Slashdot Mirror
Music Doesn't Feature In the Pirate Bay's Top 100 Biggest Torrents
journovampire writes Good news for the industry's anti-piracy efforts? Or rather embarrassing for music's appeal in the big, wide world? No single music release features in the Top 100 most-torrented files. From the article: "MBW has analysed TPB’s Top 100 most-pirated files in the 48 hours since its re-emergence. And although you’ll find plenty of movies and a smattering of porn in there, you won’t see a single music release. The Top 4 most-pirated files over the weekend were all movies, led by new Jason Statham vehicle Wild Card. It was followed by three more Hollywood releases – The Interview, American Sniper and Nightcrawler."
You can find it on YouTube or Spotify, to name but two sources. Full-length movies are harder to come by in this fashion.
Current music sucks so bad Pirates don't even want it.
"Good news!" said Sony Music
"Oh shit" said Sony Motion Pictures.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
plenty of movies
its to be expected. Sitting through 20 minutes of mandatory trailer before my bluray starts actually playing the movie i paid for is nothing short of a war crime.
smattering of porn
ew.
but in all actuality the lack of music is likely due to spotify, soundcloud, and pandora not to mention bandcamp and the rise of unsigned, independent artists using a 'pay if you want' model. stream rips from Youtube are also popular. If you're expecting to see the top 40's in the pirate bay you're mistaken as to their purpose. Top 40 music is played 3 times a day 21 times a week for 5 months because you're being conditioned to like it. Katy perry and other artists write lyrics at the 3rd grade level not because theyre illiterate, but because their producers and writers are targeting the widest potential demographic for the song.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Could it be the music industry has adapted enough that the average joe doesn't feel the need to pirate music as much as other media?
Yes, the adaptation certainly isn't ideal, but most of my friends now pay $9 a month (or so) and stream all their music and stream most new music. They are letting their personal music libraries slowly bit rot away as they increasingly rely on the cloud and streaming services.
Plus most digital albums can be bought without DRM these days.
But movies are a different story. You have to wait before you can even watch a movie in your own home, and movie media is always DRMed.
> A whole generation has grown up who believe that music is "free".
It's not just the current generation. This has been going on pretty much for as long as there has been broadcast media. This "it should be free" thing goes back to the genesis of radio.
There is nothing new about "payment avoidance" when it comes to Music.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Does music cost $20 a song and come with a 5 minute unskippable warning against piracy, and 10 minutes of unskippable trailers for other songs? But for some products if you want quality you have to pirate it. I know some people who will buy a movie to be legit/support the industry, and then pirate it because it is less trouble than the CD.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Or how about the following three factors:
1. I can buy the tracks I want for a sensible price with no DRM, so I can listen to it how and when I want.
2. Lots of streaming services if I don't want to buy.
3. An almost fanatical devotion to the pope.
Basically street years of getting brutalized by pirates, the music industry wised up and started selling people what they wanted to buy rather than treating people like criminals to be milked for as much cash as possible.
Oh that and YouTube.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
"+ 3 Insightful"
Really? Has your lawn been horribly trampled by kids lately? There's so much good stuff out there I don't even know where to begin. We're in a golden era of music choice and availability. Not only do we have a plethora of different types and combinations of sounds and rhythms that are available for the mixing (mostly due to electronic music and computers), but this generation has the ability to find any music from anywhere now - thanks to the internet you can find all kinds of obscure stuff from another corner of the world. You have millions of artists to choose from anywhere now - maybe it's your perception bias making you think it's off (because when you walked into a CD / record store 20-30 years ago, they tend to carry only the best material, and you don't have to wade through crap).
Maybe you meant to say "I don't like the top 40 stuff they constantly repeat on the radio or at sporting events or at the bars". Newsflash: every generation thinks their parents' music was lame, but my generation's music was the greatest ever, but my kids listen to complete shit. Talk to a 30-something and they'll think Pearl Jam or Nirvana were the greatest. Talk to a 60-something and they'll think Zeppelin and Queen were the greatest. Talk to a teenager now and they'll think Katy Perry or Taylor Swift are the best evar! Maybe this has to do more with the music you listed to as a teenager shaping your musical tastes (and associating good times with that music).
Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
Now that I can actually own my own music downloaded legally from iTunes and play it on all of my devices, I have no reason to pirate it. But I still pirate movies and will continue until the DRM issue is resolved.
Whole Generation? Your information is horribly out of date.
I was raised to believe that from my father who said, "it is OK to record FM radio" which I did all the time. I also Ripped friends CD's as well as record copies of Records...
