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?"

22 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 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.

    3. 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.
    4. 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!
    5. 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
    6. 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
    7. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by patro · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't think Metallica will be much help in this. The release for free and people will pay for it model is a fad, I think.

      People pay becase NIN and Radiohead were the pioneers of this.

      If everyone goes this way then people will take it for granted and they won't pay for it.

      Some of them will, of course, but much fewer people than in the introductory phase of this business model.

      Pepople pay now, because it makes them look cool, but will they do it in the long run?

    8. Re:Would you buy a Metallica online album...? by Splab · · Score: 5, Funny

      It'd be kinda like ozzy remixing a britney spears song.


      Now that I would pay for.
    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?

  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. Here's an idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll set up a site allowing Metallica to pay me what they feel necessary to listen to their music.

  5. Fuck Metallica by 72beetle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not only wouldn't I participate in a 'pay what you like' scenario with Metallica because of their previous position, but their music just flat out sucks now.

    --
    -Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
  6. David Bowie Knows What's Up by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Would you buy a Metallica online album despite their former views? You've got to remember that they tried to stand up and speak for all musicians. Some of the other musicians had completely opposite views though. So in my eyes what they did was worse than giving the RIAA justification for suing the hell out of people, it was also misrepresentation.

    I will never buy a Metallica album. I have never owned and never will own any Metallica song or album legally or illegally. The irony is that I've been in a few cover bands (in high school mostly) and can play "Enter Sandman" and all that crap. Like many artists, I'm not a big fan of their music. Unlike many artists, I do not agree with their views in regards to music distribution.

    In 2002, Slashdot ran a story on what David Bowie saw in the future of music and the music industry. Now there's somebody who I both respect and love musically. His vision was no copyright, albums are free to download, very inexpensive to buy and the artists rake in mad cash through concerts and tours. Don't get me wrong, he used a tone that said it was going to be embraced by some artists and hated by others:

    "I don't even know why I would want to be on a label in a few years, because I don't think it's going to work by labels and by distribution systems in the same way. The absolute transformation of everything that we ever thought about music will take place within 10 years, and nothing is going to be able to stop it. I see absolutely no point in pretending that it's not going to happen. I'm fully confident that copyright, for instance, will no longer exist in 10 years, and authorship and intellectual property is in for such a bashing."

    "Music itself is going to become like running water or electricity. So it's like, just take advantage of these last few years because none of this is ever going to happen again. You'd better be prepared for doing a lot of touring because that's really the only unique situation that's going to be left. It's terribly exciting. But on the other hand it doesn't matter if you think it's exciting or not; it's what's going to happen." If Metallica wants me to listen to their music, they need to change their attitude toward music distribution. On top of that, they need to try to undo what they did. They need to apologize, speak out against the RIAA from now on, seek new channels of distribution, promote new bands other than themselves that use these channels and help out people who are being sued by the RIAA by providing legal fees so those people stand a chance. Asking a lot, I know, but Metallica did a lot to set us back in what Bowie was talking about as the inevitable end state.

    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."
    --
    My work here is dung.
  7. Re:Buying a Metallica album?! by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yeah! How dare they want to keep an unfinished song from being heard by everyone in the world?

    As I recall it, every single artist that bitched about Napster did so AFTER an unfinished, "still working on it", "no, you can't hear it mom" track was thrown up on Napster.

    And everyone I knew who used Napster, or its equivalents, did so because they were too cheap to bother buying music. Sorry, Napster's not even close to the moral standing the GPL has.

  8. Would I ?!? by UnixUnix · · Score: 5, Funny
    NO!

    They are "unforgiven" :-))

  9. 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.

  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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