Pirate Bay Promotion Attracts Over 5000 Artists

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pirate Bay Promotion Attracts Over 5000 Artists

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday April 5, 2012 @11:08AM from the do-it-yourself-promotion dept.

redletterdave writes "While the movie and music industries would have you think that torrents are a threat to their business, thousands of independent artists heartily disagree. That's why more than 5,000 musicians, actors, writers, filmmakers and artists have signed up to be promoted by The Pirate Bay, the world's largest torrent site. Earlier this year, following the seizures of many popular file-sharing domains like MegaUpload, The Pirate Bay introduced a new promotion platform for artists called 'The Promo Bay,' which let independent artists reach tens of millions of people by offering favorable advertising spots on the The Pirate Bay's homepage. The response to The Pirate Bay's promotion platform has been overwhelming: the company announced on Thursday that it has already received more than 5,000 applications, and has managed to be a quality platform for driving significant interest to independent artists."

124 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Confused by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:13 · Score: 1

How does the RIA etc collect the royalties for those poor starving artists?
1. Re:Confused by Gription · 2012-04-05 19:58 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  This kind of points out why the RIAA and the MPAA (who are incestuous siblings) will now have to seriously up the ante in their attacks on the Pirate Bay.
  There isn't any way that they can allow competition in a market that their cartel controls. Dammit!!! They paid good money for their monopoly so their senators better get cracking to wipe them out.
2. Re:Confused by b4dc0d3r · 2012-04-06 07:16 · Score: 2
  
  This will be interesting in the same way that Microsoft supporting Apple was interesting. Microsoft reportedly wanted to appear to have competition, so it supported a flailing Apple. Microsoft was being scrutinized from about 1990, and the formal case was 1998, so $150 Million in support plus development on the platform certainly could have been solely to keep the anti-trust investigators happy.
  Attacking YouTube as a haven for piracy, and then shutting down a viable self-publishing model would certainly be anti-competitive. And since these are not individual companies, but instead collectives, this might form the basis of a good RICO style collusion investigation. At some point, the reach of their campaign contributions has to stop as they run afoul of unelected officials.
3. Re:Confused by Shagg · 2012-04-06 07:52 · Score: 2
  
  Exactly, this is the REAL threat that filesharing represents to the RIAA/MPAA, and why they're terrified. It has nothing to do with "piracy" and everything to do with competition to their monopoly distribution model.
  
  --
  Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
Evolve or die by dubbreak · 2012-04-05 11:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

The artists have spoken, the consumers have spoken the music industry is evolving. Either the RIAA and big music evolve with the rest of the industry or face inevitable extinction.

--
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
1. Re:Evolve or die by ohnocitizen · 2012-04-05 11:23 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Imagine if instead of the pirate bay running this, the music labels were. "We've decided to stop paying artists entirely, that is up to them. From now on we expect them to largely give their work away for free, and will offer some advertising for the first 5000 to sign up". I wonder how we'd react?
  
  If you remove issues drm and convenience, I don't think the people left who still pirate are potential customers. So I don't think anything is really being stolen. That said, this has to feel a bit uncomfortable for artists.
  
  And I wonder what is meant by "evolution". Digital distribution free of drm? Giving away product for free on purpose? Swapping payment for "exposure"?
2. Re:Evolve or die by lorenlal · 2012-04-05 11:31 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I am not a musician - But my understanding is that musicians and bands make most of their money by touring. If that is indeed the case, then advertising with TPB, getting exposure, and (hopefully) a large fan base actually ends up being a great investment. I'd expect that this is even more so for indies, since they really don't get the benefit of the distribution channels of big label artists.
  Plus, concert goers are pretty likely to buy the album. If they're actually good, chances are there are plenty of people who will go and support them by buying music on the various digital outlets too. The Pirate Bay could be doing a lot of good for these artists.
3. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  Digitized music stopped being a "product" when P2P took root. It is just advertising, now. The product is the live show, and the willingness to pay for a digitized version of a music is entirely the consumer's prerogative.
4. Re:Evolve or die by stms · 2012-04-05 11:35 · Score: 2
  
  Exposure is everything in entertainment industry. A sold out concert tour can rake in money in the 100-200 million dollar range. So if album sales were effectively zero popular artist could still be millionaires.
5. Re:Evolve or die by Terrasque · 2012-04-05 11:38 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  "We've decided to stop paying artists entirely, that is up to them."
  As far as I understand things, they're largely there already..
  * Courtney Love does the math
  * The Problem With Music by Steve Albini
  
  --
  It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
6. Re:Evolve or die by Eponymous+Hero · 2012-04-05 11:42 · Score: 1
  
  the music labels have a different business model than the pirate bay, and therefore treat the artists differently. if the music labels started behaving like the pirate bay, they would cease to be music labels, and we could all finally get on with our lives. there's so many DIY alternatives to music labels that they have become obsolete -- that's what they are fighting tooth and nail to stop. not even distribution is a concern anymore. royalties were paid after useful services were rendered to the artists, but now the RIAA is just the MAFIAA skimming profits off others' works. music labels are no longer useful.
  
  i've said this many times in many different forums: music labels used to nurture artists and sign (arguably) good ones due to one simple fact: the technology to produce and edit recordings was very expensive. the high quality recording tape was expensive, and editing it (like old school film editing: chop and paste) took expertise. labels nurtured artists because they wanted high quality output, which in turn reduced the number of takes it took to lay down a track. then things went digital. no more expensive tape. no more high-skilled labor to edit (and by that i mean surgeon-like precision with the cutting, as opposed to learning a program).
  
  now labels can churn and burn any sucker off the street, slap autotune on it and call it a day. 50,000 takes? whatevs. and that itself has saturated the market with more artist choices than people can afford in the old model, with the majority of them not being worth the cost of the cd/download. there's only X amount of total dollars among every listener to be spent. the more artists, the less each of them can make in this environment.
  
  artists no longer nurtured are no longer artists, they are revolving door employees. they get hired and fired like mcdonald's mcjob-ers. in this kind of environment where the recording process itself has little value, it makes more sense to give away the music and nurture the live performance -- the only thing left you can point to and say, that's a real artist. labels are just simply obsolete. the recorded music itself has really just become an ad for the performance. the only other money left to be made is from licensing for things like movies and commercials, and that leaves out the average consumer and focuses on big businesses who can afford the licensing. as it should be.
  