I then taught my daughter the same except she found you can just rip friends CD's
Hopefully she teaches her 4 year old daughter the same. So there is 3 generations that know the fact that Music IS free.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This seems like a pretty bad manipulation of statistics to get the story you want... Considering the breadth of the music industry, it means there is more choice, so it stands to reason that different people with different tastes will torrent different stuff. The Movie industry on the other hand releases less than 100 blockbuster films per year... so it stands to reason that with less options to torrent, certain titles will rise to the top more quickly. This is of course based on the presumption that newer titles are more frequently torrented than older titles... but that also is a reasonable assumption given that new titles are widely advertised.
Anyways... I'm not defending RIAA or MPAA... I think they both suck and should be shut down, but I just feel like the premise of the article is suspect.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
Some might argue that this is a serious problem-- that the music industry is in a shambles and it's not clear this is all sustainable. Others might argue that this is evidence of where the problem was all along-- that piracy is the result of high prices and poor service, and when people are provided a cheap and convenient product, they're often willing to pay for it in some way. Either way, I don't see much of a reason to pirate music anymore unless it's somehow unavailable through legal channels.
The music industry has oddly enough somewhat come full circle with Spotify becoming the new middleman. Here in Norway after a dip in revenue from 2009 when it was 15% digital it's now slightly higher (601 vs 592 million NOK) in 2014 with 86% digital, of which 11% is downloads and 75% streaming. During the same period the piracy rate among people under 30 dropped from 70% to 4% of the population.
Why do I say it's become full circle? Because once again either you accept the terms of Spotify or nobody going to hear about you. And because many people just use it as background noise for popular music creating superstars is still big business, the "long tail" doesn't get anything extra for writing music people care about so a lot of marginal artists are complaining that where they could make money selling CDs to a small but loyal following before Spotify pays them peanuts.
I guess Spotify lowered the bar on getting your music published, since they don't run out of shelf space or air time. But I don't think it has increased the number of artists who are able to play professionally, though I'm not sure that matters. It's a bit like comparing YouTube with cable TV, maybe a whole lot of well... something beats a couple hundred channels of "professional" TV. But when I've heard friends say "Either you're on Spotify or you don't exist" somebody's holding too much power.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
"With 1828 ‘seeders’ and just 76 ‘leechers’, True is a fair distance behind the 100th most popular torrent overall: PC game Far Cry 4, which has 1604 ‘seeders’ plus 1260 ‘leechers’."
Keep in mind that:
1) Once a "leecher" finishes downloading, they become a "seeder"
2) Nearly all clients will stop being a "seeder" once a predetermined share ratio is reached
Considering a typical music album is FAR smaller than a game (probably 100-200MB at most, depending on bitrate for encoding, vs. multiple gigabytes for a game - FC4 is over 10GB I'd guess, I can't view TPB to check from my current location), "leechers" become "seeders" far faster, and "seeders" disconnect from the torrent due to hitting the share ratio cap of the client (kTorrent defaults to 1.30 for example) far faster.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Let's hope vinyl or increased quality isn't just a passing fad.
I'm old enough to remember when there was no such thing as a CD and vinyl or tape were your only options to get a full album. I do not miss for a moment vinyl records and all the hassles involved with them. If you think vinyl is great you either A) did not grow up with vinyl records or B) you have a fetish for obsolete technology which interferes with your ability to remember why we don't use it anymore.
Let me remind of just some of the reasons rational people gave up on vinyl records years ago:
1) Vinyl only sounds good when operating perfectly and most of the time it does not, particularly if the record has seen meaningful play.
2) Vinyl is absurdly easy to damage and virtually impossible to keep intact with meaningful use. They are flimsy and scratch easily. See point 1 above.
3) Vinyl is bulky increasing it's propensity to get damaged (see point 2 above) and takes up unnecessary space.
4) Vinyl record players rely on needles which wear out and regularly damage the very media they are intended to play.
5) Vinyl stores a relatively small amount of music and does so in a very bulky and non-portable media
6) Vinyl cannot easily or conveniently be copied to any portable player
7) Vinyl does not come with digital track data that can be copied conveniently to other players
8) Vinyl cannot easily be utilized in conjunction with other media such as putting a song into a video.
9) Vinyl cannot easily be used for other purposes. I can use a CD or flash memory to store other types of data. Not practical with vinyl.
10) There are non-lossy digital formats which are indistinguishable from even the best vinyl in double blind tests. (If you claim otherwise I'm going to call you a liar)
Increased quality? I'm on board unless it requires vinyl. If it does then screw increased quality because it is not worth the hassle of vinyl.