once liked, without somehow relating it to a negative experience, is weird

      really? i see this as a completely normal thing. i liked 'twinkle twinkle little star' when i was 6 years old. not so much anymore. if i can change who i am, why wouldn't my musical tastes change too? shouldn't they reflect, in some way, who you are? the concept that you must always like songs you once liked unless you had a negative experience is, in my opinion, the wierd one.

  2. Hell no by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lars is still an asshole.

    I probably would download it off the net though, with the help of my .torrent friends.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  3. Hell yes! by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Would you buy a Metallica online album despite their former views?" Yes, because I am a fan and will buy the new album regardless.

    Yes, because it's never too late to do the right thing.

    If Microsoft GPL'd Microsoft Office, would you install it?
    1. Re:Hell yes! by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If Microsoft GPL'd Microsoft Office, would you install it? No because my reason for using Open Office isn't just because I'm a tight wad.
  4. Music Sucks by iphayd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Only if they went back to their roots and made complex, musical songs rather than the drivel that they've come out with since the Black album (and I know that some consider the Black album the start of the drivel.)

  5. If they apologize. by evanbd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they apologize for calling their fans thieves, then yes. They got it wrong; everyone makes mistakes, and sometimes they're big ones. If they're willing to admit it, then I can forgive them; if not, then they're just out to make a quick buck.

    I want the industry to get it right; I feel no need to be vindictive. But if they're just jumping on the next bandwagon, then they haven't actually changed at all.

    1. Re:If they apologize. by Original+Replica · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they post the music, along with an open letter to Congress requesting the radical alteration and/or repeal of recent copyright legislation like the NET Act or the DMCA, then I would consider spending my money with them.

      Open letters to Congress don't mean nearly as much as professional lobbying, I would much rather see a Metallica team up with other musicians (perhaps Radiohead and NIN) to form a "Fans are not Criminals" political action committee and have a PAC contribution option with every download.

      --
      We are all just people.
    2. Re:If they apologize. by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To err is human. If they've seen the error of their ways... I think its more likely that they saw the green.
      --
      This space available.
    3. Re:If they apologize. by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed. To follow others because of greed doesn't imply having seen the light.

      However, Metallica will almost certainly fail in this, because they have alienated those who would go for this type of distribution model. Sorry, I'm not responsible for Lars' kitten starving, Lars is.
      You reap what you have sown.

  6. Yes. by Kingrames · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they learn to adapt to the world, then they deserve to survive. it takes a lot to admit that you were wrong and I'm not going to downplay that.

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  7. It depends by Zerth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will their "Pay what you want" form allow for negative numbers?

  8. If they apologize. by MacDork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To err is human. If they've seen the error of their ways, then I would reconsider them. They would need to do more than say "I'm sorry" though... They'd need to actively work against the copyright regime they helped create. 1997 NET Act made copyright infringement without profit motive a criminal offense. That's a first and is due in no small part to Metallica. They helped create a whole new class of "criminal" and they have to atone for that mistake. If they only post their music, they can keep it... If they post the music, along with an open letter to Congress requesting the radical alteration and/or repeal of recent copyright legislation like the NET Act or the DMCA, then I would consider spending my money with them.

  9. I was at The Farm in SF by fishyfool · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was at The Farm in SF, way back in the day when Metallica said "copy our tapes and hand them out to your friends" and we did. Then they got a fat assed contract and said "stop copying our property and giving it away for free" We need MORE money. Lars and James were at the forefront of both. Now that the world has quit listening, they want to give it away again. Thanks, I'll pass.

    --
    Enjoy Every Sandwich
  10. Re:Damned if they do, damned if they don't... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They want kudos for reversing their stand after they found out it is profitable?

    I'll tell you what, if they donate the proceeds of their next album to the people who have been harassed by the RIAA, then we can talk. Till then, there's no basis for "forgiveness," they're just pursuing the almighty buck.

  11. Re:David Bowie Knows What's Up by kentrel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Metallica will not atone for their actions and I will do everything in my power to dissuade those around me from listening to them. If I could say one thing to the band, it would be "You've always been on board the RIAA ship and now you'll ride that ship down to the bottom of the ocean with your career." Geez. You make it sound like they committed genocide and refuse to say sorry. Have a little perspective here. All they did was try to stop people from distributing their music for free. They spend a fortune producing it - they do have the right to at least want to get some of that money back. If they make mistakes along the way and piss people off, that doesn't make them bad people - businesses and artists piss off their customers all the time. At least give them the opportunity to do the right thing. Don't punish them out of spite, and a petty desire for an apology now that they're doing what music fans have wanted all along. Reward them for doing the right thing and they're more likely to do it again. Who cares what their motives are. You don't know their mind. If they're doing what fans want, then fuck their motives.They're at least doing it, aren't they.

    They did what anyone who's successful would have done - tried to hold on to that success. If you had built up a hugely successful band or business you would also be very suspicious, or even deathly afraid of anything that might have been a threat to that and would do what you could to stop it. The anger and aggression that came from Metallica at the time, makes me think they were more afraid, than suspicious.

    You may, in your infinite knowledge say that you would have given it away for free, being a true artist, but you try looking at the receipt after paying for even ONE professional guitar, never mind a whole studio, music videos and distribution system. If you still want to give it away for free then you're a better man than 99% of bands in the world (except Radiohead and bands so new or bad that they can't even give it away)

    As it turned out they did the wrong thing, which is easy to see with the benefit of hindsight. Not everyone makes good business decisions. That doesn't make them bad people. What actions do they have to atone for? You're using really strong words to describe something that was an entirely human reaction and entirely legal.

    And for all we know their contracts with their record company and other associates may have made it impossible for them to even consider at the time what Radiohead have considered. Who by the way had the advantage of almost 10 years to study the new distribution models. Pretty easy to make the right decision when you have that much time to think about it.

    Metallica made a mistake which hurt their reputation. Good businessmen and good people will learn from their mistakes. If they haven't then you'll know by their results... which we'll find out eventually.

    If you really really hate Metallica with the burning fiery passion that you imply in your post, then you're really doing the wrong thing by launching a crusade to tell everyone you know not to listen to their music. Just tell them ALL to download the free album from Metallica's site, bleed their resources and just never pay for it.

    That's going to make it clear to them nobody wants to pay for their music - provided everyone you know has your long argument in mind when listening to Heavy Metal.

    How about a little understanding, and forgiveness? Since you won't have to pay for anything, what's the point in getting angry over it?
  12. Will people buy a Metallica online album...? by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "'popular, therefore people paid for it'"

    I'm concerned that this will lead to an internet boycott.

    The only thing that could have a major effect on this launch is a serious boycott based on Metallica's earlier views. Most /.ers are pissed and the issue is something that people learning about this album online will know about, likely the album will still do well... though it will be pirated more.

    I hope this album is successful.
    I think Metallica is played out and their music is old fashioned and mediocre.

    But I hope whatever stupid way they choose to distribute it succeeds, just so that other misguided artists who feel that piracy is the end of music will STFU. :)