  --
  insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
7. Re:Evolve or die by dubbreak · 2012-04-05 11:44 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Did you even read the summary? I know RTFA is frowned upon, but 5000 artists selected this as a way to get their music out.
  
  Since pretty any person can now record their own music with quite high quality with minimal investment (which used to be limited to studios with many thousands of $$ invested in equipment) we are finding more and more free music. And it makes sense. Music is about creativity and sharing. If you want to get your music out there how do you? You might luck out with getting local radio play, but the internet is now the definitive way to get yourself noticed. You aren't going to get noticed charging for people to listen to you.
  
  All the new music I discover is either:
  1. found online
  2. through friends (which discovered it one of these two ways.. yay recursion)
  
  Once I hear about a band what do I do? I download some music via p2p, bittorrent, off their site.. some free medium. IF I like it and want to listen to it long term I buy (vinyl which usually comes with high quality mp3 rips as well) and add it to my collection. If they are in town I'd buy a ticket to a show. I'll probably subscribe to their youtube channel to watch new videos and hear new releases (which generates some add revenue) and if singles come out I like and need now I'll buy via iTunes or similar. The key is I need a free avenue for me to move into any payment type scenario or I'm not interested.
  
  Look at how well the 'pay what you want' model has worked for music and games. It's impressive. People want to reward others for their creativity but also want low risk. Yes there will be leaches in the system, but it all works out in the end. I don't endlessly complain about people on welfare because of my tax bracket.
  
  Kickstarter is a great example of how people want to support creativity but want low risk. I just discovered it a few months ago and have already supported 2 projects. The best part is you aren't limited to some kind of MSRP (kickstarter and pay-what-you-want). If you really like what someone is doing you can support them as much as you want.
  
  I honestly believe people want to reward others for their creativity, but it seems quite honestly a heavy fisted middle man (such as the US record industry) isn't required to do that. The music industry used to offer exposure. That's what a record label bought you (with the huge cut they take in sales). Instead of taking a cut of future sales the Pirate bay is offering exposure for free. I think it's a huge win for artists.
  
  --
  "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
8. Re:Evolve or die by GmExtremacy · 2012-04-05 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  Unsuccessful artists whose music nobody was stealing anyway have spoken
  I didn't know that theft of music (I'm guessing you meant CDs or something?) had become prevalent.
9. Re:Evolve or die by marcosdumay · 2012-04-05 11:50 · Score: 1
  
  "We've decided to stop paying artists entirely, that is up to them. From now on we expect them to largely give their work away for free, and will offer some advertising for the first 5000 to sign up"
  It is more like "We offer advertizing services, you can hire us, 5000 artits already did". By the way, advertizing is the only remaining activity of the labels, thus it would be just another channel.
  
  --
  Rethinking email
10. Re:Evolve or die by PopeRatzo · 2012-04-05 11:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That said, this has to feel a bit uncomfortable for artists.
  
  Oh yeah. It makes them so uncomfortable that 5000 of them rushed to sign up with a web site that has been declared Public Enemy No 1 by the entertainment conglomerates, the RIAA, the MPAA and a whole bunch of sovereign nations.
  Yeah. Real uncomfortable, they must be.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
11. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 12:01 · Score: 0
  
  Extinction no... merely reorganization and a name change to help people forget that the same people are in charge... The propaganda machine must endure no matter what the costs. Indie artists will be silenced by the licensing bureaucracy (evil bit)
12. Re:Evolve or die by dubbreak · 2012-04-05 12:06 · Score: 4, Interesting
  The music industry used to offer exposure. That's what a record label bought you (with the huge cut they take in sales). Instead of taking a cut of future sales the Pirate bay is offering exposure for free. I think it's a huge win for artists.
  I'd like to correct myself. The music industry offered a few things to artists (not just exposure) in exchange for a hefty cut of all sales:
  
  Exposure (as mentioned before)
  
  Recording facilities/expenses
  
  Distribution
  
  With the internet and modern tech these are all irrelevant. Bands can get exposure online through various avenues online. Recording can be done in a basement. Distribution is trivial if online and there are services for physical distribution that don't take anywhere near the cut the labels do.
  --
  "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
13. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 12:07 · Score: 0
  
  Christ. I had no idea Courtney Love had a brain.
14. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 12:09 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  In fairness they make most of their money off of touring because the record companies with their various accounting practices and lop-sided contracts get all the profit from music sales. It doesn't have to be that way but yes independents giving away music build an audience is smart.
15. Re:Evolve or die by PopeRatzo · 2012-04-05 12:11 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Exposure is everything in entertainment industry. A sold out concert tour can rake in money in the 100-200 million dollar range. So if album sales were effectively zero popular artist could still be millionaires.
  You don't have to be a "popular artist" to make good money, if you are capable of creative thought and care about your work and your audience.
  I've made a portion of my income as a professional musician for just over 25 years, and the past 5 have been by far the most lucrative. It's never been my main source of income, but I could live comfortably on it (though I probably wouldn't be able to bankroll my daughter's grad school).
  I have quite a few friends who have very successful music careers. They're not mega-platinum, rolling in dough guys, but they've got health insurance and some have 401k accounts. Some make money from traditional channels, CD releases, etc, but most have found alternative income streams from their music, and all make a good chunk from public performance. About 8 years ago, I started writing and producing music on commission, the way some artists and sculptors work. It was a goofy idea when I started, but it's turned out well. When I sell a piece in this manner, I sell the rights as well. The commissioner can do whatever they want with the recorded piece, sell it, duplicate it, destroy it. In some cases, I don't keep even a copy for myself in final form (though with digitally produced and recorded music, keeping the parts is the same thing as keeping the whole, since all the information I need to create an exact duplicate of the final product is saved). The only thing I retain is attribution, so the only thing the commissioner cannot do is say he made it. I'm experimenting with various digital watermarking, to insure I maintain the attribution for music that is distributed beyond just a few people, but I haven't found exactly what I'm looking for in that regard, yet. I'm sure I will eventually.
  The point is, artists are supposed to be innovators. The world for artists is changing today as it has changed several times in modern history. If they innovate, have integrity, and care about their audience, they'll do OK.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
16. Re:Evolve or die by GmExtremacy · 2012-04-05 12:12 · Score: 1
  
  So I don't think anything is really being stolen.
  It's not even possible to steal (in the literal sense of the word) potential profit, anyway.
17. Re:Evolve or die by fooslacker · 2012-04-05 12:15 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Since they made them available at an affordable price and without DRM I've bought more in the last year than in the last 10 before that combined. Evolve doesn't mean the model you espouse above with the live show being the product is the only viable one. Where you are correct however is that the old model of the record company taking the majority of risks and relying on 3 mega stars to prop up 3000 busts and trying to recreate the same success over and over again by mimicry of past successful artists is no longer viable since today's artists don't need major labels to front the costs of getting in the studio and getting a record/tape/cd pressed. The real key to finally putting a nail in big music's coffin is open new radio like distribution channels where music can be experienced for the first time for free and that is happening slowly through things like pandora and spotify. Hopefully, it will continue.
18. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 12:35 · Score: 0
  
  It was Kurt Cobain who blew out his brain...
19. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 12:40 · Score: 0
  
  I wonder how we'd react?
  
  For those who are already at the top, they'd react negatively.
  For those who are on the bottom, they'd react positively.
  The one benefit of publishers should be as gatekeepers for good content. But, as time passed, they became not only gatekeepers, but arbiters of what is good and what is bad.
  Perhaps we'll move back to a pre-industry style of art, funded by donations and patrons who enjoy it rather than by the handouts of those at the top.
20. Re:Evolve or die by SolitaryMan · 2012-04-05 12:55 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I'd say that this is what labels and artists would have to live with, eventually.
  The problem with their existing business model is that they too used to making megabucks by writing one so-so song, promoting the hell out of it on every music station and making money on selling the whole albums with this song.
  First hit they took is iTunes starting to sell songs, rather than albums. Remember how they were screaming?
  The next hit comes slowly, yet painfully: the costs of producing music are dropping and thus fewer and fewer artists need middle-men for this. It is easy to reach the whole funbase via internet. Thus, making music becomes not just an activity for elites, but for everybody. Eventually, this will drive profits of the top artists down too, because competition increases rapidly. This also means that the average *quality* of music would increase too, thus making it harder for top labels to make money on Britney Spears kind of crap.
  Top labels have a good formula for taking average music and selling it big. They don't have a formula for making good music, and this is their main problem.
  
  --
  May Peace Prevail On Earth
21. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 13:09 · Score: 0
  
  Asociación de Industria Discográfica de Estados Unidos) es una asociación estadounidense que representa a la mayor parte de las compañías disqueras y es la responsable de la certificación de ventas discográficas en Estados Unidos. Sus miembros principalmente son las compañías disqueras y los distribuidores discográficos, que según datos propios de la RIAA "crean, producen y distribuyen aproximadamente el 85% de todas las producciones sonoras producidas y vendidas en los Estados Unidos.
22. Re:Evolve or die by skine · 2012-04-05 13:29 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Bands, both established and new, are realizing that it's possible to exist without a record label. And in many cases, it's in their best interest to get away from their label.
  One of my favorite bands is Streetlight Manifesto.
  From their website:
  
  We’re writing today to ask you to please boycott all Streetlight related items by not purchasing any of our records or merchandise from Victory’s website, any traditional CD stores, online third party retailers or any digital distribution service (iTunes, Amazon etc). Victory has a long-time reputation of pocketing all of the proceeds from a band’s music and merch, with shady accounting and generally bully-ish behavior. If you want to support Streetlight, our music and our ability to tour and continue to release music, please make all SM related purchases from our own webstore, The RISC Store (www.riscstore.com), or come out to a show and buy a shirt or cd from us directly. In regards to getting the music we make, you can buy directly from us, or, alternately, we’re sure you can find a way to get the tunes onto your computer that may not be, ahem, traditional Speaking a Bit metaphorically, there is a Torrent of methods to accomplish this, and Google is your always loyal friend
23. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 13:34 · Score: 0
  
  ROTFLMAO, you mean the "artists" who make a living doing something else. Of course you could have tens of thousand of rejected talent show "artists".
  Oh, and dont haul out the one or two examples where someone has succeeded otherwise you would also have to accept we should all quit our jobs and play golf because of the people who have made millions doing this too, or the hundreds of people who have become millionaires playing lotteries.
24. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 13:35 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, imagine. All those artists who are now forced to have "real jobs" just like everyone else. How dare they make money.
25. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 13:40 · Score: 0
  
  Lets see, spend hundreds of dollars travelling/Accommodation/tickets for a one off show (if you can get a ticket), or spends $20 buying the album which I can listen to as often as I like. Once concert I would have like to have gone to would have costs me about $1000 all up.
  Now if I have just spent hundreds going to a concert I would feel cheated if I was then expected to BUY the album rather than getting it for FREE like everyone else.
  Personally, the current system works well for both me AND the artists.
26. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  The point is, if people can get the music for free then their expectation of what you as an artist/performer/creator will also fall.
  You comment about "water marking" has shown that you KNOW people will pay nothing if the can, and you want to have a method
  to force them to pay.
  Artists are highly skilled, have taken years to learn their trade, so please explain why they should not earn good money doing something others can't, you know like doctors, lawyers, accountants. They make money because you can not pirate what they do, its not that their value to society is actually any higher.
27. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 14:22 · Score: 0
  
  Where you are correct however is that the old model of the record company taking the majority of risks and relying on 3 mega stars to prop up 3000 busts..
  Yeah, real risky business when you've got the market all sewn up. It isn't market risk, it's a business manouver; it'smarket over-saturation. Like a drug lord who throws 50 tons of cocaine at the border, knowing that only a portion gets through, and is enough to sustain the market until the next shipment. No one else gets *into* the market, because demand is fully saturated at every level, and any flavour that yields profit is pushed in the next round of market over-saturation. Thge rest of the fodder just fills in any cracks to keep the niche air-tight.
  This isn't some benevolent institution looking to serve artists, it's a small, cutthroat group of businessmen looking to make sure no one else gets a piece of the action, unless they allow it.
28. Re:Evolve or die by veganboyjosh · 2012-04-05 15:14 · Score: 1
  
  To be fair, Victory has a history of being shitty to artists. One of my friends put it simply "bands who sign to Victory in this day and age have it coming."
29. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 15:58 · Score: 0
  
  I've been waiting for someone to set up a website that will allow people to click a button to donate money directly to an artist. If the artist gets money for the music you download, wouldn't that kind of cut the legs out from under the RIAA?
30. Re:Evolve or die by rewarp · 2012-04-05 16:27 · Score: 1
  
  I knew it was pretty bad, but reading this just put me off buying any works of art unless I know every single penny I am spending goes directly to the artist or is under the artist's control.
  
  --
  In adding a sig, for no other reason, than for aesthetics.
31. Re:Evolve or die by PopeRatzo · 2012-04-05 16:29 · Score: 1
  
  The point is, if people can get the music for free then their expectation of what you as an artist/performer/creator will also fall.
  Nonsense. This is provably false.
  
  You comment about "water marking" has shown that you KNOW people will pay nothing if the can, and you want to have a method
  to force them to pay.
  Not at all, the music I want to watermark has already been sold. I just want people to be able to identify it as genuinely mine and I don't want anyone else claiming credit, since I don't have, nor do I want, control of how it is distributed. I've sold those rights already. All I'm looking for is attribution.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
32. Re:Evolve or die by jamstar7 · 2012-04-05 16:48 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, she has a brain alright. Problem is, she's done so much drugs that it's taken a couple years for her to sober up after she stopped taking them. Some time during that process, her brain actually rebooted.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
33. Re:Evolve or die by BenJCarter · 2012-04-05 16:53 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I am not a musician - But my understanding is that musicians and bands make most of their money by touring.
  I met a Rock Star, once. He hit it big in the late 80's, and is still Rockin'. Being the network geek that I am, the subject of online distribution and piracy came up. In his words, "He used to tour to promote albums, now he uses singles and albums promote tours."
  
  Perhaps Pirate Bay's business model may have a shot. I can certainly think of at least one industry just begging for more creative destruction...
  
  --
  For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. - Publius
34. Re:Evolve or die by jamstar7 · 2012-04-05 17:11 · Score: 2
  
  I'd like to correct myself. The music industry offered a few things to artists (not just exposure) in exchange for a hefty cut of all sales:
  
  Exposure (as mentioned before)
  Recording facilities/expenses
  Distribution
  
  Sure they supplied those services. Then they turned around and made the artists pay for every penny of it. 'XYZ Records', for instance, signs a contract to 'XYZ Recording Studio' to record the album, 'XYZ Distribution' to distribute the album, another contract with 'XYZ Advertising' to advertise it, and 'XYZ Publishing', who 'bought the rights' to the song. What they don't tell the artists is, XYZ Publishing, XYZ Advertising, XYZ Studios and XYZ Distribution are wholely owned by XYZ Records, and do business with nobody else. So, they launder their profits through wholey owned subsidaries, and the artists are clueless. 'Just the cost of doing business'...
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
35. Re:Evolve or die by jamstar7 · 2012-04-05 17:14 · Score: 1
  
  So I don't think anything is really being stolen.
  It's not even possible to steal (in the literal sense of the word) potential profit, anyway.
  The Clinton Administration once wanted to tax people on potential income until somebody pointed out to Hillary that she'd have to pay a shitpile of money due to her law degree even though she was masquarading as 'a simple housewife'.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
36. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 19:12 · Score: 1
  
  They do, however when you sign a record deal it is more or less a loan, if you spend that contract money and do not make any money for the company they will demand or take everything back, you pretty much give the copyrights to ""your"" music as well by signing.
  They make money from album sales, interviews, Merchandising (shirts, posters, music books, ect..)
  Independent artists, are the other reason why the music and movie industry is dying off, and I hope they get destroyed soon. Your seeing Independent Artists like a wildfire they are all over you could not say that 10-20 years ago. I would much rather watch a Independent Movie then the over bloated shit the major studios come out with, there is too much bullshit. Same with Music it is much more raw..
37. Re:Evolve or die by Bing+Tsher+E · 2012-04-05 19:53 · Score: 1
  
  He shouldn't have worded it that way.
  Unsuccessful artists whose music nobody wants have spoken.
38. Re:Evolve or die by cyber-vandal · 2012-04-05 20:35 · Score: 1
  
  There used to be a website quite a few years ago where you could do that. I can't find it anywhere though.
39. Re:Evolve or die by Intrepid+imaginaut · 2012-04-05 21:22 · Score: 1
  
  So what, it doesn't mean that there aren't a huge number of relatively talented people who will at last get on the global stage and be heard. This is the democratization of music my friend, the end of the monolithic model. Of those 5000, a couple of hundred decent ones will emerge, and of those, a couple of dozen will make it big, without the intervention of the record companies.
40. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 21:58 · Score: 0
  
  my understanding is that musicians and bands make most of their money by touring.
  It really depends.
  If you're selling directly (or through a site like Bandcamp) you'll make more money from selling a copy of the album than from selling a ticket for a live performance, which carries more expenses for the musician.
  It's only when you sell albums through a shitty contract with a (major) label that you usually don't see much money.
  This should be common sense, but I want to point it out because the "I won't buy the album, because the band doesn't make money from that anyway - but I might go to their concert if they happen to stop by my house" is an excuse I see way too often.
41. Re:Evolve or die by reub2000 · 2012-04-05 22:13 · Score: 1
  
  And the pirate bay is approving the work they promote based on quality, so yeah, this seems like an excellent tool to get the word out for those with real talent.
42. Re:Evolve or die by Ash-Fox · 2012-04-05 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  The artists have spoken
  It's only over 5000, most big publishers have more artists than that. This isn't even close to a significant majority of artists yet.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
43. Re:Evolve or die by Ash-Fox · 2012-04-05 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  I've been waiting for someone to set up a website that will allow people to click a button to donate money directly to an artist.
  It's already existed and died out due to lack of popularity.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
44. Re:Evolve or die by CAPSLOCK2000 · 2012-04-05 23:22 · Score: 1
  
  Imagine if instead of the pirate bay running this, the music labels were. "We've decided to stop paying artists entirely, that is up to them. From now on we expect them to largely give their work away for free, and will offer some advertising for the first 5000 to sign up". I wonder how we'd react?
  For many musicians that has been the case for decades. They need(ed) the companies to distribute and promote their work but that leaves so little money for the artists that many are effectively giving their work away for free. Sure, in return they get promotion and attention, but isn't that exactly what the Piratebay is doing, but without the overhead?
45. Re:Evolve or die by Ash-Fox · 2012-04-05 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  and we could all finally get on with our lives.
  What the hell are you talking about? The music industry isn't stopping me from getting on with my life.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
46. Re:Evolve or die by trancemission · 2012-04-06 00:25 · Score: 2
  
  To be fair, $recordCompany has a history of being shitty to artists.
  
  FTFY
47. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 00:33 · Score: 0
  
  Extinction never felt so good.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWvIqZL0wNQ
48. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 01:09 · Score: 0, Informative
  
  Only the really big acts make significant PROFIT from touring. Mid-size and lower acts barely break even, and do it as a marketing tool.
  And yes, I manage a band (you may even have heard of them), and I DO know what I'm talking about.
49. Re:Evolve or die by Man+Eating+Duck · 2012-04-06 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  Plus, concert goers are pretty likely to buy the album. If they're actually good, chances are there are plenty of people who will go and support them by buying music on the various digital outlets too. The Pirate Bay could be doing a lot of good for these artists.
  Here is what you do if you discover a new artist and they are going to play in your area: *don't* buy the CD from the store. The band literally makes only pennies from a CD sold in stores, if that. Many have draconian contracts in which they're obliged to "reimburse" the record company for heaps of semi-fictitious costs related to services rendered, leaving them with *nothing* until they've sold a huge amount of albums.
  Instead, listen to them through Spotify, download them or whatever, buy a ticket for the gig, and get their albums from the merch boot. You're often allowed to tip them as well if you feel generous. From this the band can get as much as 2/3 or more of the asking price, that's the proper way to support the artist, and you'll have a great experience to boot. Oh, and grab a shirt as well while you're there :)
  
  --
  Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
50. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 01:23 · Score: 0
  
  Some of my favorite bands are indy artists, too.
  Natalie Walker has been a favorite of mine since she fronted the trip-hop band Daughter Darling. Her solo stuff is more in the down-tempo electronica realm, but I think she has done great on her own. Her music gets featured on TV shows and films all the time, but most people don't recognize it because it is not as heavily promoted as a big-label artist.
51. Re:Evolve or die by jcaldwel · 2012-04-06 01:57 · Score: 2
  
  You comment about "water marking" has shown that you KNOW people will pay nothing if the can, and you want to have a method to force them to pay.
  Some people may pay nothing if they can. I recall Radiohead's album In Rainbows was released under a "pay what you want" program. In this case, "what you want" includes free. According to the band, most people paid normal retail price for it.
52. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 03:37 · Score: 0
  
  This is where rappers have a good thing going... people expect them to announce who they and their friends are within the track, so the watermark is blatant and incorporated into the work.
  As you were saying earlier about innovation, that might be the answer to watermarking. A signature instrument or rhythm tastefully included in the track as a signature, like Chuck Berry.
53. Re:Evolve or die by Eponymous+Hero · 2012-04-06 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  the hell i'm talking about is the hell people go through fighting RIAA litigation and discussing moot topics like the obsolescence of the recording industry. have some coffee first. jesus christ
  
  --
  insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
54. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 04:28 · Score: 0
  
  Shut it.
55. Re:Evolve or die by painandgreed · 2012-04-06 05:17 · Score: 1
  
  I am not a musician - But my understanding is that musicians and bands make most of their money by touring.
  I'm not a musician either, but I know a few of them and have heard them talking to their musician friends. Touring combined with product sales probably does out weigh the money from straight records sales via other avenues, however, I've heard them say that "any attempt to look at the money making side of music as anything other than licencing, is just delusion". Simply put, that the money involved in licensing a song to a game, commercial, movies, etc far outweighs the money involved in touring and related product sales. Of course, the conversation went on into how many musicians don't set things up to do that, and how hard it is to get that money (instead of a studio), but that's where the money is.
56. Re:Evolve or die by Shagg · 2012-04-06 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  "We've decided to stop paying artists entirely, that is up to them. From now on we expect them to largely give their work away for free, and will offer some advertising for the first 5000 to sign up".
  I thought that's how the RIAA already does it.
  
  --
  Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
57. Re:Evolve or die by PopeRatzo · 2012-04-06 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  This is where rappers have a good thing going... people expect them to announce who they and their friends are within the track, so the watermark is blatant and incorporated into the work.
  Oh, I absolutely thought a lot about that. I've been using some carefully camouflaged audio watermarking, containing me saying my name or something else identifiable, but I don't know how that's going to survive resampling and other digital format changes.
  Still, though, I would like to see something inaudible that would identify it as my work.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
58. Re:Evolve or die by Thing+1 · 2012-04-06 10:28 · Score: 1
  
  What the hell are you talking about? The music industry isn't stopping me from getting on with my life.
  It is if you want to create, or derive enjoyment from, derivative works from works that were created 29 years ago. (Currently, it's "...from works that were published after 1923".)
  
  --
  I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
59. Re:Evolve or die by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 15:36 · Score: 0
  
  Book authors and even actors have it a better than musicians. Still not a massive portion of the income from publication but the publisher does take somewhat more risk on new authors than the record companies. Actors have their union that, whatever you think of it and it's tactics, has kept them from being chewed to paste by Hollywood.
60. Re:Evolve or die by skine · 2012-04-07 20:22 · Score: 1
  
  Not all record companies are horrible. In fact, there are quite a few good companies out there.
  Fat Wreck Chords, Asian Man, Saddle Creek and Suburban Home are just a few that come to mind.
  The real difference is that a good record company works on behalf of the band, while a bad one works only for their own profit.
Indie music has opened up my library. by Beardo+the+Bearded · 2012-04-05 11:18 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'm listening right now to a PB song: Unite by Djjage
I teach spin classes and use almost all indie rock and electro rock. Every time, people ask me for the artists and comment on how good the music is.
Fuck the labels, all of them. They're useless and intolerant and dangerous. Actually, let's not fuck them. I like my dick to not fall off.

--

---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
1. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:26 · Score: 1
  
  cdbaby has done more for widening my horizons than just about anything else. Instead of listening to the same stuff, I pop over and grab a few of their $5 cds at random. Since then, I've gotten into Choro, Samba, "happy hardcore" (wtf is that even mean?) Techno, Jazz... there's a lot out there.
  I won't lie and say I don't still pull out my Meatloaf albums every once in a while, though ;)
2. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by Ziekheid · 2012-04-05 11:39 · Score: 1
  
  Be careful, you're starting to sound like a hipster there..
3. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by xevioso · 2012-04-05 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  Awesome! I love Happy Hardcore. I have literally hundreds of albums. Great stuff to dance to. I will have to check out cdbaby.
4. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by Beardo+the+Bearded · 2012-04-05 13:36 · Score: 1
  
  Oh yeah, that was pretty close. Uh... as long as the music sounds good and has a catchy beat.
  And I like my glasses to look good.
  
  --
  
  ---
  ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
5. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by 0111+1110 · 2012-04-05 17:46 · Score: 0
  
  Hand in your geek card. You're not allowed to dance. And if you try you should be laughed at. I gave up trying to dance after the first girl who laughed at my pathetic attempts.
  
  --
  Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
6. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by Ash-Fox · 2012-04-05 23:43 · Score: 1
  
  Fuck the labels, all of them. They're useless and intolerant and dangerous. Actually, let's not fuck them. I like my dick to not fall off.
  I prefer mind.in.a.box, Daft Punk and Lady Gaga to this to be honest.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
7. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 00:33 · Score: 0
  
  The nice thing about happy hardcore (it was huge here in the Netherlands once, where it originated), is that you are supposed to look silly while dancing to it.
8. Re:Indie music has opened up my library. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 01:57 · Score: 0
  
  See? One more reason you should be gay. There's no pressure when dancing with girls, so you can laugh with them when you fuck up.
  The secret is that almost everyone is bad at dancing. Some people just look good anyway, but the only thing that really matters is if you're enjoying yourself.
  You might be right about geeks not dancing, but it's refusing to dance that makes you a geek, not being bad at it.
And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by VinylRecords · 2012-04-05 11:22 · Score: 1

Will they remove the torrents of said artist's work?
1. Re:And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:26 · Score: 0
  
  The said artist has to provide his work as a torrent.
2. Re:And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by vux984 · 2012-04-05 11:38 · Score: 1
  
  The said artist has to provide his work as a torrent
  No they don't. I'm pretty sure the Metallica torrents weren't provided by Metallica...
3. Re:And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by vux984 · 2012-04-05 11:43 · Score: 1
  
  And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? Will they remove the torrents of said artist's work?
  I see what you did there; but TPB is acting as a search engine.
  If an artist wants prominence they can pay to adertise on google.
  But if an artist doesn't want to be on google? So what...?
  Does google or any other search engine remove links to sites containing the artists marterials if the artist objects?
  Nope.
4. Re:And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:45 · Score: 0
  
  I was referring to the promoted artists.
5. Re:And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by vux984 · 2012-04-05 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  I was referring to the promoted artists.
  Yes, but were you referring to the torrents provided by the promoted artists... or any torrent provided by anyone else of the artists work?
6. Re:And if an artist doesn't want to be on TPB? by Kalriath · 2012-04-05 12:25 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, yes, Google often does. They won't remove links that go to sites that don't contain the artist's materials.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
the pirate recording association by Pausanias · 2012-04-05 11:34 · Score: 1

It would be an incredibly delicious outcome if TPB managed to transform itself from an outlaw defender of freedom to the legal representative of talented young artists (at fair compensation to the artists)
I submitted by jordan314 · 2012-04-05 11:34 · Score: 5, Informative

I'm one of the 5000 artists that submitted to this campaign. All of the music on my page can be downloaded for free. For artists like me who have only dozens of listeners, the exposure is worth any potential loss of income. http://soundcloud.com/jordanbla
1. Re:I submitted by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:46 · Score: 0
  
  Indeed, when you have twenty customers, the chance to increase it to a thousand for no significant expenditure of resources on your part is worthwhile.
  Your exposure is limited. For somebody else, the calculations are different.
2. Re:I submitted by skine · 2012-04-05 13:34 · Score: 2
  
  And also, from hanging around friends who were in moderately successful local bands, they didn't put out CDs because they intended to make money. Sure, they made a buck or two each, but most of it was sold at cost.
  Aside from the boasting rights of saying "I made a CD!" it was all about spreading their music to people's friends who couldn't make it to the show.
3. Re:I submitted by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 23:30 · Score: 0
  
  For somebody else, the calculations are different.
  Is that a fact, now? I would be slightly more cautious and say that the calculations might be different, for the somebody else you're referring to. I can certainly imagine the method in question to work quite well for a great many different "somebody else" rather than failing.
  Then again, I don't work for one of the traditional labels. I'm sure they would disagree with me.
4. Re:I submitted by amcdiarmid · 2012-04-06 03:28 · Score: 1
  
  Is this licensed? I just looked & first impressions are that it's remixes of popular songs...
An excellent use for torrents by Grayhand · 2012-04-05 11:37 · Score: 2

It puts the control back in the hands of the creator where it belongs. The only ones I can see against it would be the corporations that want to exploit the artists work. Wait until one of them signs with a major distributor and see how fast the demands to take the work down show up. It's when the corporations get involved that things fall apart. Artists are always looking for ways to promote themselves while corporations only care about how much money they would make off it.
blocked by court order by blackest_k · 2012-04-05 11:38 · Score: 4, Interesting

I would quite like to look at this site however, my isp says access is blocked by court order
so i can't access these independent artists legally...

On the 24 July 2009, an Order was made by the High Court requiring eircom to block or otherwise disable access by its subscribers to the website thePirateBay.org, its related domain names, IP addresses and URLs. The Court was satisfied that on the basis of the evidence presented by the record companies that the PirateBay website is a website that facilitates the exchange of copyrighted sound recordings without the consent of the copyright owners.
eircom recognises the legitimate rights of the owners of copyrighted material and believes that individuals who share or download copyrighted material without the authorisation or the permission of the copyright owner are acting illegally.
The Order further provides that should the PirateBay website content be legitimatised in the future, then eircom has liberty to apply to the Court to have the Order vacated and access to the PirateBay website enabled.
eircom in compliance with the Order has agreed that access to the website the PirateBay.org, its related domain names, IP addresses and URLs from the eircom network will be blocked indefinitely from the 1st September 2009.

is the content hosted at http://thepiratebay.se/promo enough to change anything?

--
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
1. Re:blocked by court order by CreamyG31337 · 2012-04-05 12:24 · Score: 1
  
  Probably you can just use another dns server like opendns or google, and as an added bonus your browsing will be faster too. google's are easy to remember: 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 If you have a router just stick it in there once and you're done.
2. Re:blocked by court order by blackest_k · 2012-04-05 18:32 · Score: 1
  
  Tried that and it doesn't work, of course there are "probably" other methods that do ,and they do not need spelling out as that could be seen as evidence that Eircom isn't obeying the order of the court and further measures might be enforced and I'd hate to be used as a proxy for the music industry.
  For most if not all Internet users in Ireland the block is effective. The terms of the order are interesting though. If the promotional material was on a separate domain name such as piratebaypromo.org or similar then it wouldn't be arguably part of an infringing site and the court ordered block should be able to be successfully reconsidered and narrowed in scope. Especially if Irish independent artists wanted to use the site to promote their work. As a brand the pirateba
  
  --
  Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
3. Re:blocked by court order by blackest_k · 2012-04-05 18:37 · Score: 1
  
  slipped up there but as a brand the piratebay is well known to millions and releasing music and other digital goods via the piratebay would be an excellent promotional tool for independent artists and authors.
  
  --
  Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
4. Re:blocked by court order by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 21:01 · Score: 0
  
  Move to Vodafone, it is cheaper and PB is not blocked.
5. Re:blocked by court order by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 21:03 · Score: 0
  
  Please setup a Tor node and start using it.
lets be honest.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 11:39 · Score: 0

Torrents aren't a threat to these independent artists because no one wants to download their stuff for free yet.
With TPB posted a compendium of published promos by gellenburg · 2012-04-05 11:56 · Score: 4, Interesting

I understand Promo Bay requests submitters list the top 3 countries, presumably for geo-targeting, but I wish the TPB folks would at least put up a web page that lists ALL of the published promos from every country.
I love discovering new music, and love listening to music from all over the World. I'd hate to not discover some awesome music from say Gabon or Tanzania or India because the submitter didn't put USA as one of the Countries.
Patent? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 12:44 · Score: 0

The Pirate Bay should also file for a patent in the US and other countries.
That way, when the tide shifts, and the RIAA realizes how much money is no longer flowing through their channels ... they can ask TPB nicely for a patent license.
Yeah. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 13:00 · Score: 0

While the movie and music industries would have you think that torrents are a threat to their business, thousands of independent artists heartily disagree.
To which the move and music industry giants said: "QED."
5000 artists? Anyone we know? by mapkinase · 2012-04-05 14:00 · Score: 1

5000 artists? Anyone we know?

--
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
1. Re:5000 artists? Anyone we know? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 15:47 · Score: 0
  
  5000 artists? Anyone we know?
  No, but we will soon.
2. Re:5000 artists? Anyone we know? by Ash-Fox · 2012-04-05 23:37 · Score: 1
  
  No, but we will soon.
  I doubt it, I don't even frequent the pirate bay.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
3. Re:5000 artists? Anyone we know? by hkmwbz · 2012-04-05 23:56 · Score: 1
  
  You don't have to. Others will.
  
  --
  Clever signature text goes here.
Another good site by future+assassin · 2012-04-05 14:10 · Score: 2

that I try to promote when I can is http://www.ektoplazm.com/ Tons of good free electronic music on there.

--
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
1. Re:Another good site by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-05 16:51 · Score: 0
  
  This is a good site indeed; though I am more of the Klaus Schulze/early Tangerine Dream/Jean-Michel Jarre/etc. denomination of electronic music, there is still some ambient that's good.
  What sets this apart from Jamendo.com is that you can download in lossless FLAC and I've just been doing so at about 3MB/sec.
  While streaming preview is not available (at least I didn't see it), it still sticks to the "album" metaphor, conveniently made available in archived format (for those who like checksums and original date/time stamps). This beats out having to download single tracks by hand.
2. Re:Another good site by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 02:03 · Score: 0
  
  I often visit http://kahvi.org/ for free relaxing electronic music albums.
  While I haven't seen FLACs there, they do have the files available as OGG (and MP3, for those who haven't got RockBox installed yet).
3. Re:Another good site by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 03:47 · Score: 0
  
  Thank you for sharing! I love Ektoplazm and have gotten all of my music there for the last couple years.
Kickstarter: paying for albums in advance by 0111+1110 · 2012-04-05 18:05 · Score: 2

It seems to me that with something like Kickstarter it would be pretty easy for any musical artist to get pre-funded as long as he has some good songs to post as enticement or already has some renown for making good music. I think this whole crowd-sourcing patronage idea is going to be game changing in a lot of artistic fields. A new paradigm for the digital age. Music, film, game development, fiction writing. Basically anything that can be represented digitally and distributed to people who make donations is a natural to be directly funded by fans or potential fans of the work. I would like to think that this could lead to a Tunguska level explosion of creativity, a new Renaissance for a new age as part-time artists with a day job can suddenly quit and work on their craft full time. Once they get funded piracy doesn't matter. Your loyal fans will still buy a legit copy and the free riders are irrelevant. The artists are happy because they are getting paid to do what they love. The fans are happy because their favorite artists are encouraged to exercise their talents as much as possible. And the bloodsucking middlemen are left out in the cold where they belong.

--
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
1. Re:Kickstarter: paying for albums in advance by cyber-vandal · 2012-04-05 20:40 · Score: 1
  
  Do you work in advertising?
I did this. Sort of. by Mike+Mentalist · 2012-04-05 19:23 · Score: 1

I uploaded all my own books to The Pirate Bay, Demonoid and ISOHunt a couple of months back. I created threads on the forums about it (including 4Chan...!)
It's impossible to say what the effect on sales was/is as they were so close to zero in the first place, but my website/blog has had an increase in the amount of people Googling for more info about my work.

--
I put my books on Amazon, Smashwords, Demonoid, ISOHunt and Pirate Bay. Search for 'Michael Cargill'
and sellaband by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 00:38 · Score: 0

https://www.sellaband.com/ have been doing this for years already . great site !
And a majority of the 5000... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 00:48 · Score: 0

...are nobodies.
1. Re:And a majority of the 5000... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 01:25 · Score: 0
  
  ..and will be blacklisted by the major labels, so they will never make enough money to give up their day jobs.
Death Knell of the Pirate Bay by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-06 02:30 · Score: 0

The Pirate Bay just signed their own Letters of Marque.
The MAFIAA will not simply stand idly-by and allow TPB to give "their" (MAFIAA's) ransomed property away for free *AND* allow TPB to gather future hostages (Indie Artists) away from the deplorable contracts of 'the industry'.
Whoop-de-doo 5000 Musicians! by Paul+Slocum · 2012-04-06 02:40 · Score: 2

Big "so what". Soundcloud has 10 million. There are way too musicians in general these days, and of course most of them suck and are desperate for publicity and will grab whatever they can get.

And as a musician, why the hell would I think that Piratebay of all places would be even a decent curator of music compared to the thousands of other places that offer the same kind of curated promotion? And finally, just couldn't feel that good over a place promoting my music through publicity earned by violating the copyrights of thousands more musicians.
1. Re:Whoop-de-doo 5000 Musicians! by ThatsMyNick · 2012-04-06 09:59 · Score: 1
  
  And as a musician, why the hell would I think that Piratebay of all places would be even a decent curator of music compared to the thousands of other places that offer the same kind of curated promotion? And finally, just couldn't feel that good over a place promoting my music through publicity earned by violating the copyrights of thousands more musicians.
  1) Because Piratebay is much more popular (atleast a few orders more popular), and has a real audience that enjoys music.
  2) And you prefer to give away music to the people for free, rather than giving away for free to the record companies.
  3) You dont agree with the current copyright laws and dont give a shit about them.
Re:Audio watermark for music by jsfs · 2012-04-06 16:56 · Score: 1

I'd look into adding a modulated carrier wave in either the sub- or supersonics and bury it a bit in the mix. If you use anything over 22kHz it probably won't survive any form of data compression unless it's really loud, but you also avoid nearly everyone's ears (except animals, the very occasional engineer, and perhaps babies). You might also consider using a specific element as an info medium, perhaps using a tambourine or a glock or toms to carry Morse code (or of course the high carrier could be used to transmit Morse, but that's much too simple and unlikely to be tampered with - DRM needs to be cumbersome and easily bypassed ;p).
Re:Audio watermark for music by PopeRatzo · 2012-04-07 01:45 · Score: 1

You might also consider using a specific element as an info medium, perhaps using a tambourine or a glock or toms to carry Morse code (or of course the high carrier could be used to transmit Morse, but that's much too simple and unlikely to be tampered with - DRM needs to be cumbersome and easily bypassed ;p).
Morse code. That's a good one. A lot of my music isn't rhythmic enough for a tambourine, but I could see slowing the morse code waay down.
I'm not really that worried about somebody trying to pretend that they made it instead of me, as much as I want to "sign" the work the way a painter signs a canvas. It was a joke when I started, but in the very small audience I have on the internet, there's already been some trading and selling of my stuff, and I'm happy about that.
Funny thing about the internet and art: Even a very small audience can sustain an artist. A few thousand people all over the world is unbelievably tiny, but if you can get 5000 of them to spend a buck now and then, it turns into some money. Now add the commission work and occasional live performance and one could make a nice living.
I've never approached it to make a living, which is probably why I enjoy it so much. I'd be doing it whether or not there was a buck in it.
"morse code..." You know, you've given me an idea. My wife is a mathematician and she's got a co-worker who's a number theorist. Maybe there is some series of numbers that I could translate into frequencies... OK.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
serious BS lame PR stunt... now TPB has Sold Out! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-07 04:16 · Score: 0

If the pirate bay really wants to help artists, how about helping them pay their rent? Why does the pirate bay get to make money from an artists work, but not the artist themselves? Even record labels pay artists and negotiate contracts, not so with the pirate bay.
This is just a shallow PR stunt. You can only pick three countries to be promoted in and they want you to pick "small countries"... seriously? Ya, promote me in Nigeria... thanks.
Artists have about as good a chance at meaningful promotion as they do getting a review in Rolling Stone... so now it's The Pirate Bay who are the Elitist Gate Keepers... how the mighty have fallen what a cheap and worthless stunt...